Preface to kufi calligraphy
I am going to articulate my ideas about Kufi scripture because I wish to present my Kufi calligraphy compositions collectively; so that they may be preserved and registered in a book format. Besides, being a history professor—my doctoral dissertation was on “Arab Invasions to Anatolia (640-750 A.D.)”—I am also recognized as a Kufi calligrapher, professionally accepting orders and composing Kufi calligraphy since 1970. My first design, “Nokta-i Suğra,” was published on the cover of a book, Peyami Safa’s Sanat, Edebiyat Tenkit, Ötüken Publishing, Istanbul, 1970.
This Nokta design is cited and published in the article “Nokta-i Suğrâ” in the Encyclopedia of Literature (Edebiyat Ansiklopedisi), published by Dergah.yy, İstanbul, 1991. While working as a high school teacher, in 1973, I created my Kufi composition featuring the names of Allah, Muhammad, and the four caliphs for a book cover (Hadislerle Müslümanlık),
and my Kufi Besmele design for Aydın Bolak in 1974.
It was because of that Besmele design, which was discovered by chance in Enderun Sahafiye by Prof. Dr. Kaya Bilgegil, that I was appointed as a calligraphy artist and specialist in paleography and epigraphy. Thus, my university career began as a calligraphy artist in the Department of Turkish Literature in 1976, and just one year later, I was employed in the History Department of Atatürk University.
In April 2024, I created a new Kufi composition in response to a request, and this recent work inspired me to revisit and revise some of my earlier Kufi sketches.
Now, as a retired history professor, I have decided to showcase all of my Kufi calligraphy compositions in book form and to write about the history of Kufi scripture more broadly. I see this as a new opportunity to convey all of my ideas once again—perhaps more clearly than in my previous writings—illuminated by the profound light of the Kufi scripture. For this reason, I intend to offer some brief critiques on language and human knowledge in general before delving into the history of Kufi calligraphy. I will attempt to interpret the history of Kufi scripture within the framework of my own philosophy of history; adopting a holistic and multidisciplinary approach—that is, considering all the varied angles and perspectives employed by diverse disciplines. Let me state here that “all meaning is an angle,” and understanding cannot exist without perspective.
On the other hand, due to the special significance of language and the sacred scripture Qur’an in Islam, Kufi scripture may be debated from theological and semantic standpoints, since some linguists hold that language is God-given and not created by humans.
Indeed, Kufi script has been used primarily for writing the Qur’an for centuries, yet it is found everywhere—from buildings to instruments and even on clothing. Calligraphic writing has been the most formative element of Islamic culture, to the extent that it is the most distinctive and visible aspect of Islamic civilization. From the 7th to the 11th century, for five centuries, Kufic calligraphy was the most prominent feature of the cultural identity of the Muslim world, manifesting as a civilization of Kufi scripture. Consequently, Quranic verses were visible everywhere—from architecture to the ‘tiraz’ garments. The word of God, seemingly embodied by the Kufic calligraphy, as if it were the incarnation of the sacred “Kelam” (akin to the ‘Logos’ concept of Heraclitus or the incarnation of the word of God in flesh by Jesus)—was embodied and represented by the solemn character of the Kufi scripture of the Qur’an. It permeated every aspect of Islamic culture, everywhere. This brings to mind a verse from the Qur’an: “Ve lillâhi’l-maşrıku ve’l-mağrib. Fe’eynemâ tuvellû fe-semme vechullah”: “To God belong the East and the West; whithersoever you turn, there is the Face of God…”
Kufi Calligraphy from the Perspective of my Philosophy of History:
Sacred Text, Revelation, and the Ontology of Writing
اِقْرَأْ بِاسْمِ رَبِّكَ الَّذٖي خَلَقَۚ
,خَلَقَ الْاِنْسَانَ مِنْ عَلَقٍۚ
اِقْرَأْ وَ رَبُّكَ الْاَكْرَمُۙ
اَلَّذٖي عَلَّمَ بِالْقَلَمِۙ
عَلَّمَ الْاِنْسَانَ مَا لَمْ يَعْلَمْؕ
Qur’an /Alak
Recite: In the name of thy Lord who created
Created man of a blood-clot.
Recite: And thy Lord is the most Generous,
Who taught by the Pen
Taught Man, that he knew not
Qur’an/ The Blood-clot (1)
وَعَلَّمَ اٰدَمَ الْاَسْمَٓاءَ كُلَّهَا
And He taught Adam the names, all of them
Quran/ The Cow 31
Ma’nâ yı-kelâm şâhid i-mazmûn i-Hudâdır
Gönlüm sadefinden olur azrâ gibi peydâ
The meaning of the word professes
the hidden existence of God in it”
This word, likewise a virgin pearl, occurs in my heart which is the mother-of-pearl.” Şeydâ Dîvânı, Tevhid Kasidesi
.سم الله الرحمن الرحيم
الحمد لله الذي خلق القلم أولاً و كتب الكتاب المكنون بذلك القلم في اللوح المحفوظ . و فيه كتب كل المقدّرات، من البداية إلى يوم القيامة. هو الله الخالق لكل أمرٍ و شأن. و الشكر لا يعد لمن خلق الإنسان و علّمه البيان . و هو علّم آدم الأسماء كلّها، و علّم بالقلم ، و علّم الإنسان ما لم يعلم . لأن الوحي الأوّل كان اقرأ باسم ربّك و قيل في تلك الآية هو الذي علم بالقلم
.كما كان هذا القسم بالقلم في القرآن, ن و القلم و ما يسطرون
…و في القرآن له آية تدل على ماهیت القرآن. بل هو قرآن مجيد في لوحٍ محفوظ
صلوا على محمّد هو كشف الدجى بنور الوحي و نوّر قلوب العارفين به . و بدأ الخط الكوفي في عصره ليكتب آيات القرآن ولقد كان القرآن مصدر الفكر والحضارة الإسلامية كلها. والقرآن كتب بالخط الكوفي لعدة قرون. ولهذا السبب أصبح الخط الكوفي أشهر في تمثيل الحضارة الإسلامية. كما كان الان . وهذا من فضل ربي
In the name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful
Praise be to God who created the Pen first and the hidden book was written with that pen on the Preserved Tablet. In it are written all the decrees, from the beginning until the Day of Resurrection. He is God, the Creator of every matter and phenomen. Countless Gratitude is to the One who created man and taught him speech. He taught Adam all the names, taught with the pen, and taught man what he did not know. Because the first revelation was “Read in the name of your Lord,” and it also was said in that verse: “He is the one who taught with the pen.” As this oath was in the pen in the Qur’an Nun, by the pen, and what the lines it writes…And in the Qur’an there is a verse that indicates that Qur’an is eternal. But rather it is glorious Qur’an in a preserved tablet.
Pray for Muhammad, he removes darkness with the light of revelation and enlightens the hearts of those who know him. In his era, the Kufic script began to write verses of the Qur’an, and the Qur’an was the source of all Islamic thought and civilization. The Qur’an was written in Kufi script for centuries. For this reason, the Kufic script became a representation of Islamic civilization. As it was now. This is from the grace of my Lord.
Thus, silent letters of the kufi script had become an embodiment of Kelamullah/ the Word of God; displaying all the resonant spectrum of enchanting melodic incantations of the recitations of Qur`an verses and come to light and participate in every aspect of Islamic culture.
I. A Philosophical Perspective on Writing, Human Knowledge, History and Historical Significance of the Kufi Calligraphy
1. About Preserved Tablet/Lawh Mahfuz, Qur`an, Origines of the Language and Semantic Debates
The nature of writing kûfî calligraphy goes beyond to its material structure or symbolic letters; because it was the embodied face of the sacred word, manifested face of the sacred revelation of Qur’an. As if, it was the incarnation of the sacred Word of Allah; it was the first materialized form of Qur’an which indeed could be considered as recitations from some verses of Lawh Mahfuz (the preserved tablet); And Qur’an’s mediating role between the human heart and Allah, that is the soul of Qur`an had been embodied by kufi script. According to Qur’anic revelation, writing is not merely a record but a manifestation—an embodiment—of divine knowledge. As it is expressed, in the afore-mentioned epigraph, in the very first verses of the Qur’an:
“Recite in the name of your Lord who created—
Created man from a clinging substance.
Recite, and your Lord is the Most Generous—
Who taught by the pen—
Taught man what he did not know.” (Qur’an, 96:1–5)
The Pen (al-Qalam)’ as have been described in this verse by Qur’an, is not only an instrument of writing but of divine instruction. Here, the Pen is not only a tool for writing but a sacred symbol that records knowledge beforehand, foreseeing and instructing to become alive later, to come into the act of creation.
In fact, Qur’an itself also instructs to begin with God’s name and commands human beings to learn, to read, and to pursue knowledge. It is an interesting “mixtum compositum” that creation, knowledge, and writing mentioned all together in the first verses of Qur’an. Human existence, the capacity for learning, and the act of writing are intertwined in a singular ontological structure here. And the name of revelation, The Qur’an itself, means ‘to be recited’; that is, meaning itself is revealed in the heart of the words and apparently materialized and represented as kufi script’ and then become alive when it is recited as Qur’an.
Once upon a time I have written a poem about the Unity of God in my Divan (Şeydâ Dîvânı, Tevhid Kasidesi) and there is a stanza in that poem:
Ma’nâ yı-kelâm şâhid i-mazmûn i-Hudâdır
Gönlüm sadefinden olur azrâ gibi peydâ
“The meaning of the word professes
the hidden existence of God in it”
This word, likewise a virgin pearl,
occurs in my heart which is the mother-of-pearl.”
How is it possible that some strange sounds of a word might include a “meaning” and that word’s meaning can imply the hidden existence of God as Meaning. Here, the Nature holds a material face of existence like the sound of a word; but nature has also a hidden meaning in it as God. That is, God is the meaning of existence. Thus, unlike nature`s physical/material mode, there is also a metaphysical, meaning mode of nature. Nature`s physical face hides in it that sacred mode of meaning likewise being a pearl in the shell.
