Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →
↑ ↓
CEMB → Forum → Life, The Universe & Everything → Religions and Gods → Qur'anic studies today

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts

What music are you listen...
by zeca
November 24, 2024, 06:05 PM
Lights on the way
by akay
November 22, 2024, 02:51 PM
Do humans have needed kno...
November 22, 2024, 06:45 AM
Gaza assault
November 21, 2024, 07:56 PM
Qur'anic studies today
by zeca
November 21, 2024, 05:07 PM
New Britain
November 20, 2024, 05:41 PM
اضواء على الطريق ....... ...
by akay
November 20, 2024, 09:02 AM
Marcion and the introduct...
by zeca
November 19, 2024, 11:36 PM
Dutch elections
by zeca
November 15, 2024, 10:11 PM
Random Islamic History Po...
by zeca
November 15, 2024, 08:46 PM
AMRIKAAA Land of Free .....
November 07, 2024, 09:56 AM
The origins of Judaism
by zeca
November 02, 2024, 12:56 PM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Qur'anic studies today

 (Read 1494299 times)
  • Previous page 1 ... 78 79 8081 82 ... 370 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2370 - July 05, 2018, 05:51 AM
    I am new to this group and my knowledge of the research on early Islamic manuscripts is limited. I live in Norway and have just seen one article in a smaller newspaper about the modern research of the Quran. That's all. I have many times tried to get academics interested in this topic, but with little luck. I recently spoke with a professor that is an international expert on the Dead Sea scrolls and he didn't know anything about the discussion on the early Qurans.
    I read Danish and I couldn't find one article in Danish media about the late Patricia Crone. Why wasn't she a famous academic in her own home country?
    My point with this comment is that all the research about the origins of Islam and the Quran must be heavily politicized. What would be the result for the Saudi economy and Islam if everyone agreed that the Quran originated in Palestine or that Muhammad probably never had been to Mecca or Medina? Why do Tom Holland "duck" when he claim that Islam originated much further north than Hijaz?
    Would Al Jallad or other academics get the permission to enter Saudi Arabia if the authorities there knew it could ruin their economy or their religion? Or would anybody neutral historian dare to enter that region if he has the "wrong" view of Islam? 
    My point is that this field is so intense that it's hard to think about it as neutral. Patricia Crone was threatened. Who wants to end up as Theo van Gogh or Salman Rushdie? How many neutral researchers are there in this field?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2371 - July 05, 2018, 07:47 AM
    Quote from: mundi on July 04, 2018, 11:40 PM
    1/ I only read the Olaf summary of Gallez' work.

    2/ Quranic language: for sure the text went through scribes hands. What was their background? The choice of words must have been greatly influenced by the actual person writing it. There seems to have been a very early canonization explaining the lack of storylines and weird sentences?  No gradual editing (and improvement) of the text because of early sudden canonization?


    1/Reading the books is (to me) better. Even if I do not agree with the Gallez main thesis.
    2/ At last someone who ask questions about the text! Dig!
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2372 - July 05, 2018, 07:55 AM
    Quote from: mundi on July 04, 2018, 08:31 PM


    Through the text we know a lot about the scribe(s)/author(s). All we think to know about the audience (and its language) is speculation. No traces of the reception of the Quranic text outside Quran before 690, Dome of Rock.


    1/ Yes
    2/ The audience perforce could "read" the text (there's no "prophet")
    3/ NO! (Think of it)
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2373 - July 05, 2018, 08:40 AM
    Quote from: Asbjoern1958 on July 05, 2018, 05:51 AM
    I am new to this group and my knowledge of the research on early Islamic manuscripts is limited. I live in Norway and have just seen one article in a smaller newspaper about the modern research of the Quran. That's all. I have many times tried to get academics interested in this topic, but with little luck. I recently spoke with a professor that is an international expert on the Dead Sea scrolls and he didn't know anything about the discussion on the early Qurans.
    I read Danish and I couldn't find one article in Danish media about the late Patricia Crone. Why wasn't she a famous academic in her own home country?
    My point with this comment is that all the research about the origins of Islam and the Quran must be heavily politicized. What would be the result for the Saudi economy and Islam if everyone agreed that the Quran originated in Palestine or that Muhammad probably never had been to Mecca or Medina? Why do Tom Holland "duck" when he claim that Islam originated much further north than Hijaz?
    Would Al Jallad or other academics get the permission to enter Saudi Arabia if the authorities there knew it could ruin their economy or their religion? Or would anybody neutral historian dare to enter that region if he has the "wrong" view of Islam? 
    My point is that this field is so intense that it's hard to think about it as neutral. Patricia Crone was threatened. Who wants to end up as Theo van Gogh or Salman Rushdie? How many neutral researchers are there in this field?


