New Book Release: Let The Stones Speak Download PDF

Q&A #03 Moving the Black Rock


Click below to watch the video:


How did Ibn Zubayr pick today’s Mecca as a place to move the Black Rock? How did he get so many people to move from Petra? How did they feed them? Dan Gibson answers questions about how and when the Black Rock was moved from Petra to Mecca.




Transcript


Video #31 This is a general transcript of a Dan Gibson video.


Hello, I am Dan Gibson, and this is another Question and Answer Video. One of our viewers, Khalifa has asked a question. The question is: When Ibn Zubayr moved the Ka’ba to today’s Mecca, was it a planned move? If yes, how did he zero on the present location of Mecca? Any clues on that?

Thank you Khalifa, it is a good question, but we need to clarify a couple of things at the onset.

In 70 AH Ibn Zubayr was in the middle of a civil war. I think he realized that it was going to drag on for a long time. So the idea came to move the Black Rock away from the city to safe-keeping. There is no indication that he was planning to create a new Ka’ba and a new Qibla. I think that came later.

From my reading of the text, there were a large group of horses and camels available, brought by his brother Musa’ib. I also think it was mostly old men, women and children that were moved away from the war zone in the city.


undefined

undefined


So why Mecca in Saudi Arabia? Look at a map. It was as far away of Damascus. Pretty well as far away as they could get without going down into Yemen. They would not want a populated area because the local people might end up claiming the Black Rock for themselves, so they wanted an isolated place. Also there was a trade route through Mecca that was occasionally used by merchants, who were shifting from the coastal road to the internal incense route. Mecca is on a connecting route between the two trade routes. Also, Mecca had an ancient well. The original name of that well has been lost to us. But there was a well there; so there as water.

Last, the original tribes in the area were probably more hostile to Damascus than to these few people who settled around the ancient well, with their herds of camels. I have not been able to find the original name of that valley, nor of the well that was there. That has been lost to us in history.

In time, the war went badly for Ibn Zubayer, and eventually he was killed by General Hajjaj, who had been sent from Damascus. At that point Hajjaj makes a token effort to repair the Ka’ba building, but he had no black rock to put into the corner of the Ka’ba.

It is interesting to notice that there are two instances in history at this time, that people took oaths, using the term, “By the Lord of the Corner and the Station” rather than swearing “by the Lord of the Back Rock.” That indicates to me that the Black Rock was missing from the Ka’ba building. It s just an idea, I have no absolute proof.

Khalifa’s second question: Since Mecca of today is still in a very inhospitable location; how did he get so many people to move there and when they did how did they manage to procure water, food etc? It would not have been easy to get people to move from a big city like Petra to a desolate place like Mecca.

Again, this is a good question. But there is an assumption in it. How did he get so many people to move. The issue here is, How many people made the initial move, and how many came later?

As far as the initial move, it could have been quite a small number of people. Remember, their assignment was to take the Black Rock, which was not a huge rock. It could have been carried on a single camel. And they were to take it far away from the armies of Damascus and hide it in the desert. It would seem that women and children also accompanied them, but there is no prove of this. So it could have been a small number, maybe twenty or thirty people, maybe less that made the move originally.

As I mentioned, there was an old well in the center of the Mecca valley, and I am sure there was some grazing for camels and sheep as well.

During my time with the Bedouin, the shepherds would take small flocks of goats out into the barren desert. But they would find things for them to eat. You and I would starve because we not only need our prepared food, we would want a Starbucks as well.

But some Bedouin live solely off of camels and goats. There are some green places in southern Saudi Arabia, so it would have been possible to purchase some food stuff from those regions. Only 100 km away, there was a valley with some agriculture. That valley was on the trade route, the main incense route, so it was not too hard for the original guardians of the Black Rock to obtain grain and rice there.

If you go south from Mecca down wadi Ne’uman, and then cross a mountain range into al-Hada. There was agriculture at AlHada. Today there is a highway joining these two, and so it only takes an hour to drive from one to the other. Then across the next mountain range is a very fertile place. So they could purchase supplies.

So this brings us to another interesting question. I am sure they took money with them when they fled from the armies of Damascus. But how did they earn more money when they got there? They may have had money for months, maybe a year, maybe even two years, but eventually they needed a source of income.

Now you can imagine all the gossip that took place in the surrounding areas around Mecca. The Black Rock was in that valley over there. You can imagine that people came to see it, some would have come to worship it; especially the pagans. Muslims would have come to touch it, or kiss it and to revere it.

And so from the very earliest time, right from when the rock was moved, I think people would start making journeys to Mecca. Just the surrounding people, to the Black Rock. So the surrounding people in Mecca with the Rock would have to provide food for them, housing for them, deeding them, and so people would come and buy what they needed. So commerce would have started quite soon after.