This ontological framework highlights here the metaphysical question of representation—how truth is made manifest. Here, the Qur’anic concept of the Lawḥ Maḥfūẓ (Preserved Tablet) becomes pertinent. The Qur’an itself, as a timeless text, is said to be inscribed on the eternal tablet:
بل هو قرآن مجيد في لوحٍ محفوظ
“Indeed, it is a glorious Qur’an,
In a Preserved Tablet.” (Qur’an, 85:21–22)
Here, The Lawḥ Maḥfūẓ/Preserved Tablet is understood as the cosmic ledger of divine decree, destiny, and knowledge. In this context, writing is not merely a communicative tool but a metaphysical register. The transcription of the Qur’an into written form does not reduce its timelessness; rather, it translates the eternal into the human realm of comprehension. Here, kufi script serves not only ontological but also a theophanic function as the drawn signs of it reflects and embodies the incarnation of the meaning by the words.
Islamic scholars have addressed these themes across theological, linguistic, and philosophical dimensions. Linguists such as Ibn Fāris and Ibn Jinnī maintained that language and writing possess a divine origin, grounding this belief in the verse:
وَعَلَّمَ اٰدَمَ الْاَسْمَٓاءَ كُلَّهَا
“And He taught Adam the names—all of them…” (Qur’an, 2:31)
Indeed, according to Qur’an, human language also had been taught to Adam by God; according to this verse, language is not a conventional communication instrument made by men.
This verse does not refer solely to the vocabulary acquisition but also to the naming of meanings, concepts, and even realities. Accordingly, writing is not simply a human invention but part of the ontological continuity of divine instruction—a vehicle of revelation, an embodiment of meaning, and a visible form of truth.
اِقْرَأْ وَ رَبُّكَ الْاَكْرَمُۙ
اَلَّذٖي عَلَّمَ بِالْقَلَمِۙ
Recite: And thy Lord is the most Generous,
Who taught by the Pen
Taught Man, that he knew not
Qur’an/ The Blood-clot
Writing, in this view, is not a creation but a tajallī—a divine manifestation.
It is believed by orthodox (sünnî) muslim that Qur’an is the Word of God brought by Gebrail to the consciousness of Muhammad; and being so, Qur’an is the incarnation of the word of God and has no beginning in time likewise the guarded scripture (Lawh Mahfuz).
Because of this Lawh Mahfuz, which is a metaphysical guarded book and includes all the events from the beginning until doomsday, naturally a theological problem would arise: Predestination… In that case, is there a free choice of human volition? If it is the Word of God brought by Gebrail to the prophet, is this word, the Qur’an is created in time or not? Because it is revealed from what God who created before everything else, with the Pen/Qalem, from the Guarded Book/Lawh Mahfuz. Even the name of revelation, i.e., “Qur’an”, means reading aloud, reciting, the name does not designate to a book in the usual sense. Perhaps it could be understood as reciting some verses of Lewhi Mahfuz as revealed to prophet’s consciousness. That is why the first word of Qur`an is Iqra/ Recite. And what about the nature of revelation as a mystical experience of the Prophet, as an altered state of consciousness? How and why he organized his believers to establish a ‘theonomous order’ which tied them by both faith and politics. Why Qur’an does not have a usual book format and why prophet did not ask from his ‘clerks of revelation’ to write down all the verses of the Qur’an regularly in a book format? All these questions and many similar questions also are discussed by many sectarian theologians of Islam beginning from the first century of Islam. Why Language, and even Writing, is regarded as not created by men but God-given to Adam according to some medieval Islamic scholars?
For example , Ibn al-Faris says that, ‘no doubt the script is not an artwork (sun’u) of humanity’, it is not man-made. And according to Qalqashandi, arabic letters also are revealed to Adam or prophet Hud’.
According to this view, writing is not merely a tool of communication but an extension of revelation and contemplation. It is the visual embodiment of the divine attribute of Speech (Kelām/Logos).
If writing stems from a divine source, then letters and symbols do not simply signify meaning—they embody and transmit it. Each grapheme becomes a theophany, not merely a sign. Alternatively, if writing is a human construct, then letters and symbols are arbitrary indicators whose meaning is produced through consensus and context.
Muhammed Antakî says in his book ‘el Vecîz fî Fıkh ül-Lüga’(p.25-27) ‘because of the above-mentioned verse of the Qur’an, ‘He taught Adam all the names (وَعَلَّمَ اٰدَمَ الْاَسْمَٓاءَ كُلَّهَا), some muslim scholars say that the language itself is not created by men but taught to Adam by God (Tevkîfî) and according to some other muslim scholars -who also speak quoting other Qur’anic verses; language came into existence culturally made by men ( bi’t-tevatu).
Within this Islamic intellectual tradition, this inquiry has largely revolved around the question of whether language is of divine origin (tawqīfī) or a human invention (isti‘lāḥī or taʿātī); yet, this issue is not merely a philosophical curiosity but an epistemological question that directly informs the meaning of writing itself—especially Sacred writing in Arabic—and, by extension, the semantic depth of the Kufi script.
According to Muhammad Antaki, such debates are not exclusive to Islamic thought. In Western philosophy too, the same question arises. The quest for the origin of language begins in ancient Greeks with this question: ‘is a name’s designation to the reality of a thing is created by men with convention or comes from the nature of man’ (is it taught by God to Adam?) According to Heraclit, language/logos is not made by men; that is, the name signifies the the named thing naturally. According to Democritos it is made by men; language also, likewise all other man-made elements of culture, made by conventions between people.’
Plato’s Cratylus famously stages the conflict between the view that names are “natural” (phýsei) and the view that they are conventional (thései). Do names reflect the essence of things, or are they arbitrary? This remains a central concern in modern philosophy of language. While Plato leans toward the idea that some names may be inherently appropriate, the nominalist tradition would later dominate Western discourse and thinkers such as John Locke, Ludwig Wittgenstein, and Saul Kripke reconceived the relationship between words and meaning through frameworks of mental representation, social usage, and linguistic practice. This dispute goes on in western philosophy until now but it is not necessary here to quote what other western philosophers say about this matter.
As transmitted in the book ‘Fıkh ul-Luga’ (semantics) also, İbni Faris says that Arabic language is tevkîfî (god-given) according to the afore-mentioned verse of the Qur’an that states God taught to Adam all the names. Ibni Faris does not only give this kind of evidence (naklî) which is based on Qur’an verses, but also make a reasoning (aklī) evidence that, “because we do not know any example of giving a name to something by the people who lived in the recent past, also we did not hear that companions of prophet has made new names or terms…” Yet the majority of muslim scholars say that `origin of the language is tevatu’ (by convention) and language is istilah (terminology); it is not made by ilham, vahiy (revelation) or tevkîf (God-given)’. For example, Kadı Ebubekir el Bâkıllânî says that both are possible: “inne t-ta’lim kad husile bi’l-ilhâm ey bi’l kuvveti, lekad vadaa allahu fi’l-insân meleketü’l halk, sümme terekehu yahluku alâ hevâihi” which means “Adam learned by revelation, that is the language is God-given or God gave to man ability to create and leave him to create as he wish”. Abū Bakr al-Bāqillānī and some other scholars also mentıoned the possibility that writing could have been developed gradually as a product of social convention and human intellect. According to this view, writing arises not from a sacred origin but from rational necessity and human adaptation. It is not tawqīfī (divinely fixed) but ta‘ātī (emergent from mutual human exchange). This dichotomy over the origin of language has profound implications for the relationship between writing and meaning.
Indeed, this is a universal philosophical question about meaning and representation.
In fact, this is a difficult subject in semantics and I know it cannot be fully expressed with some few and simple statements. For example, Saul Kripke has made large semantical and logical discussions about ‘naming’ in his book ‘Naming and Necessity’. I will mention here these contemporary logical and semantical arguments about naming merely making an interesting excerpt from Saul Kripke:
‘Sometimes we discover that two names have the same referent, and express this by an identity statement.so, for example, you see a star in the evening and it’s called ‘Hesperus’ (evening star). We see a star in the morning and call it ‘Phosphorus (morning star). Well, then, in fact we find that it’s not a star, but is the planet Venus and that Hesperus and Phosphorus are in fact same. So we express this by ‘Hesperus is Phosphorus’…Also we may raise the question whether a name has any reference at all when we ask, e.g., whether Aristotle ever existed… what really is queried is whether anything answers to the properties we associate with the name-in the case of Aristotle, whether any one greek philosopher produced certain works, or at least a suitable number of them.`
Kripke’s famous example—the dual naming of the planet Venus as Phosphorus (morning star) and Hesperus (evening star)—exemplifies the complexity of reference and naming. Although the two names refer to the same celestial object, their different usages suggest distinct epistemic paths. This complicates the question of whether writing merely reflects reality or actively constitutes it. The act of naming—and by extension writing—is not merely descriptive but generative of meaning.
In fact, it is possible to discuss in this context Leibnitz’s law of identity and `identity of indiscernibles’, but I do not wish to delve more deeply into the philosophical implications of Qur’anic verses; yet I have to warn that words or names may imply more than its seemingly apparent and clear meaning. Indeed, Words and names may imply much more difficult problematic philosophical matters than it has been understood by their traditional usage in the language. And so, sometimes they even transcend the capacity of human reasoning. I do not wish to debate here any human belief, so I will not discuss here Leibnitz’s law; but I suspect that, if I could dispute this idea of the “identity of indiscernibles” of Leibnitz in a large context; in that case, not only naming but even the identity of the named things could seem dubious. Let me remind here that identity is the first principle of logic, i.e. “a thing is what it is”, other rules of logic also derived from this identity principle; and being so, all logical human reasoning depends on identity principle. The most satisfactory statement of identity was indeed, “ego sum qui sum”, which is said to Moses on the Mount Sinai according to Old Testament. Genesis II, 13. Which means also the absolute identity (God) which never changes oor die (huve l-baqi). Yet scholars, especially some theologians, do not understand that human knowledge, language and reasoning capacity of humanity are not capable of answering satisfactorily every problem of truth we have come face to face. I will repeat here a beautiful statement by Hallâc: “Truth is true only for itself!”
