The Abrahamic Stand at Nabī Yaqin: The Conversion Process of Holy Place

Abstract

The site of Nabi Yaqin preserves an ancient tradition of Abraham’s prayer over Sodom. The landscape that stretches from the ridge of Nabi Yaqin facing east to the Dead Sea and the Jordan River serves as the backdrop for the formation of this tradition. In this paper, we will show that the tradition regarding Abraham’s prayer apparently began during the Byzantine period as indicated by the writings of Egeria and St. Jerome. Although the exact location they identify cannot be determined from the sources, it seems that the region of Bani Na’im and Nabi Yaqin should be regarded as one space connected to the story of the destruction of Sodom. During the Middle Ages under Muslim rule Nabi Yaqin area became associated with Abraham’s prayer and a hollow in the ground at that location was marked as the place of his prayer. At a later stage, towards the end of the 17th century, two footprints were added to that socket. During the 18th and 19th centuries, an additional pair of footprints was added, which marked Lot’s prayer outside the compound. In Bani Na’im the neighboring village the burial place of the prophet Lot was identified. In fact, both sites are extensions of the story of the destruction of Sodom, with the former associated with its beginning and the latter with its end. We proposed that the process leading to these identifications was influenced by a site overlooking Lot’s Sea and Lot’s Cave, and the site itself became the burial place of Lot and the prayer site of Abraham.

About five kilometers southeast of the city of Hebron lies a site called Maqam al-nabī Yaqin (مقام النبي يقين). Its relative proximity to Hebron, the astonishing view it offers to the east, and its role as a connection point between the cultivated land and the desert have led to various traditions being associated with it. The site features a building (‘Maqam’) with an inscription from the 10th century, and around it, you can find a large courtyard and various ancient facilities. The aim of this paper is to review the findings at the site and its historical references, and to trace the development of the different traditions that appear in Nabi Yaqin and the surrounding area.

The main idea underlying the article is that the development of the Nabī Yaqin site, as well as the nearby Tomb of Lot, is fundamentally related to the geographical point that connects the east and west. The fact that the place serves as a viewpoint over the Dead Sea and is the presumed location of the biblical story of Sodom led to various traditions associated with the narrative converging at these sites. The proximity to Hebron and the Oak of Mamre, the place of Abraham, also constitutes a part of the sanctification of the space. Throughout history, the site and its traditions shifted from one Abrahamic religion to another until the current Islamic status of the site.

1. Nabī Yaqin Site in Ancient Times

The site of Nabī Yaqin likely preserves its biblical name of ‘Cain’ mentioned as a city in the inheritance of Judah in the Carmel and Ziph area (Joshua 15:57). Yohanan Aharoni suggested identifying Cain with Nabī Yaqin itself, as part of the Ziph district (Aharoni 1967, p. 354), but following the archeological survey by Moshe Kochavi, and later by Avi Ofer, Cain was identified at the nearby Khirbat Bani Dar, about 400 m west of Nabī Yaqin (Kochavi 1972, pp. 29, 64, Sites 162–63; Ofer 1993, Vol. 1, Part 3: p. 78, Vol. 2: Appendix 2A, Sites 171, 172).1

In 1998, following looting excavations at the site, archeological investigations were conducted at the cemetery of the site by the Staff Officer for Archaeology, revealing several burial caves from the Iron Age IIb and another cave from the early Roman period (Peleg and Srukh 2004; Zelinger et al. 2009). The site apparently existed in the 7th century BCE and was abandoned around the time of Sennacherib’s campaign in 701 BCE (Yezerski 2009, p. 150).

During the Roman period, the site was reestablished, and it is now referred to as ‘Yaqim’. It is mentioned in two documents found in the Judean Desert, one document from Nahal Ze’elim (Yardeni 1994) and the other presumably from Nahal Hever (Cotton 1994). Besides the clear evidence that the settlement existed during this period, Hanna Cotton also pointed out that there is a clear connection between the area of the Judean Desert, including Yaqim, and Zoara area on the other side of the Dead Sea, and they should be regarded as one area (Cotton 1994, p. 65). I would like to return to this point at the end of the discussion.

During the surveys, many Byzantine artifacts were found, both at the Nabī Yaqin site itself and at the nearby Bani Dar site, indicating the continued use of the places (Kochavi 1972, p. 64, Site 163; Ofer 1993, Vol. 2: Appendix 2A, Sites 171, 172). In the Byzantine period, we know from historical sources about the nearby site of the village of Bani Na’im, which was then called ‘Kephar Baricha’ (Ofer 1993, Vol. 1, Part 3: 52; Tsafrir et al. 1994, p. 98).2 Kefhar Baricha was first mentioned by Epiphanius (Ἐπιφάνιος) of Salamis (4th century CE) as the dwelling place of a certain Gnostic priest named Peter, who led people astray: “As I said he got it—like getting poison from an asp—in Palestine from an old man unworthily named Peter, who used to live in the district of Eleutheropolis < and > Jerusalem, three milestones beyond Hebron; they call the village Kephar Baricha” (Epiphanius of Salamis 2009, p. 283). Kephar Baricha was also mentioned by Euthymius (Ευθύμιος 473–377 CE), one of the early desert monks of Judea (see Cyril of Scythopolis 1991, pp. xxvi–xxx) who established a monastery in the place:

He [=Eutymios] left there and came to the desert of Ziph, out of a wish to see the caves where David took refuge from the face of Saul. [THE MONASTERY OF CAPARBARICHA AND THE PEOPLE OF ZIPH] In this region he founded a monastery. The cause of the foundation of this monastery is said to have been as follows. A son of a certain headman of the village of Aristobulias had an evil spirit and would in his shrieks invoke the holy Euthymius by name. The father of the boy, hearing of Euthymius’ being in the region between his village and Caparbaricha, made search and came to him. As soon as the youth saw the saint, he was thrown into convulsions and the demon came out of him, at which he was cured. When the miracle was noised abroad, people came to him from Aristobulias and the villages round about and built him a monastery; some brethren gathered and remained with him, while God satisfied their bodily needs” (Cyril of Scythopolis 1991, pp. 17–18)