    Dear Asbjoern1958,

    Not sure why the late Patricia Crone was not (apparently) famous in her own country. Lack of interest, maybe? Her death was certainly shocking to a lot and got decent media coverage. 

    The geopolitical impacts of this research is not known to me nor anyone here, if I were to assume.

    Tom Holland is a popularizer, not an academic in this field per se.

    Dan Gibson entered Saudi Arabia without problems and Saudi kingdom does not affect anyones research.   

    There are plenty of neutral historians out there and scholars have nothing to fear. Maybe in the Near East, but not here. Sure, mockers who provoke responses did get hurt, but not academics. At least to my knowledge.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2374 - July 05, 2018, 08:43 AM
    Quote from: mundi on July 04, 2018, 09:18 PM

    2/ If an audience was intensely listening to these Surahs and memorising them, quotations would have popped up in other written texts and epigraphy. But nothing, we see a lot of Quran copying/manuscripts but no "digestion"of the text.


    Therefore, no proclamation in a city which do not exist. Only text.

    Quote
    The first attestation of a quote from the Quran (outside of the Quran) is in the mosaic text of the dome of the rock (690), and that is not even verbatim correct.


    An adaptation.

    Quote
    So where was the Quranic audience? Who was the audience?


    No Quranic audience. Quranic readers.


  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2375 - July 05, 2018, 09:05 AM
    Quote from: Asbjoern1958 on July 05, 2018, 05:51 AM
    Why do Tom Holland "duck" when he claim that Islam originated much further north than Hijaz?
    Would Al Jallad or other academics get the permission to enter Saudi Arabia if the authorities there knew it could ruin their economy or their religion? Or would anybody neutral historian dare to enter that region if he has the "wrong" view of Islam? 


    Christian Robin writes about the Jews in pre-Islamic Arabia and is often a guest in Israel. He is in Saudi Arabia every year and held in high esteem there. I cant imagine there is some government conspiracy against a certain line of research. It seems more like local activists are subject to censorship for political reasons rather than scientists.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2376 - July 05, 2018, 09:07 AM
    canaaniteshift makes a very good point here, dear Asbjoern.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2377 - July 05, 2018, 11:01 AM
    Censorship:

    No unconscious self-censorship? Where are the hyper-critical scholars working ?
    Writing about the Jews in pre-islamic Arabia is not controversial.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2378 - July 05, 2018, 11:03 AM
    Mundi - There a plenty of critical scholars out there. We have mention numerous ones on this very forum. Did not really understand your comment about censorship.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2379 - July 05, 2018, 11:10 AM
    Magraye,
    I leave it to the academic insiders to judge. I am relieved to hear all is ok. I mean it.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2380 - July 05, 2018, 11:20 AM
    Quote
    No Quranic audience. Quranic readers.


    And Quranic copyists...They did it perfectly. Was there a switch of christian or jewish scribal centres into islamic ones? Was there a period of overlap that the centers did all type of texts? Or was there a clean break between the scribal traditions?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2381 - July 05, 2018, 11:42 AM
    Quote from: Mahgraye on July 05, 2018, 12:39 AM

    The Quranic CST (and text) was canonized in the mid-seventh century AD by a centralized political authority. This is the conclusion one can draw based on the earliest manuscripts.