Eight years after the Black Rock was moved, the Ka’ba building was built, and the area around the Black Rock became Masjid al Haraam. How do I know it was eight years later? There is an inscription, written on the rocks, just 60 km from Mecca, in the region of Ḥuma al-Numūr that has verses of the Qur’ān, supplications asking for forgiveness, mercy, martyrdom and paradise; trust and belief in the Prophet Muḥammad and the sending of prayers and blessings upon him. One inscription stands out as it contains the full shahādah. It also tells us that in the year that the inscription was made, Masjid al-Ḥarām was constructed. The inscription is clearly dated as 78 AH (697 CE).

So here we have an inscription, only 60 km away, made by the people that lived in the area, that said that Masjid al Haram was built this year, over there.

So that was the year that they decided to build Masjid al Haram around the Black Rock. The date is written in stone. Masjid al Haram was not built a hundred years, or a thousand years before in Mecca, the date is written there.

In the year 89 AH, about ten years later, it was reported that the well of Zamzam was lost, most likely from a flood that swept through the center of Petra. (Al-Wāqidī tells us: in his day the location of the well of Zamzam was lost. Ṭabarī 23:148) So with the original ZamZam covered over with rubble in far off Petra, it wouldn’t be hard to name the local well in Saudi, as Zamzam.

A couple of years later, in 94 AH (714 AD) more of the city of Petra was destroyed in an earthquake. It was about then that the focus of many people was towards Mecca in Saudi Arabia.

So to answer Khalifa’s question, I think only a small group went to Mecca. The original intent seems to keeping the Black Rock from the Umayyads. Over the next 20 years, however, Mecca was developed, and became a center of pilgrimage, people started going there, and so the local people in Mecca started earning income from those who were coming.

Eventually, all of the history associated with the first Ka’ba in Petra, was associated with the Ka’ba in Mecca in Saudi Arabia. And the later historians just spoke of one Mecca, and both histories merged as one in their minds. Those who held to the first Qibla were known as traditionalists. Those who accepted the new Qiblas were known as Reformers. Eventually the reformers won out, and the original Ka’ba building was totally forgotten.

I hope this answers your question, Khalifa, thank you for sending it in.

I am Dan Gibson, and this has been another Question and Answer video.


Page Discussion

Membership is required to comment. Membership is free of charge and available to everyone over the age of 16. Just click SignUp, or make a comment below. You will need a user name and a password. The system will automatically send a code to your email address. It should arrive in a few minutes. Enter the code, and you are finished.

Members who post adverts or use inappropriate language or make disrespectful comments will have their membership removed and be barred from the site. By becoming a member you agree to our Terms of Use and our Privacy, Cookies & Ad Policies. Remember that we will never, under any circumstances, sell or give your email address or private information to anyone unless required by law. Please keep your comments on topic. Thanks!

