What does the historical record say about this? Was his previous burial site a well known location before the construction of the Green Dome? Was it built around his body or was he moved there? Are there any records or accounts from witnesses regarding this?
For context, before the answer, Muhammad ibn Abdullah died, per the majority opinion of scholarship, in the month of Rabee' al-Awwal (the Islamic calendar is based off the Lunar calendar, not Georgian). The majority view is that his death occurred on the 12th of Rabee' al-Awwal, a Monday, and he was buried two days later on Wednesday. For simplicity, this is the majority opinion and there is a minority view that his death was on the 1st of Rabee' al-Awwal, another opinion that it was on the 2nd.
For further context, al-Masjid an-Nabawi, or the Prophet's Mosque, in Medina, Saudi Arabia, and its boundaries outlines what the entire city of Medina at the time of the Prophet Muhammad in the 7th century was. Here is a overhead view of the mosque. The Green Dome is in the center of the picture, towards the rear of the mosque.
Per the hadith, or narration, that outlines the final moments of Muhammad, it is clearly stated that he was in the house of his wife 'Aisha bint Abi Bakr. During that time, the house of 'Aisha was connected to the main prayer area of the mosque, and was adjacent to the house of Fatima bint Muhammad, the daughter of Muhammad. Here is the side of the tomb from which the bodies are facing (or anterior side, anatomically) are seen from. And here is the North side from which the backs of their bodies are seen from. It should be noted that the way Islamic burials are performed, the face is directed towards Mecca, and Medina is directly North of Mecca.
To your question, Muhammad was buried in the house of 'Aisha and has remained there. There is no historical reference to indicate otherwise. To expand on that further, the only reason why Abu Bakr and Umar are buried there, as well, is because Muhammad is there - the famous hadith where Umar is on his deathbed and asks 'Aisha for permission to be buried, in the place where she was hoping to be buried, which was next to Abu Bakr who is next to Muhammad, is a prime example that speaks to this.
The only changes to the area has been expansions and structural improvements to the tomb and the mosque itself. This diagram outlines the initial improvements. A wooden cupola was initially constructed over the tomb in the year 678, and then the tomb was painted twice in the late 15th century, and then once more in 1817. In 1818, the current dome was constructed by the 30th Sultan of the Ottomans named Mahmud II. The dome was then painted green in 1837 and officially became known as "The Green Dome".
I would be happy to answer any further questions about the area, I was actually just there a few months ago.
References:
I study early islamic history and history of islamic theology so I can take a crack at this.
The short, unsatisfying answer to your question is simply: yes. The site of his burial was well known, guarded, and maintained continuously since his death and up until modern times. A few times since then the burial site was more closely examined or even dug out partially, confirming that the site remains in its original shape. Thus, with the extreme lack of any evidence to the contrary, the fairest assumption would be to conclude that the site remains as it originally was.
To begin with, islam has three main holy sites that all mosques. First, the Haram Mosque with the Ka’aba in Mecca, the city towards which muslims do annual pilgrimage. Ka’aba is the black square building you see muslims praying towards, and Mecca was the birthplace of the prophet Mohammed. Second, the city of Jerusalem and the Dome of the Rock mosque, which was the first location muslims prayed towards for a few years at the earliest days of Islam before switching to pray towards the direction of Mecca. These two site and mosques predate islam, and are described in Islamic theology as having been always sites of worship for Abrahamic relations. It is worth mentioning here that Islam views itself as a continuation of Christianity, and views Christianity as a continuation of Judaism, which puts in high islamic revor any sites or books upheld by the other two abrahamic faiths. Lastly, and most importantly in this context, is the city of Medina and the prophet’s mosque in it.
This last holy site stands out from the first two in one key aspect; it was not a holy site before Islam declared it so. Similarly, the prophet’s mosque was an empty stretch of land of no particular significance before Mohammed ordered the construction of the mosque there. Although it originally did not, the Mosque of the Prophet in Medina now houses the burial site of Mohammed. Nevertheless, the burial site never changed place; the mosque instead expanded as Islam spread and the city saw more visitors until it engulfed the burial site and many other note-worthy sites.
