User:Saifnasr25/Painting of the Six Kings

Article Draft
The Painting of the Six Kings is a fresco found on the wall of Qasr Amra, a desert castle built by the Umayyad Caliphate located in modern-day Jordan. It depicts six rulers standing in two rows of three. Four of the six have inscriptions in Arabic and Greek identifying them as the Byzantine emperor, King Roderic of Spain, the Sasanian emperor, and the King of Aksum. The painting, now substantially damaged, is thought to be from between 710 and 750, commissioned by one of the Umayyad caliphs or an heir apparent. It is one of the most recognized frescos in the Qasr Amra complex.

Location and History
The painting is located in Qasr Amra (also transcribed "Quseir Amra" or "Qusayr Amrah", literally "palace of Amra"), an Umayyad desert structure and a UNESCO World Heritage Site about 85 km east of Amman and 21 km southwest of the Azraq Oasis in modern-day Jordan. "Qasr" translates to palace and there are many Qasrs scattered across the region such as Qasr Kharana, Qasr al-Azraq, and Qasr Mushatta. Qasr Amra served as a desert retreat, hunting lodge, banquet hall, ceremonial audience chamber, and bath house. The complex has several frescoes painted on its walls.

The painting is on the southern end of the west portion of the main wall. Along with other works in the complex, it was cleaned and preserved in the 1970s by a team from the National Archaeological Museum of Spain.

Historian Elizabeth Drayson estimated the earliest possible date for the painting to be 710, the year of the accession of Roderic – one of the kings portrayed in the painting – and the latest to be 750, the year of the Abbasid Revolution that overthrew the Umayyads. The artist who painted the fresco is unknown and many historians disagree about who built Qasr Amra. The patron who commissioned the building, including the painting, was likely one of the caliphs al-Walid I (r. 705–715), al-Walid II ((r. undefined – undefined)743–744) or Yazid III ((r. undefined – undefined)744). '''Architectural historian K.A.C Creswell believed that the palace was built by al-Walid I because of the inclusion of Roderic. It was during the reign of al-Walid I that the Umayyads conquered Iberia and defeated Roderic at the Battle of Guadalete in 711. Historian Robert Hillenbrand believed that caliph al-Walid II was responsible for construction. Historian Oleg Grabar believed the Yazid III constructed the building. He built off the work of historian Jean Sauvaget who found epigraphical evidence that the desert palace could have been built by an heir apparent. Yazid III was kept from the throne for 20 years and was a key actor in the overthrow of al-Walid II. Additionally, Yazid III was a known admirer of Sasanian culture and linked himself to Sasanian origin.'''

The complex, long familiar to local nomads, was first visited by a Westerner in 1898, by the Czech scholar Alois Musil. He first arrived at the complex guided by a group Bedouins. Musil and his companion, Austrian artist Alphons Leopold Mielich, tried to remove the painting from the site, causing permanent damage. The painting earned recognition in the 1907 publication of the Vienna Academy's volumes. A fragment of the painting, containing the crowns of the Roman emperor and the Visigoth king, is now on display at the Museum of Islamic Art, Berlin.

Musil's 1907 publication Kusejr 'Amra included a tracing made by Mielich, Musil's interpretative copy of the painting, Mielich's later reproduction, and Mielich's written description of the painting. This publication included their observations before their attempted removal.

Description
The painting is badly damaged, due to the efforts by Alois Musil to remove it. Large portions of the figures and their garments are not clearly visible. There are six rulers, or kings, facing the viewer in two rows of three. '''The kings made up two ranks or simatans. This arrangement was customary when foreign dignitaries were presenting to the Umayyad Caliph. Each king stretches out both hands with palms turned upwards, which in a gesture of supplication. In the actual painting only the hands of the kings in the front row are visible. All six kings take on a youthful, beardless appearance. On first inspection, Austrian art historian Alois Riegl mistook the kings for women. The effeminate style of the kings was very popular in the Eastern Mediterranean at the time. The artistic style of the kings is sharply contrasted by a bearded Arab hunter in a nearby fresco. According to historian Garth Fowden, the choice made by the artist reflects a sense of respect for the older pre-Islamic civilizations as the youthful look is a sign of sophistication.'''

'''All six kings are dressed in the style of the Byzantine court. The robes can only be seen on the left and middle subjects in the front row. This type of styling can also be seen in the mosaics of the Church of Saint Demetrius in Thessalonica and also the Monastery of Saint Catherine in Sinai. Fowden argued that the inclusion of Byzantine court-wear shows the reverence the early Umayyads had for Byzantine culture. Byzantine robes were extremely popular in the royal court with caliphs Sulayman, Hisham, and al-Walid II. Another notable aspect of the fresco is the headgear of each ruler. From the fragment of the painting brought back to Germany, the helmets of both the Roman emperor and Visigoth king are visible. On the original fresco, the Sasanian king in the very middle also has a piece of his crown showing. The top most element is a crescent moon resembling the Sasanian crown.'''

