As-Salam aleikum wa rahmatullahi wa baraketuh, 

How to explain that there is no non-Islamic testimony about the existence of Mekka in old times except only from the Greco-Egyptian geographer Ptolemy in the mid-2nd century A.D., who mentioned a place Makoraba, but even here it is not certain whether this allusion indeed referred to Mecca, as he only mentioned the name in passing (I know that many historians have said that Prolemy mentioned Mekka naming it as Makoraba, but it does not satisfy me)
Do we have some early, historical report which can prove that Mekka existed before Christian era ?

Actually I have found an obvious proof, but I need first to know how Muslims  (Isaiah 56:5: Muslim is the future believers' name.  Sons and daughters titles will be "no more") explain almost completely lack of evidences dealing with the historicity of Mekka.

Salam aleikum,

your reasoning is nice and quite logic, but it does not change the fact that there are many ancient records and documents from North Arabia with no mention of Mecca ? Thus, the explication of the lack of evidences (except very few records) from my point of view remains still problematic.

See e.g. this article: http://religionresearchinstitute.org/mecca/archeology.htm

I didn't read the entire article anyway, but maybe you or other brothers will notice something that I've overlooked.

Jazakum Allahu khayran for every kind of your efforts.

https://www.answering-christianity.com/paran.htm


and I would like to hear your obvious proof of Mecca being in the ancient times,and the reason for less writings on it is probably due to people not noticing it,you see Mecca was FILLED with mountains,around the whole Ka'aba itself,And Mecca had many 1000s if not MILLIONS of different names in the past,
It can be Paran,Makkah,Bakkah,Macoraba,Mikrab,etc,etc there are MANY names,and since the Place was MOUNTAINOUS and was a dangerous place due to it being mostly Jungle and moutains and the Ka'aba people went around it,
since the place had nothing in it except a structure(Kaaba),the place had no Population in it,except a few(probably tribal) people Kedar

Salam aleikum,

I know all about of those informations you've posted brother. Maybe you right, since Mecca was covered by mountains and it has not too much population, perhaps this argument would justify why there are so few historical witnesses to its existence.

As to my obvious proof, it comes directly from an early translation of Genesis (the first book of the Pentateuch), and also from an ancient samaritan writing ascribed to the Prophet Moses (pbuh). I will discuss it insha'Allah today

As-Salam aleikum wa rahmatullahi wa baraketuh, 

In regard to our topic, there is a powerful proof that Mecca has already existed as a city in the time of revealing the Torah to prophet Moses (pbuh). 

[NOTE: the below info are an excerpts from my polish book entitled “Znaki i proroctwa Starego Testamentu o nadejściu Ostatniego Posłańca Boga”]

Today, very few Muslims  (Isaiah 56:5: Muslim is the future believers' name.  Sons and daughters titles will be "no more") and Christians alike are aware of that Mecca - along with Medina – is explicitly mentioned by name in an early rabbinic translation of the Pentateuch. In Genesis 10:30 according to the Masoretic Text we read the following:

“And their dwelling was from Mesha, as thou goest toward Sephar, unto the mountain of the east.” [JPS, 1917]

However, the above passage according to the Judeo-Arabic translation - i.e. process of reading run as in Arabic, but the script is written with Hebrew letters - made by Rabbi Saadia ben Joseph al-Fayyumi (ca. 882-942), also known as Saadia Gaon, reads as:



Translation: 

“And their dwelling was from Mecca towards al-Medina, unto the mountain of the East.” [Œuvres complètes de R. Saadia ben Iosef al-Fayyoûmî, ed. by J. Darenbourg, vol. 1 (Paris: E. Leroux, 1893), p. 17.]

Everyone who is familiar with Hebrew will not contradict me in this matter (Mekka was marked with blue color, al-Medina with red color). First of all, Saadia Gaon is one of the most prominent Jewish scholars, and it is said that his translation holds an unchallengeable authority over all other biblical translations, since he was the best especially in scriptural exegesis, Jewish history and Talmudic knowledge in general, and he is responsible for the first and most important Arabic translation of the Torah which became the standard version for all Jews living in Muslim countries. Maimonides himself, a great and respected Rabbi (1135-1204) said: 

“were it not for Saadia, the Torah would almost have disappeared from the midst of Israel; for it was he who made manifest what was obscure therein, made strong what had been weakened, and made it known far and wide by word of mouth and in writing." [H. Malter, Saadia Gaon: His Life and Works, (Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society of America, 1921), p. 279.]


Therefore, as you can see, his translation is a primary source when it comes to the accuracy of Old Testament interpretation. As to the mentioning of Mecca and Medina in Genesis, let us recall e.g. the statement of the Rev. Professor William Paul who in his critical interpretation to the Hebrew fragmentהַקֶּדֶם הַר [[#996] from Genesis 10:30, has wrote: “mountain (mountains) of the East. These are supposed to be those mountains of Arabia running from the neighbourhood of Mecca and Medina to the Persian Gulf.” [Rev. W. Paul, Analysis and critical interpretation of the Hebrew text of the Book of Genesis, (Edinburgh: W. Blackwood & Sons, 1852), p. 100.]

Other scholars also shares a similar view. This of course explain why rabbi Saadia Gaon has mentioned Mecca and Medina in Genesis 10:30. This is not only his paraphrase concluded from the context as some might think, because if you go to the Hebrew text you will notice there such word as באכה (baka) which was translated as “as thou goest” !