A wealth of African scholarship is hidden in ancient manuscripts. Perhaps the most famous of these manuscripts are the Timbuktu manuscripts. They reflect a knowledge society that was engaged in the pursuit and application of knowledge. The Timbuktu manuscripts are a symbolic representation of the impact and influence of the early schools and universities (12th–16th centuries) that existed in West Africa. There were, however, other such knowledge societies in Africa where Africans engaged in reading and writing many centuries ago. These African manuscripts cover a variety of fields including astronomy, astrology, economics, mathematics, religion, culture and ethics. Most of these are written in Arabic, and the local ‘Ajami’ words that found its way into the texts, the historic language of scholarship in Africa (Diagne 2008:26).

In October 2015, a translation into English of one of these manuscripts, Qissat Dhul Qarnayn’ (The story of the ‘Two-horned King’ known as Alexander the Great), was published (Sukdaven, Mukhtar & Fernana 2015), which focussed on one of many Alexander the Great romances. The manuscript was written in 1736 CE and is based on information from the Qur’an and other medieval Islamic sources that include the Hadith compilations. The author is unknown, and the only possibility is the mention of an individual by the name of Abu Abdel Malek. This work dealt with the topic of Dhul Qarnayn, as mentioned in the Qur’an in Surah Kahf, verses: 83–97. The topic of Dhul Qarnayn, the fort and the Ya’jūj and Ma’jūj (Gog and Magog) has intrigued many people. In fact, he was even known by the Jews because they were the ones who posed the question about Dhul Qarnayn to the Prophet Muḥammad.¹ However, ever since they have been mentioned in the Qur’an, there have been numerous scholars who have researched the topic eager to discover who this person was and when he lived.

Sukdaven et al. (2015) quotes the narrator, Abu Abdel Malek, in his introduction to the manuscript as follows:

Historians differ in the tale of Dhul Qarnain. Some say he was a great king, sent to the people of Yemen, others say he was from Rome (Europe). Some say he was a prophet, others maintain he was just a messenger without any prophecy from God, because the Arch-Angel Gabriel was not revealed to him between Makah and Jerusalem … It was also said that he is Tuba the great king of Yemen, while others say he was a saint loved by God. (p. 3)

The Timbuktu manuscript is based on the Alexander Romance and the Qur’an does not portray how Dhul Qarnayn’s life ended. In fact, it ends rather abruptly with the exchange between Dhul Qarnayn and the Queen of Candace. It does not follow a chronological order, and it also mentions some of the Alexander’s adventures that some contemporary historians including Tabbakh have not mentioned. Many of these adventures and travels are not substantiated with proof or references. Even some of the references made to traditions of the Prophet Muhammad are not supported with the names of the sources. This is one of the areas that distinguish Tabbakh because as a historian and a Hadith scholar, he provides references and some discussion on the strength of the narration. There are no time lines in terms of dates so following events is somewhat difficult.

The narrator seems to be inclined to two possible explanations with regard to the personality of Dhul Qarnayn; a king from Yemen and the other being the builder of Alexandria.

The above manuscript already highlighted the issues and difficulties of identifying exactly who Dhul Qarnayn was. Some documented their research in books dedicated to this topic. These scholars were diverse in their areas of specialisation. Traditional Hadith and history scholars, as well as a number of Sufi scholars, wrote about this topic. Classical scholars like Al-Ṭabarī (d. 923) (1986) and Al-Suyūṭī (d. 1505) (2003) are some examples of scholars who addressed this topic in their commentaries on the Qur’an.

From among these scholars, a renowned Syrian by the name of Muḥammad Rāghib al-Ṭabbākh (hereafter referred to as Rāghib) (d. 1951) reflected on this personality. He wrote a book in Arabic titled Dhul Qarnayn wa Sadd al-Ṣīn wherein he discussed in detail the arguments surrounding Dhul Qarnayn. This book was first published in 1949 and then again in the year 2003. The 2003 edition was edited by Abū ῾Ubaydah Mashūr ibn Ḥasan Āl-Salmān and has some additional information contained in the footnotes. This article will attempt to provide a brief profile of the author and thereafter critically examine, with specific reference to the 2003 edition, the main ideas and theories that he presented with regard to Dhul Qarnayn and the aspects related to him. Rāghib’s book on the topic is significant because he combined his expertise as a historian and his vast knowledge of Ḥadīth. He used the methodology of the Ḥadīth scholars to scrutinise and analyse the various reports and narrations, which included a study of the narrators and their credibility and reliability in transmitting such information. Because his writings are considered somewhat recent, this book is comprehensive in formulating the arguments centred on Dhul Qarnayn.

