Was Petra the Real Mecca? | Al Muqaddimah 

What if the real Mecca was the friends we made along the way?

Apart from that, the location of Petra shows that it has to be under Christian Byzantine rule and as far as I know, no other religion survived with a central locus under Byzantines except christianity, the Jews were kicked out of Jerusalem, all folks religion was destroyed so how come the pre-Islamic polytheism survived in the first place and the same goes for Islam, if Petra would have been the actual Makkah, the Byzantine would had nib it in the bud before it reached the Rashidun Era.

As an irreligious person, I really, really admire your ability to speak of your own faith in such unbiased, fact-based manner. Really great respect to you, man.

I live in the U.K. most of the mosques don't face towards Mecca. The reason for this is quite simply:most mosques are converted existing buildings like community centres, houses, warehouses and more recently in central London, a Sega Funland. This was probably the case earlier. Inside the mosque we always pray towards Mecca, regardless of the direction of the building.

I truly appreciate the improvements you made to your speech pattern. I was watching some of your earliest videos a while ago and you are a lot more understandable now =) Greetings from Germany

When it comes to the way Muslims pray and you have to face in direction of Mecca, I thought as a young teen (Irreligious for as long as i can remember) it was pretty stupid and inconvenient. Later on in life it started making sense. On a personal level you feel connected to a wider Muslim world even when praying alone. On a religious level it makes sense to have something that centralize the faith (holy sites within lots of religions). Also, very interesting video!

As an arab with much globalisation influence, I got back into religion because of english videos like this, jazak allah khair

I watched the docunentary of Dan Gibson about Petra and as Muslim, Qur'an is the best guide and we should not question it. Peace be upon us all

I'm always fascinated by all of Religions history. I am an Atheist and study all aspects of religion ever since time immemorial but I respect all religious views to the highest degree. Salam Alaikum dear muslim brothers

They're like flat earthers, it boggles the mind.

Even in my language ' Urdu" we have a idiom that goes like " Ap apna Qibla darust kijiye" which literally means " You should rectify your direction of Kabbah" and figuratively means " Leave the bad habits and do the right thing"

Thank you for this video. I was very conflicted and confused after watching Dan Gibson. You really set the record straight. Thank you. May Allah Bless you. We need more muslims scholars/researches in the Islamic faith.

“A revision of history, ON THIS SCALE, in that period is IMPOSSIBLE. I cannot stress this enough.” Mic drop. Thank you. If Petra were the Real Mecca, one would think the Byzantines would have mentioned that they were fighting the people and worshippers of the 'mythical holy shrine’ of Petra. There is this whole body of orientalists and now Evangelicals who keep coming up with really strange theories. They need to be called out publicly.

People still made mistakes in determining Qibla direction in modern era. The mosques in Indonesia (or Dutch-Indies as named in that era) faced a general West direction before early 20th century. The correct direction is North-West to a certain degree.

Even here in Malaysia, a couple of mosques built 30 years ago were not accurately faced to Kaaba, not until recently ( 5 years ago or so) that the Qibla of the mosques were corrected after recalculation. And this happened at the time where gps exist, so it's totally understandable if the ancient arab miscalculated their Qiblat way before computer ever existed.

Your videos are so fascinating! Good job 😊

I'm a Christian, and I'm here bcz I like to see both sides of the story. You do have good points here, and I like that you have a more open-minded approach like when you say that there are obscure things in the beginning of the post Mohammad history. I think that we need more research from both sides as you mention it. I'll stay tuned for more videos since I'm interested on the Middle East, more precisely Iran.

Interesting hypothesis, I know the comments will be interesting as well.

Your analysis doesn't suffice the question raised by Dan. I still think Dan's presentation of facts is vast and detailed. Especially the fact that he put the sequence of events in a timeline with facts was impressive and convincing. You've missed a lot of things from the 1.25 Hour documentary and surely your attempt to debunk Dan's work is incomplete and hence incompetent. Excuse me for that, but for you to prove your point, you gotta make a detailed point by point counter on Dan's work. Unless you can do that, the logical conclusion favors Dan's work and after watching his documentary, I am of the opinion that Petra was the True birth place of Islam and YES, cover ups have happened throughout history, so for you to say that its next to impossible is itself false and doesn't hold much wait. Killing 7000 people in a single morning is easy but burning a few thousand copies of the Quran to alter some facts and spread their own propaganda at that time is impossible? Well, you should not be narrow minded when it comes to your religion, try to be curious and investigate the facts presented by Dan. As I said, IF and ONLY IF you can debunk Dan's facts point by point, will the viewers truly believe you.

