Question for Muslims about 29:38

NABA wrote: I also showed u quote of archaelogist who says Quran is correct abt strktres of Thamud.

Really? I must have missed it, I can't recall seeing that.

Would you be so kind as to please show me again? My apologies but I honestly don't remember seeing you do that. Thanks so much, NABA.

NABA wrote: U can still c the posts in interfaith dialouge.it might b in page 6 or 7.

I'm looking through them. I don't see any any quote posted by archaeologists who claim that the Quran was correct about the structures of the Thamud.

Page 6 of our debate
http://www.islamicity.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=25890&PN=6

Page 7 of our debate
http://www.islamicity.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=25890&PN=7

NABA wrote: I had showed u the quote of Muslim archaeologist.

Which Muslim archaeologist? What did he say?

Lachi wrote: Forgive me the interruption, but could we backtrack a bit? How certain is it that the Quran/Hadiths identify the Thamud with the archaeological site of al-Hijr? Articles I've been reading take it for granted that the connection is sound, but don't give any explanation of it. Is this a later identification / interpretation, or is there evidence that it was so at the time of Mohammed? Have alternative sites been identified for the Thamud at anytime?

The Quran claims that the Thamud used to carve homes out of stones at Al-Hijr. "Al Hijr" means "rocky tract".

15:80
And verily, the dwellers of Al-Hijr (the rocky tract) denied the Messengers.

Many Muslims have identified the site "Madain Saleh" as the Al Hijr mentioned in the Quran. Others have identified it as Petra.

Muslim and non-Muslim archaeologists have also identified Madain Saleh as the place mentioned in the Quran.

The National Museum Guide- Saudi Arabia Through the Ages

Al-Hajer (Medain Saleh)
Al-Hajer or Medain Saleh is located 22 kilometers
northeast of Al-Ula. Its historical reputation based
on its position along the ancient trade route linking
the Arabian Peninsula, the Levant, and Egypt. The
settlement had two main roads, the first one led to Petra
via Tabuk, and the other led to Mesopotamia through
Tayma and Dawmat al Jandal. Majority of the ruins in
the city date back to Nabatean period. Next to Petra, it
is no doubt the most important Nabataean site in the
world. Accounts from the Quran, however, tell of an
earlier settlement of the area by the tribe of Thamud.

http://www.nationalmuseum.org.sa/images/Museimguide.pdf

Dedan and al-Hijr

At about the start of the Christian era, the Nabataeans took control of the oasis. They settled at al-Hijr, which grew considerably. It was from this period that the famous rock necropolis dates, with its splendid fa�ades cut in the sandstone like those at Petra.

In 106 AD, Rome annexed the Nabataean kingdom. Al-Hijr became a Roman town, as is
illustrated by a superb Latin inscription from the end of the reign of Marcus Aurelius
(161�180).

An inscription in Nabataean-type Aramaic, dating from the middle of the 4th century,
mentions princes of al-Hijr with biblical names. This fact is indicative that Judaism was probably the dominant religion.

Al-H�r was abandoned before Islam. The Quran refers to it as one of the victims of divine
anger (15:80�84). A French and Saudi archaeological team has been studying the site for about ten years.

Page 50
http://www.scta.gov.sa/Antiquities-M..._Arabie_ar.pdf

I am unaware of any alternative sites.

Both at Petra and Madain Saleh you can see large majestic buildings are carved into rock. It is easy to see how people would have associated them with the Thamudic tribe described in the Quran.

The Quran clearly states in 29:38 that the dwellings of the Thamud and 'Ad can be seen by people, and that these dwellings "make it clear" what the Quran says.


Muslim and non-Muslim archaeologists identify the site of Madain Saleh as the "Al Hijr" described in the Quran. However, as history shows us, these buildings were constructed by the Nabataeans and not the Thamud. In fact, the Thamud were a nomadic tribe that didn't make any permanent settlements anywhere.

Earliest Historical and Archaeological Information
The first clear mention of the Nabataeans in historical reference dates back to 312 BC, when Diodorus described Petra and its people during Antigonus�s attack on the town (Diodorus XIX 94-97). In was almost three hundred years later that Mada'in Salih was first mentioned by Strabo, who described Gallus�s attack on Arabia in 24 BC (Strabo, Geography 16.4.24). That meant that the town was established in the last quarter of the first century BC.
However,scholars suggest that the town might have been founded before the Nabataean settlement, in the early part of the first millennium B.C., by the Dedanites (Healey, 1993, 25). Dedan is known as Al-Ula. It was an important station on the main caravan routs from South Arabia to North Arabia and flourished during the sixth century BC. Winnett believes that the Minaean inscriptions in Madain Salih (JS1-5, 33, 34) and the 29 Lihyanite inscriptions are strong evidence that the site had witnessed a Minaean occupation prior to the Nabateans (Winnnet and Reed 1970, 130 Chapter 7). Musil believes that the Nabataeans were initially under Lihyanite rule (1926, 107). Al-Ansari believes that the Minaean inscriptions which are located at various places in al-Ula and Madain Salih indicate trade relations between the two towns and not Minaean rule. Minaeasns were temporary residents in Al-Ula, just as they were in other places, like Greece (Al-Ansari, et al. 1984, 11). Pliny mentioned that Hegra was the Lihyanite capital, while Musil believed that Madain Salih was the capital of the Lihyanies before the Nabataeans (Musil, 1926, 107). There were Nabataean inscriptions located on the road between Tay�ma and Madain Salih, which translate as saying that Masudu called himself the King of the Lihyanites. Those inscriptions are dated to the second century B.C. (Winnet and Reed, 1970, 120). As the inscriptions are engraved in Nabataean, it may be suggested that perhaps Masudu was a Nabataean. There seems to be no apparent reason for a Lihyanite to write in Nabataean script. Also Masudu is not listed among the known Nabataean kings, so perhaps he was a revolutionary who took over power from the Lihyanites for the time. Subsequently, Madain Salih took the place of Al-Ula as a trade centre.
Reference should be made to the numerous Thamudian inscriptions located in the area. Muslim historians wrote that Al-Hijr was the land of the Thamudians (Al-Istakhari, 24, Al-Hamawi, 2.220-221), Thamud being an old Arabian tribe. There are a large number of so-called Thamudian inscriptions located all over Arabia, which are usually short, and mention the name of the inscriber, or the tribe or the deities. Some contain the SLM (Salam),* a deity of Tayma attributed to the 6th century B.C. There is a general view among scholars that the Thamudians had no permanent land or settlement and that they never established a kingdom. It is likely that the �Thamud� was the name of a group of several of these tribes (Al-Talhi et al. 1988, 48). However, there is no archaeological evidence from the excavation which can be attributed to an early settlement prior to the Nabataeans.
The archaeological surveys conducted by Winnettt and Reed (1970), by Parr, Harding and Dayton (1971) and the current work do not provide any archaeological material from earlier settlements.

Page 179- 180 of report, p 194-195 of the document
http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/42225/1.hasCoversheetVersion/0000319.pdf