That is, within Islamic thought, these philosophical concerns converge on writing. Kufic script, in this regard, is not merely a stylistic choice but a material manifestation of the sacred ontological and theological dimensions of writing. It is not meant only to be read but to be contemplated, visualized, and intuitively grasped.
But I do not wish to discuss those names ‘Qur’an (recitation), Kitabu meknûn/Levhi mahfuz (kept and guarded book) with all of the historical and theological implications of these names; i.e., predestination/fate problem or the role of man in the actions of historical events. After all, this is an essay about the calligraphy of kufi, not particularly theology or the “sacred scripture Qur’an itself”.
2. Theological and Cosmological Significance of Kufic Script
Thus, in the early centuries of Islamic civilization, Kufic script emerged not only as a mode of writing but also as a metaphysical structure through which the sacred was represented. It serves as a conduction channel for transferring revelation into spatial and temporal registers. It is the symbolically embodied aspect of articulating metaphysical truths as revealed by Qur`an.
Thus, the usage of Kufic script in the earliest Qur’anic manuscripts enabled a strong identification between the form of writing and the content it carried. Besides, writing a Qur’an manuscript was not an easy task in the fırst century of Islam, because there was no paper then and calligraphers are forced to write a few werses on big pages of parchoments; Qur’an manuscripts are made from hundreds of sheepskins which are used to produce a Qur’an manuscript. Certainly, the used material also had made a big impact on the minimalist and angular style of the kufi calligraphy of Qur’an. Within this framework, geometric composition of the script might be perceived as a visual symbol of divine mystery. Its symmetrical balance of vertical and horizontal lines seems like the divine order embedded in the universe. The space between letters, the proportional heights and widths letters, were functional features—but they also became revered as part of a sacred style that reinforced the sanctity of the message.
Let me remind here Ibn al-ʿArabī’s theory of the “ontology of letters” which is especially illuminating. According to Ibn al-ʿArabī, every letter is a theophany—an outward manifestation of one of the metaphysical realities contained in divine knowledge. Letters are not accidental phonetic tools; they are expressions of divine being. Writing becomes a surface upon which these theophanies appear. The fixed geometric nature of Kufic script shows its ontological and metaphysical charge more visibly potent.
Ibn al-ʿArabī says: “All praise be to Allah, who instills meanings into the heart of words.” For Ibn al-ʿArabī, all letters are symbolic representations of God’s creative act. A letter is not merely a sound unit but the primordial shape of a being. Ibn al-ʿArabī’s theory of letters elevates this discussion to a mystical plane. In his thought, letters become the metaphysical building blocks of existence, each reflecting an aspect or attribute of the Divine Names.
This idea again resonates in the mystical dictum of al-Ḥallāj:
“Letters are bodies, and meanings are their souls.”
As if, the architectural form of Kufic script embodies a belief that letters carry a metaphysical essence. Kufic calligraphy solemnly displays and suggests the aesthetical and visual expression of this reverence for the sacred words.
These theological implications of Kufic script is not confined to the shapes of letters alone. The materials with kufi inscriptions or the space it occupies like mihrab, also contribute to its semantic richness. Qur’an verses written in Kufic script are not only vehicles of oral transmission but served also as visual representations of divine revelation. Some Qur’anic verses in Kufic script were often integrated into architectural surfaces—thus making revelation to merge with space and amplifying the symbolic power of the script.
This intermingling of writing with cosmic order is implied by Qur’anic verses such as the opening of Sūrat al-Qalam:
“Nūn. By the pen and what they inscribe.” (Qur’an, 68:1)
Here, The Pen is not an ordinary object but as aforementioned it is the first creation of God, inscribing divine decree and order into existence. Hadith traditions also affirm this interpretation, stating that the first thing God created was the Pen. Here, writing signifies not only knowledge production but also the act of inscribing destiny and existence.
Kufic calligraphy, according to this cosmological symbolism, seems both static and dynamic. It seems majestic and static in its geometric fixity; but also dynamic because it embodies revelation and continually acquires new layers of meaning in time. Its static form suggests permanence, but its dynamic semiotic potential emphasize the timeless relevance of the sacred message.
Moreover, the structural design of Kufic script could imply a reverence for an aesthetical feeling which aligns closely with the Islamic concept of tawḥīd—the oneness and unity of God. Its repetitive, proportionate, majestic visual character commonly used on important buildings makes Kufic calligraphy an aesthetic affirmation of divine unity and also an identity symbol of Islamic civilization. Each letter occupies a specific place in this visual cosmos; nothing is arbitrary. In such a way, Kufic script becomes a visual and symbolic articulation of tawḥīd at both the formal and conceptual levels.
It really occupies a distinctive position within this representational framework.E.g., its geometric construction produces a space where form and meaning meet. Its solemn and majestic abstraction invites not only textual reading but also intuitive contemplation. Kufic does not assert meaning directly; it intimates, alludes, and beckons the observer toward a metaphysical horizon.
As if, Kufic script visually expresses the belief that letters are not just phonetic units but ontological entities. Al-Ḥallāj’s dictum –“Letters are bodies, meanings are their souls”- resonates here as a metaphysical hermeneutic.
Kufic script, then, does not merely transcribe a text—it transmits the very structure of its meaning. The ratios between letters, their symmetrical layout, recurrence, and internal logic are not simply visual choices but they reflect an architecture of meaning. Kufic is simultaneously a bearer and producer of meaning, an aesthetic system through which ontological truths are encoded.
This understanding of Kufic calligraphy marks it as a unique expression of the Islamic conception of the relationship between writing and truth. While preserving sacred content, it also suggests that meaning is not static but always subject to reinterpretation. Kufic’s formal rigidity offers a visual anchor through which shifting interpretations may gain stability.
In conclusion, debates over the origin of language and writing are not merely historical but ontological and epistemological in nature. Kufic calligraphy stands at the center of this discourse: it embodies the sacred, provokes reflection on meaning, and channels metaphysical resonance. In the silence of its letters, one hears the echoes of a vast cultural and theological vision. It is not just a calligraphy—it is a metaphysical architecture, a form of thought, and a sanctuary for meaning.
This is why the versatile symbolism of Kufic script, appears so often in Islamic architecture. It usually adorns domes, mihrabs, or arches, so Kufic becomes as an act of devotion, contemplation, and transmission of knowledge. Kufic inscriptions of sacred texts onto architectural surfaces show within this uniformity of style that space itself becomes a symbol of tewhid (unity of Allah), a bearer of the unique meaning and identity of Islamic civilization.
That is, Kufic script manifests the integral interrelationship among knowledge, revelation, destiny, and aesthetics in Islam. Its geometric form implies cosmic order; its metaphysical dimension transforms letters into symbols of being. Kufic calligraphy is not merely writing—it seems as if it is the embodiment of theological truth and a sacred way through which the unseen is made visible.
On the other hand, there is a striking similarity between levh- i mahfuz /guarded plate/ preserved plate (which Qur’an also means reciting some of the verses from that guarded book revealed by archangel Gebrail to prophet Muhammed’s heart) and contemporary simulation practice. As if, this writing act resembles the contemporary practice of writing some algorithm codes of a computer-game which later comes into play whenever you wish to play that game. Indeed, those verses of Qur’an about the guarded tablet (levhi mahfuz) reminds me some contemporary discussions about whether this universe, the existence, is real or a simulation or what not. As it is known, some virtual reality games are only written algorithms, they are written by a code-script and it becomes alive to be seen and played in computer games on a screen. Nowadays some physic theorists seriously argue that universe could be a simulation written and played likewise those virtual reality games. Sure, it could be thought so, metaphorically or seriously; and it is interesting to see that what Qur’an describes as Pen and Guarded Scripture (levhi mahfuz) articulates exactly the same idea: God created Pen and the pen wrote every events from the beginning to the doomsday. That is, like a virtual game, what happened in this universe is written/ or coded and predestined in that guarded book (levhi mahfuz/kitabu meknûn) and then all events happen according to the codes of that guarded-book which means our universe is only a simulation, there should be a real existence but this world is not real; it is just like a virtual game, a virtual reality.
Anyway because of the belief about above-mentioned levhi mahfuz/guarded book, same simulation metaphor used by a Turkish poet too. I will include the calligraphy of Neyzen Tevfik poem also which says:
Yazılmış alnına her neyse fi’liin, reddi nâkaabil/ Hüner, bu defter-i âmâl-i ömrü hoşca dürmektir
Musaddaktır bu î’lâm tâ ezelelden muhr-i hikmetle/ Cihâna gelmeden maksad bu tatbikâtı görmektir”
“Whatever is written on the forehead of the deed, its rejection is impossible
Skill is to neatly fold this book of life’s deeds.
This declaration is confirmed with the seal of wisdom from eternity.
The purpose for coming into the world is to witness these practices.
We know already from neurophysiology and consciousness studies that, what we know as the world or existence, is a simulated picture made by human consciousness. As metaphorically explained by Donald Hoffmann, human consciousness is like a computer interface which is a simplified but useful description of the world. I remember here Edgar A. Poe’s beautiful poem which he says:
`All that we see or seem
Is but a dream within a dream.’
3. On Existence, Knowledge and the Limits of Human Consciousness
We have spoken about prophetic revelation of Qur’an and its theological implications.} but what about ordinary methods used by humankind in search of wisdom? For a gratifying understanding of an investigation one must be aware of different perspectives imposed by different standpoints, because kufic script itself is the most common and identifying facet of islamic culture. Indeed, a multi-discipliner approach is necessary to grasp the full implications of this subject; that is, a larger framework of understanding provided by a con-spective/ holistic philosophy of history. But then, to adapt a holistic perspective means one must try to grasp the meaning in a different light with every different standpoint; in this case, this discourse becomes too much enlarged and it will include every important aspect of human thought and destiny.