I'm so glad I found this, bringing some much-needed objectivity on this subject. Your fairness and well-documented evidence is a good reminder: No matter what one's personal feelings are about a subject as sensitive as this, as a religion it must be respected.

Your capability of non-bias astounds me. I don't know how I could think clearly enough to actually look into this and see a thousand people disparage something I hold so dear.

Actually from an Arab Egyptian Muslim perspective, I feel like many people specially foreigners deal with Islam as an ancient lost civilization and ancient book that we are trying to understand, As if we found stones and temples and hieroglyphs writings and then we knew that there were pharos and ancient Egyptians and we try to understand their history, They deal with Islam as the same thing, Man if you are raised in a house and then left your family and lived somewhere else and a foreigner came to you with a million evidence and papers and witnesses to proof that your old house is actually not here it is in the other street you will not believe him because it's not an ancient temple, you lived here you had a family here. Guys, Mecca and the qibla and the prophet life and the Kaaba are sooooo holy for us, we know each detail of the prophet life in Mecca and in Madina, No one ever can change this things even after all this years, or even after only 10 years, you can't even say that Rome was in Germany then it was shifted to Italy, because it is strong history for you, and mecca is not history for us, it is history and still present we are still living and praying facing it in all the globe from the beginning of Islam, we are not trying to discover a lost civilization here.

Recently discovered this channel. I'm loving it. Minor complaint: Could you lower the volume on the page turn sound effect every time you introduce a new source or scholar? It's a bit distracting. Otherwise, I love this shit. Good work.

Nice video, good research and editing, YYou deserve more subscribers and view. Greetings from Italy

Thanks for this clarification. I grew up in a muslim household, I am not religious myself and I had the open mind to accept Dan Gibson's hypothesis, I even got excited about it. However, later I started to notice that he had missionary tendencies when he actually started diverting from archaeology and instead talking theology, and most of the times, as you have mentioned, took things literally and transliterated certain statements, that being an Arab, I knew were not accurately interpreted. For example, he seemed so desperate to prove to muslims that their prayers won't be answered since they're not pointing the right way, which having been raised up a muslim, I could easily debunk by saying that God takes the intention into account first. Also he projected a lot of things from the Christian way of crediting worship and assumed in Islam it would be the same. I sent him several emails asking him why he's trying to debunk Islam when there are innumerable theories of Jesus Christ not dying on the cross and others questioning his divinity. He never replied.

Thanks for doing an open-minded, as unbiased as possible analysis of Islamic history! You'd make the Muslim scholars of the Golden Age proud.

there is a city near to Mecca called Ta'if and it was a good agriculture center so Mecca can have a population of few thousands in the 7th century AD

Thanks for addressing this. I was somewhat convinced by this theory and have been waiting for a solid rebuttal, which you’ve delivered. شكرا

When I was in Alexandria in Egypt, I was always told to give my back to the sea and turn a little to the left; that way, I should face Mecca, but who knows, I might have been facing India, hahaha.

Just found your channel linked by Let’s Talk About Religion, your topics look amazing and I’m so excited to find this channel! (I also had to comment on this video specifically because I named my cat Petra after this amazing location.)

This makes sense because Dan Gibson doesn't mention anything about Madina, how could it be so far away from Petra? he claims Cave Ghar Hira was in Petra because of a crescent sign, but the crescent was actually made by the ottomans and not the muslims. He also claims cannon balls were found in Petra. This is weird because he didn't find ANYthing about the placement or remnants of the Kaba there because of earthquakes and floods that wiped it out but somehow some cannon balls remain? Also how is it that zamzam water still flows in Mecca and not Petra. Which doesnt make sense about safa and marwa. There was no mention about structures being built apart of the mountains which repeatedly struck to me. Why is it that there are no mentions of tall structures in the mountains. There are reports of makkah bieng a small city, not with tall structures. the main attraction was the Kabah that drew people to it for pilgrimage. Yet the most important detail of the remnants of the Kabah are not mentioned in Dan Gibson's 'theory'. He also claims that the city was huge with thousands of people. This is actually false. it was quite a small city with few hundred people or less as dr.Yasir Qadhi explains in more detail. Everyone knew each other at the time. Also if you look at the sites of battle of Badr and Uhud it is nowhere near Petra, how is this? For Muslims: We know that the quran was never changed so as a spiritual point of view we dont accept his statement that the quran was altered from bakkah to makkah. This is also a theory and no real evidence is there accept to support his theory about Petra, all he says is its easy to change a baa to a meem. (arabic letters)

The reason it cannot be Petra are: 1) They would have to transport Jabal Al Nour (mountain of light) complete with cave to Petra. 2) Jabal Thawr ( Mount Thor) complete with cave to Petra.