Inscriptions in Greek and Arabic above four of the figures, written in white letters on a blue background, identify them as:


 * Kaisar/Qaysar ("Caesar"), the Byzantine emperor, face not visible, wearing imperial robes and tiara,
 * Rodorikos/Ludhriq, Roderic, the Visigothic king of Hispania, barely visible, except for the tip of his helmet and robes,
 * Khusraw/Kisra, the Sasanian emperor, appearing young with curly hair, wearing a crown, a cloak, and shoes,
 * "Negus/Nägāsī" The King of Aksum, face partly visible, wearing a light garment with a red stole, and the imperial head cloth as seen on coins of kings.

The labels were already fragile when Musil found it and removal further damaged them. Apart from the four rulers, no identification remains visible for the other two rulers on the far right. According to Swiss historian Max van Berchem, the artists arranged the figures by western rulers on the left and eastern rulers on the right. '''One of the figures is thought to be the "Khaqan", which is a title the Arabs gave to Turkic people or the Emperor of China. The other unknown king is possibly a Turkish or an Indian prince.'''

Alongside the Painting of the Six Kings is a painting of a woman with the Greek word ΝΙΚΗ Nikē "Victory" above her. Opposite the painting, towards which the six rulers are gesturing, is a painting of a man seated on a throne. Above this man is an inscription containing a blessing to an unknown recipient.

'''Out of all the kings in the fresco, the King of Sasania is set in the middle. An interpretation of this placement given by Fowden is to imply that the Sasanian ruler is the leader of this congregations of kings.'''

Interpretation
Meaning

Like the origin of Qasr Amra, the intent and meaning of the painting are unclear and disputed by scholars. The highly diverse interpretations of the painting are partly due to the loss of information from the damage.

According to Islamic art consultant Patricia Baker, the Greek word for "victory", appearing nearby, suggests that the image was meant to assert the caliph's supremacy over his enemies. Betsy Williams of the Metropolitan Museum of Art suggested that the six figures are depicted in supplication, presumably towards the caliph who would be seated in the hall. Other scholars, including Max van Berchem and K. A. C. Creswell, argued that the six rulers are a representation of the defeated enemies of Islam. Iranologist and archaeologist Ernst Herzfeld argued that the painting is an Umayyad copy or version of the Sasanian "Kings of the Earth" located at Kermanshah, as recorded by Yaqut al-Hamawi in his work Mu'jam al-Buldan (Dictionary of Countries). Oleg Grabar interpreted the painting as an attempt to convey the idea that the Umayyads were the descendants and heirs of the dynasties it had defeated. '''Grabar also argued that this notion of a family of kings comes from Sasanian culture developed in the Shahnameh, where all the world's rulers were dependent and in awe of the Persian ruler. Also, Persian writer and historian, Al-Mas'udi writes about an international ruling lineage, "I am the son of Kisra and my father is Marwan and Qaysar is my grandfather and my grandfather is Khaqan." The fascination with Persia is well documented with the Umayyads, with Caliph Hisham ibn Abd-al-Malik ordering a book to be made about the lives of every Sasasian king in 731. Grabar also put forth the idea that the painting could be in the style of "Kings of the Earth", but its main focus is to show that the Umayyad rulers are the decedents of a lineage of kings.'''

Naming

'''In the painting, every empire is given a generic ruling name for their king except the Visigoth Kingdom. Roderic, the Visigoth king at the time, is specifically named. Fowden argued that there was little contact with the Visigoths except during the Umayyad conquest of Iberia in 711 during the reign of Roderic. The other three empires were in constant contact with the Muslim world during the early period of the Umayyads. Additionally, both Negus and Roderic were written in Greek despite very little contact between those two regions and the Greek world.'''

Civilization Contact

'''There was a long documented relationship between the Islamic world and the Kingdom of Ethiopia. During the hostility of the Kuraysh wars, the companion of the prophet, Ja'far ibn Abi Talib, sought refuge with the Negus. One of Muhammad's most trusted companions, Bilal, was from Ethiopia. Muhammad even wrote a letter to the Negus inviting him to join the Islamic faith. But not all interactions between these two civilizations were peaceful. During the rule of Caliph Umar, there were many small conflicts between the two empires. An Ethiopian fleet attacked the Arab port of Shu'ayba. In the later Umayyad period, the caliphate captured the Ethiopian lands of Dahlak Kebir. Parts of Ethiopia were even ruled by Muslim kings as early as 900 such as the Sultanate of Shoa. The Muslim world also was in constant contact with the Byzantines. According to historian Hamilton A. R. Gibb, frontier warfare between the two sides lasted for centuries. The Rashiduns fought the Byzantines in the Syrian, Levantine, and North African theaters. While the Umayyads pushed deeper into Anatolia and Upper Mesopotamia. However the relationship between the Muslims and Romans was not purely militaristic. The Umayyads in particular revered the culture of the Byzantines. They meticulously looked after Roman roads and followed in the tradition of constructing mile markers. The earliest coins of Abd-al-Malik were done in a Byzantine style. Gibb also believed that the construction of the Dome of the Rock and the Great Mosque of Damascus were influenced by the Byzantine idea of building imperial religious monuments. The prophet Muhammad even wrote a letter to Roman Emperor Heraclius compelling him to convert to Islam.'''