From this segment, it can be learned that the Ziph desert, east of Hebron, was identified as the area where David hid from Saul (for more information about the Ziph desert during the Byzantine period, see Batz 2006). The location of the monastery that Euthymius established near Kephar Baricha is unclear, and several identification proposals have been raised in research (Hirschfeld 1990, pp. 13–15 (Site No. 5); Hirschfeld 2002, p. 37; Amit 1996; Shar-Avi 1998). This is not the place to discuss the various proposals since we are dealing with another site, but the mere abundance of proposals indicates that the area was quite populated with monasteries during the Byzantine period, any of which could have been Euthymius’ monastery. It is possible that we have additional sources from the Byzantine period related to the site of Nabī Yaqin, which have not been discussed in research until now, and they will be presented below.

2. Nabī Yaqin Site in the Early Islamic Period

According to the survey results, the site continued to exist during the early Muslim period, and towards the end of this period, a Maqam was built at the location (Arraf 1993, pp. 133–35). The site of the Maqam includes a square wall surrounding a rectangular courtyard, with a gate on the north side (Figure 1). On the western side of the fenced complex, there is an elongated room with a mihrab facing south. In the center of the room, there is a sunken area containing an exposed natural rock, and at the southern end of the sunken area, there is another small mihrab. In the center of the rock, there are two footprints attributed to the patriarch Abraham, and they also face south (Figure 2). Outside the site area, to the west, there are two additional footprints surrounded by a circle of stones [Figure 3].

At the entrance to the elongated room, there is an Arabic inscription:

• بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم أمر ببناء هذا المسجد محمد ابن اسمعيل الصباحي
• انفق من ماله طلب الثواب وذالك في شعبان سنة اثنين وخمسين وثلث (مائة)

[=Basmalah. Has ordered the building of this mosque Muḥammad b. Ismāʿīl aṣ-Ṣabāḥī, using his own funds, beseeching Allah’s reward. This was in Shaʿbān 352 (=August 963)].

Above the inscription were added the words أَبِي بكر [“Abī Bakr (sic!)”] and to the left of the inscription the word ٱلمقدسي [“al-Muqaddasī”]. Below the inscription was added a line: وتولاه الحسن ابن عبد الله القيم رحمة الله عليه [=“It was supervised by al-Ḥasan b. ʿAbd Allah the custodian may Allah have mercy on him”] (Yadin 1964, pp. 109–11; Mayer 1933b, pp. 183–84; Sharon 2013, pp. 87–89). According to this inscription, the building was constructed a few years before the Fatimid conquest, when the land was under the Ikhshidid rule (935–69), a period from which not many structures remain, making the location special, although it is important to emphasize that it was not built by the regime itself.3 However, it is important to note that Palestine Exploration Fund (PEF) researchers who arrived at the site indicated that the structure is modern (Conder and Kitchener 1883, pp. 371–72) and it is possible that the inscription was on an older structure that was renovated.

As a complement to this inscription, we have a description of Shams al-Din Abu Abd Allah Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Muqaddasi (المقدسي) (written in 985 CE) that describes the place:

“A farsakh distant from Hebron is a small mountain overlooking the Lake of Sughar (Dead Sea) and the site of the cities of Lot. Here stands a mosque which Abū Bakr al-Sabāhī built; within it is the resting place of Abraham-peace be upon him-which has sunk below the surface of the dry ground about a cubit. It is related that when Abraham saw the cities of Lot in the air he fell prostrate there and said: ‘I now bear witness that this is in truth the time of Certainty [of death]’”.

(Al-Muqaddasi 1994, p. 157)

This important description indicates that already in the 10th century, there was a tradition regarding Abraham’s place of prayer watching Sodom and Gamora from Nabi Yaqin. It should be noted that the footprints are not mentioned but rather the sunken area. The expression ‘the absolute truth’ is a Quranic phrase in the context of the Day of Judgment: “This is the certain truth [al-Haq al-Yaqin]” (Qur’an, Surah 56 (The Event): 95 in Haleem 2005, p. 358), and from there the current name of the place likely preserved the biblical name Yaqin.

It should be noted that near, the courtyard there is another burial cave attributed to Fatima, who was related to the prophet Muhammad through his son-in-law Ali (Yadin 1964, pp. 111–13; Frenkel 1984, pp. 72–74; Elad 1987, pp. 264–65; Lecoquierre 2019, pp. 37–41).4 Since al-Mukaddasi does not mention this important grave, it is likely that it was established after the 10th century.

3. Nabī Yaqin Site in the Crusader Period

During the Crusader period, the place was not explicitly mentioned in Nabi Yaqin in the accounts of Western travelers, but the tomb of Lot nearby was mentioned starting from the year 1100 (Pringle 1993, p. 107; 2022, pp. 144, 242).5 However, the description by the Russian abbot Daniel (Даниил Палoмник) deserves special attention as he described in 1106 the specific mountain from which Abraham gazed upon Sodom:

“Near this spot, a verst6 from the double cavern towards the south, is a high mountain which the Holy Trinity ascended with Abraham, who had accompanied them from the oak of Mamre. On the summit of this mountain there is a very beautiful place where Abraham, prostrating himself on the ground, adored the Holy Trinity, and offered the following prayer… It is from this mountain that the Holy Trinity sent two angels to Sodom to make Lot, Abraham’s nephew, flee from the city. It was therethat Abraham offered a sacrifice to God, throwing grain into the fire. This place is, therefore, called ‘The Sacrifice of Abraham.’ It is situated at a considerable height, and from it the whole country of Canaan can be viewed… Thence to Sigor it is two versts. Lot’s sepulchre and that of his two daughters are to be seen there; they are two separate sepulchres. In this mountain there is a large cavern, in which Lot took refuge with his daughters; also the remains of a city of the first inhabitants of this country; it was situated on the heights of this mountain, and the place is called Sigor”

(the Russian Abbot Daniel 1888, pp. 46–48)

Despite the unclear wording, it seems that one can learn from Daniel that near Hebron there was a holy place from which Abraham observed the destruction of Sodom, and where the negotiation described in the Book of Genesis about the number of righteous people living in Sodom took place. It is also unclear from the description where the location of Zoara is and where the cave to which Lot fled with his daughters is situated. Indeed, the scripture states that Lot and his daughters did not remain in Zoara and fled to the mountain: “And Lot went up out of Zoar, and dwelt in the mountain, and his two daughters with him; for he feared to dwell in Zoar: and he dwelt in a cave, he and his two daughters” (Genesis 19:30), but from the plain meaning of the text, it seems that the reference is to the mountain adjacent to Zoara, which as mentioned is identified on the other side of the Dead Sea.7

Ali ibn Abi Bakr Al-Harawi was a Persian traveler from the city of Herat in Afghanistan, who wrote about the holy places in the late 12th century (in 1173) under Crusader rule. Regarding Nabi Yaqin, he wrote the following: “Yaqin: a village that contains the tomb of Lot, where he dwelt after his migration from Zoar. It is called Yaqin because when he led his household and saw the punishment that struck his people, he bowed down at this place and said: ‘I have come to know that the promise of Allah is the truth’ (=al-Haqq al-Yaqin).” (Al-Harawi 2004, pp. 76–78). Here we see a development of the tradition, and instead of Abraham, Lot appears. This duality will accompany us throughout the Middle Ages, and sometimes the one praying is Abraham and sometimes it is Lot.

4. Nabī Yaqin Site in the Late Islamic Period

During the Ayyubid period (1260–1187), the famous geographer Yaqut al-Hamawi (ياقوت الحموي, wrote around 1225) described the place in almost the same words as Al-Harawi (Le-Strange 1890, p. 552; for the Arabic source see Yaqut 1957, p. 426).

The place continued to be a holy site even during the Mamluk period (1260–1517). A traveler from Morocco named Muhammad al-Abdari (محمد العبدري) visited the country in 1289 and wrote the following:

“The al-Yaqin Mosque mentioned earlier is located on a high mound where there is only one building adjacent to the mosque on the east side, and there lives the supervisor. Near the door of the mosque, there is a place sunk in the rock, and they shaped it like a mihrab in which prayers are made, and there is no space except for a solitary worshiper, and it is said that this is the place where peace be upon him (Abraham) said that this is the truth that he affirmed when the people of Lot died, it trembled slightly and sank into the ground”.

(al-ʻAbdarī 1968, p. 227, about al-Abdari see Ben Cheneb and Hoenerbach 1960)

This description is very similar to the previous description of Al-Muqaddasi, especially regarding the depression in the ground, but Al-Abdari noted the fact that there was a supervisor present at the site.

Another traveler who wrote about the place is the famous Maghreb traveler Abu Abdullah Muhammad ibn Battuta (أبو عبد الله محمد بن بَطُّوطَة 1369–1304):

“In the vicinity of the turba of Lot is the Mosque al-Yaqin, which is situated upon a high hill and has a brightness and a glow which no other mosque possesses. There are no buildings near it except a single house, inhabited by its keeper. In this mosque, close by the door, there is a spot sunk in solid rock, in which there has been formed the figure of a mihrab, only large enough to accommodate a single worshipper. It is said that Abraham prostrated himself in this spot in gratitude to God Most High on the destruction of the men of Lot, and the place where he prostrated himself moved and sank down a little way into the ground”.

(Ibn Battuta 1958, p. 76)

It seems likely that Ibn Battuta himself did not visit this place but relied on the words of Al-Abdari, a phenomenon that appears in his writings elsewhere as well.8 It is important to emphasize that whether it is Al-Abdari’s words or Ibn Battuta’s, there is no mention of the footprints, and one can assume that if such footprints did exist, they would have been mentioned by the travelers. However, it is evident that the place has become sacred, and we hear that at this stage, qualities of a holy site were attributed to it, such as a special halo (about those sacred places see Anabsi 2008).

The famous Mamluk historian Mujir al-Din al-Aylami al-Hanbali (مجير الدين العليمي الحنبلي) also mentioned the place in a manner quite similar in the year 1495 in his book ‘The Significant Ambiance in the History of Jerusalem and Hebron’ [Al-Uns al-Jalil bi-Tarikh al-Quds wa al-Khalil]:

“A parasang from Hebron lies a small mountain overlooking the Zoara Lake (Dead Sea), the site of the cities of Lot. There we see a mosque built by Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn Ismail al-Subhi; it surrounds the place where the indentation of Abraham is found, engraved in the rock to a depth of nearly a cubit. It is told that when Abraham saw the cities of Lot lifted into the air, he lay on the ground and called out, “I bear witness that this is the certain truth [=al-haqq al- Yaqin]” This is why this mosque is called the mosque of the certain truth [=Nabi Yaqin]. Its construction was completed in Sha’ban of the year 352 (963)”.

(Mujir Al-Din 1973a, p. 72)

The resemblance is evident between this description and that of al-Muqaddasi, and it seems to have relied on it.