    It is what it is recounted. We have no external evidence about the existence of Utman, Umar et al. I think that the rasm is really canonized by Abd al Malik : he has clearly existed.   DAM 01-27.1 (last half of the 1st/7th century CE—that is, between 650 and 685 CE) is another version of the rasm ; there was many version of it,  Abd al Malik has destroyed them.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2382 - July 05, 2018, 11:43 AM
    The rasm was canonized before ʿAbd al-Malik. That is the story the manuscripts tell.  Ironically, DAM 01-27.1 refutes the mid-Umayyad codification under ʿAbd al-Malik, and so does other manuscripts, such as Codex Parisino-petropolitanus. DAM 01-27.1 contains the ʿUthmānic text.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2383 - July 05, 2018, 11:56 AM
    Quote from: canaaniteshift on July 05, 2018, 09:05 AM
    Christian Robin writes about the Jews in pre-Islamic Arabia and is often a guest in Israel. He is in Saudi Arabia every year and held in high esteem there. I cant imagine there is some government conspiracy against a certain line of research. It seems more like local activists are subject to censorship for political reasons rather than scientists.


    Christian Robin is an archaeologist and not an historian nor a scholar of the Quran. He believes like all Muslim that Mecca/Medina/ Muhammad has really existed before Islam whereas there is not an atom of source to validate these affirmations (and he knows very well that there is no source...) Therefore he trusts accounts which have no scientific grounds, like Moses in the Red Sea.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2384 - July 05, 2018, 12:07 PM
    Quote
    It is what it is recounted. We have no external evidence about the existence of Utman, Umar et al. I think that the rasm is really canonized by Abd al Malik : he has clearly existed.   DAM 01-27.1 (last half of the 1st/7th century CE—that is, between 650 and 685 CE) is another version of the rasm ; there was many version of it,  Abd al Malik has destroyed them.


    Thank you for posting the modern table of the C14 analysis. But a complete article with a full contextual analysis of the C14 results would be handy. Now we are speculating about what the earliest dates are. I know that the C14 of the parchment is not equal to when the text was written, but just adding or subtracting some decades according to what is convenient to the point one wants to make doesn't advance clarity.
    From the results I have seen, mid 7th C seems to be latest canonisation possibility, likely earlier. That is important for the Quran emergence scenario.
    Has Déroche published something recently on all the new results coming in?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2385 - July 05, 2018, 12:10 PM
    C. Robin: If I was a yearly guest of the Saudis, I wouldn't dig in to Gibson's work either...
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2386 - July 05, 2018, 12:16 PM
    Quote from: Altara on July 05, 2018, 11:56 AM
    Christian Robin is an archaeologist and not an historian nor a scholar of the Quran. He believes like all Muslim that Mecca/Medina/ Muhammad has really existed before Islam whereas there is not an atom of source to validate these affirmations (and he knows very well that there is no source...) Therefore he trusts accounts which have no scientific grounds, like Moses in the Red Sea.



    He is no archaeologist; he does not excavate. He is an epigraphist and historian. While he uses islamic sources rather uncritically he comes to conclusions that differ in huge ways from saudi doctrine. Another good example is thomas milo who does not accept one iota of the tradition but this did not stop the omanis from commissioning their muscat mushaf from him.

    I think all academics agree that the traditional account of muslim origins is largely mythological , with mahomet riding pegasus to heaven and what not, but that doesn't mean every detail is invented ex nihilo. Archaeology and epigraphy are opening up the peninsula from the 6th and 7th centuries. We will see the truth of all this soon i would guess.assertions that there is no hijaz before islam seem misplaced. Hijaz is a geographic term referringto the western coast and mountains of arabia. You can call it anything you want but it was a region. Robin thinks it is thmt in the south arabian inscriptions. Yathrib is real obviously al-hijr is real tabuk etc. Mecca i agree remains to be proven outside of stories. If it truly existed as a place we could expect some reference to it. It is clear that ir wasn't a pan arabian cult site so if anything the tradition contains a great deal of exaggeration , as expected. Why does the existence of mecca as a minor cult site cause such a problem -- it doesnt imply that the tradition isnt fraudulent but only that known places were used in weaving a narrative.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2387 - July 05, 2018, 12:18 PM
    Quote
    Thank you for posting the modern table of the C14 analysis. But a complete article with a full contextual analysis of the C14 results would be handy. Now we are speculating about what the earliest dates are. I know that the C14 of the parchment is not equal to when the text was written, but just adding or subtracting some decades according to what is convenient to the point one wants to make doesn't advance clarity. From the results I have seen, mid 7th C seems to be latest canonization possibility, likely earlier.


