BHO 815

Many maṣāḥif are cross breeds.
UT combines the page layout of HOQz (Haǧǧ Ḥāfiẓ ʿUṯmān Ḫalīfa Qayiš­Zāde an-Nūrī al-Bur­durī = Küҫük Hafiz Osman = HO the Younger d. 1894) with the text of KFE2 (1952) without the after­word.
The Ḥaddād-Šamarlī com­bined the layout of MNQ 522 with the same 1952 text (including the after­word).
KFE1 (1924) crosses many Moroccan features with the eleven/twel­ve lines of BHO = Bülük Ḥafiẓ Osman = HO the ElderHâfız Osman (1642–1698)

If you say: the KFE has 827 pages, not 815.
you forget that the KFE was type set.
Just as the type set "child" of MNQ522 has 525 pages,
the child of BHO 815 has a few pages more.
Both a scribe and modern (!) IT can modify letter, con­nection and space bet­ween words to copy the page lay­out exactely,
metall type can not achieve justified lines exactly as in the handwritten "parent".

I critize German orientalists for largely ignoring India, Indo­nesian, and Africa.
They largely ignore Central Asia, Iran, Turkey and even the Levant and Meso­pota­mia.
They treat Egypt (and now Madina) as THE Musim world.
Many believe the KFE has changed every­thing for all muslims.
Yes, after 1924 the Amiriyya stopped reprinting maṣāḥif in the Ottoman spelling
and in Egypt, private publisher mostly switched to it too ‒ many kept the old spelling, both as base text with a tafsīr around, and for Qurʾān only.


Some know that in 1951 the ʿIrāqī state pub­lished a revisted Otto­man manu­script;
few know that it published another non berKenar muṣḥaf on 689 pages, written by Ḥasan Riḍā
printed as base text for a Turkish translation

Of course there are expensive fac­similes, reproducing the original faith­fully (while maṣāḥif for "lay" Muslims are adopted to the new standard)

While the berKenar muṣḥaf written by Ḥasan Riḍā were printed in Turkey and his non-ber­Kenar one in ʿIrāq, the 815pp 11liner by Hafiz Osman the Elder was extremely success­ful in Syria: it was THE muṣḥaf before ʿUṯmān Ṭaha.
As usual there was no title bad, the kolophon was pro­minent

let's start with images from the first print I came across 1298/1881

another Ottoman example is from 1304/1887

While the prints started in Istanbul, and most were made in Damuscus, the last is from Jerualam/Jodanian al-Quds 1380/

The information page before and the one com­ing next are not in the "normal" Syrian prints

Unlike the "normal" Syrian prints, the one from 1380 has elimi­nated most signs (see abvoe the list from al-Quds) be­cause they could confuse ‒ includ­ing the ih­mal signs (not in the list).
As typical for the time, it has a title page and ex­planat­ions of the remaining signs:

‒­