Retrieving long-forgotten writings is always an achievement. As for the biography of Mohammad, I am not sure whether it exactly is worth something if it comes from the 13th century. The source material is always Ibn-e-Ishaq and is under criticism for lacking objectivity. However, if the Libyan biography (most probably an imported one in those times) is different from what we have today, then we may iron out the seams of digression that have been weaved into the fabric of understanding over centuries.

Timbuktu, an unknown city even in the modern scholarship in history, could probably not provide an authentic version of whatsoever is found since to my understanding it has never been a center of wisdom even in the peak of Muslim Civilizations. Libya could’ve lived its past under The Fatimids of North Africa whose flourishing base as put by Farhad Daftary and other Western Scholars remained much centered to Cairo and Al-Azhar, the world’s oldest University. Had anyone created or built the biography of Muhammad to be accepted historically authentic then center’s of Muslim Civilizations should be dig into rather than ironing out what an unknown city could give you.

Both, Karim and Iqram, illustrious and well-read bloggers with a knack for critical estimation of subjects under study, seem to be presumptous as far as their comments on the retrieval of biogarphis of the Prophet Mohammad, dating back to 16th century A.D., are concerned. How can be formed opinion about a subject unless we have an opportunity to go through it? Let the manuscripts be in public domain for scrutiny. Islam has a glorious past of having written history. The tradition continues. Even Mohammad was in favour to acquire knowledge and information even if you have to visit far flung countries such as China.