Excellent arguments refuting Dan Gibson's theory. Another argument against it comes to mind based on your discussion of Umayyad rivalry with the Abbasids. Would not Shia Muslims have also criticized moving the Kaaba from Petra to Mecca? The absence of any such criticism speaks volumes to me. Keep up the good work. I subscribed, and, God willing, will help on Patron.

"A bold idea that seems to shake the faith of more than a billion people just gets picked up by people without much further research" Damnn this is true for all religions tbh!

Thank you for your take on that theory. It sounds absurd. I just wanted to note a couple of things: Mecca, while still being in a dry climate, it is in a valley "بوادٍ غير ذي زرع" and could have some green surfaces like palm trees, minding that was after Hajar and Ismail were moved to there. Olives would have been weird, though. Also, "Muslimeen" was mentioned during the lifetime of Muhammad (peace be upon him) so the term was actually used, but it is well known that facing our Qiblah is a major unifying character that is likely used to remind someone of the unity of Muslims.

My argument is that in a large dessert of Arabia there is only one Zamzam well situated in Mecca which is present here since around 1200 to 1600BC. You dont find such source of water even at 1000 miles around Mecca. It meant a lot to the dessert men and for those who travel in dessert. It is just impossible that this place been ignored by all historians. Since this hub was not thickly populated hence everyone has called in their own name. Quresh were traders and they dont fight, they have no warfare only swords indicating they just had occasional skirmish but never participated in war, hence did not mentioned long in history. They did not knew how to dig trench. Salman farsi was from Iran and lived rest of his live in Madina. So people did know what is Mecca and where it is located.

MALAY SUBTITLES Part 4 of 4 13:31 terdapat banyak kiblat. Namun, bagi sesiapa yang biasa dengan budaya Arab, ini adalah perkara biasa. 13:37 Orang Arab selalu menggunakan kiasan seperti ini. Ini bukan metafora yang asli, 13:42 sebenarnya dalam Al-Quran. Dalam ayat 148 bab kedua Al-Quran, dikatakan, 13:47 "Semua orang berpaling ke arah mereka sendiri [doa]" 13:50 Maksudnya, semua agama mempunyai kiblat masing-masing. Ini datang dengan segera 13:56 setelah pertukaran kiblat menjadi Tempat Berkumpul Terlarang yang diperintahkan dalam ayat 144. 14:03 Mengatakan bahawa kita adalah orang yang mempunyai kiblat yang sama bermaksud kita menganut agama yang sama. 14:08 Pada masa itu, istilah Muslim tidak digunakan. Sebenarnya, petikan dari al-Tabari yang digunakan oleh Dan Gibson 14:13 tidak lengkap. Baris seterusnya mengatakan, "Kami bukan orang Turki atau Daylamites" 14:18 Maksudnya, "Kami bukan non-Muslim". Metafora digunakan lagi beberapa halaman di mana 14:23 seseorang berkata kepada saudara ibn az-Zubayr, “Kamu adalah orang yang, dalam satu pagi, membunuh 14:28 tujuh ribu orang yang berpaling ke arah kiblat. " Bukan kiblat KAMI tetapi Kiblat. 14:35 Ini adalah metafora yang tidak difahami oleh Dan Gibson secara harfiah. 14:40 Pada akhirnya, terdapat banyak misteri mengenai Islam awal. Banyak fakta telah menyebabkan banyak perkara 14:45 soalan yang tidak dijawab. Walau bagaimanapun, hipotesis yang dikemukakan oleh Dan Gibson 14:50 tidak sesuai sama ada. Mustahil untuk menutup skala ini. Lebih senang dibayangkan 14:56 sejarawan awal membesar-besarkan perincian mengenai Mekah daripada membayangkan semakan semula 15:01 sejarah pada skala luar biasa ini. Walaupun semua ini masuk akal dalam dokumentari, 15:07 apabila anda melihat dunia Islam yang lebih luas pada masa itu, tidak ada cara untuk ini masuk akal. 15:12 Ini sebenarnya adalah keluhan yang saya ada untuk kebanyakan orang di internet. Orang sering memilih 15:16 menyusun sekumpulan fakta dari internet tanpa cuba memahami konteksnya. Sebuah acara 15:20 tidak berlaku sendirian, ia dipengaruhi oleh dunia di sekitarnya. Semasa anda cuba memeriksa sama ada 15:26 cerita itu sahih, anda periksa persekitaran dan konteksnya untuk melihat apakah itu benar-benar mungkin. Malangnya, 15:32 idea berani yang seolah-olah menggegarkan kepercayaan lebih dari satu bilion orang baru saja terpilih 15:36 oleh orang tanpa banyak kajian lebih lanjut. Jumpa awak lain kali. 15:40 Sekiranya anda ingin mengetahui lebih lanjut mengenai sejarah Islam awal, Muslim Sepanyol dan Khilafah Abbasiyah, 15:45 lihat senarai main di saluran saya. Jika anda suka saluran dan jika anda mampu, 15:49 janjikan satu dolar atau lebih di Patreon untuk menyokong saluran tersebut.