markcyrill Thu, 10PM
Hi Dan, I have a question; If ibn-zubayr escaped to south, how did al-hajaj killed him? Did he killed abdulah ibn-zubayr in Petra, and another ibn-zubayr ( for example; his brother) Took the black rock to suoth? Thank you Mark Cyrill
tarek.au Thu, 9AM
Hello Dan, I saw your documentary, The Sacred City, and found your theory very interesting. However, I have a question that I'm hoping to get clarity on. If Mecca wasn't a significant place for Islam until around 689 AD (when Ibn Zubair moved the Black Stone and migrated with all the Muslims from Petra to Mecca), why was then Mecca mentioned twice in the Quran, which had already been collected and edited into a book (unaltered till this day) about 40 years prior to this event (in the 650's, at the time Caliph Uthman)? Any input is appreciated. Regards, Tarek Abdullah
dangibson Fri, 8PM
@tarek.au Tarek, Thanks for your comments. I have struggled to know how to present all of my thoughts in one location. Each thought takes a separate paper or more. For instance you question about the name Mecca appearing in the Qur'an is addressed in the paper: Petra in the Qur'an. https://nabataea.net/explore/founding_of_islam/petra-in-the-quran/ By the time you check this, it may have disappeared. Not because we have withdrawn it, but because it was submitted to an academic journal. And they don't like it if the paper appears on the Internet. This is a struggle with modern academia. Journals prefer to be the first and last place where a paper is published. This is how they earn their income. But this is a very slow and tedious method, and many papers in journals never end up in the public domain. Right now, the paper is being worked on by a number of scholars and we will jointly submit it to a journal. At that time, the paper on this webpage will be withdrawn until the journal accepts it, publishes it, and tells us that we are free to posts it.
dangibson Fri, 8PM
@markcyrill Hello Mark, I think there is a small misunderstanding. I don't believe Ibn Zubayer took the Black Rock south. All indications are that he sent some of his followers south, and that they took the rock with him, while he stayed to fight the Umayyads from Damascus. All indications are that he died in the fighting along with his youngest son. Al-Hajjaj was leader of the attacking army, who went on to Medina to fight the followers in Ibn Zubayer there, and then he was called to fight in Iraq against an uprising there. He never got around to going farther south. That is my opinion. Remember the only real facts we have are the archeological remains of mosques and the directions they faced at certain times. That is the irrefutable evidence from the rocks and stones. After that, all other ideas are theories of how that happened. I expect others will also put forth theories, and this is OK with me. There must be theories, so that we can figure out how the manuscript accounts fit the archaeological evidence.
thetruth Thu, 10PM
When presenting the thesis that the original Qibla was located in Petra rather than Mecca, you provided evidence to support this claim. However, we must crucially also explain HOW and WHY the Qibla was shifted from Petra to Mecca and address the absence of historical records from any historians whether Muslim or non-Muslim documenting this change. Sir Dan Gibson, I am trying to understand the points made in your article, about the relocation of the Kaaba from Petra to Mecca. My understanding this occurred amid the political rivalry between Muawiyyah and Ibn al-Zubayr ibn al-Awwam. Muawiyyah’s base was in Damascus, while Petra, where Al-Zubayr was defending his Caliphate, was 265 miles south. Ibn al-Zubayr was defeated and killed in Petra in October or November of 692 CE, not in Mecca as commonly believed for the past 1300 years. After the death of Ibn al-Zubayr's brother Mu'sab in 691 CE, Marwan I’s successor, Abdul Malik, instructed the Umayyad commander al-Hajjaj ibn Yusuf to lay siege to Ibn al-Zubayr in Petra. Ibn al-Zubayr, aged 68, was killed in 692 CE. By that time, however, followers of Ibn al-Zubayr had managed to move the Black Rock or Black Stone (Hajar al-Aswad) from Petra to Mecca, possibly without his knowledge or order. Al-Hajjaj’s main goal was to defeat Al-Zubayr’s forces and remove their leader, not to seize the Black Stone or the Kaaba. Thus, the Black Stone was securely and safely placed in Mecca, which then became the new central focus of worship, with pilgrims directed its pilgrimage to this new location. From what I understand of your thesis, Sir Dan, sometime between 692 and 750 CE, the pilgrimage gradually shifted from Petra to Mecca, a remote village in the southern Hejaz. Although some pilgrims recognized that Mecca was not the original pilgrimage site, many continued to visit Mecca to see and to have connection with the remaining part of the Kaaba "the Black Stone (Hajar al Aswad), without fully understanding the change, especially those new to the pilgrimage. With no newspapers or written guides, information was passed verbally, causing confusion among pilgrims who were directed to “just go south.” Imagine in 7 century, camels, donkeys, a few by horses and travel by foot as the primary modes of transportation. You mentioned that eight years after the Black Stone was moved, the Kaaba building was constructed. If the Black Stone was moved in 691/692 CE, then the Kaaba’s construction would be around 699/700 CE? Additionally, an inscription from 78 AH (697 CE) near Huma al-Numūr, 60 km from Mecca, indicates that the Masjid al-Haram was built during this time. Is this confirmed by evidence, or is it deduced from the inscriptions? Are the inscriptions still present today? You also noted that in 94 AH (714 CE), Petra was further damaged by an earthquake, reducing its significance. Only a small group went to Mecca. The original intent seems to keeping the Black Rock from the Umayyads. Over the next 20 years, however, Mecca was developed, and became a center of pilgrimage, people started going there, and so the local people in Mecca started earning income from those who were coming. Eventually, all of the history associated with the first Ka’ba in Petra, was associated with the Ka’ba in Mecca in Saudi Arabia. And the later historians just spoke of one Mecca, and both histories merged as one in their minds. Those who held to the first Qibla were known as traditionalists. Those who accepted the new Qiblas were known as Reformers. Eventually the reformers won out, and the original Ka’ba building was totally forgotten. And here is my last question: is the relocation of the Black Stone (Hajar al-Aswad) from Petra to Mecca, which is said to have occurred around 690 to 692, a theory you are proposing, or do you have historical or archeological evidence to support this claim? Thank you once again. I look forward to your response, best regards.
dangibson Sat, 9PM
@thetruth Thank you for your quick outline of what I am suggesting. It has similarities and differences from the traditional account. There are TWO THINGS to take into account here. FIRST: I have amassed a database of over 200 mosques from the first 3 centuries of Islam, and have studied the qibla directions of these mosques. This is the background of what I am presenting. The challenge we face is to explain these qibla directions. The Traditional Account of Islam does not explain the different qiblas. SECOND: I have sought to merge what the early Islamic manuscripts tell us with the Qibla database. The result is the the account that you have nicely put together. If someone else can put together a better account of the rise of Islam using the earliest materials AND the Qibla Research, I would be very open to hearing it. However, in doing this, we must remember that the early accounts of Islam are all written 200 years after the events took place, and under different circumstances and rulers. These days I hear many ideas and theories that people are suggesting, but few if any of them have studied both the ancient manuscripts AND the modern archaeological findings. The book Let The Stones Speak attempts to record how these two fit, and to carefully footnote the earliest manuscripts. At this writing, I am busy translating the first volume of Akhbar Mecca by Azraqi. It should be out by the end of 2024 as a free pdf file. Check https://nabataea.net