Was Kaba / Qibla Displaced From Petra

Acknowledging and admiring wonderful efforts, interest and dedication of Mr. Dan(iel) Gibson and his
team while exploring ‘The Sacred City’, but at the same time finding several flaws and wrong
suppositions in this documentary, I have some reservation in this regard, although I’m neither an
archaeologist nor scholar nor historian nor an authority on Arab culture, but just a common Muslim, a
university graduate who have just background of studying History and Journalism in Bachelor's degree
program along with other subjects.
I was not able to challenge his finding with respect to archaeology or missing of description of Makkah
/ Mecca in historical / chronicle books due to lack of my knowledge / expertise, so assuming his
arguments correct tested possibility but his suppositions and arguments regarding direction of ancient
(First century era) masjids / mosques and shifting of ‘Kaba / Qibla’ and ‘The Black Stone’ to Makkah /
Mecca by Abdullah ibne Zubair (RA) after demolishing its original building to ground did not qualify
to be correct. Why? The reasons are given in following paragraphs

First pointing of Kaba / Qibla (where black stone has / had been affixed) direction by ancient first
century’s masjids / mosques.
Before I start narration of reservation, I/one will have to imagine / understand the conventional
approach, means of communication, practices, methodologies, technologies, educational level of a
common man and limitations of that era / up till 724 AD. Compass was invented around 10 BC – 10
AD but its usage for navigation purpose started in 10th century so by knowing how people used to find
directions, passages / routes and destinations becomes important which Mr. Dan(iel) Gibson ignored in
his documentary and corollaries, as my perception. As per my knowledge people used to take help from
position/ shadow of sun, moon, stars, mountains, topographies, rivers, stationary identification objects
like trees, light house towers, land marks, towns etc etc in reading maps and finding directions during
their journeys. Sun has another issue that it changes its position with change of season / quarter of year.
You can use your own knowledge about techniques and skills of nation/people of that time for
understanding circumstances, environment and conditions of that time and nation / common man and
keeping this criteria in mind decide by yourself what precision level would / should had been in
determining direction of these masjids quoted in said documentary by their laymen founders. Further
decide that little difference of angle in direction calculated with modern GPRS system and initially set
direction at that time would be intentional or calculation precision.

Being native of South Asia we can find historical references in which masjids constructed on orders of
sultans / kings of sub continents faced same mistake in precision of kaba/Qibla’s direction even in 17th
or 18th century only because of judgment or calculation error which were rectified later.

Other than technological limitation or constraint reason there is another strong reference which can
debunk this supposition / misconception which is Masjid e Nabvi, the second holiest place of Muslims.
Madina (tul Munawara) is situated at a location where Makkah and Petra are roughly in opposite
directions. Now if Mr. Gibson’s supposition had some value the direction of Qibla of that Masjid had
been almost in opposite directions which in contrary points towards direction of Makkah.

Then comes supposition of demolition and shifting of Kaba / Qiba to present location of Makkah /
Mecca by Abdullah ibne Zubair where the documentary lost its credit for following reasons:
Kaba is and was a holy place for all Muslims above dignity of their caliphs and leaders of that
time and even now. Muslims believe that it was the first building on earth built by First man
and prophet Adam along with Angel, then by Prophet Noah, after biggest flood ended, then
by another Prophet Ibraheem / Abrahem along with his Son the Prophet Ismael and finally by
the last Prophet Muhammad peace be upon all of them. The place has its permanent non
transferable attributes which composes of its sanctity. Muslims strictly follow attributions
mostly and some time this becomes more important than the source itself for many of them.

Coming back to supposed allegation of/ justification given by documentary that Ibne Zubair
destroyed it while Kaba had no controversy in his dispute with Ummaiyads. This false
supposition raises question that how other Muslims and companions , supporters of Ibne
Zubair could accept and tolerate it when Ibne Zubair was not as great as the holy place itself,
rather his own supporters and companions had revolted and punished him within no time.
How could citizen / common people leave that holy place, the place that was the part of
religion, when the dispute between Ummaiyads and Ibne Zubair was of political nature rather
than religious or at least related to non compliant practices?
Why did not Ummaiyads demolish his constructed place when they defeated him and later
Muslims in Madina also, did they not know of new place which was not even walled.

Why did other people remain silent over a such a big issue when they had openly discussed
their differences and had differentiated others over much lesser issues than this, while books
are full with their differences minor or major, old or new, but none of these books talks about
this. Were all books on this issued destroyed even of far distant areas and was it possible. Was
it wiped from memories / knowledge also. How, why and when they agreed to offer their
prayers towards a place which had no atribution to their prophet / belief. If it was so easy to
change its location why did regimes not shift it to their own when it would had been of great
political strenght and it was wish of many to do but they failed.

