Francois Deroche's study works directly from the palaeography of the earliest surviving Quran manuscripts, including the great Kufic codices such as the Samarkand and Tashkent manuscripts, dating them by their script and material features rather than by tradition alone. That direct manuscript-based method is why its conclusion, that these codices belong to the later Umayyad and Abbasid periods rather than the caliphate of Uthman as popularly claimed, carries real evidentiary weight rather than resting on the publisher's standing. This record has not independently traced further scholarly response to Deroche's specific dating since 2014. Use it for the documented palaeographic dating of the earliest Quran manuscripts; a claim about the Uthmanic recension's own textual history as distinct from manuscript survival needs a separate source addressing that specific question.
Facts
Assessment
Reliability Tier1
Francois Deroche's scholarly palaeographic study of the earliest Quran manuscripts, dating the great Kufic codices including the Samarkand and Tashkent manuscripts to the later Umayyad and Abbasid periods rather than the caliphate of Uthman, published by Brill. NotesPalaeographic study of the earliest Quran manuscripts; frames the dating of the great Kufic codices (including the Samarkand/Tashkent manuscript) to the later Umayyad and Abbasid periods rather than the caliphate of Uthman.
Citation
AuthorFrancois Deroche
PublisherBrill, Leiden
Publication Year2014
URLhttps://archive.org/details/quransofumayyads0000dero
Source Typeacademic monograph
Cross-Tradition Connections
Associated With
This source names Samarkand directly: "the great Kufic codices such as the Samarkand and Tashkent manuscripts, dating them by their script and material features rather than by tradition alone."
This source names Uthman directly: "Quran manuscripts; a claim about the Uthmanic recension's own textual history as distinct from manuscript survival needs a separate source addressing that specific question."
Claims Backed By This Source (79 claims)
This source backs 79 claims across the atlas. As facts: 41 well-attested. As cited relationships: 6 holds. Plus 32 entities citing it as a general reference with no single fact or relationship attached.
Disposition By Topic
- Alphabet Letters, 56 claims: 28 well-attested, 28 general references.
- Sources, 10 claims: 8 well-attested, 2 holds.
- Artifacts & Relics, 5 claims: 2 well-attested, 2 holds, 1 general references.
- Historical Figures, 5 claims: 1 well-attested, 2 holds, 2 general references.
- Articles, 2 claims: 2 well-attested.
- Figures, 1 claims: 1 general references.
Reader Challenges (0 open reader challenges)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.
Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.
View At A Past Year
The atlas records no dated fact of its own for this entry, so there is no other year to choose.