this theory isn't even believable and the moment he said there was a massive cover up, i knew he had no real evidence

No mention of the "mother of all cities" being a walled city with a river running through it? Clearly Mecca has never been a walled city or ever had any river as both foundations and river beds are easy to find, you would think anyone going on a pilgrimage there would know that. I would not try to make the case that Petra was the home of your faith but I could very easily make the case that it was clearly not Mecca as it fits none of the criteria.

I don’t get the controversy, we know Jesus wasn’t born in Bethlehem (if we accept that he did exist, which most scholars do), they just changed that to fit the Old Testament prophesy. Doesn’t materially change what Christian’s believe if he’d been born in Nazareth instead. Might have been an issue for some Jewish converts, but nowadays what’s the difference?

Wtf I live in Jordan and this is my first time hearing about this

Petra was at the edge of the Roman Empire, home of Muhammad’s clan. Religious thinkers gathered at the edges of the empire escaping orthodoxy, Roman had a long history of inventing religions, to cement the army together and control the countryside cheaply. I find it hard that Petra wasn’t the intellectual heart of the original movement and going on Christian religious sites Mecca was chosen later as being better for cash flow and safer from annihilating attack, Petra being severely damaged by earth quakes

From what I have heard from Islamic scholars regarding more "lax" qiibla directions is that there was a difference of opinion. The now unpopular opinion was that the qibla was based off of if the kaba's four walls were extended from east to west and north to south and that as long as your direction of prayer was in line with one of those walls then you would be ok. So for example the mosques in cordoba were faced south because when the kaba's walls are extended it would be closer to face south than to face East.

Theory of qibla in Petra is totally absurd... Thousand year ago, we already have traders, sailor, astronomers, travelers, navigator, algebra and so on.. Its impossible to replace one mountain to another mountain even back then... How they travel to south east Asian then get back to their homeland, or travel by silk road from china to Italy and then going back if they not master the navigation.. Its impossible they not recognize their homeland..

I take issue with what the author claims are Dan Gibson's "conclusions". All Mr. Gibson did in his video was present hypothesis, which is far different than a conclusion. What explanation do you have regarding such things as peoples, geography, and vegetation in the Quran referring to things more closely found in the Petra area than in Mecca? The author acknowledges that some things may be lost and exaggerated in early histories. Ok, what explanation do you have for what Mr. Gibson observes? How do you explain the total lack of archeological evidence of anything in Mecca that predates 800 AD?

We actually do have a few very early non Muslim sources mentioning the Kaa'ba and it's location in Arabia. Read the Khusistan chronicle written in 650s CE.

