Urartians expanded their kingdom in the area between Lakes Sevan, Van and Urmia for about three centuries from 9th century B.C. The bronze bracelet with Urartian inscription from Tul-e Talesh has been studied by the scholars as a proof of Urartian border expansion and t More
Urartians expanded their kingdom in the area between Lakes Sevan, Van and Urmia for about three centuries from 9th century B.C. The bronze bracelet with Urartian inscription from Tul-e Talesh has been studied by the scholars as a proof of Urartian border expansion and their effects on the region or even as a looted object. This inscription is known to belong to Argišti I or Sarduri II. But the solder in the bracelet has been the cause of arguments and also distractions from other details. The inscription was written with two sorts of epigraphy and with no sufficient attention. Therefore the era when this inscription was written is hard to be determined. The inscription contains only two words as mar-giš-ti and uš-tú-ú. The second part is incomplete and could be uš-tú-ú-ni or uš-tú-ú-ri or uš-tú-ú-li. The author of this paper suggests that it was possible for this object to be moved from one site to another as an ancient tradition. It is also possible that the inscription was cut from another longer inscription and was made into a bracelet with adornments. The words in the beginning and the end of the inscription are incomplete and it is also possible that the metalworker cut the word Argišti for any reason and used another part (ni-še uš-tú-ú) with no attention or knowledge of Urartian grammar. Therefore, the translation is useless as there are two words of “Argišti” and “dedicate”. “ḫi” as a paternal sign could have possibly been hidden under the solder as well. The poor epigraphy of the inscription is the reason for the author not to accept the idea of the bracelet as a temple dedication.
Manuscript profile
The Prophet's order to compile the Qur'an at the same time as its revelation is a matter agreed upon among the scholars of the sciences and history of the Qur'an; however, whether the form of writing the words was ordered by the Holy Prophet (PBUH) or after his death wa More
The Prophet's order to compile the Qur'an at the same time as its revelation is a matter agreed upon among the scholars of the sciences and history of the Qur'an; however, whether the form of writing the words was ordered by the Holy Prophet (PBUH) or after his death was determined by the companions and that the scribes of revelation wrote according to the usual method of writing the Arabic language, or not, is a matter of controversy. This raises the question of whether, in any case, it is necessary to follow the original writing system of the Holy Qur'an in later centuries, and whether the idea that the Qur'anic orthography is not subject to theorizing is correct or not. This article intends to provide a correct answer to the proposed questions by examining the historical course and careful analysis of the opinions of eminent scholars in this field. Based on the finding of this research, it is preferred to adhere to the original and ancient orthography of the Holy Quran in comparison with two other theories, one of which considers the orthography of the Qur'an necessary to be followed and another considers it obligatory to deviate from it.
Manuscript profile
Tashkent Codex is the most famous Codex in terms of its attribution to ʿUthmān. The books al-Muqniʿ and Mukhtaṣar al-Tabyīn are the most important sources containing the orthography of the ʿUthmānic codices and the main criterion for measuring the Quranic Orthography. T More
Tashkent Codex is the most famous Codex in terms of its attribution to ʿUthmān. The books al-Muqniʿ and Mukhtaṣar al-Tabyīn are the most important sources containing the orthography of the ʿUthmānic codices and the main criterion for measuring the Quranic Orthography. This article tries to compare the orthography of Tashkent codex with the traditions of these two books and assess the orthography reports. The words of Tashkent codex are divided into three categories: 1. Words that are consistent with the traditions of the two books of al-Muqniʿ and Mukhtaṣar al-Tabyīn; 2. Words that are consistent only with the traditions of al-Muqniʿ or Mukhtaṣar al-Tabyīn; 3. Words that are inconsistent with the traditions of the books of al-Muqniʿ and Mukhtaṣar al-Tabyīn. Words that are inconsistent with the traditions of Sheykheyn in this codex can be divided into two parts: A) Words that do not correspond to the traditions of Sheykheyn, But other scholars have mentioned it; B) Words that do not correspond to the traditions of Sheykheyn and also there is no any other traditions confirming that orthography. The result of the study indicates that the orthography traditions should be supplemented and corrected in some cases by referring directly to the ancient codices.
Manuscript profile