This article therefore reflects on the views of Muḥammad Rāghib al-Ṭabbākh in his book together with the manuscript found in Timbuktu and brings together views that attempt to establish and understand who Dhul Qarnayn is or was and his adventures.

It is of tremendous importance that an understanding and the scholarly contributions of Rāghib are understood so as to lend credence to the value attached to this work on Dhul Qarnayn.

Yaḥyā al-Ṭabbākh, who is the son of the author and a specialist in history and the author of a book on his father, stated that his father Muḥammad Rāghib al-Ṭabbākh was born in 1877 (1293 A.H).²

Rāghib was raised in a family of great scholarship, business and tasawwuf (the science dealing with self-reformation and discarding all bad characteristics and adopting pure and noble qualities). He began studying from the age of eight and commenced by learning the basics with regard to reading and writing and the recitation of the Qur’an. He also learnt Turkish, Persian and French. During his student years, he memorised many didactic poems dealing with various Islamic Sciences. When he was 14 years old, he visited the cities of Makkah and Madinah where he met and engaged with many scholars and observed some of their gatherings and listened to their discussions.

Over the years, he met illustrious scholars in Syria and elsewhere, and those who he was unable to meet, he corresponded with through letters. He also interacted and corresponded with a few orientalist scholars like David Margoliouth (d. 1940). These orientalists gained tremendously from his extensive knowledge, especially his expertise with regard to Arabic manuscripts.

Despite being an avid reader and researcher, he found time to engage in journalism, teaching and guiding the public. His articles in various magazines and newspapers were well received by the public and scholars alike.³ He taught at the prestigious Khesrevye School in Aleppo and even took it upon himself to improve and amend the syllabus so that it met the requirements of the time. He introduced subjects like mathematics, geography and natural science. Eventually in 1937, he was appointed as the director of the religious academic school.

He was passionate about the city of Aleppo and its history including its architectural legacy. This is apparent in his book, Ilām al-Nubalā (1988). He authored numerous other books that covered a range of topics from history, biographies of his teachers along with the respective chains of transmission and even compilations of classical Arabic poetry. This is an indication of his versatility as a scholar. He served in many academic organisations, and his last role was as president of the League of Ulama for the city of Aleppo. He served in this position until his death in 1951 (29 Ramadan 1370).

Two scholars that are known to have had a tremendous impact on him were Muḥammad Zarqā (d. 1924), who was an erudite scholar and specialist in Islamic Jurisprudence (Fiqh) of the Ḥanafi madhhab (school of thought) and Bashīr al-Ghazzī (d. 1920), who was a member of the court in charge of fatwa and a specialist in the Arabic language and its poetry.

His son, Yahya, has listed at least 14 published and about 13 unpublished works by his father. One such published work is the book that we are reviewing and which is a rather detailed work on Dhul Qarnayn and the Wall.

With the establishment of Rāghib as an astute scholar, we now turn to his book and will focus on Rāghib’s examination of the theories, views and arguments on Dhul Qarnayn by a plethora of scholars. We do this by addressing the following fundamental questions:

Who are the people who posed the question regarding Dhul Qarnayn?

We will try and summarise a response by Rāghib in his book to each of these questions.

This discussion emanates from verse: 84 of Sūrah al-Kahf (The Cave) in the Qur’an wherein Allah says: ‘Indeed, We have established him on earth’. Before trying to attribute any time to Dhul Qarnayn’s stay on earth, it must be noted that some scholars were of the view that the above verse is referring to prophet-hood, while others said it refers to kingdom. The commentator of the Qur’an, Al-Bayḍāwī (d. 1286) (1997:291), was of the view that the verse meant that he travelled the earth freely. In addition, he was granted everything that made his affairs easy and enabled him to fulfil his tasks with tremendous ease. Others have stated that the verse implies that he was granted great knowledge that allowed him to achieve his objectives much easier. Another view claims that he was granted control of the landmarks on earth. ‘Abd al-Raḥmān ibn Zayd ibn Aslam (d. 798) was of the view that he was bestowed with the ability of knowing different languages. This meant that whenever he went into battle against any nation he addressed them in their own language.

