,
6 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
1/6. Modern or early forgery ?
Some years ago, I came across this “Antique Hijazi Quran", with a suspect provenance “Acquired from an acquaintance in Paris… belonged to a Professor of Islamic Art”, on this blog:
abudervish.blogspot.com/2013/11/ancien…
I first thought it was a modern fake.
Some years ago, I came across this “Antique Hijazi Quran", with a suspect provenance “Acquired from an acquaintance in Paris… belonged to a Professor of Islamic Art”, on this blog:
abudervish.blogspot.com/2013/11/ancien…
I first thought it was a modern fake.
2/6. So, why a forgery ?
First, the script style seems to me very artificial, unnatural. A bad imitation of Hijazi. The last word at the end of the page shows shapes which are definitely much later.
First, the script style seems to me very artificial, unnatural. A bad imitation of Hijazi. The last word at the end of the page shows shapes which are definitely much later.
3/6. Second, the layout is very unusual for the early period : Small size + horizontal format associated with only 5 lines by page + words are cut at the end of the page. The parchment is also weird, very shinny and strangely damaged in the margins.
4/6. Another trouble is the text itself : really bizarre… There are plenty of strange mistakes : confusion of letters shapes, omissions.. See in red on the picture above : the word al-’arḍ.
I'll let you find out other oddities by yourself.
I'll let you find out other oddities by yourself.
5/6. Two other folios are signaled on the blog : 1 was in display in London ; the other sold on Ebay. The script is more homogeneous, the text more consistent.
6/6. So, I reopen the case : to my view it is clearly an imitation, but perhaps done in ancient times (8th-or beginning 9th). What’s your opinion ?
