I intended to paraphrase the good points and correct the bad ones
in Efim A.Rezvan's "A History of Printed Editions of the Qur’an"
in The Oxford Handbook of QUR’ANIC STUDIES.
Unfortunately the first part is about manuscripts and other non-print matters.
The part about the St.Petersburg and Kazan Qurʾāns is fine ‒ but not new.
The section on prints after Kazan (pp 268-270) is all wrong, not worth a critique.
picture: https://mnaber.org/img/cache/thumbnail/pZEanzZW1ilzNgi4DQVqO0vo96q0wLpj1lIKFzY0
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Lahore, India 1935 (AHI: Anǧuman-i Ḥimāyat-i Islām)
I have read that the Taj Comp. Ltd. changed the Indian verse numbering by adopting the Verse numbers from the KFE. I can't confirm this...
-
40 years ago Adrian Alan Brockett submitted his Ph.D. to the University of St.Andrews: Studies in Two Transmissions of the Qurʾān . Now...
-
It is common knowledge that the King Fuʾād Edition of the Ḥafṣ qirāʾa was an immediate success in the Muslim world. Common knowledge, but...
-
There are many false assertions about the King Fuʾād Edition: that it is type printed ‒ it is type set, but offset printed that it ...
No comments:
Post a Comment