Good reply to the hypothesis presented by Dan Gibson. Not that there's much room to say any more. I'll add my two cents anyway. The Muslims were asked to change their direction towards the Kaaba whilst they were praying at the Quba Masjid. The commonly held view is that this was a complete about turn (i.e. 180 degrees). So if standing in Medina they were facing Jerusalem, they'd be pointing roughly North. If they were asked to change to Petra, they'd still be pointing North. Whereas, they about-turned and then were faced South, in the direction of Mecca and NOT Petra. In any case if the change in direction was from Jerusalem to Petra. Standing in Medina, roughly 400 nautical miles from Petra and 495 nautical miles from Jerusalem (and given that Jerusalem is roughly 98nm from Petra), they'd have to turn about 3.1 degrees rightward which is roughly just under 3mm. I think Dan Gibson, given his interest in precise cartography should agree that this is an absurd proposition. In real terms, this would mean no turn was required whereby the Quran clearly orders the Muslims to turn. Or would Dan Gibson like to show us how he would perform 3.1 degree turn without a protractor (or even with one!).

The most important thing is that Dan Gibson has conducted an extensive before RESEARCH before developing conclusion that Mecca is located in Petra (Jordan). He also published his findings and conduct seminar publicly & open for any debate. But you just talk without any extensive research like Dan Gibson did.

As strange a theory as it is; it would kind of make sense that Abraham would build the Ka'bah in Petra rather than Mecca - as it's much more closer to the other areas associated with Abraham and the places he and his sons travelled too.

When I travelled to the UK from south Asia, I prayed towards the west instinctively for about a month until I realised that mecca is actually in the south east of England. Many of the early Muslims didnt even see a proper world map in their lifetime. So they may have prayed towards the direction where their instincts directed.

No mosque in the world is build facing ka’bah , it’s not a requirement, though some may have build. But in all mosques prayer are performed facing in the direction of the ka’bah in Makkah this is the most important thing.

Pre-Islamic Arab were very good to pointing directions. It was easy to pointing Petra or other city at that time... #peace 😊

I've flipflopped on this idea often. First I was convinced, then I wasn't, then I watched more of Dan Gibson's videos and I became convinced again, then I researched even more and finally today I honestly am skeptical. A lot of what Gibson says makes sense but I find it hard to believe that such a radical change would go unnoticed. The explanation he gives that that it was and he cites some texts about one of the final tabi3een saying the prayer is being forgotten but that's not the same as an entire city. Can you imagine being an inhabitant of Petra and allowing your community to forget that the city is holy? Also by the time of Muhammad Petra was almost entirely Christian as well, not pagan. But I don't know, the issue is that both sides of this debate have religious axes to grind, Dan is a Christian and associates with apologists, its difficult to find a secular viewpoint. The secular scholars I know of however haven't really paid much attention to this debate.

As well, other than muslims in these empires, there were muslims in abysinia or ethiopia or habesha, in turk areas were abbasid caliphate didn't reach, new muslims in Indonesia. Like, somebody would have noticed at least, this hypothesis is nonsense

this kinda seems like an emotional response in disguise, tbh. i'm not judging tho. anyway, now that you mentioned explicitly the exact location of the first Qibla, and the fact that some of us here can indeed read and understand Quran in arabic, i was wondering, could you just enlighten us where in the verse [2 : 144] or any other (related) verses for that matter, it is mentioned that the first Qibla was in Jerusalem? ps. ofc, this is a rhetorical question. we already know the answer: it's not mentioned anywhere. or maybe, this is just another "metaphor" that the rest of us don't understand after all!

Brother, your way of presentation is really great. But , you are wrong in one thing , pre-Islamic Arab merchants were really good at pointing directions, they used positions of stars , stone and thread and also poems . So directions of those old quiblas could not be unintentionally wrong. Also Hipparcus(190bc -120bc) was known as the father of trignometry. So, use of trigonometric formulas was also very common in ancient civilizations like egyptians, greeks, romans , persians and indians.

This reminds me of the hypothesis that early Arab ideological conflict was an extension of the rivalry between the Ghassanids and Lakhmids. Just wish we knew more specifically.

I want you to make a series about Spreading Islam In Nusantara Archipelago (Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and Brunei) it will be very Interesting cause spreading Islam in that region is even more peaceful than how Islam Spread in the Middle East

I am from Pakistan and many of the mosques I have been to don't directly face Mecca. Because, it simply doesn't matter. The direction we pray towards is not in the direction the mosque is facing, it's Mecca (Rugs are not aligned with the walls of mosque). Direction of mosque is not even an argument in the first place. It's such a random thing to pick and make a propaganda. Not to mention all the historical facts that were presented in this video.