Rāghib concluded that Dhul Qarnayn was granted everything that eased and facilitated matters for him in his kingdom. He used these means to help him attain his goals and objectives.

The reason for this discussion is also based on the verses in the Qur’an. In this case, verses: 86–87 of Sūrah al-Kahf, ‘Then he followed a way until he reached the rising of the sun and found it rising on a people to whom We had not given any shelter from it’.

Rāghib said that he was certain that Dhul Qarnayn, the one who built the Wall, is an Arab and he travelled extensively until he reached the furthermost region to the west. He travelled across Africa, then into Andalus (Spain) and then further west until he reached present day America. He quotes the author of the book al-Tijān (Ibn Munabbih 1928:446) who stated that Dhul Qarnayn sailed with his army until he reached some islands in the Atlantic Ocean. Some historians have established that these islands were the Canary Islands. It appears that the inhabitants did not understand him and he wanted to fight them but he was stopped from doing so by Khiḍr. Thereafter, he continued sailing westwards until he eventually reached America. Thus, Rāghib maintains that Dhul Qarnayn was the first to discover America. It is interesting to note that some 8 years after writing this, Rāghib came across articles written by non-Muslims that were published in the years 1944 and 1948 in various Egyptian magazines like al-Muqtataf and al-Risalah, which confirmed that the Arabs were aware of America before the west and more specifically before Columbus. Later scholars established that some Arabs settled in the area known as Mexico. They based this on the presence of some words in the area that even the local people are unaware of its origins. The word ‘alligator’ is one such word. The Arabs were also aware of the islands to the west of Great Britain that were known by Greeks as Kasselerides. The reason for their success is attributed to the following:

They were excellent sailors.

In 2000 the late Moroccan professor, ῾Alī al-Kettānī (d. 2002), delivered a lecture in Rabat wherein he proved without doubt that the Arabs had indeed arrived in America before Columbus. He verified this with renowned Spanish authorities on the topic (al-Kettānī 2009). In addition, Columbus, in his diary, testified to this. In fact, he even wrote about the religion of the inhabitants of the Caribbean and confirmed that they were monotheists (al-Kettānī 2009).

On the contrary, there are numerous non-Muslim historians who have confirmed that Muslim sailors reached as far as Iceland. Rāghib then provides some proofs that the Muslims were certainly aware of the geography of the time. This reinforces the notion that they had indeed travelled to these regions. Historians have confirmed that some Muslim scholars had drawn an accurate sketch of two continents. This was done long before western scholars had done so.

This discussion eventually leads him to another topic and that is in the shape of the earth. The reason for this is that there were some scholars in the past as well as some during the author’s era that doubted in the oval nature of the earth. While discussing this, he also discusses the Arabs and their connection to the Mediterranean Sea. He substantiates with proofs from a number of prominent scholars like al-Mas’ūdī. These quotations among other are clear indications from these scholars on the oval shape of the earth. Much of these facts were discovered much later by other scholars.

He then discusses a certain island on which Hercules is supposed to have built some huge pillars. Some of the inhabitants lost their way and found themselves in a strange land where they were imprisoned for 3 days. On the 4th day, they were addressed by a person who spoke Arabic. Some have speculated that these sailors were in an area near to or possibly close to the Bermuda.

The author then quotes Ibn Fadl Allah al-‘Umarī (d. 1384) who in his book titled Masālik al-Abṣār fī Mamālik al-Amṣār spoke about a King Mūsā ibn Abī Bakr from Mali who mentioned that he came into power when the king before him travelled with over 1000 ships on the ocean eager to find the end and he never returned. It is assumed by some scholars that Columbus was aware of these initial travellers and he probably read some of their diaries or writings. Columbus in his travels is supposed to have reached the land known as San Salvador.