It seems that between the visit of Mujir al-Din in 1495 (if he indeed visited the place himself) and the visit of Abd al-Ghani al-Nabulsi, the place underwent a change. Abd al-Ghani al-Nabulsi (عبد الغني النابلسي 1641–1731) was a Sufi reformer who, despite his name, was not born in Nablus but in Damascus (see Sirriyyah 1979 about him and his journey in the Holy Land). He visited the Holy Land in 1690 and was the first author to dedicate serious and extensive discussion to Nabi Yaqin, and he was also the first to mention the imprinting on footprints:

“Today is the blessed Friday, the 26th day of my enjoyable and holy journey, and we gathered for the morning prayer at the Mosque of Abraham, peace be upon him (the Cave of the Patriarchs). … After that, we decided to go up to the shrine of Lot, peace be upon him, and those from the place went with us. We arrived at the Mosque of al-Yaqin… we entered it, to the ancient and ruined place, and we looked at the footprint of Abraham in the rock, inside the mosque. We blessed our arrival at the place, and nearby there is a village called Yaqin. Al-Harawi says that in the village of Yaqin there is the shrine of Lot, peace be upon him. The place is called Yaqin because when Lot was punished, he came with his people to the place, prayed and said: I acknowledge that this words of Allah are true. Hanbali [=Mujir al-Din] reports that the mosque was built by the companion Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn Ismail, and it has the footprint of Abraham, who, when he saw the dwellings of Lot, stopped and said this is the place of truth and suffering (Yaqin) and called the place, Mosque of al-Yaqin. The place was built in the month of Sha’ban in the year 352 (August 963). We stood and read the book of Muhi al-Din Ibn al-Arabi called the Book of al-Yaqin (Kitab al-Yaqin)… We passed by the Mosque of al-Yaqin in the year 602 (May 1206) … The reason the place is called so is because Abraham, peace be upon him, when the angels announced to him about Isaac, came to the place where he was informed about the destruction of Lot’s people and was commanded to stay until Lot’s arrival … There, he prayed in the wilderness and said this is the truth of suffering … and that is why the place is called so ….

(al-Nabulsi 1990, pp. 284–89 with excerpts)

Al-Nabulsi mentioned Al-Harawi and Mujir al-Din, whom we mentioned earlier, and understood from them that they were talking about footprints, but as stated, according to what we have seen, it seems that they were referring to a depression in the ground and that the footprints were likely added later. However, it should be noted that there may have been a different version before Al-Nabulsi’s. An interesting piece of information is the connection of Ibn Arabi found in the Mosque of Al-Yaqin. Ibn al-Arabi (ابن عربي) was a well-known mystic, philosopher, and Muslim writer from the 13th century, originally from Spain. He visited many places and around 1200 went on a pilgrimage from Andalusia to Mecca. He then continued his journey and in 1206 arrived in Jerusalem (Ateş 1971). The Mosque of Al-Yaqin inspired him to write the Epistle of Certainty [=Al-Yaqin]. Certainty is an advanced stage in a Sufi’s path to God, indicating the Sufi’s arrival at a complete sense of certainty in the knowledge they have attained. From the words, it appears that the place was also identified as the location where Abraham prayed and also the place where Lot arrived before the destruction of Sodom.

Mustafa As’ad al-Luqaimi (مصطفى أسعد اللقيمي, passed away 1764) also arrived at the place around 1730, but in his words, there is no real novelty, rather a quote from Mujir al-Din and a lengthy discussion about the figure of Tamim al-Dari, as he was accompanied by one of Tamim al-Dari’s descendants (Al-Luqaimi 2012, pp. 150–51).

For a long time, the place was not mentioned in sources, and travelers did not visit it, or at least did not write about it. The next traveler to write about his visit was Count Luynes (Honoré Théodoric d’Albert de Luynes) who visited the site in May 1864 and wrote a long and important description, noting also the footprints of Abraham and even knee prints above them, and mentioned the footprints we referenced outside the area, stating that these were the footprints of Lot (de Luynes 1874, pp. 220–30). He also mentioned the nearby grave of Fatima and the tomb of Nabi Lut in Bani Na’im. PEF researchers mention at the end of the 19th century a tradition about the grave of Cain in the center of the mosque (Conder and Kitchener 1883, pp. 371–72).9

5. Sacred Footprints

The phenomenon of sacred footprints is a well-known and widespread phenomenon around the world. The phenomenon crosses cultures and religions and represents important and ancient figures like Jesus, Shiva, Buddha, and in our case, Abraham (Hasluck 1915–1916; Dunbabin 1990; Hasan 1993; Bord 2004; Takacs 2005; Rachman-Schrire 2015; Bynum 2020). On one hand, footprints denote the absence of the supreme power and its withdrawal from the earthly, material space, but on the other hand, it serves as proof that the supreme power indeed resided in the place and left its mark in stone. In fact, a paradox of the presence and absence of the divine figure through the footprint is created here (Takacs 2005, p. 222).10

The footprints are diverse and different from one another. In most cases, they are standard footprints, but in the example of the footprint attributed to Adam at ‘Adam’s Peak’ in Sri Lanka, it is a giant footprint, measuring nearly 180 cm long, which all religions view as evidence of the imprint of a great figure such as Adam, Shiva, Saint Thomas, etc. (Bord 2004, p. 36). Footprints were an integral part of the Greco-Roman space, and in fact, they have different meanings as Catherine Dunbabin wrote, meanings that include preservation and worship, but at times they refer to completely practical meanings, such as marking sandals in a mosaic at the entrance to bathhouses to warn those entering about the heat of the floor (Dunbabin 1990).