Its a tantalizing concept. It would be worthwile to challenge it with archaeology. Just because Petra deserves its history in Islam, whatever it is. Some things that I also am curious about. The stone was placed in the Qaba by Ismael, but Abraham and Isaac were buried in Hebron. Its the burial place of Aaron. It was the place moses drew water from a stone. Would in not have been more logical that Ishmael would have been in that area close to his family? Petra was also a trading hub for the insence trade at the time. Muhammed may have been there a lot just as a part of life. Petra was like a central location for the many tribes and nations to gather at and was the capital of the nebateean kingdom. Its worth learning more. It does not devalue where the Qaaba is if it has merit.

This channel is seriously underrated!!! I seriously recommend doing more collabs because more ppl need to find you! (It's how I found you. your collab on your did mohammad exist video)

The Greek historian Diodorus Siculus writes about Arabia in his work Bibliotheca historica, describing a holy shrine: "And a temple has been set up there, which is very holy and exceedingly revered by all Arabians".[41] Claims have been made this could be a reference to the Ka'bah in Mecca. However, the geographic location Diodorus describes is located in northwest Arabia, around the area of Leuke Kome, closer to Petra and within the former Nabataean Kingdom and Roman province of Arabia Petraea.

Thanks for making this video...

Thank you for explaining the context! I saw that documentary a while back and I felt that such a huge cover up would have been difficult to manage back in the day. Even nowadays it would be difficult! Really enjoying your channel!

So roughly around the 3:35 mark you make a comment regarding the documentation of the early period of Islam being unreliable and possibly doctored. I will agree that actual documents from the period are sparse but you ignore the oral-based hadith and seerah (the biography of Prophet Muhammad's life) literature in its entirety. I feel that this is a theme throughout the videos of yours that I have seen. You come across as quite orientalist.

hi could you please make a list of all the journals, pdf's and books you cite and read, it seems interesting and would like to dive deeply into the Islamic history

I watched dan Gibson's doc and read some of his stuff and it really seems he found something groundbreaking. His answers and research findings are not vague but is concrete with all the evidences still there in petra.

Really good video. I agree that a cover up of this scale simply wouldn't be possible in this context. It almost reminds me of the phantom time hypothesis.

Excellent. Clear. Methodical. Point-by-point. A super rebuke.

Thank for this. I'm a student of Islam and Middle Eastern studies from Jerusalem, Israel. And you convinced me of the inconsistencies of Dan Gibson's hypothesis.

Fantastic work .. thank you.

Dont forget that Qibla also means direction meaning that our direction or metaphorically "path" is better or different or is the right one and that makes more sense tgan suggesting a different direction of prayer since non are mentioned or even hinted at.

Nice response. Great for on-going discussion. Thank you. Your comments about Spanish Qibla's are valid, but Dan Gibson only proposes his idea as a possible explanation. As for the cover-up, if Islam (based on leading figures of the Arab conquest) was systematized under the Umayyads and revised under the Abbasids as the glue that held the empire together, then a cover-up is easily acceptable.

i can't get the free trail The requested URL was not found on this server.

Great video! Great rebuttal

The issue here is not only quibla direction but also of the Hajj. Here in the Philippines Filipino Muslims who had gone to Mecca as pilgrimes they're usually called Hajji. If the allegation of Dan Gibson is found to be true then probably they will be called as fake Hajji.

Dan Gibson's data on Qibla direction is accurate because he is using modern technology, the GPS. For me, he is persuasive in this matter. If the creators of the early Qiblas do not have any sense of direction, if they do not have any technique to determine the right direction where the early Qiblas would point to, the technology which Gibson used would give a random direction. However, to everyone's surprise, the early Qiblas' direction, according to GPS, point to Petra. Is this a mere coincidence?

As an arabic speaker who read Dan gibson work, the guy made numorous mistakes translating some words in arabic he didnt account for vowel per example he translated a certain word حِجر to حَجر which both look the same other than the vowel but have totaling different meaning one means a rock the other means Lap. so im not that surprised of the inconsistencies of his work pretty genuine i guess but still Wrong

They were very good at geometry and maths. The Greeks learned it all from ancient Mesopotamia. By the time all these Mosques were built this knowledge was everywhere.