Rāghib continued in his discussion and investigation on the travels of Dhul Qarnayn with some special attention on the explanation of the verse in the Qur’an that deals with the place of the setting of the sun. He quoted a number of classical commentators of the Qur’an like Imām al-Rāzī who in his exegesis actually confirmed many scientific facts including the fact that the sun is much larger than the earth. It appeared to Dhul Qarnayn that the sun was setting in the ocean or in a spring of water. Other scholars are of the view that he reached a land that no person could traverse.

Imām al-Nasafī (d. 1310) (Al-Nasafī 1998:318) in his commentary to the Qur’an said that some scholars looked at the context and used this to conclude that Dhul Qarnayn could have been a prophet.

Al-Azraqī (d. 837) (2004:36), who is a famous historian of Makkah, along with a few other scholars maintained that Dhul Qarnayn accepted Islam at Prophet Ibrāhīm’s hands and circumambulated the Ka’bah with him. This strengthens the view that he was a pious and righteous servant of Allah.

The author then discusses Dhul Qarnayn’s return from the west and his journey to the east. He again mentions various opinions among these are those who said that he returned over a period of 12 years and reached the point from where the sun rises. He came across a nation that did not possess any homes and when the heat was very intense they sought refuge.

The context of these verses (i.e. 89–93) of Sūrah al-Kahf ‘Then he followed a path until he arrived between the two mountains where he found a people scarcely able to understand speech …’ also indicates that during his travels he came across the area between two mountains and this was the region where Ya’jūj and Ma’jūj emerged from.

He cites the view of Al-Khatīb (d. 1570) (1881:404) who in his commentary to the Qur’an titled al-Sirāj al-Munīr spoke about various maps of China that appear in the book al-Nukhbah al-Azhariyyah fī al-Kurah al-Ardiyyah (1903:268) in which there are clear indications of this barrier or fort. He goes on to mention the Gobi Desert that is inhabited by the Moguls who according to him are Ya’jūj and Ma’jūj.

The author also speaks about the region between the Black Sea and the Khazar Sea where he spoke about an area that he referred to a ‘natural wall’. This is somewhere in present day Turkistan.

Dhul Qarnayn and Khiḍr while on their journey passed an area known as al-Jazīrah, which is north of Mosul and is probably presently in Mardin, Turkey.

Because any discussion on Dhul Qarnayn cannot be completed without mentioning Ya’jūj and Ma’jūj, Rāghib dedicates some time trying to understand who they really are and some of their characteristics.

He quotes a Ḥadīth that is recorded in the two famous and authentic compilations by al-Bukhārī and Muslim (2006:120) wherein the Prophet Muḥammad said that from every 1000 people, 999 will enter the fire of Hell. The Companions of the Prophet enquired about the one that will be saved. The reply from the Prophet comforted them when he said that the 999 are from Ya’jūj and Ma’jūj.

Ya’jūj and Ma’jūj are also from the progeny of Prophet Nūḥ and this is based upon a prophetic narration reported by Imām Al-Tirmidhī (1996:280) in his Ḥadīth compilation wherein the Prophet said that Nūḥ had three sons; Sām, Ḥām, and Yāfith. Sām is the father of the Arabs, Ḥām is the father of the Africans and Yāfith is the father of the Turks.

Ya’jūj and Ma’jūj are a group from the Moguls who are from the progeny of the Turks.

Rāghib mentioned that there are numerous reports from Prophet Muḥammad that confirm their existence and their large numbers to the extent that one of them will not die until he saw at least 1000 from his progeny. There are other narrations that provide some detail on how tall or short they were but these are baseless or very weak according to Rāghib.

The above is the common view but it is interesting to note that there were a few other opinions. One stated that Ya’jūj and Ma’jūj were in Yemen because a large Wall was discovered in the 10th century. Another view maintains that they were in Derband in Russia. The editor, Abu ‘Ubaydah Mashūr ibn Ḥasan, elaborated and stated that the latter view was held by two prominent Indian scholars with slight variations in the detail. These scholars were Shiblī Nomānī (d. 1914) and Abū al-Kalām Azād (d. 1958) in their Urdu rendition of the meanings of the Qur’an. They were somewhat certain that the Wall is in the Caucasus region of Russia. The latter seemed more convinced of his view after he visited Iran and surrounding areas; and he claimed to have seen the Wall.

