This article analyses the incomplete Qur’anic manuscript Ayasofya 23 in the Ayasofya Collection of the Suleymaniye Library (Istanbul). The manuscript is written in Kufic on parchment and consists of 67 folios with five lines on each side. The rectangular manuscript measures 32.5x22 – 23.5x13.5 cm and contains suras 29/alʿAnkabūt, 30/al-Rūm, 31/Luqmān, 32/al-Sajdah, 33/al-Aḥzāb. Its sister manuscripts, many of them abroad, are scattered in ten different libraries and collections. The manuscript is remarkably diverse in terms of qirāʾāt and its ornamentation is conspicuous. The rasm is written in brown ink, the vowels are indicated with red dots, and the variant readings are mostly in green, rarely in gold ink. Takhmīs marks are similar to the letter hā, and taʿshīr marks are depicted in gilt ink in the form of flowers. The article analyses the manuscript in terms of content, codicology, orthography, verse separators, qirāʾāt, and ornamentation. It examines the manuscript in terms of its content, codicology, spelling, end-of-verse signs, pronouncing, recitation and ornamentation features. There are several Qur’anic manuscripts in Türkiye dating from the first century of the Hijra to later periods; however, a large portion of this heritage has not yet been the subject of research. Studies on Qur’anic manuscripts are valuable in terms of identifying historical connections. The examination of the relationship between existing manuscripts is important in determining the stemma of the manuscripts. Ultimately, these studies provide to follow the stages of the Qur’anic rasm. Many Qur’anic manuscripts dating back to early periods do not bear any colophons. Determinations can be made about the region in which the manuscript was studied and its connection with the Uthmanic codex through the comparison of its spelling features and recitations with other Mushafs. Spelling features are a potential area for developing our knowledge of where and when the manuscripts were produced. On the other hand, the corrections or additions made to the manuscript by secondary scribes show the journey that the manuscript has gone through. Although the leaves of Ayasofya 23 and the same Mushaf have been the subject of various studies, a detailed study has not been conducted on the leaves of the Mushaf found in the libraries in Türkiye. The relevant literature states that the vowels were initially marked with red ink and that the color of the ink applied later varied. Ayasofya 23 is in a special position in terms of both the presence of vowels and separating marks in different colors and the fact that different recitations are shown on the same copy. However, this situation is not specific to Ayasofya 23 but is a feature encountered in various Qur’anic manuscripts. The aim of this study is to contribute to the determinations based on the transmission of the Qur’anic text by examining the spelling and recitation preferences and the ways in which they are expressed. In the study, research was conducted on the origin of the manuscript and the history of the collections in which the Mushaf leaves were found, and a high probability was determined that the Mushaf leaves were distributed from Egypt to world collections. However, the origin of the manuscript remains unclear. Although there is no information on where the Mushaf leaves with the inventory number Topkapı E.H. 26 were transferred to the Topkapı Palace Library, there are only two sultan seals on these leaves. These are the seal of Bayezid II found on leaves 17b and 18a, and the seal of Abdulhamid I found on leaves 18a and 20a. Following the research conducted on the origin, codicological analyses were presented, and it was seen that the readability level of the manuscript was high. There are also sura titles, prostration, takhmīṣ and taʿshīr marks. It has been determined that there are three types of punctuation, including iʿjām, vowel points and iʿrāb. The text is largely vowel points; however, it has been determined that the vowel points in the middle of the word are irregular. It is understood that there is no rule that the scribe followed at this point. Taken together, these findings suggest that the mixed recitation method was used in the manuscript. In general, the red dots represent vowels, while the green and golden dots represent differences in recitation. When the orthographic features of the manuscript are examined, it is seen that the predominant spelling is with the ḥaḍf. The manuscript is in accordance with the seven recitations, mainly Abū ʿAmr b. ʿAlāʾand Ḥamza b. Ḥabīb. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]