Is Dhul-Qarnain the Same as Alexander the Great?

by Sulayman Ceasar August 07, 2025

Is Dhul-Qarnain the Same as Alexander the Great?

1. Weak Manuscript Evidence

The Syriac Alexander Legend survives only in manuscripts from the 18th century—over 1000 years after the Qur’an.1 Van Bladel generously dates it to around 630 CE2, but there’s no physical manuscript evidence from that period to support this. In contrast, Surah Al-Kahf, where Dhul-Qarnain is mentioned, was revealed in Mecca roughly 8 years before 630 CE3, as a response to Jewish rabbis' questions posed by the Quraysh.

2. Quranic Revelation Timeline

Surah Al-Kahf was revealed before 622 CE (Hijrah)3. This is crucial—the Prophet ﷺ hadn’t yet migrated to Medina, and the Islamic state did not yet exist. Associating the Qur’an’s account of Dhul-Qarnain with later Christian or Syriac legends makes no chronological sense.

3. Historical Inaccuracy of the "Arab Kingdom" in the Legend

The Alexander Romance mentions a prominent Arab Kingdom4, which didn’t exist during Alexander's time. Arabs were scattered tribes with no unified state. However, around 629–636 CE, the Rashidun Caliphate emerged, possibly influencing the later versions of the Romance. The mention of Arabs as a strong kingdom likely refers to the Islamic Caliphate, not to pre-Islamic entities like the Ghassanids (who were under Byzantine rule).

This suggests the Syriac legend was influenced by Islamic history—not the other way around.

Do Scholars Identify Dhul-Qarnain as Alexander the Great? Let’s Clarify:

1. Ibn Ishaq (d. 761 CE) – Misrepresented

In his Seerah, Ibn Ishaq does not explicitly name Alexander the Great. He quotes foreign opinions claiming Dhul-Qarnain was from Egypt and called Marzuban bin Marduba al-Yunani—a name that doesn’t match “Alexander son of Philip.”5

He then cites Sayyiduna Umar (RA), who said Dhul-Qarnain was an angel, and finally concludes with “Allah knows best,” showing he's not asserting a firm stance—just reporting varying views.5

2. Ibn Kathir follows the same approach in his Tafsir, listing multiple views without affirming one as fact. He explicitly denies Alexander the Great as Dhul-Qarnain6

3. Ibn Taymiyyah rejects Alexander the Great being Dhul-Qarnain.7

4. Tafsir al-Jalalayn (15th century CE) – Extremely Late Source

This tafsir, compiled nearly 800 years after the Qur’an, does associate Dhul-Qarnain with Alexander7—but this reflects popular legend, not solid historical or theological analysis. It’s not a strong authority on the matter, and the timing alone undermines its relevance.

Major Theological Inconsistency: Dhul-Qarnain Was a Believer,

The Qur’an clearly describes Dhul-Qarnain as a righteous monotheist and just ruler.8

In contrast, Alexander the Great was a polytheist,9 often associated with Greek pagan gods (and claimed to be the son of Zeus-Ammon)10. There’s no evidence that Alexander worshipped the One God or upheld the kind of moral governance praised in the Qur’an.

This alone disqualifies him from being the figure described in Surah Al-Kahf.

Sources:

1. Alexander the Great in the Syriac Literary Tradition By Juan Pedro Monferrer-Sala, page 46
https://www.academia.edu/6461094/Alexander_the_Great_in_the_Syriac_Literary_Tradition

2. https://almuslih.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Van-Blader-The-Alexander-Legend-in-The-Quran.pdf

3. https://quran.com/surah/al-kahf/info

4. https://archive.org/details/BudgeSyriacAlexander/page/159/mode/2up