If we wish to mention some footprints close in time and space to our case, we must mention the footprint at the Mount of Olives attributed to Jesus in the Ascension Church [Figure 4]. Until the Crusader period, the traces were marked in dust, and only in the 12th century, during the Crusader period, did pilgrims note a footprint in the stone itself (Limor 1998, p. 116; Pringle 2007, pp. 72–88).11 As a complement to this point, the earliest evidence in Christian art depicting Jesus ascending from a rock on the Mount of Olives also appeared right at the beginning of the Crusader period, shortly after the year 1100 (Bynum 2020, p. 228).

Another famous footprint is found in the Dome of the Rock and is attributed to Muhammad (Elad 1994, pp. 72–73),12 and it was mentioned also by Mujir al-Din (Mujir Al-Din 1973b, pp. 16–17). In the context of the Ascension Church, some have claimed that Al-Qadam al-Sharif [=The noble footprint) is the missing footprint in the Ascension Church (Pringle 2007, p. 76).

However, despite the popularity of the tradition regarding Muhammad’s footprint, the Persian traveler Nāşer-e Khosraw (ناصر خسرو) wrote as early as 1047 that it was actually the footprints of Abraham: “Rock itself rises to the height of a man above the floor and is surrounded by a marble balustrade to keep people away. It is a bluish rock that no one has ever set foot on. On the qebla side is a depression that looks as though someone’s foot had sunk in, as into soft clay, for even the imprint of the toes remains; there are seven such marks. What I heard is that Abra- ham was here, and that when Isaac was a small child he walked there and these are his footprints” (Nāşer-e Khosraw 1986, p. 32).13 In the Muslim world, Abraham’s footprints are famous in Mecca. According to Muslim tradition, while Abraham was building the Kaaba in Mecca, his feet left a mark on the place, and it is now noted as “Maqam Ibrahim” (Kister 1971; Peters 1994, pp. 16–17; Khan 2016, pp. 34–35). This expression appears already in the Quran in two places:

“We made the House a resort and a sanctuary for people, saying, ‘Take the spot where Abraham stood as your place of prayer.’ We commanded Abraham and Ishmael: ‘Purify My House for those who walk round it, those who stay there, and those who bow and prostrate themselves in worship”.

(Qur’an, Surah 2 (The Cow): 125, in Haleem 2005, p. 15)

“The first House [of worship] to be established for people was the one at Mecca. b It is a blessed place; a source of guidance for all people; there are clear signs in it; it is the place where Abraham stood to pray; whoever enters it is safe”.

(Qur’an, Surah 3 (The House of Imran): 96–97, in Haleem 2005, p. 41)

From these references, we see that the place of Abraham in Mecca is considered a place of prayer and is marked today with a pair of footprints that indicate exactly this prayer. Various researchers connect the description of Abraham’s prayer about Sodom and the place of Abraham in Mecca (Peters 1994, p. 16).

In Damascus, there existed the Al-Qadam [=the footprint] mosque, where there was a footprint attributed to Moses (Sadan 1980, p. 34; Talmon-Heller 2007, p. 55) or to the Prophet Muhammad (Wheeler 2000, pp. 15–16). An additional footprint is found at the tomb of Nabi Shu’ayb, near the Horns of Hittin, attributed to Jethro (Tal 2023, pp. 83–85) or to an angel who descended at the place after the death of Joshua, son of Nun (Reiner 1996, pp. 285–86) (Figure 5).

A less known footprint is located a short distance from Nabi Yaqin, in the Cave of the Patriarchs. Near the tomb of Abraham is a stone with markings attributed to the footprints of Adam, and the place is called ‘Maqam Adam’. It is ambiguously mentioned in the words of Mujir Al-Din (1973a, p. 18), as well as in the words of al-Nabulsi (1990, p. 282). The location of Adam’s grave in the Cave of the Patriarchs is an ancient Jewish tradition, and likely influenced the identification of the place (Kadari 2016).

In summary, the phenomenon of sacred footprints is a well-known and recognized phenomenon in the Middle Ages, and there are several parallels to the case of Nabi Yaqin such as in Jerusalem and in nearby Hebron, as well as other examples directly related to the figure of Abraham, for instance in Mecca. Already, Tawfiq Canaan noted that one of the characteristics of the most important saints in Islam is the ability to imprint feet or hands in solid rock (Canaan 1927, p. 241).

6. To the Source of the Tradition

According to historical sources, it seems that the tradition of Abraham’s prayer appears in early Muslim times in the words of Muqaddasi. Is it possible to trace earlier sources for Abraham’s prayer? In my opinion, attention should be drawn to ancient sources that were known in research but, in my view, did not receive appropriate context.

Egeria undertook a journey to the East between 381 and 384 CE, but only a small part of it, most of which did not deal with the Holy Land, survived. However, in the 12th century, Petrus Diaconus, who was a librarian at the Monte Cassino library, composed a compilation about the holy sites using excerpts from Egeria’s work (Limor 1998, p. 119).14 In this work of Petrus, the place to which Abraham accompanied the angels on their way to Sodom appears: “Not far off is the mountain to which Abraham escorted the angels on their way to Sodom” (Wilkinson 1981, p. 188). The point from which Egeria set out to view the landscape was Hebron, but it is unclear whether this refers to the Cave of the Patriarchs or perhaps the area of the Oaks of Mamre (Ramat al-Khalil) (Limor 1998, p. 122, note 27). The point from which she looked out over Sodom is likely the first place where the area of Sodom was revealed from the east of Hebron, and this place is located on the ridge of Nabi Yaqin and Bani Na’im.

A more detailed description of that very place was found in letter 108 of Jerome to Eustochium, the daughter of Saint Paula (Sancta Paula). In this letter, written in 404 CE, Jerome described to the daughter the journey he made with her mother in 386 CE to the holy places (Wilkinson 1977, p. 50).