The Makkah is / was a place whom visit and certain rituals in certain days at-least once in life,
is one of component of Muslim’s faith and this cannot be done at any other place, besides
these certain days they also visit(ed) this place throughout the year all over the world, so it is/
was not possible to change its location, without publicity at large, acceptability comes even
later.

Muslims claim / intend that they follow as per message of Allah (their God / ultimate Lord),
teaching and practices of the last prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and avoid / resist any self
devised / derived deeds unless and until it is entirely new issue so it does not seem possible
for believers to remain in confusion and opting a middle direction silently at their own when
there are historical references that they used to have debates on religious views claiming that
their version was the original / proven or as per practice / teaching of the Holy Prophet
(PBUH), with strict stand on their own stance irrespective of nature of difference, minor or
major.
 In the said documentary Mr. Dan(iel)
Gibson presents reference of 40 days
tenure of a Ummaiyad’s regime during
the first war between Ibne Zubair and
Ummaiyads when Ummaiyads army got
news of regime change and Ummaiyads
decided to return stopping the war
because of some participating generals
close to the royal family, who reached
the palace before the ruler was killed.
Then Mr. Dan(iel) Gibson argues that
distance between Makkah and their
capital was 1400 Km and average speed
of slow moving armies used to be 20
miles per day so adding time of message
arriving and decision making time they
should not have reached the palace
whereas they were reached. There is
problem in determining movement speed
of the troops which is assumed 20 miles
per day which may be correct for Geek
or Roman large and heavy armies with
heavy equipment, goods and animals as
mentioned it in “The Cambridge History
of Greek and Roman Warfare, Volume
2”. This book quotes message passing
speed from 50 – 160 miles per day
depending upon nature of message from
routine to urgent respectively. Another
book “From Sumer to Rome: The
Military Capabilities of Ancient Armies”
relatively discusses in detail the
capabilities including marching speed of
different armies in different reins with
nature of their formation which critically
affects their mobility speed. This book
mentions speed of Alexender’s army
from 13 to 40 miles per day depending
upon its composition / formation.
Another book also quotes 46 miles per
day in context of Alexendar’s expedition
in Asia when his army was mostly
consisting of cavalry.
Now compare formation and
composition of Ummaiyad’s army with
heavy Greek/ Roman armies and Alexendar’s army’s expedition in Asia. You will definitely
find that Ummaiyad’s army was not matching with Greek / Roman’s heavy armies whose
 moving speed of 20 miles is used for calculation. If we use any speed around 40-46 miles per
day the matter solves.

Another decisive and clear reference which the documentary has ignored in framing the
supposition, is series of events and flow of said expedition which according to same book, this
documentary uses for references. The book tells that during this expedition first Madia (ul
Munawara) was attacked and secured / settled, then the Ummaiyad’s army moved towards
Makkah / Mecca where Abdullah Ibne Zubair had flown / stayed. So decide how and why it
had been logically wise to attack / secure Madina which was far away from Damascus (the
capital of Ummaiyads) as compare to Petra where Abdullah Ibne Zubair was, whereas it was
relatively more important and sacred than Madina also. Why did not they first attack / secure
more important and nearer. If you are not convinced / able to decide then find another proof
when Ummaiyad’s return to Damascus after negotiation with Ibne Zubair at end of this first
war, Ibne Zubair repented over losing opportunity of being recognized and becoming a ruler
while the Ummaiyad had reached in Madina and had come in contact with some local
important figures of Madina. This proves that Madina was on route between Makkah and
Damascus Otherwise how and why they had gone Madina to meet dignities of Madina while
in hurry to return Damascus when Petra is nearer to Damascus and Madina far away from
their route. Why they touched Madina before and after Makkah arrival if it was not in route?

As Mr. Gibson perhaps remained distracted from cause of this war in which Kaba / Qibla had no issue,
similarly near the end of documentary, without knowing reason ill perceived unification/compilation of
Holy Quran in Uthman’s rule as series of modification in Quran, as till that time it was permissible to
use synonyms for a few words which could have been matter of misunderstanding of / differences for
non Arabs, so on attention drawing it was abandoned. Further if it had been tempering of the Holy
Book, people would have resisted as it was learned by heart at large and used to be properly and
completely revised in the month of Ramzan other than their daily routine every where they were living,
keeping in mind that there were several other differences at that time and were discussed openly.

So I/one can conclude aside from archaeological aspect (which has not been covered in this article) that
the supposition of Petra to be original birth place of Islam instead of present Makkah city and direction
of 1st century’s mosque / masjid pointing towards Petra does not prove to be true. The slight variation
of direction may be due to judgmental / precision error due to limitation of techniques / conventional
method of that era and the same had been quoted earlier by renowned authors in chronicle books /
journals, however research must continue to a expanded / detailed / enhanced level regarding
archaeology of Makkah / Mecca and history of Petra. If any body has different view / proofs /
arguments and want to correct me can contact me at [email protected] or
[email protected]