The author then discussed the building of the Wall and goes into details with regard to the story as mentioned in the Qur’an. This involves the plea of the local people to Dhul Qarnayn to do something to protect them from Ya’jūj and Ma’jūj. He discussed the material used to build the Wall and provides some description of the Wall. He then mentions a book written by Abū Dalf Mis’ar ibn Muhallil who described his travels to China. The author of this book mentioned Qulayb an area in China where there were Arabs who remained there after Tubba’, a king of Yemen had waged war against the Chinese. There are some reports that Yemeni kings ruled over parts of that region for about 320 years.

Rāghib then confirms that the Arabs had rediscovered this area during the time of the 2nd Caliph, ‘Umar. It was ‘Abd al-Raḥmān ibn Rabī’ah who was one of ‘Umar’s generals and along with his army had reached this land in around 19 AH. This was followed by the ‘Abbasid leader, al-Wāthiq Hārūn, who ascended the throne in the year 227 and died in 232 AH and his dream. After the dream he commissioned a group who travelled for a long period until they eventually reached the Wall where they found people who were Muslim and who spoke Arabic. Thereafter the author commented saying that he wrote based on the historical narrations and he does not attest to its authenticity. However he does acknowledge its existence because it is mentioned in the Qur’an.

Mention is made of Ya’jūj and Ma’jūj and their attempts to make a hole in the Wall through which they could escape but they failed. The author believed that the opening and various other aspects will not take place simultaneously, instead these will occur gradually and the evil and corruption will also take place more than once, but their greater emergence that will have serious consequences will take place closer to the Day of Judgement.

The author also quotes some western scholars such as Hadland Davis from other faiths who acknowledged the existence of the Wall. Some maintained that it was built about 214 years before the birth of Prophet ‘Isā. Many of these scholars provided detail with regard to the length of the Wall and the type of brick and other material used to build it. They also speak about the different Chinese emperors and their dedication in repairing the Wall. Because of the uncertainty around their exact location, the extra details about the materials used to build it are not significant and cannot be relied upon.

The Qur’an the Ḥadīth make mention of an opening in the Wall. In fact, the Prophet Muḥammad spoke about destruction that will befall the Arabs because of some evil that is close and eminent. This was when a small hole opened up in the Wall.

Assuming as some scholars believed that the Moguls are actually the Ya’jūj and Ma’jūj, then they were eventually successful in breaking out of this prison. This was in the latter part of the 6th century and the early 7th century. They, under their leader Genghis Khan, caused havoc by killing thousands of people and this continued under Holaku and again in around 1399 under Timurlane as stated by Kohn (1999:485).

Despite the havoc and bloodshed during the times mentioned above, they will reappear prior to the Day of Judgement because Prophet Muḥammad included them among the 10 major signs prior to the Day. So how do we reconcile with the reports that confirm a small opening? This could be that the hole was far too small for them to emerge. If indeed it was them who caused all the destruction, then it is not impossible for them to reappear with even more drastic consequences. At some point, Shaykh Rāghib thought that the Japanese could be included among Ya’jūj and Ma’jūj. However, in 1949 some 9 years after completing this book and after the Second World War and the destruction of Japan, he reconsidered his position.

This book written by Rāghib has provided a very comprehensive yet detailed examination of the controversies and debates surrounding Dhul Qarnayn and Alexander the Great. This discussion can be concluded by confirming that since the Qur’an and the Ḥadīth have both mentioned Ya’jūj and Ma’jūj, Dhul Qarnayn and the Wall, these were indeed real events even though some contemporary scholars and explorers have denied it because of their failure to locate it.

Is it possible for scientists and researchers who have dated certain fossils back some 50 000 years, to use some similar modern technology to conclusively locate the whereabouts of Ya’jūj and Ma’jūj and the Wall? After all the mention of Ya’jūj and Ma’jūj and the Wall are to be found also in the Jewish and Christian literature.

Finally, the manuscript discovered and digitised from Timbuktu on Alexander the Great and Dhul Qarnayn, may have been influenced by many stories in existence and brought to bear and thus created the debate as to who is Dhul Qarnayn exactly. This discussion was comprehensively examined, and it is the conclusion of the authors of this article that Alexander the Great and Dhul Qarnayn are two different individuals; hence, the limited mention of Dhul Qarnayn in the Qur’an.