“Next day, when the sun was up, she was standing on the crest of Caphar Barucha (“the Village of Blessing”), the place to which Abraham followed the Lord. From it she was looking down over desert wastes, and what had formerly been the land of Sodom and Gomorrah, Admah and Zeboiim, and meditated on the balsam-vines of En-gedi, and on Segor, the heifer three years old, which had once been called Bala, but had its name changed to the Syrian “Zoara”, meaning “small”. Then she remembered the cave of Lot, and, bursting into tears, warned the virgins with her to beware of wine, in which is excess, and which caused the existence of the Moabites and Ammonites”.

(Wilkinson 1977, p. 50)

According to this description, it seems that the place identified with Abraham’s prayer was in Kefhar Baricha itself. However, it is difficult to determine with certainty at which peak in the expanse Paula stood, and in her physical journey, the spiritual dimension was sometimes mixed in as well, but it seems the direction of view of the travelers during the Byzantine period was eastwards, towards the Dead Sea, and the entire region was linked to the story of Abraham, Lot, and the destruction of Sodom already from the Byzantine period. The mention of the Cave of Lot is also significant for our discussion.

In the landscape visible opposite the hills of Hebron, on the other side of the ‘Sea of Lot’ (بحر لوط in Arabic), there are sites related to the story of Lot and Sodom. About 60 km from Nabi Yaqin, there is the town of Al-Safi (الصافي), which is identified as the biblical Zoara. A total of 2 km northeast of the town, in a place called Deir Ain Abatah (دير عين عباطة), a cave was discovered, half natural and half artificial, which served as part of a church during the Byzantine period (Politis 2004; 2012).15 The site contains a monastic complex and retreat cells around it. The site is identified as the location to which Saint Lot (‘Agios Lot’) fled with his daughters according to inscriptions found in the cave, which address Saint Lot, such as: “Saint Lot, remember your servants…” (Politis 2012, pp. 412–15). In the mosaics of the cave, dates such as 605 CE and 691 CE were mentioned, and the place continued to exist into the Abbasid period. Various findings from this period were discovered, including an inscription in Kufic Arabic that may indicate a sacred relationship to the site also by Muslims (Politis 2012, pp. 417–19). It should be noted that the place was already mentioned on the Madaba map with the inscription: “Of Saint L[ot]” above the city of Zoara (Avi-Yonah 1954, p. 42), as well as in the description of the life of Stephen of Mar Saba in 794 CE, where the place was described as one of the monasteries in the Dead Sea area named “Mar Lot” (Leontius of Damascus 1999, p. 24).

Another place in the vicinity that mentions Lot’s memory is the Byzantine church in the city of Nebo (Kh. Al-Muhayy). In some of the mosaic inscriptions, the memory of Saint Lot is mentioned, such as: “O Saint Lot. Accept the prayer of Roma and Porphyria and Maria your servants” (Saller and Bagatti 1949, p. 192).16

Surprisingly, Lot’s figure in Christianity is quite a positive one. For instance, it is indicated in the Second Epistle of Peter (2:4–9), and in the Apocryphal books (The Book of Wisdom 19:17), where Lot is depicted as a completely righteous person who stood firm against the sinful people of his city, thus making him a figure of imitation for the Byzantine monks in the Dead Sea region (Saller and Bagatti 1949, pp. 193–99). Another mention regarding Lot exists in the Monastery of the Cross in Jerusalem, where he is given a place of honor as a penitent (Saller and Bagatti 1949, pp. 198–99).

In closing, I would like to note that a similar perspective on Lot can be seen in the words of the sages in the Babylonian Talmud: “Read: ‘For Lot and his wife two blessings are said. For his wife we say: “Blessed be the true Judge”, and for Lot we say: “Blessed be He who remember the righteous”” (Berakoth 54b) According to the Talmud, if a person sees Lot, they should bless “Blessed is the One who remembers the righteous”. The commentators have already grappled with the meaning of seeing Lot, but according to the plain sense, it may be understood as referring to seeing his grave. However, it is important to note that the matter is unclear and we have no Jewish tradition regarding Lot’s burial in the sources.

7. Spatial Perspective

The area east of Hebron is characterized by two aspects. On one hand, the villages face and refer toward Hebron and the ecumene, while on the other hand, they overlook the desert. The connection to the desert is evident already in the early Jewish sources we have presented. As mentioned, in the sources from the Byzantine period, the view towards the east, towards Sodom, is prominent, and in the Muslim sources, it is said that the place overlooks the Dead Sea (sea of Lot/Zoara) and the villages of Lot.17 It seems that the location was chosen due to the view that is revealed from it to the east, and in fact, this is the first place where the Dead Sea becomes visible to those coming from Hebron.

The area near Nabi Yaqin is also related to the story of Lot, and in the nearby village of Bani Na’im, Lot’s tomb is noted [Figure 6].18 The figure of Lot in Islam occupies a significant place in the Qur’an (for example Sura 7:80–84; 11:74–83; 15:61–77 and in other places) and is identified as a true prophet sent to warn the sinful inhabitants of Sodom, much like other prophets in the Qur’an such as Hud who was sent to the people of ‘Ad, Salih who was sent to the people of Thamud, Noah sent to his people, and Shu’ayb sent to the Midianites. In most of these cases, the people do not heed the voice of the prophet and are punished severely, except for a handful of believers who are saved, as happened with Lot. As part of Lot’s righteousness, many Islamic scholars believed that Lot did not sin with his daughters (Sharon 1999, p. 18; Heller and Vajda 1986, pp. 832–33).

