The close associtation of the tree and the serpent
Minare madrasa, the miniature thus documents
is also evident in the Risālat of Ibn Faḍlān, sec-
a variation of the motif in a Christian context 173
retary of the caliphal mission to Volga Bulgaria
A large marginal ornament from an Armenian
from 309/921 to 310/922, that relates the story of
Gospel of Luke illuminated in 1323 shows open-
a tree being cut to size which then begins to move
mouthed dragons with projecting tongues that
and crawl away in the form of a giant dragon 171
touch the base of a more stylised, tree-like vegetal
Given the historical relations of Armenians
motif The latter contains the symbols of the four
with the principality of Erzurum (Karin), which
Evangelists set amidst foliage that tapers to an
at various times belonged to Armenia and under
arched apex It is surmounted by an ornate cross
Islamic rulership also had a Christian Armenian
flanked by clusters of grapes instead of the birds
population, it is interesting to relate the Çifte
that top the tree-like compositions on the collec-
Minare madrasa motif to earlier as well as con-
tion of sermons of 1216 and the mid-thirteenth-
temporary Armenian references preserved in
century Çifte Minare madrasa The ornament was
manuscript illumination A significant variant
illustrated by the miniaturist Tʿoros Taronatsi in
on the imagery is presented in a collection of
the important scriptorium of the monastery of
sermons of 1216 illustrated by Barsegh Kʿahanay
Gladzor in southern Armenia (fig 45) 174
(the priest) in Skevra monastery, Cilician Arme-
In view of the close analogies between the
nia (fig 44) It portrays a tall multi-branched
dragon compositions on the façade of the Çifte
tree bearing large foliage, buds and fruit that are
Minare madrasa and contemporary Armenian
pecked at by different types of birds that perch
stone carvings, Rogers has referred to the reliefs
on the branches yet instead of growing out of
as “barely islamicised versions of Armenian
the base of the tree and rearing up from there,
khatchkʿars (commemorative cross-stones) ”175
the interlaced slender trunks of the tree are here
This is particular evident on vishap-type Arme-
shown to be enclosed by an entwined pair of giant
nian Christian sepulchral steles or commemora-
scaly serpents forming a double loop The motif
tive cross-stones (khatchkʿar), such as a twelfth- or
represents an example of the standard depiction
thirteenth-century example from Makravankʿ in
of the tree or pole together with the serpent form-
Ararat province, on which a closely related form
ing the figure of eight (both open and closed) as
of imagery can be deduced On this khatchkʿar a
also repesented in the symbol of the caduceus
pair of stylised dragons springs from the base of
(kerykeion) discussed below The reptiles gnaw,
a cross, whence their serpentine bodies bifurcate,
with heads upreared, at the uppermost leaves A
form a loop and then curve upwards to terminate
small bird is perched on the summit of the tree
in stylised heads with wide-open jaws Just below
while a pair of confronting human-headed birds,
the heads, ornamental bands enclose collars in
probably harpies, flanks the base of the trunk The
the form of a figure of eight which accent the
latter bears an intricate interlace terminating in
ophidian necks and delineate the bodies, the latter
pendant palmette-shaped buds The tree-with-
being enlivened by parallel decorative stripes The
serpents motif certainly al udes here to a complex
bases of the small crosses are shown to rest on the
of ideas, not least the serpent and the fruit-bear-
tips of short tongues projecting from the drag-
ing tree in the Garden of Eden 172 Painted about
ons’ mouths whose lips end in inward-curling
three decades before the construction of the Çifte
tips (fig 46) 176
171 Ed Dahhān, S , Damascus, 1959, pp 127–8 (fol 4 206
Taronatsi; see The Christian Orient, 1978, pl 13 (caption
wāw), as cited in Montgomery, 2006, p 72
119) The same conceptualisation can be observed in an
172 A reference to the tree is also found for instance in
eleventh- or twelfth-century Georgian illustration of the
the Proverbs of Solomon: “A Tree of Life is wisdom for those
Gospel book from Ghelati near Kutaisi in northwestern
who acquire it” (3 18) On the meaning of the Tree of Knowl-
Georgia which shows a tree-like composition from the base
edge and the Tree of Life, see Agathangelos, Teaching of St.