I must say I found both Dan Gibson and the cambridge academic very convincing. As a sunni, born Pakistani, who spent some early years in Saudia....I cannot fathom how Mecca could have possibly existed as a city which the Holy Quran describes. Even more is how would Hazrat Hussain go to Koofa from Mecca in 28 days...that is somewhat possible from Petra but not from present day Mecca. Dan also talks about a city called Becca which is near Petra which could have been Mecca. Kaaba , is shape of cube which was a ubiquitous structure found in Arabia ......Muslim intelligentia and their prized books were decimated in 1200 by the Changez Khan....there has never been a voice of reason or dissent after that holocaust.....everything following 1200 -1300 has been tutored under state supervision of Ottomans until 1900's when Middle eastern fiedoms started to assert themselves. The more people find it religiously difficult to accept alternate reality of Mecca, the more I am convinced they have something they feel insecure about.

this petra hypothesis is so absurd that it doesn’t need any videos being made to disprove it

Thank you for your fair reporting.

The defeat of Al Zubair is logic..because Hajar Aswad is one of the important thing that should be with kiblah

Let me guess: You watched Engineer Muhammad Ali Mira's video debunking the documentary. Supreme Video btw, love your content as always!

I thought there are archeological research like Dan Gibson....but this video more like, "dude trust me."

this was well done

Uumm, Dan actually gave 10 or 12 of the oldest known around the world and they all pointed to Petra. Even the mosque you said they dont know why they changed later. Also, arab astrology and astronomy was actually on point than. Other wise all the old mosques just happen to point to petra out of luck? I doubt that.

Some are commenting that most muslims were not giving unbaised answer, there are some really amazing scholars who have given unbiased, logical answers but their videos are not in english

Even today there are many mosques in Pakistan that are built incorrectly I use the qibla campus and many of our mosques have difference of minor degrees but those minor degrees could mean praying towards medina or yemen or who knows maybe jerusalem 😂

I LOVE THIS VIDEO. I just saw the documentary and it seemed interesting, but also a bit conspiracy. I'm very happy I found your video. I'm very happy with scholars like you on the internet. The ones that are religious but also interested in the early history of their religions. It shows you are searching for the truth and nothing but the truth. I can trust you. You are not trying to prove something. Also, you show very well how difficult it is to research early Islamic history. (The beginning of "anything" is always heavenly debated and you should never believe one source trying to change the narrative. That's the case here as well and I'm very happy you show that AND WHY it is so difficult/hard to know.) Truly, thank you, thank you, thank you. I cannot say it enough times. You're doing an amazing job educating the masses about truely fascinating subjects!

F.E. Peters in his Book "The Hajj..." (Princeton university 1994) quotes an inscription found on the makam Ibrahim in Mekka. People at that time couldn´t read it until they found a jewish scholar, who translated, that this place belongs to "Zebaot" - a name of God frequently mentioned in the old testament. This points to Mekka being a holy site to Judaism many centuries before the advent of islam. (The inscripion was probably in old hebrew script, which in the time of the Kaaba restoration few people could read)

I can give you a very recent example of a nation collectively forgetting a truth about their past, even only a couple of generations ago: Ask any European woman if they were aware that many European women until 1900's wore headscarves in public life, for example in Britain it was considered inappropriate for a woman not to. Let's ask them and see if the majority is aware of that fact. Political and social authorities can be much more powerful than we think is possible in shaping collective memory, identity and worldview.

Why and how could people build a very important shrine in the middle of no where while no one could live nearby to maintain it? Why would people consider a barren land as the holy place? Why was the Forbidden Area needed to be installed when nobody wanted to go there because it was so unimportant? The "cover up" could succeed might be the same reason as you mentioned "people just didn't take qibla as seriously as we do today".

this is why more people should be investigating this, theres no one out here really doing research, only dan gibson is.

No it’s not Petra. You had thousands of people that performed Hajj each year and no one mentioned “For some reason the trip to Mecca was 1,000 miles more than I expected” c’mon

Your closing statement alone single-handedly put the entirety of Gibson's research and works invalidated and cremated to dust. My respect and honour to you in helping out the doubts to whomever question about it. 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👍🏻👌🏻

It appears that Dan has presented a very concocted version of the second Islamic civil war. Muslims just don't just pray facing towards the Kaaba but they have been doing another thing at that direction from that time to now, they bury their deceased facing towards mecca now Dan has responded to it in a video but his statements and arguments seem not to satisfy me also after ibn Zubair was killed Hajjaj still had crushed the rebellion for a time and during this period even in agony he would have demolished the Kaaba and shifted it back to Petra as we know Hajjaj did demolish the Kaaba built by ibn Zubair and reconstructed it by raising the entrance door and changing the little rectangular shape to a more cubic shape and it would have been the perfect opportunity for him to rebuild it and shift back to Petra instead he rebuilds it at the same place.

