The Dome of Rock
Monuments are also a subject of
manipulation and the Dome of Rock seems to be one of its finest examples.
Located in the holy city of Jerusalem, this one monument is presently
associated with all the three monotheistic faith of the city. The amount of
interpolation and extrapolation done with the associated sources, in the mid of
ongoing fight between the three religion or in greater sense the politics which
has set its back of it has almost made it impossible for forming some concrete
notions. However, the amount of study done in this area has revealed many facts
but still it has led to scholarly debate.
All the three faiths have weaved on
their own stories which may have some element of truth but are mostly
fabricated and is widely perceived among the present-day public. For Muslims,
the Rock came to represent the foundation stone of the world, the Rock to which
the Black Stone of the Ka'ba in Mecca would itself pay a visit on the Last Day,
with the Well of Souls in the cave beneath it and the Abyss of Chaos below
that. It features among the most important building only next to Kabba in
Muslim photographs.[1]
The Renaissance days concept of sacred geography related to Jerusalem is well
known within Christianity. Schematic city plans, such as the Uppsala map of the
twelfth century and one of the thirteenth century in the Hague already show the
Dome of the Rock with a cross on it, some even give the building a pyramidal
roof.[2] The
latter Latin seals depict the Dome of the Rock, given the name 'Templar' as the
mother church of their order and whose copies sprang up all over Europe from
the twelfth century onwards. In Jewish communities, it served as the
identifying mark for the printer Marco Antonio Giustiani, and was identified in
Hebrew as the Temple in a Venetian woodcut of 1547. Also, in several Jewish
depictions, images of the Dome of the Rock continue to take pride of place of
Jerusalem even since 17th century.
·
The Dome of Rock (as
per Islamic Sources):
The Dome of the Rock, built under
the patronage of the Umayyad Caliph Abd al-Malik (685– 705), is considered to
be Islam’s first major monument. Completed in around 72/691f., the Dome of the
Rock sits atop the Temple Mount, which looks down upon Christian Jerusalem. The
building is seen as a monument to victory: not merely victory over Ibn
al-Zubayr as its construction seems to have taken place during or soon after
the end of the fitna, but, more importantly, victory over rival monotheisms.[3]
Much has been written about its meaning and purpose, even then there seems to
be no consensus existing among scholars. Through its location, inscription, and
mosaics, the Dome of the Rock provides us with three strictly contemporary documents,
which are not so far been fully exploited. The other texts were only written
after the construction of the Dome of the Rock and hence are not authentic
source on elucidating Abd al-Malik’s motivations. One of the mosaic
inscriptions bears the date 72 AH (691–2 CE), though it is not clear whether
this refers to the beginning or the completion of the construction.
Probable reasons for construction:
First Explanation: Based
on the text of al-Ya'qubi (A.D. 874), a shi'ite brought up in Baghdad who
had travelled widely throughout the empire, and Eutychius (d. 328 A.H./A.D.
940), a Melkite priest from Alexandria[4],
scholars like Goldziher, Creswell etc have agreed that Abd al-Malik wanted to
divert pilgrims from the Hijaz by establishing the Palestinian city as the religious
centre of Islam alternative to Mekkah as Ibn al-Zubayr was in possession of
Mekkah.
Second Explanation: Based on the accounts of historians as al-Tabari and
al-Baladhuri, and local patriot like al-Maqdisi, it is argued by most scholars that the Dome of the Rock was built as a sort of martyrium to a
specific incident of Muhammad's life. It is widely accepted at least by the
faithful that it was made to reflect the night-journey (isra') of Muhammad as described in surah
I7, verse I, of the Koran. Ibn Ishaq, 2nd century biographer of
Prophet, linked it with complex Ascension (mi'raj)
of Muhammad, and claimed that the masjid al-aqsa was in fact in Jerusalem and
that it is from Jerusalem that the Prophet ascended into heaven[5].
Later tradition has associated the rock as the place where Muhammad set his
foot while going to heaven.
Presently, both of these reasons are contested
as Mekkah was still acting as pilgrim centre and the qubbah
al-mi'raj, the martyrium of the Ascension stood next to the Dome of the Rock and
in fact it still stands today, so there was no need of two buildings for same
building, moreover, most of these are seen to be stories crafted to imbibe the eschatological
messages with time to glorify Umayyad’s rule.
·
Not an Islamic monument?
In the last few decades, a recent
argument has been started among the scholarly circles based on the architecture
of the Dome of Rock. It is argued that while it is sometimes casually referred
to as a ‘mosque’, it does not resemble one in form, it is an octagonal
structure consisting of two octagonal ambulatories and a circular area which
encloses the Rock. Many scholars have time and again related the Dome’s
architecture with the prevailing monuments of the time showing similarity in
its structural plan with those monuments symbolic of the Christian martyrium.