Nevertheless, I will try to define, as short as possible, my classification of different standpoints and varieties of explanatory perspectives used in search of wisdom. According to my judgement there are seven pillars of wisdom, that is seven way of constructing perspectives as different kinds of interpretation in search of understanding. I think my classification of these different perspectives could determine the method and content of the disciplines as differing viewpoints for making sense of its content of that discipline according to the spesific perspective it belongs to. That is the viewpoint of History is retrospective (retro-spectare) science is pro-spectare/prospection, philosophy is inspection, art is introspection, mystical experience is introspection by illumination, religious wisdom also provides a perspective for orientation and philosophy of history should have taken a holistic perspective ; i.e., ‘t should take into account all of these different perspectives trying to merge them as a holistic “con-spection”. The purpose of my classification of disciplines according to a perspective is to show the limits of capabilities of every discipline by its differing perspective and limited angle of its standpoint. In short, every kind of knowledge or understanding should be assured that there are many different perspectives for making sense of a subject; all of these understanding styles need to be filtered and re-examined and also re-evaluated by a holistic philosophy of history conspectively for a real understanding. So be it! And this is why I am trying to comprehend all of the aspects of kufic scripture from this holistic perspective of my philosophy of history.
But according to my philosophy of history not only these perspectives of understanding and reasoning tools of humanity are all considered some limited ways of comprehension, but also human understanding of reality is a narrow angle beginning from the standpoint of “consciousness-capacity” of humankind.
Perhaps, I have to speak here little bit more about human consciousness, because, what we know about any culture or what we enjoy or hate in the world, all knowledge depends on our consciousness. And there are many unsolved facets of human consciousness. Later on, comes the semantical problems of human languages and also the problem of knowledge and defects of human reasoning. Yet, in spite of mankind’s limited ability of comprehension, we have to make sense of our studies taking into consideration every different perspective about the nature of those studied subjects, to be sure, as far as possible for in the limits of human abilities. Later on, comes the evaluation of those mentioned seven disciplines and epistemological value of human knowledge in general. According to my understanding, a philosophy of history should provide a holistic understanding of wisdom to attain an orientation and a projective vision of future about the destiny of humankind, if it is going to be fruitful.
There is this verse in The Bible, Corinthians 13:11: “Videmus nunc per speculum in aenigmate: tunc autem facie ad faciem. Nunc cognosco ex parte: tunc autem cognoscam sicut et cognitus sum.”: For now, we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.” This verse is rephrased by St Jerome, and he says: “per speculum videmus in aenigmate; et ex parte cognoscimus, et ex parte prophetamus”; that is, ”we see in an enigma through the looking glass in the dark: we comprehend in part, and in part we prophetize to foreshow events.” In fact, this is a statement that compares knowledge and belief. But consciousness also reflects the reality just like that. My consciousness is the mirror of my mind, and the reality is some enigmatic light rays reflected by the eye to the mirror of the mind, but they are reflected only in part, i.e., only visible light frequencies between 400-800nanometers. Indeed, most of the photons of the visible light again infiltrated twice by the two layers of the retina of the human eye. Then processed as ionized electro-chmic events separately with so many brain neurons to be perceived at last; as movement, color, shape etc. And then th’s partial sense datums are united again constructed by the mind as the picture of reality. In such a way, we are made aware of this enigma of the world in our speculum mentis, within the mirror of the mind. It is clear that the mind cannot touch to that enigmatic reality itself directly, but the mind can build only an impression of reality by its consciousness. Although that dictum had been said in a context of theology, it is also a beautiful and terse description about human knowledge and the position of historians and historical knowledge.
That is, consciousness aware of the outside world only by sensory inputs. I cannot doubt from the contents of my own consciousness, but let us remember that there is more than that impression which is reflected in the mirror of the mind. I can never doubt that it is my consciousness, it belongs to myself, and I am made aware of myself with my self-consciousness and same consciousness makes sense of the foreign natural forces or realities; like electromagnetic force which touches and disturbs my eye’s retina as light photons, or the weak and strong forces of atoms as material, touchable and sensible objects, either soft liquid or hard solid materials, and also gravity because of the inner ear’s sense of balance. They are not me, not myself, but some foreign forces of reality/nature that affect me. Thanks to my consciousness, I am made aware of those natural forces as an alien reality which is independent and not related to my-self. Metaphorically speaking, our skulls/cranium resembles the speculum of St Jerome, let us suppose that the eyes are the doors of cranium, then it also seems plausible to compare it with the Cave Metaphor of Plato. My consciousness and my Mind resides in the cranium of my head like a caveman; It senses only very limited and weak part of some light spectrum which comes throughout the eye’s door., I can see only a dim light ray reflected in the mirror of my mind or let me say, on the walls of the cave. If only I could go outside the cave, then I would see a very different reality than the shadows on the wall of the cave, or reflected in my mind’s mirror. From this metaphor comes the discussion of the world of ideas world and reality.
But can we leave the cave and go to see the outside world? My self or my mind cannot walk and go outside from the cave of its cranium/skull and make a direct contact with reality. In this case, the mind is forced to make an inference from what it senses about reality, a second-hand inferenced knowledge about the alien outside world by using the mirror/ wall of its consciousness, some impressions about the reality as the reflected shadows on the wall of a cave. It really resembles Plato’s famous cave metaphor or St Jerome’s dark mirror. I think Donald Hoffman’s metaphor of interface is also very good consciousness really resembles the computer interface we see on the desktop of a computer. Consciousness is an interface or an illusion of reality created by mind.
But then, if our consciousness also is a second-hand knowledge, what we can know directly about reality-in-itself? What we know for sure? The only thing I can not doubt is that I am Consciouss and also that consciousness belongs to me (it is not necessary now to speak about many different consciousness modes). That is, the most undisputable thing is not consciousness but rather the self-awareness attribute of that consciousness. According to the modern physicalist viewpoint of consciousness, even that self-awareness also is a construction of the mind. Sure as a Philosopher I can doubt and debate everything. But if you do not accept the validity of selfhood also then there is no dependable or unsusceptible ground on which we can stand and debate with each other. According to my judgment that self-awareness is the most basic and undebatable identity principle. There can be no logic without identity. Ego sum qui sum: I am that I am. that is a tautology that refers to itself with identity principle,and all logical rules depends on the identity. Anything is what it is! But our rational reasoning instruments has also their limitations and aberrations. I only mention here that, according to my judgement, Logic, language and math- these rational reasoning tools also have their intrinsic paradoxes and limitations which we can not eliminate easily.
4. On the Limits of Language and Meaning
As once Wittensgenstein also said: ‘Philosophy is a struggle against the language which is deceiving the mind’…If only, I could speak in large details about all of these related subjects. I envy those ardent writers who wrote large volumes of books; and I say, ‘if only’, because, even though I have already written some books about my own philosophy of history; they all remained as incomplete works lacking some aspects of the history here and there. Such an endeavor was a “never-ending story” which had never satisfied me. As it is said by Salomon in Ecclesiastes: ‘cunctae res difficiles non potest eas homo explicare sermone non saturatur oculus visuauris impletur auditu’ : All things are difficult and wearisome; Man is not able to tell it. The eye is not satisfied with seeing, Nor is the ear filled with hearing.’ (Ecclesiastes I-8) In short, every word is incomplete, man is not capable speaking.
Let us return to semantics and speak once again about the language itself. I have to tell what I think about the capacity of human languages too. Here I will mention briefly my judgements about some general aspects of human languages.
For now, ı will articulate some of my ideas as short judgements only jurisdictively: human languages are not capable of conveying truth, such as being a fully trustworthy description of living reality, because of the limits of, not only human consciousness, but also so many great flaws inherent in every human language. First of all every language categorizes things according to its own historical development and its own grammatical construction; i.e., every language describes passage of time differently. For example, Arabic grammar has only three different time tense: past present and future (mazi, muzari, istikbal). Yet I remember, though I can not recall the source of this saying now, once I had read that a scholar of semitic languages says that arabic language also has ‘imperfect tense’. May be it can not be a grammatical tense but could be a way of telling an imperfect time tense with some descriptive phrases. Anyway, Man can not understand the Time perfectly; we do not even know “what is time”, so it is only natural that human languages have many different time tenses.
Let us remember that Human languages are full of abstract, universal concepts. Man could not think if there was not any universal concept, but let us again remember that all universals are dubious like every generalization is. Sure I can not discuss at large all the arguments of platonists, realists, nominalists or conceptualists here, but universals are not really exists in the world extensionally. In addition, every human language is full of biased phrases such as judgements of intensional logic because of the conditioning nature of every human culture. More over, a judgement of intensional logic is not valid from the perspective of logic; but perhaps 80 per cent of every human language is made up with these universals and so many biased phrases that is articulated with an intensional logic. Logical propositions should be expressed as extensional logic if it refers at all to a to a concrete thing. If so, then the linguistic descriptions are always dubious because they always distort the reality and mislead thoughts and conducts of man.
Let us add that, not only universals but every word of language might be considered deceitful because of distorting reality more or less; because a word can be only a representation of some reality, a word is merely a metaphysical symbol and as Semanticist Alfred Korzybsky put it :’ The map is not territory.’ Likewise, “the word is not the thing”. To name something with a word does not necessarily imply that the referred thing, named thing, really exists either intensionally or res extensa. A name may designate a thing, and writing also metaphorically represents a thing. But a thing is not necessarily signified truthfully by a linguistic name, sign or symbol. As Immanuel Kant put it: ‘the thing in itself can not be known’, we know only appearances (phenomenon). Let us also remember that, there are many criters of truth in philosophy, not only semantical or coherent theory of truth but also many others, such as correspondence theory of truth and pragmatical, performative, sentential theories etc. All in all, as Salomon put it in eccesiastes, cunctae res difficiles, non potest eas homo explicare sermone… All things are difficult and wearisome; Man is not able to tell it.