    No problem, but I think you wrongly quoted Altara instead of me, haha. Anyways. Most of the results in the table are not based on C14, at least not the earliest ones (no. 1, 2, 3 & 4). You could be right about an even earlier canonization, but the text was definitely canonized by the mid-seventh century at the latest. At the very least, it is around that time the earliest manuscripts show up.

    Quote
    That is important for the Quran emergence scenario. Has Déroche published something recently on all the new results coming in?


    Depends on what results you are referring to. Sanaa? Then yes, he has commented on the divergent datings and rejected them, opting for the one I provided in the list.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2388 - July 05, 2018, 12:21 PM
    Quote
    He is no archaeologist; he does not excavate. He is an epigraphist and historian. While he uses islamic sources rather uncritically he comes to conclusions that differ in huge ways from saudi doctrine. Another good example is thomas milo who does not accept one iota of the tradition but this did not stop the omanis from commissioning their muscat mushaf from him.

    I think all academics agree that the traditional account of muslim origins is largely mythological , with mahomet riding pegasus to heaven and what not, but that doesn't mean every detail is invented ex nihilo. Archaeology and epigraphy are opening up the peninsula from the 6th and 7th centuries. We will see the truth of all this soon i would guess.assertions that there is no hijaz before islam seem misplaced. Hijaz is a geographic term referringto the western coast and mountains of arabia. You can call it anything you want but it was a region. Robin thinks it is thmt in the south arabian inscriptions. Yathrib is real obviously al-hijr is real tabuk etc. Mecca i agree remains to be proven outside of stories. If it truly existed as a place we could expect some reference to it. It is clear that ir wasn't a pan arabian cult site so if anything the tradition contains a great deal of exaggeration , as expected. Why does the existence of mecca as a minor cult site cause such a problem -- it doesnt imply that the tradition isnt fraudulent but only that known places were used in weaving a narrative.


    Great comment! Nice and objective assessment.

  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2389 - July 05, 2018, 12:26 PM
    Quote
    Depends on what results you are referring to. Sanaa? Then yes, he has commented on the divergent datings and rejected them, opting for the one I provided in the list.


    No, I am not referring to Sanaa alone but to the entirety of all the results. C14 on Quran did not stand still with Sanaa. From your answer I deduct that there has not been a recent scholarly update of all C14 results or at least it hasnt been published yet. Therefore I conclude that the Islamic Awareness site is at the forefront and the most complete source of info on the topic.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2390 - July 05, 2018, 12:28 PM
    In that case, nothing new has been published. The datings are very stable. There is the case of Mingana 1572a, were the C14 gave a wrong dating (see no. 3).
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2391 - July 05, 2018, 12:32 PM
    He is no archaeologist; he does not excavate. He is an epigraphist and historian.

    Not at all : 1964. Diplômé de l’Institut d’Études politiques de Paris. - 1967. Diplômé de l’École nationale des Langues orientales vivantes (arabe littéral)."
    He was trained at Science Po which has nothing to do with History of (Late or not) Antiquity, and in l ’École nationale des Langues orientales which is a school to train French Diplomats (Ambassador, etc)  where he has learn Arabic. And that's all. Nothing to do with History.  Because I speak English, I am a specialist of the reign of Edward III? What kind of folly is that? I thought he was  (at least) an graduate archaeologist! Thank you!
    For me he has not the training.
    End of story.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2392 - July 05, 2018, 12:41 PM
    Quote
    For me he has not the training.


    Aren't we exaggerating the outcome of a "training"? We are living in the 21 C. Isnt compartiment thinking passé?
    But C. Robin has turned 75 I see on Wikipedia. Maybe not the age to engage in novel theories?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2393 - July 05, 2018, 02:34 PM
    Quote
    I think all academics agree that the traditional account of muslim origins is largely mythological ,


    It's inexact. 90% believe in the frame "Mecca/Medina/Prophet Muhammad" as the genuine origin of the Quranic text the others shut up (like Dye for example.)

    Quote
    i would guess.assertions that there is no hijaz before islam seem misplaced. Hijaz is a geographic term referringto the western coast and mountains of arabia.  You can call it anything you want but it was a region.