We also know Lot’s story in detail from Muslim writers dealing with the Stories of the Prophets (Qiṣaṣ al-Anbiyā), such as Muhammad ibn Abdallah al-Kisai (محمد بن عبد الله الكساءي) (al-Kisāʾī 1997, pp. 155–60) and Ahmad ibn Muhammad al-Tha’labi (أحمد بن محمد الثعلبي, died 1035) (al-Tha’labi 2002: 174–80). The tomb has been identified in the location since the 12th century and was mentioned in the words of Al-Harawi regarding Kefhar Baricha: “Kafar Barīk is a village that contains the tombs of Lot and Ibrahim ibn Adham. The truth is that Ibrāhīm is in Jabala on the coastal plain” (Al-Harawi 2004, p. 76). Around the same time, the German priest John of Würzburg (Johannes Herbipolensis) also mentioned the burial at the location, but it was a very general description: “Two miles from Hebron is the tomb of Lot, Abraham’s nephew” (John of Würzburg 1994, p. 99). In 1322, in the purport travelog of John Mandeville, the location is mentioned in the same words but it mistakenly called Lot “Abraham’s brother” (Mandeville 2012: 37). In fact, the entire area of the Judean desert, from Hebron and Beersheba in the west to the Dead Sea in the east, is referred to in Arab sources as “the dwellings of the people of Lot” (Diyar Qum Lut) (Le-Strange 1890, pp. 286–92; Tal 2014, p. 444). The maqam of Nabi Lot is currently located in the center of the village of Bani Na’im, but at the time of the British survey, it was to the east of the village (Conder and Kitchener 1883, pp. 303–4). A square wall surrounds an octagonal building with a dome, and inside it lies the tombstone of Lot. In part of the mosque, the use of spolia from a Byzantine church is evident, and some have suggested that it is the site of an ancient Byzantine basilica (Ovadiah and de Silva 1984, p. 140; Sharon 1999, p. 12).19 From the Ottoman records of the 16th century, it appears that the village was known by both names, with the main name being Burayk and the secondary name being Bani Na’im, and it was inhabited by 42 taxpayers (Hütteroth and Abdulfattah 1977, p. 124). The name Bani Na’im was also mentioned in 1690 by al-Nabulsi (1990, p. 286), but he too referred to the place as Burayk and only added that in his time it was also called Bani Na’im.

On Lot’s tomb, there are inscriptions that, based on the style of the writing, should be dated to before the year 1100 (Yadin 1964, pp. 105–106; Sharon 1999, pp. 13–16). The first inscription reads as follows:

“In the name of Allah. This is what the scholar (faq’ih) ‘Abdallah b. Muhammad endowed (as a waqf legally certified) in a waqf document: (he endowed) the whole of this estate within its borders and all the rights pertaining to it, its lower parts and its rocky (high) areas, its buildings and its paths, its gardens, its trees, the passage (that traverses it), and every inherent right pertaining to it, and every intrinsic right derived from it. This is a firmly consecrated endowment, (which is to remain) as long as the world continues to exist, a waqf for the prophet Lut the son of Haran, the brother of Ibrahim the friend of the Compassionate (Allah), may the blessings (?) of Allah be upon them, and for the (maintenance of) this sanctuary and for providing hospitality to its visitors. Now, whoever changes this (waqf) having heard this, the curse of Allah be upon him. Accursed, again accursed and yet again accursed, shall be he who changes (it)…”.

(Sharon 1999, p. 14)

Generally, the term ‘mausoleum’ also indicates a burial, such as in the tomb of Jonah in the village of Mashhad (Tal 2023, pp. 93–94) or in Mashhad Hussein in Ashkelon (Talmon-Heller et al. 2016), although the meaning of the name in Arabic can also be interpreted as ‘an observation’.

The second inscription is shorter and states: “Basmalah. This estate within its full borders, and every inherent right pertaining to it, and every intrinsic right derived from it, is the waqf of the Prophet [Lut]” (Sharon 1999, p. 16).

A third inscription found at the site mentions a renovation carried out in the complex in 1410 by the Mamluk Sultan Faraj ibn Barquq:

“Basmalah. The building of the sanctuary of the prophet of Allah Lut, peace be on him, was renewed by our lord the sultan ai-Malik an-Nasir Faraj, son of the sultan al-Malik az-Zahir Barquq, may Allah perpetuate his rule. And may Allah bless our master Muhammad and his family and his companions and grant (them) peace. (The work was accomplished) during a period, the end of which was the first of Rajab “the unique” the year 813 (=Friday, 31 October 1410). From what has been done by the order of Ahmad b. Qutayba al-Ansari”.

(Sharon 1999, pp. 16–17)

To complete the picture and strengthen the connection to Hebron, it is necessary to mention a pair of inscriptions located in the Cave of the Patriarchs that reference the Kefhar Baricha. In the hall of Abraham in the Cave of the Patriarchs, there is a golden Ayub inscription from the year 1215 stating that the village of Burayk/Kefhar Baricha was one of the villages dedicated to the Cave of the Patriarchs by the Ayyubid ruler al-Mu’azzam Isa (Sharon 2013, pp. 40–43).20 The dedication of the village is also mentioned by Mujir al-Din: “Al-Malik al-Muazzam Īsā was learned and generous, and he built the mosque of al-Khalil, peace be on him, and endowed for it the two villages of Dūrā and Kafr Burayk” (Mujir Al-Din 1973a, p. 403).

The place is also mentioned in another, more detailed inscription beneath the inscription of Mu’azzam Isa (Sharon 2013, pp. 83–91).21 In that inscription, it is explicitly mentioned that part of the mosque’s income in Hebron was designated to fund the maintenance of the holy buildings in the area: the tombs of the prophets Lot, Yunus,22 and al-Yaqin. Although it does not specify who the ruler is, Sharon correctly points out that the inscription should have been written after 1280 since Ribat Al-Mansuri is mentioned, a guesthouse built by Sultan Al-Mansur Qalawun, a residence that was built in 1280, the Muristan (=hospital) built by him in 1281, and the ‘Mathara’ [=purification facility before prayer], which was built in 1280. Presumably, the one who erected the inscription was Sultan Qalawun or his son Sultan al-Nasir Muhammad.

