Was Square Kufic Influenced by Chinese Seal Script?

The origin of Square Kufic calligraphy is a subject of debate among scholars, and there are a few different theories regarding its development. One theory suggests that Square Kufic developed as a result of architectural adaptations. The area where Square Kufic originated had a long tradition of applying patterns to buildings in a square grid or cartoon. The calligraphic style may have evolved as a way to apply this tradition of patterning to inscriptions on buildings and objects. This theory is supported by the fact that Square Kufic is particularly well-suited to large-scale inscriptions, as its bold, simple forms can be easily identified from a distance. It also aligns with the Islamic tradition of integrating calligraphy into architecture and other forms of decorative arts.

Another theory suggests that the style was influenced by Chinese seal script. The idea is that Islamic calligraphers were exposed to Chinese seal script through trade and cultural exchange between China and the Islamic world around a thousand years ago. They then adapted the Arabic Kufic script to mimic the square, angular forms of Chinese seal script. However, this theory was criticized to be somewhat speculative, and that there was little concrete evidence to support it. While there were certainly trade and cultural contacts between China and the Islamic world during this period, there is no clear evidence of direct influence on the development of Square Kufic. However, the amount of similarities in both styles and the geopolitical influences during that time would support this theory.

That being said, there are several visual similarities between the two styles that have been noted. Both Square Kufic and Chinese seal script use a grid and exhibit horizontal and vertical monospacing. They also share the absence of dots in Square Kufic, as there are no separate squares in Chinese seal script. This is interesting considering that dots were already introduced in the Arabic alphabet during the time when Square Kufic was developed. Additionally, both styles allow for rotation of letters, words, and sentences.

Another similarity is the absence of diacritics in both Square Kufic and Chinese seal script. Diacritics play an important role in the Arabic writing system, but they are not present in Square Kufic. Similarly, while Chinese seal script lacks diacritics, it includes tone marks to indicate tones. The use of rectangular shapes to form letters, the absence of unnecessary endings or rags, and the balance between solid and void elements are shared characteristics as well. Both styles adhere to a certain number of squares for each line, and there is a parallel in the method of letter folding seen in Chinese seal script and the odd folding numbers observed in Square Kufic. Historical records of Square Kufic date back to the time after 1000 A.D., and during this period, Chinese seal script was widely used in the era after the Liao dynasty, particularly by the Khitans who employed seals extensively.

While the similarities between Square Kufic and Chinese seal script are intriguing, it is important to approach this theory with caution due to the lack of direct evidence. It remains a topic of scholarly discussion and further research may shed more light on the potential connections between these two script styles. The visual appearance of both Square Kufic and Chinese seal script further supports the theory of their potential connection. Both styles exhibit a distinct aesthetic characterized by a bold and geometric quality. Square Kufic features block-like letters composed of straight lines and sharp angles, resulting in a visually striking and architectural appearance. Chinese seal script, too, presents a similar visual impression, with its robust and angular strokes forming characters that convey a sense of strength and stability. The shared emphasis on clear, defined shapes and the absence of decorative elements in both Square Kufic and Chinese seal script contribute to their overall visual coherence and lend weight to the notion of possible mutual influence or inspiration.

Both Square Kufic and Chinese seal script share common features. They employ a grid system and exhibit horizontal and vertical monospacing, resulting in a uniform and structured arrangement. Furthermore, Square Kufic, like Chinese seal script, lacks the use of dots. Chinese seal script does not contain separate squares, and consequently, Square Kufic also omits dots from its characters. Despite the availability of dots in the Arabic alphabet during the development of Square Kufic, early examples of this style often excluded dots, even though their inclusion could have been easily incorporated within the designs using squares to represent them.

Another notable similarity is the rotational flexibility of letters, words, and sentences in both Square Kufic and Chinese seal script. This characteristic allows the calligraphic elements to be arranged in various orientations, adding to the artistic versatility of both styles. Additionally, both Square Kufic and Chinese seal script lack diacritics, despite the significant role diacritics play in the Arabic writing system. Chinese seal script, while not employing diacritics, incorporates tones indicated by tone marks placed above vowels.

Rectangular shapes serve as the foundation for forming letters in both Square Kufic and Chinese seal script, further aligning their visual characteristics. Both styles eschew unnecessary endings and rags and exhibit clean and sharp lines without rags or superfluous elements. Moreover, the rule of a minimum of three squares per line is followed in Square Kufic, similar to the method of letter folding in Chinese seal script. Furthermore, an intriguing parallel between Square Kufic and Chinese seal script can be observed in their shared utilization of a specific letter folding technique. Square Kufic adheres to an odd folding number pattern, such as 3, 7, 9, 11, and so on. Similarly, Chinese seal script also employs a comparable method of letter folding. This alignment in folding practices further strengthens the argument for a potential connection between the two styles, suggesting a possible exchange of artistic techniques or cultural influences during their respective periods of development.

The balance between solid and void is an important symbol in Chinese and Islamic cultures, and it is reflected in both Square Kufic and Chinese seal script. This balance, representing affirmation and negation as well as the interplay between solid and void, carries cultural significance in both traditions. Historically, Square Kufic records date back to the period after 1000 A.D. During this time, Chinese seal script was widely utilized, especially following the decline of the Liao dynasty ruled by the Khitans, who extensively employed seals in their administration.

While direct evidence of Chinese seal script’s influence on the development of Square Kufic is lacking, the numerous similarities between the two styles, coupled with the geopolitical context of the era, provide substantial support for the theory proposing a connection between them. The visual elements, the grid system, the absence of dots and diacritics, the use of rectangular shapes, the lack of unnecessary endings, the rule of squares, and the balance between solid and void all contribute to the intriguing parallels between Square Kufic and Chinese seal script.

Overall, the origin of Square Kufic calligraphy is likely the result of a complex interplay of cultural, artistic, and architectural traditions in the Islamic world. While there is no clear consensus on its origins, both theories provide plausible explanations for the development of this distinctive calligraphic style.