A central circular space
surrounded by an ambulatory was a fairly common type of commemorative or other
religious building in Roman and Byzantine architecture. The rotunda
of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre (335 A.D), also known as Anastasis
built by the emperor Constantine at a short distance away from Mount Moriah is the
earliest example of this type of design in the Syrian region. Its design had
possibly derived from the Mausoleum of Santa Costanza in Rome. Creswell
describes Mauss’ theory about how the corner points of the inner and the outer
octagons, in the plan of the Dome of the Rock are set out from two interlocking
squares within the inner circle which is ‘just large enough to surround the
rock’[6]. According
to Creswell, it is a geometrical construction ‘circle surrounded by circle’
which has influenced the Dome of Rock.
Many other Roman-Byzantine
buildings of the period like the Tomb of the Virgin Mary, in the same area of
Jerusalem, the
Mausoleum of Diocletian at Split, Croatia (306 A.D), The great basilica church at
Bethlehem, (built in 4th century A.D), The 5th century Byzantine octagonal church at Capernaum
in Galilee, etc seems to have octagonal features in their plans to have
influenced the architecture of the Dome of the Rock. The Bosra Cathedral (573
A.D) in southern Syria shows a double ambulatory with a series of internal
columns arranged to form an octagon outside the ring of columns of the inner
circle. The geometry of the plan is described by Creswell as ‘circle surrounded
by octagon surrounded by circle in square’ as the perimeter of the outer ambulatory
is made circular with the help of niches in a square plan.
Anwarul Islam and Fauzi Zaid
al-Hamad argue that none of these buildings as described by Creswell and Prag
express the same external character as that of the Dome of the Rock. Morever,
in the internal planning, none of these has two concentric octagonal
ambulatories around a circular space with a sacred object at the centre.
However, they identify the symbolic value of number 8, an important number in
Christianity which is associated with all buildings, the eighth day is the
eternal day, sanctified by the Resurrection of Jesus. They argue that the Dome
of the Rock needed to be octagonal to reflect the unique religious scenario
that was believed to be happening only in the location where it was being built[7] and
in fact according to them there was indeed no monument which resembles to it on
time or before.
They argue that the inscriptions
do not in any case reflect the Night Journey but to the place where it was
believed the ‘Day of Judgement’ will happen, reflecting some aspect of the
‘Day’ which includes God sitting on His throne. An image of a throne
conveniently shaped for either eight angels or eight rows/groups of angels to
hold it as stated in a surah of the Qur’an is what according to them has
led to its Octagonal Plan, which is also reflected in the Jewish and Christian
traditions, thus, reflecting upon a unique religious scenario influenced by
most of the traditions of time.
This uniqueness is also agreed
upon by Oleg Grabar, Rosen-Ayalon, claiming that there is no immediate model
for the Dome of the Rock. Grabar points that the model for the Dome of Rock was
a fairly common type in Late Antique and Early Christian or early Byzantine
architecture. However, he states that “the plan of the Dome of the Rock is
distinguishable from the plans of most comparable buildings by its inordinate
size”. Rosen-Ayalon carried out a detailed study of the interior surface
decorations of the Dome of the Rock, and suggests that the general theme for
the design of the monument was to portray the symbol of Paradise. Though the
indicators reflect for eight gates and not eight walls, however, it is possible
that the designer wanted to portray the image of paradise in some its features,
e.g., a strong element of the building is the series of seven arcaded bays in
each of its eight walls, the number ‘seven’ being associated with the number of
heavens mentioned in several verses of the Qur’an. Moreover, the mosaics and
inscriptions suggest a place of heaven.[8]The
mosaics made inside the building, apart from vegetal motives, have many jewels
crafted on them. Recent studies, in particular those of A. Grabar,
J. Deer, and P. E. Schramm, have shown that these were all, in varying degrees
and in different ways, symbols of holiness, power, and sovereignty in the official
art of the Byzantine and Persian Empire.[9]
There is no definite biblical
reference to the Rock, however there is no doubt that the Haram was the site of
Solomonic temple. In medieval times Mount Moriah in general and the Rock in
particular were endowed in Jewish legend with a complex mythology. Mount
Moriah, through its association with the Temple, became the omphalos of the
earth, where the tomb of Adam was to be found and where the first man was
created. The Rock is also considered as the place of the sacrifice of Abraham.
The patristic literature associates these traditions to Christianity but it seen
that with the construction of Holy Sepulchre, these traditions in Christianity
got linked with it.
·
An Islamic monument?
If we look upon the architecture of
the Dome of Rock, Richard Krautheimer study about a group of churches dating to
the Middle Ages becomes important. He shows that though the historical
documents reflect that the constructors built these Churches with intention to
copy the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem, the modern scholarship
could not even find similarity even in their architectural model. Hence, it was
not always necessary for the buildings in antiquity to show differences even if
they were modelled on some existing one.
Rina Avner has recently stressed that
the architectural feature of two concentric ambulatories was introduced in Jerusalem
as early as the fourth century (in the Ascension Church on the Mount of Olives)
and later modified in the fifth century (in the Kathisma); it was not a unique invention
of the architects of the Dome of the Rock. She surveys the octagonal
architectural unit built over the cave of the Nativity in Bethlehem in the time
of Constantine the Great, dated to ca. 333, The Rotunda of the Anastasis, built
over the Tomb of Christ, during the rule of the emperor Constantius (r. 337–61)and
The Byzantine Church of the Ascension which originally had two concentric
ambulatories that circumscribed a central round space. Architecturally, the
Church of the Ascension was an independent concentric structure, unattached to
a basilica. It acted as an architectural solution that enabled a large number
of worshippers to visit the shrine and circumambulate the locus sanctus
which was a problem with Anastasis. Moreover, it should be noted that the
Ascension is very close to the site of the Dome of the Rock; in fact, the two
monuments are mutually visible.
Avner argue that the architectural
plan of the Dome of Rock belongs to a local family of early Byzantine
concentric memorial shrines. Similar to the other buildings of this group, the
Dome of Rock reflects local Jerusalemite architectural features, in some manner
adjusted to meet the functional demands of its Umayyad patrons.[10] The
architectural similarities between the Church of the Kathisma and the Dome of
the Rock appear in the following features: both are octagonal in their
exteriors, their plans each consist of a central space with a hallowed rock,
and both have two octagonal concentric belts around that central space.
According to her, the Dome of the Rock belongs to the “three-shell” type of concentric
martyrium. This model is unique to the Holy Land and the majority of examples
are found in Jerusalem. Adaptations were made in each martyrium in order to “update” the
architectural model to meet the specific functional requirements of the newer monument.[11]
The historical details indicate that
the Muslim and Christian communities were well aware of and were informed about
local hallowing practices, and shared legends and beliefs that developed in and
around the Christian holy places. On the whole, one can deduce that the two
communities shared not only aspects of material culture but also religious lore
and experiences, as well as attachments to holy places that they were reluctant
to abandon.[12]
The two men who supervised the construction of the monument, Rajaʾ ibn Haywa and
Yazid ibn Salim, were familiar with the major churches of the city, particularly
the concentric martyria. It is therefore not surprising that the plan they
chose for the Dome of the Rock derives from the architecture of two accessible major
churches in the area, viz., the Anastasis within the city and the
Kathisma only three miles away.
According to Avner, it was meant to
express the emergence of a new faith that rejects a basic tenet of Christian
belief.
This
was a time when Christian holy places could still be shared and their lore and
beliefs carried over into Islam as with the case of stories related to Mary’s
childhood in the Temple. For example, both Muslim and Christian sources say
that she received her food through divine intervention. Hence, Islam could have
used the same existing designs of the monuments but for preaching its own
faith. The presence of Crown figures in the mosaics are also explained as to be
made on behalf of bringing the non-Muslims to new faith. The choice of
Byzantine symbol could have been an indicator that they were now accommodated
to Islam and in fact it is argued that these symbols were used in Islamic
context to emphasize holiness.
Recent studies have persuasively
argued that Abd al-Malik’s ambitious master plan comprised not just the Dome of
the Rock but also the development of the whole precinct. The Dome of the Rock
was therefore not an isolated structure but part of an extensive ensemble.
Gulru Necipoglu argue that the sequence of architectural units framing the Dome
of the Rock conditioned not only ways of seeing and experiencing it but also
the intertextual meanings it communicated in dialogue with them.[13]Gulru
shows that the Dome of Rock was one among the buildings in the
“master plan” conceptualized by Abd al-Malik for the gigantic complex that came
to be known as the Noble Sanctuary (haram al sharif) in Mamluk and
Ottoman times, offering a new paradigm of salvation.
Many of the Early sources reflect upon
construction of the complex by Abd-al Malik. The chronicle of Ibn Habib
accounts to be the earliest surviving source. It records the report by Al
Shabi, who mentions that Abd-al Malik was the one who built it. Another
tradition attributed to 9th century Palestinian hadith scholar also
mentions Abd-al Malik as the patron of other buildings in chain of the Dome of
Rock. The text of Fatimid geographer, al-Muhallabi, tells the same but he
accounts that it was al-Walid I who added more domes there, with enhancement of
eschatological significance attached to the sanctuary.