Thus, we see that on one hand, Nabi Yaqin and the area are connected to the landscape from the east and to Lot’s story, and on the other hand, they are connected to the nearby city of Hebron and are considered part of its territory for various matters.

8. The Development of the Tradition

I would like to propose that the development of the site of Nabi Yaqin, and the nearby tomb of Lot, is fundamentally related to the connection between the desert in the east and Hebron in the west. Abrahamic traditions are related to Hebron already from ancient times, and the story of Lot and Sodom constitutes an important component of these traditions (Lipschits 2024). Oded Lipschits suggested that these traditions reflect the life of trade between Transjordan and the region of Judea (Lipschits 2024, p. 504). As noted, the Dead Sea Scrolls also reflect this reality of a clear connection between these populations in the Roman period (Cotton 1994, p. 65). It seems that this connection continued even into later periods.

Why was Lot’s tomb identified in this area? To answer this question, I would like to point to a similar phenomenon in the Middle East related to Muslim holy sites (‘Maqams’). Conder already wrote that in some cases, maqams do not signify a tomb (Conder 1877, p. 90), and Yoel Elitzur also followed him (Elitzur 1984, p. 84). In some cases, they are places that overlook an area associated with a certain figure and become sacred by the very fact that they are sites of observation, for instance, in the case of the tomb of Moses in Nabi Musa, along Jerusalem–Jericho Road. Yosef Sadan (1980) and Nimrod Luz (2024) showed that the development of the tradition about the tomb of Moses was relatively late and that during the time of Sultan Baybars, there was competition between the site near Jericho and another site near Damascus. In 1269, Baybars built a mosque on the tomb near Jericho, thereby seemingly resolving the dispute. The dedication inscription at the site also indicates that this was about a reconstruction, not a renovation: “He commanded to build this holy site on the grave of Moses, the speaker of God” (Mayer 1933a, pp. 27–32). Joseph Braslvsky suggested that the site of Moses’s tomb was named so because it overlooks the burial place of Moses on Mount Nebo, and over time, the observation place became the tomb itself (Braslvsky 1954, p. 326). Braslvsky brings several other examples of this phenomenon: the mound of the Prophet Jethro near Parod from which one can see Hittin (Braslvsky 1940, p. 103), the tomb of Nabi Hosha north of As-Salt in Transjordan from where one can see Jericho (Braslvsky 1954, pp. 332–31), and a particularly interesting example related to our discussion is the Maqam of Nabi Khalil. This place, which is situated on the road from Al-Karak to the Dead Sea, marks the place from which one can see Hebron, thus serving as a kind of mirror image to the topic of our discussion (Braslvsky 1954, p. 326). Elitzur also suggested that the site of Nabi Samwil became sacred simply because it overlooks the city of Samuel, Rama, identified with the nearby Al-Ram (Elitzur 1984, p. 88). I would like to propose that both Nabi Lot and Nabi Yaqin grew in view of the landscape unfolding before them, related to the story of the destruction of Sodom, and likely began as a place of observation and then became burial sites for Lot and ‘Yaqin’, respectively.23

9. Summary

The site of Nabi Yaqin preserves an ancient tradition regarding Abraham’s prayer for Sodom. The landscape stretching from the ridge of Nabi Yaqin overlooking the Dead Sea and Transjordan serves as the backdrop for the formation of the tradition (Figure 7—site map].

In this article, we saw that the tradition regarding Abraham’s prayer likely began during the Byzantine period as suggested by the words of Egeria and Jerome. However, it is impossible to discern from the sources what the exact location they identified is, but it seems that the area of Bnei Na’im and Nabi Yaqin should be regarded as one space related to the story of the destruction of Sodom. During the early Islamic Period, the area of Nabi Yaqin became distinguished by Abraham’s prayer, and the nearby village of Lot’s burial, probably due to the perspective on the space in which he operated. However, it should be said that we do not have any concrete archeological data regarding conversion in Naby Lot (Pringle 1993, p. 107) or in Nabi Yaqin, but we do have literary evidence from the Byzantine era of Christian traditions in the places.

At Nabi Yaqin, they even identified the specific location of Abraham’s prayer by a depression in the ground at that spot. At a later stage, toward the end of the 17th century, a pair of footprints were added to the depression. During the 18th and 19th centuries, another pair of footprints appeared outside the complex, marking Lot’s prayer as well. In the 19th century, the site transitioned from being Abraham’s/Lot’s place of prayer to being the burial site of Cain, a process that is recognizable from other places where a sacred site becomes a holy grave.

In fact, both sites, Nabi Yaqin and Nabi Lot, constitute an expansion and creation of a ‘sacred geography’ of the story of the destruction of Sodom, with the former related to its beginning and the latter to its end. To these two sites, we must add the burial cave near Nabi Yaqin, which began its journey as the grave of a female descendant of Caliph Ali in the 11th century, and over time became the cave to which Lot escaped from his distress with his daughters.

As mentioned, the location of the site overlooking Lot’s lake and Lot’s cave across the Dead Sea led to all these identifications, and over time the site became the place of Lot’s grave and Abraham’s prayer. During the Ottoman period, footprints were also added to the site of Nabi Yaqin, and these footprints represent a familiar phenomenon in the area, as we know from Jerusalem, Hebron, and Mecca. Both the depression and the footprints were oriented southward, indicating a connection to the Muslim periods.24

The site of Nabi Yaqin harbors fascinating phenomena of preservation and name evolution, religious traditions that pass between religions, and religious practices known in the area such as sacred footprints and observation sites that become holy by virtue of themselves, and this article attempts to summarize and point out the nuances at this unique and fascinating site.