THE DRAGON AND THE MAGICO-MEDICAL SPHERE
a The dragon as prophylaxis and cure
Thraētaona who is invoked, as king Frēdōn/
Farīdūn, in prayers and on amulets to keep away
In Iranian mythology Thrita/Trita was the first
or cure sickness 6 The tenth-century philologist
of the healers He “drove back sickness to sick-
Ḥamza al-Iṣfahānī also records that Farīdūn “con-
ness, drove back death to death; he asked for an
structed amulets, and introduced the antidote
antidote (and) obtained it from Khshthra-Vairya
(made) from the body of vipers, and founded
to withstand sickness and to counter-act snake-
medicine, and pointed out those extracts of herbs
bite” (Vidēvdāt 20 2–3) 1 Thrita, “the third man
which keep away pestilence from the bodies of
who pressed the Haoma” (yasna 9 10), appears
animate beings ”7 Manichaean Middle Persian
originally to have been closely associated (if not
prayer and incantation texts reciting “names of
identical) with Thraētaona,2 for the invention of
power” frequently mention the “First Physician”
the miraculous gift of healing, in other words the
prydwn (Frēdūn) in connection with other pow-
granting of health, strength, fertility and fecun-
erful names known in a magical context, such as
dity, was also attributed to the latter 3 In the
Gabriel and “Sabaoth ”8
Farvardīn yasht Thraētaona had the ability to cure
The parallels in the magical healing abilities of
certain illnesses and could:
both Thrita and Thraētaona are mirrored by their
heroic feats Both are known to have overcome
counteract pain, hot fever, humours, cold fever
and incontinence, and […] the pain caused by
serpent-bodied, three-headed and six-eyed drag-
the serpent 4
ons, respectively known as Viśvarūpa and Azhi
Dahāka, the difference being that the former is a
Knowledge of the secret causes of illness and the
celestial and the latter a terrestrial dragon 9 It is
no less secret measures necessary to obtain a cure
interesting to observe that the magical healers
belonged to the duties of the healer Accordingly,
who are called upon to cure injuries caused by
Thraētaona was also regarded as the inventor of
snake bites and to invent an antidote for snake
magic 5 In living Zoroastrian observance it is
venom are at the same time dragon fighters par
1 Dubash, 1906, p 173
Hindūkān ( Bundahishn 209 11–2; idem, p 238)
2 The Zend-Avesta, tr Darmesteter, vol 2, 1880, p 549,
6 Boyce, 1975, repr 1996, p 98 Cf Modi, 1894, pp 1–24
n 275; Boyce, 1975, repr 1996, pp 98, 100 On the close ety-
On the basis of Farīdūn’s attribute of a bull-headed mace with
mological relation between Thrita/Trita and Thraētaona, see
which he breaks the stronghold of the demon-king Ẓaḥḥāk,
Watkins, 1995, pp 314–6; Remmel, 2006, pp 126–7
Bivar (1967, pp 522–4, pl 1, F) identifies the scene of a hero
3 yasht 13 131 See Boyce, 1975, repr 1996, pp 98, 100
grasping a demon by the hair engraved on a Sasanian-period
4 yasht 13 131 (cited after Dubash, 1906, p 173) The
chalcedony seal-stone, probably an amulet, in the British
Zend-Avesta, tr Darmesteter, vol 4, 1880, p 219 Cf
Museum, inv no 1905-5-30, 1, with the legend of Farīdūn
Sarkhosh Curtis, 1993, p 26
battling with Ẓaḥḥāk The latter is portrayed in the process
5 When Thraētaona, on his march to Bawri, the capital
of devouring (or expectorating) a human being whose upper
of A ž i [ ], arrived at the Tigris (the Rangha); an angel
body, head and arms protrude from the demon’s mouth
then came and taught him magic to enable him to
Bivar surmises that the scene represents Farīdūn in his medi-
baffle the sortileges of Aži (Shāh-nāma) We have in
cal role, possibly combating a fatal illness, since the demon
this passage an instance of his talents as a wizard, and
is shown as not merely wounding but devouring a human
one which helps us to understand why Thraētaona is
being
considered as the inventor of magic, and his name is
7 Ḥamza al-Isfahani, ed Gottwaldt, J M P , p 23 and
invoked in spells and incantations
٣٣, as cited in Bivar, 1967, p 522, n 25 Cf Ḥamza al-
Isfahani, Taʾrīkh sinī mulūk al-arḍ wa ’l-anbiyāʾ, Beirut,
The Zend-Avesta, tr Darmesteter, vol 2, p 549, n 275 Cf
1961, p 34; Ṭabarī, I, p 226; Balʿamī, Tarjumat-i tārīkh-i
Boyce, 1975, repr 1996, pp 68–9 and n 3; Bivar, 1967,
Ṭabarī, ed Bahār, p 148; Ibn al-Balkhī, I, p 36; and Tārikh-i
pp 522–3 The association of Bawri (Bāvīr), the fortress
guzīda, ed Navāʾī, p 84; cited after Tafaẓẓolī, “Ferēdūn,”
of Dahāk, with Babylon seems to be a later tradition, cf
EIr.
Monchi-Zadeh, 1975, p 238 and n 2 Two further for-
8 Henning, 1947, pp 39–40
tresses of Dahāk were said to be located in Simbrān and in
9 yasna 9 7; Boyce, 1975, repr 1996, pp 98–9
170