    The word "Hijaz" is totally unknown before Islam, like Mecca, Medina, Zem Zem, Kaba, etc. Totally unknown unless you have a source to prove the contrary. It is an invented word by Muslim historiographer of the 8 and 9th c.  to give a "name" to a place which had none. The origin is I think  logically hajj/pilgrimage. There was no region call "Hijaz" before Islam. End of story. Or prove it with sources. No sources, no region.

    Quote
    Robin thinks it is thmt in the south arabian inscriptions.


    Robin can think whatever he wants, he has no sources, no evidences. Like Muslim. The only difference is that he is not. But in the case of Early Islam history there is no difference between them apart the supernatural. But I do not argue about the supernatural here, I argue about the historical affirmations of the historiographers of the 8,9,10th c. These affirmations (Mecca/Medina/Kaba/Prophet/Abu Bakr/Utman) are corroborated by nothing. Therefore you have to trust these accounts. I do not. Why? Because there is no source to corroborates them, It's as simple as that.

    Quote
    Yathrib is real obviously al-hijr is real tabuk etc.


    Yatrib is real. Ok. What is Yathrib in the 6 and 7th c.? Does it correspond to what the historiographers of the 8,9,10th c. tells us it is in the 6 and 7th c. Not at all. It never mentioned as a caravan route after the 3 or 4th c. Even Ḥimyar do not know it. It is a poor oasis, a swamp, serving to give water to the local camels and no sources say other things.

    al-hijr is real. Ok. al-hijr is what in the 6 and 7th c.? A ruined city. There's nobody there, except tombs.

    tabuk  is real.  What is tabuk in the 6 and 7th c.? No one knows.

    But the "prophet" where is supposed to live? Yatrib, al-hijr, tabuk?

    Not at all.


  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2394 - July 05, 2018, 02:36 PM
    Quote from: mundi on July 05, 2018, 12:26 PM
    No, I am not referring to Sanaa alone but to the entirety of all the results. C14 on Quran did not stand still with Sanaa. From your answer I deduct that there has not been a recent scholarly update of all C14 results or at least it hasnt been published yet. Therefore I conclude that the Islamic Awareness site is at the forefront and the most complete source of info on the topic.


    We have a very big problem with C14 in Quranic Ms... Because of calibration. Google is your friend.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2395 - July 05, 2018, 02:41 PM
    Ptolemy mentions Mecca but locates it in the interior of Arabia Petraea. Archaeological surveys attest a Abū Kaʿba in northern Syria. Other localities typically placed in Western Arabia have also been found in the same region, such Mount Abū Qubays.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2396 - July 05, 2018, 02:45 PM
    Quote
    We have a very big problem with C14 in Quranic Ms... Because of calibration. Google is your friend.


    The calibration explanation seems to be untenable. I heard whispers from the Corpus Coranicum project that they have matched up the ancient Quranic manuscripts dating with other faith manuscripts. There are simply too many early datings coming in. But a nice scholarly list would be helpful. F. Déroche, please... publish.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2397 - July 05, 2018, 02:48 PM
    Dear Mundi,

    Are you looking for a list of early manuscripts and their dating? What about the islamic-awareness.org list? Forgive me if did not understand.   
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2398 - July 05, 2018, 02:56 PM
    Magraye,

    Yes, I found that one. I think it is the most complete list available. But it is from 2016, so missing about 2 years of research. Altara gave me an alternative one but it does not give enough info imo.

    From the Islamic awareness site I have the impression that there is a realistic chance that the canonisation of the Quran took place in the 630's. I think that is an important point.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #2399 - July 05, 2018, 03:01 PM
    But, what has been published since then? The only new discovery has been Codex Amrensis 1, which I added to my list. Since you know French, read Éléonore Cellard's dissertation on the Codex: Codex Amrensis 1 (Leiden: Brill, 2018). Besides, your hypothesis that the Quran was canonized around the year AD 630 can be true, but has not been supported by new research as of yet. Our earliest manuscripts stem from the mid-seventh century. Even to this day, we have not found anything prior to that.
  • Previous page 1 ... 78 79 8081 82 ... 370 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »