Al-Wal?d II and the new Umayyad Propaganda. There have been a number of pivotal moments in Umayyad history that not only had a profound effect specifically on the dynasty but also on Islamic history in general. Such was the case with regards to the reign of al-Wal?d II Ir. 743-744). But because of the heavy reliance on literary sources that were written more than a century after these incidents the historian spends more time trying to decipher the meaning behind these statements rather than the actually history of these incidents. But from time to time one gets lucky and finds a document that, for all intensive purposes, most likely goes back to the Umayyad it purportedly was authored by; this is in reference to al-Wal?d II’s letter in which he talks about the designation of his successors. These letters have been utilized by many scholars as a good source for the understanding of Umayyad legitimacy. That is, many scholars have seen that these letters reflect the Umayyad understanding of their legitimacy. They are not only a reflection of al-Wal?d II but of his predecessors’ arguments for their right to rule the Islamic community. This paper will show that in fact this was the exact opposite, that rather than being a reflection of the Umayyad understanding of their legitimacy this letter deviates sharply from the Umayyad ‘propaganda’ vis-à-vis their understanding of their authority and leadership. It will also be shown that al-Wal?d II had to resort to deviated from the old Umayyad understanding of authority and legitimacy because of the actions of his uncle Hish?m (r. 724-743) whose attacks on al-Wal?d, while he was heir apparent, eroded any possibility for al-Wal?d to anchor his claims in Umayyad propaganda. Instead al-Wal?d had to deviate quite sharply from Umayyad claims which resulted in the further erosion in what little was left of Umayyad legitimacy.