translation or paraphrase of the Aristotelian
stretched, and standing atop the horns of a bull’s
Historia Animalium and, while duly noting his
head, the nose of which is threaded through with
personal scepticism as an educated man, records
a large copper alloy ring carved onto the keystone
the following anecdote:
of the arched gate The dragons are rendered in
The Master of Logic (Aristotle) states that a ser-
formal pose with one foreleg raised (sometimes
pent with two heads was observed
considered to be “heraldic”), their elongated
I asked a bedouin about that, and he asserted
twisting serpentine tail arranged first in a so-
that it be [ sic] true Whereupon I said to him: In
cal ed pretzel-like (or heart-shaped) knot and then
the direction of which one of the two heads does
into two loops; their supernatural properties are
it creep, and with which one does it eat and bite?
represented by the presence of wings and by the
He replied: As to its creeping it does not creep
long sinuous tongues protruding from the open
(at all), but proceeds towards its aim by rolling
mouths (fig 1) 25 These details which represent a
itself as do boys on the sand As to its eating it
“heraldic” stylisation of the creature establish not
takes its evening meal with one mouth and its
only the symbolism of the Saljuq-period dragon
breakfast with the other As to its biting it does
but indicate at the same time a ceremonial and
so with both its heads 20
ritual of subjugation and domestication
Depictions of double-headed serpents, or amphis-
However in contrast to some of the later Saljuq-
baena, are a recurrent feature on architecture,
period dragon sculpture, discussed below, that
most often positioned above gates, as will be
was intended to be highly visible from far away,
shown in the following Many city gates also car-
the Diyārbakr dragon reliefs, which represent the
ried prominent epigraphic panels commemorat-
earliest surviving such examples of the medieval
ing a victory, invoking good fortune or deflecting
Islamic period, are rather discreetly portrayed:
evil influences 21 Qurʾānic verses in particular are
they are too small to be detected from a distance
considered the most powerful of all “talismans ”22
and thus remain curiously invisible It may be
Often these protective inscriptions were comple-
hypothesised that the inconspicuous nature of the
mented or replaced by images of the dragon which
depictions reflects a formative level of the concep-
served a prophylactic and talismanic (in the sense
tualisation; hence, the craftsmen were still rather
of apotropaic) function It was thus their purpose
unfamiliar with the dragon iconography and thus
to protect, avert the power of evil, and to promote
perhaps did not wish to display it too ostenta-
well-being
tiously yet the fluidly rendered portrayal, which
In 579/1183–4 Diyārbakr (Diyarbakır), the his-
is in line with later distinctive representations
toric city of Āmid, was conquered by the Türkmen
when the motif had become increasingly common,
Artuqids who in the same year made significant
betrays this assumption Indeed it may be noted
additions to the striking black basalt city walls
that, with exceptions such as the Konya dragon
to commemorate the victory 23 A large frieze
sculptures discussed below, the iconic image of
graces the West Gate (the former Rūm Gate and
the dragon was generally not conspicuously dis-
present Urfa Gate) and eulogises the patron Abū
played throughout the medieval period This may
ʿAbdal āh Muḥammad ibn Qara Arslan ibn Dāwūd
be due to the fact that size and associated visibility
ibn Suqmān (561/1166–581/1185) with extensive
were not considered to be essential criteria for the
titles and Qurʾānic verses ( sūra s 48, 18; and 61,
inherently propitious and apotropaic powers of
13) which were deemed to have specific powers
the sculptures to take effect 26
relating to the attaining of victory: “Help comes
Related but much larger, plastically carved
from God and victory is near ”24 The protective
decoration was characteristic of the early thir-
power of the inscription is augmented by carved
teenth-century city walls, gates or citadel of the
reliefs: a pair of symmetrical confronted dragons
Saljuq capital Konya (ancient Iconium) in central
with forelegs is surmounted by the composition
Anatolia, built by sulṭān ʿAlāʾ al-Dīn Kay Qubādh
of a bird of prey, probably an eagle, wings out-
I (r 616/1219–634/1237) to protect the city from
20 Kopf, 1953, p 400
25 Van Berchem, 1910, p 82, fig 30 B (drawing), pl 17,
21 Van Berchem and Strzygowski, 1910, p 73
Öney, 1969a, figs 30 a (photograph of the entire composi-
22 Porter, 2006, p 794
tion) and b (line drawing); Gierlichs, 1996, pl 48 5 (photo-
23 Gabriel, 1931, vol 1, pp 166–8, fig 136; van Berchem
graph of the dragon to the left)
and Strzygowski, 1910, pp 82–4; Kühnel, 1950, p 8
26 I am most grateful to Professor Robert Hillenbrand to
24 Cf Hauptmann von Gladiss, ed , 2006, pp 31–2
have raised this subject for discussion
dragons on monumental settings in regions west of iran
25
the Mongol advance A group of double-headed
impression of power and good fortune which the
dragon reliefs from these now destroyed monu-
sculptures were probably meant to convey
ments is preserved in the İnce Minare Müzesi,
Closely related dragon figures are known
Konya 27 Iconographic and stylistic variations cer-
from the interior decoration of Saljuq palaces
tainly exist between the dragon sculptures of this
Two small fragments have been discovered at
period, but the basic conception remains the same
the now destroyed palace-citadel at Kubadabad
for all surviving examples Akin to the Artuqid
on the west bank of Lake Beyşehir, near Akşehir,
Diyārbakr dragon reliefs the Konya sculptures
of the sulṭān ʿAlāʾ al-Dīn Kay Qubādh I (r
are thus similarly portrayed with their inner fore-
616/1219–634/1237), whose reign marked the
legs raised, the “Saljuq-style” heads with cusped
height of Rūm Saljuq power One of these is a
pricked up ears projecting at the top, the wide-open
fragmentary stone relief-carved with a dragon’s
jaws terminating in upward curled tips revealing
head,31 the other is a star tile showing paired
sharp teeth and the tongues thrust out to reveal
dragons whose necks cross over and whose wide-
bifid tips The upswept, curved wings with tightly
open confronted jaws reveal rows of pointed teeth
curled tips project from the haunches; their ser-
and bifid tongues 32 A third piece was discovered
pentine tails are knotted at mid-section In these
while excavating the ruins of the pavilion (köshk)
fragments however the tails curve backwards and
on Konya’s citadel, which was probably built
then taper to a small dragon head that snaps with
during the reign of the Rūm Saljuq sulṭān Rukn
its snout at the dragon-tail (fig 60) Although pre-
al-Dīn Qılıch Arslan IV (r 646/1248–647/1249,
served as individual panels, the dragons would
655/1257–664/1266) 33 It represents a plaster
probably have been represented as antithetical
fragment moulded in low relief with a pair of
pairs 28 In contrast to the shallowly rendered
related addorsed dragons separated by a braided
Diyārbakr dragon reliefs, these dragons are plas-
band; their gaping snouts are turned backwards,
tically sculpted, the monumentality of their size
the feathery wings raised, and the tails form a
adding to their visually dramatic appearance
pret zel-like knot and a loop before tapering to
The large stone panels may have been placed on
a point 34
or near the city gates and would have made an
One of the most outstanding examples of
impressive sight on the city wall, visible from afar
the dragon iconography on city gates certainly
The chronicler of the history of the Rūm Saljuqids,
must have been the monumental sculptures on
al-Ḥusayn ibn Muḥammad ibn ʿAlī al-Jaʿfarī
the archivolt of the so-called Talisman Gate (Bāb
al-Rughadī, known as Ibn al-Bībī (d after 684/
al- Ṭilasm) in Baghdad (figs 2, 139a and b) which
December 1285), who was head of the chancel ery
was destroyed in 1917 during the First World
of the Secretariat of State,29 describes the elabo-
War 35 As indicated by the name of the gate,
rate royal ceremonies the Saljuqs were known to
built in 618/1221–2 under the great caliph Abu
have staged at the city gates where they received
l-ʿAbbās Aḥmad al-Nāṣir li-Dīn Allāh (577/1181–
visitors before conducting them into the city 30
620/1223), this type of imagery had talismanic
The placement of several dragon sculptures on
(as also implied by the gate’s name), or at least
the city walls and gates would have amplified the
apotropaic connotations It showed a seated figure
27 Konya, İnce Minare Müzesi, inv no 889 (Sarre, 1909,
31 Öney, 1969a, p 196, fig 4; Otto-Dorn, 1978–9, p 125
p 14, fig 16; Önder, 1961, p 70, fig 2; Öney, 1969a, p 195,
32 Otto-Dorn, 1978–9, p 125; Arik and Arik, 2008,
fig 3; Otto-Dorn, 1959, pl VIII, fig 36; Gierlichs, 1996,
p 313, fig 300 (colour reproduction)
p 197, cat no 43, and pl 38 1), inv no 890 (Sarre, 1909,
33 Rogers, “Saldjūḳids,” EI 2 VIII, 936a
p 13, fig 15; Önder, 1961, p 70, fig 1; Diyarbekirli, 1968,
34 Plaster fragment Konya, Alaeddin Palace Thirteenth
p 370, fig 5; Öney, 1969a, p 194, fig 1; Gierlichs, 1996,
century Height 33 cm, width 19 5 cm Konya Museum, inv
p 198, cat no 44, and pl 38 2), and inv no 1394 (Öney,
no 1029 Öney, 1969a, p 196, fig 4; İnal, 1970–1, fig 6; The
1969a, p 195, fig 2; and eadem, 1978, p 46, fig 32; Gierlichs,
Anatolian Civilisations, 1983, p 36, D 39 On the dating of
1996, p 200, cat no 46, and pl 39 1; Grube and Johns, 2005,
the köshk, see Sarre, 1936, pp 36–7; Meinecke, 1976, vol 1,
p 230, fig 77 2)
pp 71–2
28 Otto-Dorn, 1978–9, p 125 Cf Gierlichs, 1996, p 197
35 Preusser, 1911, p 16 top; Sarre and Herzfeld, 1920,
29 Cf Duda, “Ibn Bībī,” EI 2 III, 737b
vol 2, pp 152–6, vol 3, pls 10 (lower photograph) – 11;
30 Such as the welcome accorded to shaykh ʿUmar
Hartner, 1938, fig 26; Sarre, 1936, fig 26 (detail); Kühnel,
Suhrawardī at Konya; al-Awāmir al-ʿAlāʾiyya fī ’l-ūmur
1950, p 11, fig 12 Gierlichs, 1996, pl 66 1 Meinecke,
al-ʿAlāʾiyya (“History of the Rūm Saljuqs”), completed in
1989, p 58, fig 7 Hauptmann von Gladiss, ed , 2006, p 114,
680/181, tr Duda, 1959, pp 102–3
fig 12
26