Thank you for sharing. 😊 *Dan Gibson may have been correct ... or ... not.* (After all, Mohammad's nearest relatives lived in northern Arabia and the northern Hejaz ... Hashemites) *But your points are well-taken.* From what I have read, the location of Mecca was under control of the southern Arabs. The local Arabs living near Petra did make pilgrimages to that place well into the 20th century. I think that the Nabataeans[1] and the Nabataean Kingdom Kingdom[2a] are important in understanding both Petra and Mecca as well as Medina (Yathrib) Regarding Petra: The Nabataeans were southern Arabs who migrated northward and (eventually, during the Greek era of rule of the Middle East -- during/post-Alexander the Great) had the water system built in Petra (i.e. located in the modern country of Jordan) To successfully conduct business; the Nabateans also adopted the Aramaic language [Ancient Aramaic was not that different from the ancient Phoenician/Canaanite and ancient Hebrew languages] [Aramaic was also the lingua franca in western areas of the Achaemenid (Persian) empire) When the Greeks and Romans took over the area the lingua franca of the Levant and eastern Mediterranean was Koine Greek] During the era of Achaemenid (Persian) rule there was a rebellion[3] That the *Qedarites* [4] joined. The rebels were defeated and it appears that the Nabataeans took over the monopoly of the the spice trade (from the Qedarites) with Achaemenid Persia. Later the Nabataeans also had conflicts with the Greeks (i.e.Third War of the Diadochi 312 BCE)[4] The Nabatean people were mentioned in nearby kingdoms' correspondence during the 4th century BCE. The Nabataean Kingdom existed between the 3rd century BCE (i.e. circa 300 BCE) until 106 CE/AD when it's territory was taken over by Rome and renamed Arabia Petraea[5] Later (after the division of the Roman empire) under the Eastern Roman/Byzantine empire, the territory was known as Palaestina Salutaris (circa 300 CE -- 636 CE)[6] During the mid-Roman period; the Nabatean elite sold their territory to the Roman empire and re-located to Italy, leaving the peasants in the area (with an, eventually, broken-down water system in Petra). _________________________________________________________ 1.) *Nabataeans* en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nabataeans 2a.) *Nabataean Kingdom (3rd century BCE -->106 CE/AD)* en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nabataean_Kingdom 2b.)*"Emergence" (scroll down) of the Nabataean Kingdom* en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nabataean_Kingdom ""Aramaic ostraca finds indicate that the Achaemenid province Idumaea [i.e. Edom] must have been established before 363 B.C [363 BCE] after the failed revolt of Hakor of Egypt and Evagoras I of Salamis [Cyprus] against the Persians. The *Qedarites* joined the failed revolt, and consequently lost significant territory and their privileged position in the frankincense trade; and were presumably, replaced by the Nabataeans.[3] It has been argued that the Persians lost interest in the former territory of the Edomite Kingdom after 400 BC, allowing the Nabataeans to gain prominence in that area. All of these changes would have allowed Nabataeans to control the frankincense trade from Dedan [i.e. "Al-'Ula, Medina Province, KSA] to Gaza."" - Wiki article [i.e. *Greeks and early in Roman rule used boats from India and (what is now the country of Yemen) to* . *Al-'Ula -- >Petra --> Gaza* During the later Roman/Byzantine rule; boats went all the way to Egypt] 2c.) *"Emergence" SEE MAP @ article of the Nabataean Kingdom* en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nabataean_Kingdom MAP TITLE: ""Trading routes of the ancient Middle East, when Petra was the last stop for caravans carrying spices before being shipped to European markets through the Port of Gaza"" [No Mecca on this map] 3.) *Qedarites/ "Qedar" (name)* en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qedarites 4.) *The Antigonid-Nabataean confrontations (Greeks vs. Nabateans)* en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antigonid%E2%80%93Nabataean_confrontations 5.) *Arabia Petraea (106 CE - 630s CE)* en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabia_Petraea 6.) *Palaestina_Salutaris (c. 300 CE - 636 CE)* en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palaestina_Salutaris

Beatiful mera bhai... Thanks

Fun fact :- All major religion started in asia.