Bear with me.
Visiting the city of Medina and its holy mosque now, one would not properly appreciate how small the original mosque was in comparison. Originally, the mosque was only a few square meters big, outside of which was a small one-room clay house in which Mohammed lived with his wife Eisha. The mosque itself was treated as both a mosque and what would be considered a town hall in modern terms. People socialized there outside the times of prayer with and without Mohammed presence, and Mohammed met with all political convoys in that mosque as well. This practice predates Islam, as the space around the Ka’aba in Mecca was treated similarly, and continued after Mohammed’s death during the time of the Rashidon Khilafat.
Leading to the day of his death, Mohammed grew increasingly ill and was being nursed in the mosque-adjacent one-room house he lived in with Eisha. As he grew weaker, Mohammed was ultimately rendered unable to move out of the room and into the mosque, and called for his companion Abu Baker to lead prayers instead. In Sahih AlBukhairi, there is a story narrated by companion Anas bin Malek saying that while muslims were lined up for Fajr (sunrise) prayer on the day of the death of the prophet, they saw Mohammed looking at them through the window of Eisha’s room. This story puts in perspective the proximity of the Mosque of the Prophet to the room of Eisha, so close such that the figure of Mohammed could be identified through a window before the sun rises to illuminate the place. The borders of Eisha’s room and the original borders of the mosque are clearly marked in the current modern structure of the Mosque of the Prophet, showing that the room was only a few meters away from the walls of the mosque.
ِAccording to both AlAlbani and AlTirmithi, directly following Mohammed’s death, disagreement arose as to where - not how - should he be buried. The disagreement quickly came to a conclusion when the companion Abu Baker quoted the prophet to once have said that all of Allah’s prophets die exactly where they should be buried (here slightly paraphrased). Thus, a unanimous decision was made to bury Mohammed exactly where he passed away; in the room of Eisha adjacent to the mosque. After Mohammed’s death, Abu Baker became caliph, and was buried next to Mohammed following his own death. After the two passed away, Omar bin AlKhattan became caliph, and was also buried next to the two in the same room following his own death. With all three buried in there, the room had room barely for one more grave, a spot of which many, _many_ famous islamic characters strongly refused citing their belief that they are not worthy of it.
The Mosque of the Prophet, following his death, kept being expanded by subsequent Islamic rulers one after the next. It was not long after the prophet’s death that the mosque expanded to engulf the room of Eisha with Mohammed’s grave in it. The room was left as it was for nearly 80 years after his death, and the first records of reconstruction comes during the time of Umayyads Caliph Omar bin Abdulaziz. Listed in Sahih AlBukhari, the records do mention that a butchered digging job exposed what was identified as Omar bin Alkhattab’s body. All the graves were not moved during the reconstruction process but the walls of Eisha’s room were reinforced and a second wall built around them. This is the earliest record we have showing that the burial site remains in its original state.
Fast forward nearly five hundred years into the future, we find another confirmation during the era of the Zengid Emir Nur Ad-Din. Historian Jamal Ad-Din AlAsnawi details the story of an attempt by two non-muslim pilgrims to dig a tunnel under the mosque in an attempt to reach the burial site from down under. The plan was foiled before the tunnel was sufficiently deep, but Nur Ad-Din ordered for a bed of iron to be melted under the entire burial site enclosed in Omar bin Abdulaziz’s walls. The details of this reconstruction project, taking place in the mid 1100s, are yet another record showing that the burial site remains in its original state.
It bears mentioning that, as other commentators have explained, the question should be asked the other way around. Given the absence of any records showing that a specific event happened, here the transfer of the grave, we would righteously assume that such an event did not take place. In this one instance, it so happened that there are records confirming that the burial site remained in its original place and state. However, this direction of questioning remains questionable.
More records of reconstruction remain unmentioned in my answer, and also more attempts to break into the burial site. During modern times, the government of Saudi Arabia oversees the maintenance of the site and the Mosque of the Prophet at large. Records exist for all of the above, diving into which would make this answer exceed character limit. I will be stopping here to and returning later to expand and answer questions.
