Entrance rooms are incredibly important aspects of a given building. They are a visitor’s first introduction into a new space and as such, set up a precedent in an individual’s mind. For a ruler’s palace, it is that much more important, as the space is a representation not just of the legacy of the ruling power, but also the ruler’s place in that legacy.
This form of artwork showcases beauty standards. The faces aren’t intact but the clothes are. Source
For Walid II, Caliph of the Umayyads from 743-744 C.E., he decided to make the Caliphate’s power known. On the audience room wall, there lies a polychrome painting on plaster of six individuals. Each of the individuals have their right hand outstretched in a welcoming gesture, presenting a message of respectful invitation to the onlookers. These people are each in different styles of dress, though their colors are complementary to one another. In the present day, the painting is incredibly damaged leaving no face intact and two of them completely gone.
Despite the difficulties created by the weathering of the artwork, it has been decided who the people are. The painting shows Walid II hosting previous famous rulers from the lands that were contemporarily under Umayyad rule. The painting was meant to represent the power of the Umayyad Caliphate and Walid II in conjunction with that. By placing this painting in the first room that everyone enters the palace through, it further solidifies this message of power in all those who see it. This is also the case for the builders of the qasr. As the builders and artists were likely previous Byzantine subjects, creating these would have also implanted the intended message in them as well.
Qasr ‘Amra contains representation of the craftsmen and builders whose hard labor went into the construction of the palace. In the basilica hall of the qasr, a series of thirty-two depictions of different types of craftsmen are present. Their inclusion was likely Walid II self-aggrandizing and positing himself as a great developer.1
The Umayyads taking Byzantine artwork and evolving it to fit their own style and beliefs is very similar to the religious aspects of both. To the muslims, Islam is believed to be a rightful evolution of the teachings of Christianity and Judaism. They have the same God, most of the same prophets, and most of the same stories and teachings, but adaptations are introduced. Since every religion is warped by the culture of their followers, then Islam can also be seen as paralleling the early ruling structure and the architecture of the Umayyads. Christianity and its influences can’t be stripped from the Byzantine Empire and due to the Umayyads not forcing christians to convert, their culture continued to live on. The latter concept can be applied to the Sasanian Empire with Zoroastrianism as well.
Furthermore, this concept of tolerance can be seen as another reason for the painting of the six kings. Not only is it pushing a message of power, but also one of welcoming and acceptance. Umayyad power would have been circumvented at every turn if they didn’t take an approach of gradual transition. Had they forced everyone to convert to their new religion, outright, their new citizens would have been impossible to control. Therefore, the Caliphate needed to be tolerant with their new citizenry.2 This painting showcases the two-folded effort.
Hana Taragan, “Constructing a Visual Rhetoric: Images of Craftsmen and Builders in the Umayyad Palace at Qusayr ‘Amra,” Al-Masaq 20, no. 2 (September 2008): 158, 10.1080/09503110802283382. ↩
Petra Sijpesteijn, “Chapter 11. New Rule over Old Structures: Egypt after the Muslim Conquest,” in Regime Change in the Ancient Near East and Egypt From Sargon of Agade to Saddam Hussein, (Oxford University Press, 2007), 183. ↩