I wish to remind here the famous ‘regress argument’ of Sextus Empiricus:
‘Those who claim for themselves to judge the truth are bound to possess a criterion of truth. This criterion, then, either is without a judge’s approval or has been approved. But if it is without approval, whence comes it that it is truthworthy? For no matter of dispute is to be trusted without judging. And, if it has been approved, that which approves it, in turn, either has been approved or has not been approved, and so on ad infinitum.[*]
*. Sextus Empiricus. Against the Logicians trans. R.G. Bury (Loeb edn) (London: W. Heinemann, 1935) p. 179
5. Some additional evaluations about Art, Science, Philosophy, Religion and Mystical Experience
Art is art; it does not have a claim of truth, but beauty and harmony. So art is free to create something whimsically; but again, history is something else though it might be told in some art form of narration. Historian is not free to imagine historical events fictionally likewise historical novels. History in fact, is only a historiography; because the historical events themselves which occurred in the past time can not be known really and satisfactorily even by the actors of those events. Let us imagine we have sufficient knowledge about some historical events, but could we articulate and describe those events of history as satisfactory as, for example, like Tolstoy’s War and Peace? I think, to describe the whole series of events and people as truely as that masterpiece, exceeded even the capacity of human mind. Unfortunately, only through dubious historical knowledge one may understand little bit what is the experience of humanity about the progress of events and their ultimate results. I will not speak more about History here, because, I have already published my thoughts about the epistemology of historiography in a long article; so, I think it is enough to add that article at the end of this book as an annex for the more curious reader. See annex II.
Then comes Science on the stage and it claims that the scientific subjects can be tested and being so experimental, at least “inductively” shows that the scientific claims are more trustworthy. Science is about physical nature of matter, so that, it is all about the nature and of conceivable dead matter. Whenever scientists wish to strengten their scientific arguments theoretically, they use mathematics as far as possible, because mathematical formulas are provable; and because they depend on deductive reasoning, math is stronger than the inductive reasoning of scientific methods. Yet, ‘math is a first class metaphysic’ quote= Oswald Spengler; that means, to strenghten theoretical physic we use the metaphysical language of math though science tends to deny inconceivable metaphysical issues.
When it comes to Philosophy, first of all it means theoretical thought, and now I remember the saying of aristotle in his poetika, ‘istoria/history is all about unique special events and is not a suitable subject for making theoria; even poetry is more general than history’. Philosophers make wonderful systematic theories of everything in a logically consistent way but all of their sayings remain in the scope of some semantical analyses of linguistic concepts. According to my judgement some magnificient philosophical systems might be very consistently constructed, but because they use simple two valued aristotle logic as the reasoning instrument, it can not touch and understand even physical reality. Because contemporary Quantum mechanics of physic can not compromise with that two-valued aristotelian logic. Because as Heisenberg saidin his book “Physic and Philosophy” “imppossibility of the third option rule of logic does not apply in quantum mechanics”, that is, even the solid matter of microphysics can not be comprehended by philosophy. Only the physics of daily life, i.e., newtonian physic, is comprehensible by the philosophers but neither quantum mechanics nor cosmology. But philosophy is all about making consistent constructions of theories though it is forced to remain in semantical realms of language. Yet it teaches one how to think and how to doubt. Even though, because of the scepticism about old systematical philosophies, contemporary philosophy also tend to be analytical and epistemological instead of being synthetical as meaningful philosophy should be. Yet ‘philosophical principles can only be understood in their concrete expression in history” quote tolstoy. Without enough philosophical understanding, one tends to believe everyhing without doubt. That is why without philosopical/dialectical maturity, one can not think consistently and can not doubt ideas even whenever it is surely necessary to question them. In short Philosophy is absolutely necessary to make you alert in front of dubious issues.
For example latins say: ‘sapiens nihil affirmat quod non probet!’ But as a very sceptical philosopher, I can doubt even mathematical proofs questioning its fundamenatal axioms or postulats; saying only two words ‘petitio principii!’ which means, ‘your fundamental principles as axioms or postulats need to be proven at first!’ If I do not accept the euclidian axiom that ‘the shortest distance between two points is a straight line’, though it seems very plausible and convincing to our eyes and consciousness; then the euclidian proofs of the geometry depending on that postulate collapses. That is why come into existence so many different geometries, (Lobachevsky, Riemann, Poincare, Hilbert geoetries and so on) beginning from the 18th century. In addition, though most of the mathematical reasoning depends on two-valued aristotelian logic and built on consistency of mathematical reasoning, even math includes some reasoning problems like Cantor’s famous continuum hyphothesis and Goedel’ls theorem.
As for Religion or Theology, they are very important historical beliefs of human societies which bonds individuals of society to each other as a strong instrument of social cohesion. Religion inspired men to act all together to build a civilization, it was the reason and cause of many great events of history, so a good historian should respect the religions. Grand theological explanations and constructions of a religion comes into existence in time but then this constructed theology and many different sectarian viewpoints of that theology can change or re-evaluate or sometimes reconstruct the history of its own religion. Since it is all about history of that religion and its metaphysical beliefs, in time, it might become a very developed thelogical system and discusses all the matters of humanity in its scope and methodology, sometimes logically inferring absolute results and judgements, inferring from the beliefs of the religion. Theological reasoning can make different interpretations of even core beliefs of religion for the sake of the consistency of a theological system. It seems meaningful to theologians if the discussed matter remains in the scope of those theological studies. But beliefs tend to be assured of itself, and theologians forced to speak according to a credo, so they speak as if their belief system is an absolute truth and it can be proved logically. In fact, their arguments are only a debate, a reasoning style which uses only some inferences according to the rules aristotelian logic about the historical inheritence of the beliefs of a society. (In Western cİvilization and İslamic Civilization other civilizations are something else), This is why I consider some historical accounts dubious when it depends on some theological considerations. After all, a man or a society may believe anything whether it is believable or absurd, belief is neither math nor science, theology is only a sytematic knowledge of historical beliefs; so it can not be proven. After all it is possible to say “credo quia absurdum” or as St anselm says,“credo ut intelligam”. As my readers should have noticed, I have raised a very tough critisism even about mathematical proofs arguing by the famous phrase ‘petitio principii’. This is why I consider some statements of historians and theologians as dubious statements; and so I do not wish to accept thelogical implications of kufic script at face value as true statements. Anyway there are many different sectarian views of theological matters which are related with the history of the Qur’an.
There remains only Mystical Experience as a different claim of experiencing existence, in my classification of disciplines. If one has such kind of experience, it may convince him about the trustworthines of some metaphysical experiences like Revealation/vahy or other extra ordinary metaphysical events. Mystical experience is not a normal daily life consciousness of humanity but an “altered state” of consciousness. There are many kinds of conscious states, and even pragmatist William James acknowledges that mystical experiences usually make a strong and permanent imprint on the person who experience it, in his book ‘The Varieties of Religious Experience’. And According To Henry Bergson, religious beliefs of orthodoxy is the static religion as an establishment, but the mystical interperetation of it is a dynamical religion. Great artists any mystics are aware of the illuminations coming from spiritual realms so they may have some more understanding about the claim of revelation such as Qur’an. In any way mystical experience is a different consciousness state which is an intensive experience of reality comparing to the ordinary, awaken life consciousness. But it is subjective; id est, this experience of altered kind of consciousness is real only for the person himself who experiences it.
6. On History Itself, Historiography and Philosophy of History
Moreover, history of the kufic s c r i p t u r e is a convenient and Perfect example, to dispute t h e g e n e r a l n a t u r e of historical knowledge. In addition, surely it is possible to discuss the role of historical knowledge, semantics, human knowledge and beliefs in general; yet as I already mentioned, if we take a holistic perspective, we could debate all the related subjects about human destiny in this context. ‘In history, everything is related with everything else!’
In history we do not know what happened in the past, but we know only historical documents and relics. Once I was speaking on history at ISAM (islamic research center), then I had compared all historical remnants to the famous poetry of Imru al Qays ,” kıfâ nebki min zikrâ habîbî ve menzili”: “Let’s stop here and cry, remembering the beloved and our home town, the distance she passed through”. That is, all we have only historical remnants; they are solely some relics of the past events. Looking at them, we try to imagine those past events just like Imru al Qays imagines and remembers his beloved looking at the relics of camel caravan. Knowledge about historical remnants can be a science and could be investigated by scientific methods since they are existing material objects. This is the only scientific aspect of history.
In fact we do not know for sure whence arabic script come from. These are only some predictive arguments of orientalists that it might come from the nabatean script, according to other orientalists, it might be a developed form of musnad script still others guess that arabic script influenced by syriac. There are even definitively different tendencies preferences of one or other vıew according to different echols like french, german or british ecols of orientalists.
In fact, the kufi script and arabic script and history of arabs in general is a perfect example of the dubious feature of all historical knowledge. As Will Durant beautifully articulated in his book, “The Lessons of History”: “To begin with, do we really know what the past was, what actually happened, or is history ‘a fable’ not quite ‘agreed upon’?” Our knowledge of any past event is always incomplete, probably inaccurate, beclouded by ambivalent evidence and biased historians, and perhaps distorted by our own patriotic or religious partisanship. Most history is guessing, and the rest is prejudice.” Napoleon phrased it more wittily which probably W. Durant alludes: “ what is history but a fable agreed upon!”
Let us quote Napoleon once more: “Since history is not an objective reality, but only an imaginative reconstruction of vanished events, the pattern that appears useful and agreeable to one generation is never entirely so to the next.”
But history itself as past events has passed away and gone forever and what is known as historical narration is only a historiography which is what we try to understand and narrate about past events based on interpretations of those relics. As W. Durant beautifully articulated in The Lessons of History:“Obviously historiography cannot be a science. It can only be an industry, an art, and a philosophy- an industry by ferreting out the facts, an art by establishing a meaningful order in the chaos of materials, a philosophy by seeking perspective and enlightenment. In philosophy we try to see the part in the light of the whole; in the ‘the philosophy of history’ we try to see this moment in the light of the past. We know that in both cases this is a counsel of perfection; total perspective is an optical illusion. We do not know the whole of man’s history; there were probably many civilizations before the Sumerian or the Egyptian; we have just began to dig! We must operate with partial knowledge, and be provisionally content with probabalities; in history, as in science and politics, relativity rules, and all formulas should be suspect. ‘History smiles at all attempts to force its flow into theoretical patterns or logical grooves; it plays havoc with our generalizations, breaks our rules; history is baroque.’ Perhaps, within these limits, we can learn enough from history to bear reality patiently, and to respect one another’s delusions.”
Then, Historical knowledge about all the historical relics becomes dubious if historical understanding changes according to the historian’s interpretation= and taste; therefore it can only become an art or a philosophy of history. I have already written elsewhere about epistemological value of historiography, in “The Quest of Meaning Throughout Time”, implying that historical narration is only a conjectural belief about some historical events:
“Historian has to imagine the flow of events in history, that is, how could it be possible that the river of events have been formed and taken a special river-bearing for the course of events which might have been flowed. It is so hard to describe this awakened dream of consciousness – this self deceptive imagination of historian – that I cannot help but repeat that strong statement of the Antiquarian’s view of history, “sans aultre preuve que de simples conjectures dece qui pouvoit avoir este”: “it is only a guess, simply a conjectured belief without proof, since we can conceive that it was possible to occur (as implied by our imagination); then, presumably in any case, it really had happened so.” I will not repeat all of my epistemological analysis written in this essay but simply repeat one more paragraph from that essay:
“That is, a historical event could be, at most, an ‘imaginatively constructed and believed’ explanation of a historian. There remains only this ‘ratio credentis’: we might believe a historian on the basis of his professional authority.”
If so, what are the ends aimed by historiography? and what could be the justifications of historiography? It is to narrate illustratively in a proper form what might have been discovered about history by the research and imagination of historians as meaningfully stated by the aforesaid Antiquarian. And historians always try to write history as they imagine: that is, they try to change the past according to their wishful thinking and ideology. This is also a ridiculous and whimsical wish: they try to convince some people that according to their imagined version of the story of the past is definitely true. A historical evidence cannot give any sufficient and necessary reason to prove that the indicated event is true, merely for the reason of being reported and described by it: although it might seem a strong evidence, there could be no ‘ratio veritatis’, not any proven justification that ‘the event’ had actually occurred ‘as definitely as it has been told’ by that official document, witness, historian or whatsoever. We can always suspect and deny its reliability.
As stated by Stephen J Shoemaker: ‘Historians are rarely able to prove absolutely that something did happen, or did not happen, particularly for matters of great antiquity or when dealing with the formative history of a particular community, which is often a very active site of shifting memories.’ C.k.P.38
‘Taking little bits out of a great many books which no one has ever read, and putting them together in one book which no one ever will read’ quote carl becker. And There is cynical saying which I do not remember which historian said that: ‘history does not exists until a historian writes it’.
But actual historical events can not be known even by whom who experienced them. I will quote here from Carl Becker again: xx
‘No doubt throughout all past time there actually occurred a series of events which, whether we know what it was or not, constitutes history in some ultimate sense. Nevertheless, much the greater part of these events we can know nothing about, not even that they occurred; many of them we can know only imperfectly; and even the few events that we think we know for sure we can never be absolutely certain of, since we can never revive them, never observe or test them directly. The event itself once occurred, but as an actual event it has disappeared; so that in dealing with it the only objective reality we can observe or test is some material trace which the event has left—usually a written document. With these traces of vanished events, these documents, we must be content since they are all we have; from them we infer what the event was, we affirm that it is a fact that the event was so and so. ‘(excerpted from this website https://cooperative-individualism.org/becker-carl_what-is-historiography-1938-oct.pdf)
In fact, what we know about history of Arabs, Arabic script, prophet Muhammad and Qur’an and all of the other stories related with the first century of Islamic History is all secondhand knowledge inferred from the traditional hear-sayings of historical sources and relics which are not contemporary of prophet Muhammad but the remnants from the second and third century of İslam. We do not have any authentical relic which was contemporary with prophet Muhammad. Of course we cannot know the actual series of historical events. History in itself cannot be known, historical knowledge is something else as historiography, an art form which is a narration of the past events as imagined -gathered information which depends on all kinds of historical sources- and told by a historian. This is why Voltaire cynically says: “little bit more than what is said by a scriber to another script.” Suppose we would have satisfactorily enough and true knowledge about the flow of historical events, are we sure that we could understand the essence of living reality by some descriptive narration. In history, we can never be sure of the truthfulness of statements made by a contemporary observer of events or written by a historian about an event; it can not be proved like mathematical statements and obviously can not be tested like scientific materials. Anyway, an art of narration might be beatiful but could not claim that all its statements are true. Here again, for the sake of clarity, I am forced to show my classification of disciplines, at least in short, to explain my highly sceptical attitudes towards the matters related with the kufic scripture, its history and some linguistic, philosophical and theological implications of the subject. As quoted from a poet by Aviezer Tucker in his introduction to A Companion to The Philosophy of History and Historiography: Perhaps we are…
‘Still in the earliest days of history
When the world existed only in theory . . .’
Chapter II
On Historical Origins of Arabic Script and Historical Development of Kufi Calligraphy
When I decided to write about my kufi calligraphy and kufic scripture in general, at first I thought that this is a new opportunity to convey all of my ideas more clearly here, within the illuminating light of the kufic scrupture; but in that case, to explain and discuss so many ideas would be a never ending story which needs large book volumes.
Naturally, I have already read many well written books about paleography and epigraphy of the arabic script written by famous orientalists. Sure, I have read many books, even some manuscripts, written by Arab, Persian or Turkish writers too. But I think, it is not necessary to repeat all the knowledge I have gathered from those books, all the known and unknown aspects of the subject, I will prefer to offer my interpretations whenever it seems proper to me . Anyway, naturally, this essay will include a bibliography for the more interested reader who wishes to learn more.
Let us remember some historical knowledge about arabic people and qur’an: According to muslim religion Qur’an is the word of Allah revealed by the archangel Gebrail to the prophet Mohammad. Again according to the traditional arab genealogy Muhammad was a descendant of Ishmael, the son of Abraham. Traditionally arabic people divided into two groups called adnani and kahtani, adnanis i.e. northern arabs considered as `arab ı-musta`ribe` that is, being descendants of Ishmael, they have been `arabized arabs` and the southern arabs are called as kahtani, like yemen arabs. This is why northern arabs are called ‘The sons of Ishmael’ by the Jews. According to Bible, Abraham and Hagar’s son Ishmael has 10 children. Names of the first and second son of Ishmael given by The Old Testament seemed to me interestingly historical: Nebaioth the firstborn of Ishmael, and Kedar. The name Nebaioth seems related with the Nabatean people, and according to paleographic and epigraphic investigations of orientalists, much widely held guess amongst them is that, arabic script comes from the Nabatean script.
Definitely, history of Kufi script also clearly shows us again the dubious nature of the historical knowledge. Indeed whence the arabic script come from is not clear at all. There are only different predictions of some orientalists based on some relics of inscriptions.
I think afore-mentioned short remarks about my epistemological reasoning is enough to show my stand point in front of the kufic scripture’s historical, theological, mystical, semantical and artistical aspects. As it is said in Ecclesiastes II-8 : “all things are hard: man cannot explain them by word. The eye is not filled with seeing, neither is the ear filled with hearing.”
Thus, the origins of the Arabic script have been a subject of scholarly debate for centuries. There are two main theories about its origins: The Nabataean Theory and The Musnad Theory.
The modern and most widely accepted theory is that the Arabic alphabet evolved from the Nabataean script, which itself was derived from the Aramaic alphabet. This evolution followed this path:
Phoenician alphabet → Aramaic alphabet → Nabataean Aramaic → Nabataean
Arabic → Paleo-Arabic → Classical Arabic → Modern Standard Arabic
The Nabataean script was used by the Nabataean Kingdom, which was centered in Petra (in modern-day Jordan) from around the 3rd century BCE. The Nabataeans were predominantly Arab Semitic tribes living in the area controlling trade routes from the eastern Mediterranean shores to Ḥijāz (Saudi Arabia) and Yemen. A transitional phase between the Nabataean Aramaic script and a subsequent, recognizably Arabic script, is known as Nabataean Arabic. The pre-Islamic phase of the script as it existed in the fifth and sixth centuries CE, once it had become recognizably similar to the script as it came to be known in the Islamic era, is known as Paleo-Arabic.
An alternative Musnad Theory theory suggests that the Arabic script can be traced back to Ancient North Arabian scripts which are derived from ancient South Arabian script (Arabic: ḵaṭṭ al-musnad). This hypothesis has been discussed by Arabic scholars Ibn Jinni and Ibn Khaldun. Some scholars, like Ahmed Sharaf Al-Din, have argued that the relationship between the Arabic alphabet and the Nabataeans is only due to the influence of the latter after its emergence (from Ancient South Arabian script). Arabic has a one-to-one correspondence with ancient South Arabian script except for one letter. German historian Max Muller (1823-1900) thought the Phoenician script was adapted from Musnad during the 9th century BCE when the Minaean Kingdom of Yemen controlled areas of the Eastern Mediterranean shores. Syrian scholar Shakīb ´Arsalān shares this view.
To explore the history of the Kufic script is not merely to trace the formal evolution of a writing style. It also raises critical questions of historiography and epistemology. The origins of writing, its transformations, the contexts of its use, and the aesthetic choices it entails are shaped not only by material evidence but also by historical assumptions, intellectual frameworks, and interpretive narratives.
