Al-Hira was an ancient city in south-central Iraq, which played a significant role in influencing the development of early Islamic architecture, for example at Samarra. Excavations of several of the raised mounds at the site were carried out during an Oxford expedition in 1931 under David Talbot Rice (1903-1972). Initially occupied during the Sasanian period, the site of a fortress-like palace structure was in continuous use until the second half of the 8th century based on numismatic and other archaeological evidence. Its layout shows affinities with the Palace of Ukhaidir, built during the Abbasid Caliphate.
Carved stucco work decorated a number of the door jambs, several of which survived in situ, as well in fragments found on the floor. These are among the earliest examples of Islamic stucco to have been identified. Significantly they are made of true stucco using lime plaster, characterised by a white, hard, stone-like appearance, unlike the greyish gypsum plaster employed at Samarra. There are stylistic parallels with similar stucco work found at Ctesiphon, excavated by a German expedition in 1928-29.
The stucco finds in the Victoria and Albert Museum are associated with the decoration found on wide door jambs (30 cm in width) found in Building I as well apparently as cornices and pilasters. The stiff deep carving was created with a steep-cut (Tiefendunkel), using a hand drill which is distinct from the slant-cut characteristic of Samarran carving.

In 1932, David Talbot Rice presented the stucco finds from Hira to the Ashmolean Museum in Oxford, but offered a selection to Richard P. Bedford, Keeper in the Department of Architecture and Sculpture ( the Middle Eastern Department was not created until 2002), as ‘important examples of designs’ along with photos of a door jamb from Hira. Rice described the stucco finds as being from three restorable door-jambs, a portion of a small frieze and a few other fragments. A selection of ‘half-a dozen of the best specimens’ were requested. As Bedford explained to Talbot Rice in a letter of 16 April 1932, ‘We should like to be able to choose from specimens of artistic rather than purely archaeological interest’. In the end, of the fragments sent, it was felt that it was not possible to ‘reconstruct anything like a large panel from the pieces’ and only five were selected.