A year on, the story has fallen from the headlines–largely because it is a glaring example of the central problem in Islamic historiography: Wishful thinking
“In December 2015 Professor François Déroche of the Collège de France confirmed the identification of the two Birmingham leaves with those of the Paris Qur’an BnF Arabe 328(c), as had been proposed by Dr Alba Fedeli. Prof. Deroche, however, expressed reservations about the reliability of the radiocarbon dates proposed for the Birmingham leaves, noting instances elsewhere in which radiocarbon dating had proved inaccurate in testing Qur’ans with an explicit endowment date; and also that none of the counterpart Paris leaves had yet been carbon-dated.”
The case for the antiquity of the Birmingham Qur’an fragments grows weaker by the day.
As with all orchestrated media splashes, the original story having done its work, not many people will pay attention to the unraveling of the growing mythology surrounding the discovery.
1. It has been suggested that the two-leaf parchment fragment uncovered in Birmingham “belongs with another sixteen in Paris (BnF Arabe 328(c); as indeed they sit neatly in a lacuna in that text.” However…
View original post 618 more words