The historical origins of the Kufic script are not limited to the linear evolution of the Arabic script; they also reflect a broader cultural, political, and theological transformation. The development of Kufic writing corresponds with a rapidly evolving epistemological and aesthetic quest in the wake of Islam’s emergence. As a script, Kufic embodies the early Muslim community’s dual concern: preserving the Qur’anic revelation with precision and imparting to it a form of solemnity and visual dignity.
Because I do not wish to write a large book volume about the Paleography of Arabic script like many orientalists have done before me, I will only mention here some good sources -which could be easily reachable on the internet- about the history of “arabic people, arabic inscriptions, arabic script and kufic scripture etc.
I will give here some examples from the nabatean script and some other arabic inscriptions discovered by archeologists. There are some websites on internet which shows all the arabic inscriptions and scripts including new archeological discoveries, such as:
Digital archive for the study of pre islamic arabian inscriptions
https://dasi.cnr.it/
https://corpuscoranicum.de/en
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Arabic_inscriptions
https://www.islamic-awareness.org/history/islam/inscriptions
Nabatean Script in Ummü’ l-Cimal

I do not wish to convey all the historical information to my reader which I have gathered from the books of orientalists and muslım sholars; rather, I wish to interperete some aspects of the kufic scripture which are related with those different perspectives whenever it seems to me imperative. This is why I have spoken about my epistemological standpoint about all the differing perspectives of different disciplines. For example, we have so many historical relics of arabic scripts as inscriptions, papyruses, manuscripts written on parshomen and later on coins minted by umayyads and buildings which includes inscriptions like the Rock of Dome which its is ornamented by kufic calligraphy. It seems that scholars can never agree about these issues: What is the origin of arabic people, arabic language, arabic script, and kufic script all seems dubious because of the many differing interpretations of historians. It seems to me so confusing that I guess those paleographic and epigraphic studies about so many comparable data could only be analyzed by using an artificial intelligence. It is not necessary here to repeat all the confusing details of paleographic investigations, yet I will give a comprehensive bibliography for curious readers and there are many useful sites on internet which includes all those details cr
For now I will repeat What Wordsworth said once:
Enough of science and of art
Close up those barren leaves
Come forth and bring with you a hearth
That watches and receives.
In pre-Islamic Arab societies, writing was a limited skill practiced within narrow circles, primarily used for commercial contracts, epitaphs, and occasionally for recording poetry. With the revelation of the Qur’an, however, writing underwent a qualitative transformation. The need to preserve and disseminate the divine message necessitated the standardization and refinement of the script.
How could we watch and receive, and understand the meaning of the kufic calligraphy? What is the importance of kufic script and what is the aesthetical value of it? First of all there was not a developed arabic script in the age of Prophet whether it was coming from nabatean script, or lakhmids or influenced by syriac writing; it was surely a distant relative or perhaps the last descendant of the phoenician alhabet. That script was not an alphabet but an abcad (consonantal alphabet with no vowels) which has only 18 signs of letter to write 28 letters. Remaining letters would be written with the same sign which are differientated by some dots when the script developed enough to write arabic correctly later in the age of abdülmelik ibni mervan.
Kufi script was the oldest and most significant style of Arabic script, the most formative visual art of islam, so much so that, islamic civilization has become a civilization of scripture, a kufic calligraphy civilization. In christianity jesus considered as an incarnation of god, phrased sometimes as the son of god or Word of god. Likewise Kufi calligraphy was the incarnation of the Word of God (because qur’an itself considered Word of God being intermittently revealed by Gebrail, Qur’anic verses could be considered as if they are some verses from the heavenly guarded book of destiny, levh-i mahfuz.
From the first it was not an ordinary script but a holy sicrupture of mushaf (book), the sacred scripture of Qur’an; kufi calligraphy itself came into existence and developed because of the Qur’an. Otherwise, it was an unpractical and undeveloped script perhaps rarely used by a few merchants. Arabic sources say there was only about 30 people in Mecca who knew writing and some of them have been employed by the prophet as scripts of revelation. In fact, arabs had a predominantly oral culture before Qur’an and did not like writing at all, they have only poetry as literature but it also is preferred to be transferred and recited by heart. Anyhow there was no arabic script developed enough for written books. Even Qur’an means recited aloud verses, it is not a book but qur’an, not compiled in the time of prophet and preferred to be recited by heart. I am not going into details of the discussions about how Qur’an became a suhuf (compiled surahs and verses of Qur’an between two cover likewise a book at the time of the first caliph ebubekir. But arabic script is not an alphabet, it is an Abcad; that is, it shows only consonants of the words and even though there are 28 consonants only 18 of the consonants has different sign symbols, remaining consonants would be shown by addition of different points later on, but even at the time of Osman there was no point either. At the time of Abdülmelik b. Mervan some points and signs of vowels added to these letters to make reading easier and correct.That is to say, if only there was some rudimentary arabic script used rarely at the time of prophet and there was not a developed arabic script at that time; that means, both arabic script and arabic language grammer owe their development to the goal of writing the Qur’an. Later on thıs script would be named kufic script.
Here is an example of inscription from the time of Muaviye which shows already angular and rectilinear character of kufi style, because it is only natural and easy to use straight lines to be engraved on the hard surface of a rock:

The translation of the inscription is:
1. This dam [belongs] to servant of God Muʿāwiya,
2. Commander of the believers. ʿAbdullāh b. Ṣakhr built it
3. with the permission of Allāh, in the year fifty eight. O
4. Allāh, pardon servant of God Muʿāwiya, c-
5. Commander of the believers, and strengthen him, and make him victorious, and grant the
6. Commander of the believers the enjoyment of it. ʿAmr b. Ḥabbab wrote [it].
Location
Near Ṭa’if in the Ḥijaz, Saudi Arabia. (Excerpted From the islamic-awareness.org)
The name “Kufic” is derived from the city of Kūfa in Iraq—an important intellectual and political center during the early Islamic period. In fact it is a misnomer because the term denotes more than a geographic origin; it signifies a particular aesthetic discipline and scriptural tradition. Compared with the more cursive and rounded Ḥijāzī script used in the Arabian Peninsula, Kufic is characterized by angularity, symmetry, and a structurally rigorous order.
Here is the inscription which could be called as an example of kufic script because of its rectilinear and angular letters. But those characteristics come from the natural difficulty of engraving some letters on a hard surface of the rock. This is the easiest way to engrave an inscription on a rock. Because to engrave a cursive letter on a rock would be much harder.
If the only defining caharacter of kufic calligraphy is to be rectilinear and angular, then this inscription also seems to be an example of a primitive kufic script. The kufi is the general name of scripts which have rectilinear and angular shapes of letters and there was not any strict rule of proportion or any specific shaping style of any letter until the emergence of other calligraphic styles. Later calligraphic letters somewhat resembles contemporary typography; that is, every letter would be written absolutely in the same shape and proportion every time it recurred. In fact, there is no such rule for kufi calligraphy except seeming more angular and rectilinear shape if compared to other cursive hand writings. Kufi was the general name of calligraphy for centuries until the emergence of other calligraphic styles at 11th century. In fact’ the name as “kufi calligraphy” also is a misnomer ascribed too many different kufi styles and to the city of Kûfe. I do not wish to repeat what is written about Arabic paleography and calligraphy, though they might be important from the perspective of some scholarly investigations or debates but it seems to me useless to repeat here all those dubious and confusing statemens. Scholars have given every different handwriting style a name making comparisons between the extant manuscripts; they speak about Mekki, Medeni, Hicazi, Basri, Kufi etc. Supposedly kufi developed in kufe city and hence the misnomer kufi comes. Sure there is a majestiik geometrical style which is used to be called kufi as we can see written on the parshomen manuscripts of Qur’an which conveys the sacredness of the word of Allah within the awesome beauty of mystical kufic style; but how do you know that it is developed particularly in Kufe City? And what this misnomer name kufi designates anyway? There are many different styles of kufi in history; which one you mean by the name kufi?
Sheila S. Blair suggests that “the name Kufic was introduced to Western scholarship by Jacob George Christian Adler(1756–1834)”.[5]5Blair, Sheila S. (2006). Islamic Calligraphy. p. 104. ISBN 978-0-7486-1212-3.
More interested reader can learn what is said about kufi calligraphy in old islamic sources by reading the first chapter of the book “İslam Kültür Mirasında Hat Sanatı ” written by Nihad M. Çetin, published by IRCICA. Some scholars say arabic script comes from Müsned/ himyeri, others say it comes from nabatean script still others speak about syriac influence. All these debates involve in a certain amount of guesswork. Same is the case with the misnomer “kufic”. They name some styles according to the supposed geographical centers they have been related; namely , mekki, medeni, hicazi, kufi etc. In fact these names designates only different hand-writing styles of the scripts. “Naming” should help for cognition and understanding, but it does not necessarily imply a concrete thing and becomes confusing sometimes. I think all of those confusing paleographic, epigraphic and calligraphic discuscussions would be transferred to an AI agent to analize them. Yet, it is used to be referred by the name kufi calligraphy altough this form of art does not include any strict rule of calligraphic measures if compared to the letters of the so-called “aklamı sitte” / “six kind of pen” which is developed later on at the 11th century.
Here is the description given about first manuscripts in the Fihrist (Index of Books) of the Baghdadi
bibliographer al‐Nadim, written in 987:
The first Arabic scripts were the Meccan and after that the Madinan, then the Basran, then the Kufan. As regards the Meccan and Madinan, there is in its [sic] alifs a bend to the right hand side and an elevation of the vertical strokes; and in its form, there is a slight inclination…
During the early Islamic period, the Arabic script was still in a relatively primitive state. It lacked diacritical marks (dots) to distinguish between similar letters and had no vowel markings. This made reading difficult, especially for non-native Arabic speakers as Islam spread beyond the Arabian Peninsula. The third caliph, Uthman ibn Affan (r. 644-656 CE), commissioned the first official compilation of the Quran, establishing a standard text. This project necessitated improvements in the writing system to ensure accurate preservation of the sacred text. Under the Umayyad Caliphate (661-750 CE), significant developments occurred: Introduction of Diacritical Marks: Abu al-Aswad al-Du’ali (d. 688 CE) is traditionally credited with introducing dots to distinguish between similar letters. Vowel Notation System: A system of colored dots was developed to indicate short vowels, which are not normally written in Arabic.Standardization: The script became more standardized as it was used for administrative purposes throughout the expanding Islamic empire.These innovations were crucial for preserving the correct recitation of the Quran and facilitating the spread of Arabic literacy among non-Arab converts to Islam.
The mention of inclined letters makes the reference to this primitive corpus unambiguous. But how widespread were the denominations “Meccan” and “Madinan” in al‐Nadim’s lifetime, and how long had they been in existence by then? Were they meant to encompass all of the earliest Qurʾanic scripts, or specific tendencies within them? Al‐Nadim does not elaborate on the subject or cite his sources. “(6)
https://talalchami.wordpress.com/2018/12/18/the-development-of-the-arabic-script-in-the-4th-and-5th-century-nabatean-roots-of-a-medium/
Although the Qur’anic codices produced during the caliphate of ʿUthmān may not yet have been called “Kufic” in the strict sense, they represent a foundational stage in its development. These early codices were devoid of diacritical marks and vowel signs—a fact that, given Arabic’s polysemic nature, often resulted in interpretive ambiguities. This challenge prompted the gradual elaboration of a more precise writing system.
The Umayyad period witnessed the introduction of diacritical markings by Abū al-Aswad al-Duʾalī, followed by the work of al-Khalīl ibn Aḥmad, who further developed the dotting system. These innovations significantly improved the clarity and functionality of the Arabic script, reinforcing the role of Kufic script in the preservation and transmission of the Qur’an.
By the 8th and 9th centuries, Kufic was no longer confined to Qur’anic manuscripts. It began to appear across various media—architecture, coinage, ceramics, textiles, and metalwork. This diversification indicates that Kufic had become both a functional script and a symbolic medium. It evolved into an aesthetic form that could be seen, touched, and integrated into space.
During the Abbasid period, the institutionalization of calligraphy as an art form played a decisive role in the maturation of Kufic script. Major cultural centers such as Baghdad, Kūfa, and Baṣra saw the emergence of scriptoria and schools dedicated to its development. Various regional and functional styles of Kufic began to emerge, including Eastern Kufic (mashriqī), Western Kufic (maghribī), Square Kufic (murabbaʿ), and ornamental Kufic, among others. Each variant reflects specific cultural and aesthetic evolutions of the script.
From a paleographic perspective, studying the transformation of Kufic script offers critical insights into the broader history of writing. Early Qur’anic manuscripts typically feature large letters and generous spacing between lines. Over time, the script became more compact, stylistically elaborate, and enriched with decorative elements. These changes reflect not only technical innovations but also shifts in aesthetic sensibilities, religious consciousness, and political symbolism.
In sum, Kufic script emerged from within the Arabic script tradition but soon transcended it, becoming a multi-layered cultural form that conveyed the sacred and aesthetic codes of Islamic civilization. Its paleographic evolution mirrors the broader transformation of Islamic societies—their values, modes of expression, and approaches to textuality. Thus, Kufic is not merely a relic of the past; it is one of the clearest indicators of how the written word has functioned historically as a bearer of faith, art, and identity.
Kufic is the oldest calligraphic form; it was developed around the seventh century, where it was extensively and exclusively used to copy the Qur’an by the orders of Caliph Uthman bin Affan, until the eleventh century. The Kufic script is a style of Arabic script that gained prominence early on as a preferred script for Quran transcription and architectural decoration, and it has since become a reference and an archetype for a number of other Arabic scripts.
1. On Qur`an Manuscripts
2. On different Styles of Kufi Calligraphy
Kufic is characterized by angular, rectilinear letterforms and its horizontal orientation. The main characteristic of the Kufic script “appears to be the transformation of the ancient cuneiform script into the Arabic letters,” according to Enis Timuçin Tan.Moreover, it was characterized by figural letters that were shaped in a way to be nicely written on parchment, building and decorative objects like lusterware and coins.
Kufic script is composed of geometrical forms like straight lines and angles along with verticals and horizontals. Originally, Kufic did not have what is known as a differentiated consonant, which means, for example, that the letters “t”, “b”, and “th” were not distinguished by diacritical marks and looked the same. During the first few centuries in Islam, Arabic was written without any vowel marks or dots as how the Arabic script can be seen today. This is because there was no need for these helping markers; the early Muslims were Arabs, and thus could read the Qur’an without any help. However, this changed when Islam became a multinational and multiracial religion. The need for vowel marking and dots to denote different sounds and establish differences between similar-looking characters arose, and they remain today in the Qur’an. The Kufic script dots are sometimes done in red ink. It is believed that ascribe named Abdul Aswad was the first to use these markings in 1310 CE.
The Quran was first written in a plain, slanted, and uniform script but, when its content was formalized, a script that denoted authority emerged. This coalesced into what is now known as Primary Kufic script. Kufic was prevalent in manuscripts from the 7th to10th centuries. Around the 8th century, it was the most important of several variants ofArabic scripts with its austere and fairly low vertical profile and a horizontal emphasis.Until about the 11th century, it was the main script used to copy the Quran. Professionalcopyists employed a particular form of Kufic for reproducing the earliest surviving copiesof the Quran, which were written on parchment and date from the 8th to 10th centuries.In later Kufic Qurans of the ninth and early tenth century, “the sura headings were moreoften designed with the sura title as the main feature, often written in gold, with apalmette extending into the margin,” comments Marcus Fraser.One impressive example of an early Quran manuscript, known as the Blue Quran,features gold Kufic script on parchment dyed with indigo. It is commonly attributed tothe early Fatimid or Abbasid court. The main text of this Quran is written in gold ink, thusthe effect on looking at the manuscript is of gold on blue.Regional Variations and Styles of KuficThere were no set rules of using the Kufic script; the only common feature is the angular,linear shapes of the characters. Due to the lack of standardized methods, the scripts indifferent regions and countries and even down to the individuals themselves havedifferent ways to write in the script creatively, ranging from very square and rigid formsto flowery and decorative.
Several regional variations of Kufic script developed over time:
Magribi (Moroccan or Western) Kufic
The Maghribi Kufic script is still rigid, linear and thick, however it features a significantamount of curves and loops as opposed to the original Arabic Kufic script. Loops for thecharacters such as the Waw and the Meem are pronounced and perhaps moreexaggerated.
Kufi Mashriqi (Eastern Kufic)
A thinner, cursive and decorative form of Kufic found in eastern regions. The nib of thepen used to write in this form of Kufi is thinner, and it is more cursive with somecharacters given long, cursive strokes. However, it is still within the angular vocabularyof the Kufic script.
Fatimi Kufi
Prevalent in the North African region, particularly in Egypt. Since the script is verystylized and decorative, this form was mainly used in the decoration of buildings. AFatimi Kufi script can be seen with decoration among the characters such as theinclusion of the Endless Knot or vegetal motif both in the character itself and as abackground motif.
Square Kufic (Murabba’ Kufi)
Square or geometric Kufic is a very simplified rectangular style widely used for tiling. It isabsolutely straight with no decorative accents or curves shown. Due to this absoluterigidity, this type of script can be created using square tiles or bricks. It is popular in Iranand in Turkey, where in the latter, it was popular as a decoration of buildings during theOttoman empire.
Decorative Kufic
Mainly used for daily items such as plates, bowls, vases or ewers. Too often, theinscriptions done in this script are barely readable, because of the heavy decorating. Aletter may disappear in the extensive decorating that could include turning the lettersinto vegetal forms such as vines and leaves, or written very thinly with exaggeratedvertical lines and curves.
Ghaznavid and Khourasan Scripts
In Iran, in addition to the Kufi Mashriqi script (which was also referred to as the Piramouz script), there are also more forms of the script known as the Ghaznavid and Khourasan scripts. The scripts were mostly used for monument decoration and also for coinage, as well as daily items. The Khourasan script is as thick as the Original Arabic Kufic script, but added with a simple flair for each character. The Ghaznavid Kufi has elongated vertical lines and rounded ends with decoration around the characters.
Ornamental Use of Kufic Script
Ornamental Kufic became an important element in Islamic art as early as the eighth century for Quranic headings, numismatic inscriptions and major commemorative writings. The Kufic script is inscribed on textiles, coins, lusterware, buildings and so on. Coins were very important in the development of the Kufic script. In fact, “the letter strokes on coins, had become perfectly straight, with curves tending toward geometrical circularity by 86”, observes Alain George. As an example, Kufic is commonly seen on Seljuk coins and monuments and on early Ottoman coins. In Iran sometimes entire buildings are covered with tiles spelling sacred names like those of God, Muhammad and Ali in square Kufic, a technique known as banna’i. There is also “Pseudo-Kufic”, also “Kufesque”, which refers to imitations of the Kufic script, made in a non-Arabic context, during the Middle Ages or the Renaissance. The artistic styling of Kufic led to its use in a non-Arabic context in Europe, as decoration on architecture.
Decline and Legacy
Around the 11th century, Kufic began to be replaced with more cursive scripts such as Naskh and Thuluth for Quranic copying. Thuluth script is distinguished from Kufic script in its use of decorative elements whereas the latter was designed to avoid decorative motifs. In place of the decorations in Kufic scripts, Thuluth used vowels. However, Kufic continued to be used for decorative purposes in architecture, coins, and other ornamental contexts due to its distinctive aesthetic qualities. Its influence can still be seen in modern Islamic art and design, and it remains an important part of the Islamic calligraphic tradition.
3. modern_