A large number of narratives praising
the merits of Jerusalem and many of the Jerusalemite traditions were
incorporated in Islamic beliefs. In fact, a large number of storytellers, officially
appointed by Umayyads incorporated beliefs in Islam from the Torah and Hebrew
Bible. It is revealed in the earliest surviving commentary on the
Quran, written by the Khurasanian traditionist
Muqatil b. Sulayman (d. 767–68), who lived during the construction of the Dome
of the Rock. The interweaving of the commemorative structure of the complex can
easily be identified. Later these narratives got expanded with more
interpolation elaborating cosmological and eschatological tradition. For
example, some of the traditions were formulated enough to tell that there were utterances
directed by God to the Rock, which can speak with its projecting “tongue”.[14]
Gulru argues that the many
denunciation of the Dome of the Rock as a counter-Kaba, may have some element
truth as Abd-al Malik may have prohibited hajj to Mecca as temporary war time
measure. By creating an alternative pilgrimage centre within close reach of
his capital in
Damascus, can supplement rather than supplant the Kaaba, he augmented the
sanctity that spread from Jerusalem throughout his power base in greater Syria,
thereby bolstering the prestige of the Marwanid caliphate.[15]The
poet al-Farazdaq (d. 728 or 730), Hanafi jurist al-Shaybani (d. 805)etc
glimpse upon this Marwanid legitimacy claiming them to be owner of both which
is superior to Medina. It can be seen that the re-writing of inscriptions on
the walls of complex signifying more of its divinity and may have been an
intentional plan of Umayyads to gain legitimacy.
·
Conclusion:
Thus, the architectural similarity of
the Dome of Rock with the earlier Byzantine churches can hardly be neglected.
However, these incorporation of stylistic feature of other traditions in the
monument can be seen in the context of the formative years of Islam where it
emerged by incorporating features of the existing traditions. Though the
sources are highly manipulated to serve Umayyads needs and later on with
ongoing religious fight, the fact that the Dome of Rock is an Islamic monument
is hard to neglect. The inscriptions, mosaics of the monument are inscribed
with features which are regarded as symbols to Islamic art till today. However,
it still requires more research on the subject to account the reality.
REFERENCE:
1. Necipoğlu, G. (2008). "The Dome Of The
Rock As Palimpsest: ʿAbd Al-Malik’s Grand Narrative And Sultan Süleyman’s
Glosses". In Muqarnas, Volume 25.
2. Avner, Rina. (2011). The Dome of the Rock
in light of the development of concentric Martyria in Jerusalem: Architecture
and architectural iconography. Muqarnas Online. 27. 31-49.
3. Robinson, C. (2010). The rise of Islam,
600–705. In C. Robinson (Ed.), The New Cambridge History of Islam.
4. Robert Hillenbrand, “The Dome of the Rock:
From Medieval Symbol to Modern Propaganda”, in J.Franklin and C.Stevenson
(eds), Architecture and Interpretation: Essays for Eric Fernie (London, 2012),
343-56.
5. Muhammed Anwarul Islam and Fauzi Zaid
al-Hamad, “The Dome of the Rock: Origin of Its Octagonal Plan,”
Palestine Exploration Quarterly 139, 2007: 109–28., p-113.
6. Grabar, Oleg. "The Umayyad Dome of the
Rock in Jerusalem." Ars Orientalis 3 (1959): 33-62.
[1]
Hillenbrand, Robert, “The Dome of the
Rock: From Medieval Symbol to Modern Propaganda”, London, 2012 343-56. p-345.
[2] Ibid,
p-349
[3] Robinson,
C. (2010). The rise of Islam, 600–705. In C. Robinson (Ed.), The New
Cambridge History of Islam. p-221.
[4] Grabar,
Oleg. "The Umayyad Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem." Ars
Orientalis 3 (1959): 33-62.p-36
[5] ibid,
pp.37-38
[6] Muhammed Anwarul Islam and Fauzi Zaid al-Hamad, “The
Dome of the Rock: Origin of Its Octagonal Plan,” Palestine Exploration
Quarterly 139, 2007: 109–28., p-113.
[7] Ibid,
p-126.
[8] Ibid,
pp.116-117
[9] Grabar, Oleg. "The Umayyad Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem." Ars
Orientalis 3 (1959): 33-62. p-48.
[10] Avner,
Rina. (2011). The Dome of the Rock in light of the development of concentric
Martyria in Jerusalem: Architecture and architectural iconography. Muqarnas
Online. 31-49. pp. 34-35
[11] ibid,
p-38
[12] ibid,
p-43
[13] Necipoğlu,
G. (2008). "The Dome Of The Rock As Palimpsest: ʿAbd Al-Malik’s Grand
Narrative And Sultan Süleyman’s Glosses". In Muqarnas, Volume 25, p-23.
[14] Ibid.p-35.
[15] Ibid.p-37.
Comments
Post a Comment