of which projects a root-like vertical extension that car-
Gregory, tr and ed Thomson, 1970, ch 277; The Armenian
ries a single curved serpent with gaping mouth revealing
Commentary on Genesis Attributed to Ephrem the Syrian, tr
a bifid tongue Georgia, Tbilisi, Institute of the Academy of
Mathews, 1998, pp 21–2, 27–8, 32–3, 37 and n 116, 39; see
Sciences of Georgia, Ms A 908, fol 16; see Amiranašvili, 1966,
also Wallace, 1985, pp 101–32
fig 35
173 I am grateful to Professor Robert Hillenbrand for
175 Rogers, “Saldjūḳids,” EI 2 VIII, 936a
pointing this out to me
176 For another closely related vishap-type khatchkʿar
174 For a closely related example, see British Library Ms
with small crosses issuing from the gaping dragon heads,
Add 15,411, fol 92a, dated 1321, which is also illustrated at
see Armenië, 2001, p 52, photograph, lower left side, third
the monastery of Gladzor in southern Armenia by Tʿoros
khatchkʿar from the left
dragons and the powers of the earth
67
It is notable that khatchkʿar decorated with
of which become highly stylised,181 “was a reac-
the cross, the “Sign” of God or “Wood of Life,”
tion to the traditional decoration of Armenian
as the main decorative motif, symbolise primar-
khatchkʿar ”182
ily the salvation of the souls of the departed in
Representations that associate the dragons
whose memory they were erected 177 In the case
yet again with the Christian cross are moreover
of vishap-type khatchkʿar it appears therefore less
found at the monastery of Deir Mār Behnām in
likely that the dragons are shown ingesting the
Mosul On the lintel of the southern outer door,
crosses and it may be presumed that, conversely,
just below the relief-carved representation of a
the mythical creatures are represented as deliv-
pair of entwined dragons (figs 17a and b), exam-
erers and as givers of fecundity and prosperity
ined above, is a central Greek cross From its base
The visual conflation of dragon bodies with
extends an arched cartouche which encloses a pair
knotted ornaments is perhaps indebted to the
of stylised regardant quadruped dragons viewed
canon-tables of Armenian Gospel books 178 An
from behind, whose arched bodies are crossing
important marginal ornament features a cross
(fig 50) 183 The dragons’ gaping mouths and their
resting on an inverted heart-shaped interlace
projecting tongues touch the tip of the cusped
of split-palmettes which evolves into two con-
lower end of the cross An interesting parallel
fronted dragon heads, the necks enclosed in
occurs on the portal leading to the chapel of the
narrow ornamental collars Just as on the vishap-
baptistery at Mār Behnām, where the frame is
type khatchkʿar discussed above, the creatures are
carved with a knotted serpentine moulding form-
distinctly portrayed with their tongues darting
ing ogee arch-shaped niches which also enclose
from the wide-open mouths to touch the base of
crosses whose lower ends extend into stemmed
the cross (fig 47) The ophidian heads are capped
palmettes
by pointed ears, the most characteristic aspect
An important khatchkʿar in the church of
being however the wide open, curved snouts, the
Surb Astvatsatsin (Holy Mother of God) in
upper lip ending in a rolled-up tip The ornament
Sevanavankʿ, located on the northwest ern shore
is portrayed on Mark’s first page, copied by the
of Lake Sevan in the eastern Armenian province
priest Hohannes [ sic], son of the priest Manuk,
of Gegharkʿunikʿ, depicts the scene of God expel -
in 1171 in Edessa (now known as Urfa) in south-
ling Adam and Eve from Paradise flanked by
east Anatolia 179
a pair of dragons with knotted tails and open
The rendering of the dragons on the vishap-
mouths revealing the tongues (fig 51) It is inter-
type khatchkʿar as well as the Edessan marginal
esting to note the early rabbinic assessment of the
ornament reveals analogies with the arch-shaped
association of Adam and Eve with the serpent:
double-headed knotted dragons with wide-open
“the serpent is your [sc Eve] serpent and you
jaws, pointed ears and horn-like protuberances,
are Adam’s serpent ”184 yet for its role in the fall
the bodies covered with an interlaced palmette
of Adam and Eve, God condemned the serpent
scroll, that are featured on some of the funerary
forever to eat “earth” (Genesis 3 14) However
steles at the vast cemetery of Akhlāṭ The latter
rather than being portrayed as evil, it is once again
is situated at the northwest corner of Lake Van
shown to touch the bottom tip of the long cross
between Eski Akhlāṭ and the Ottoman qalʿa and
held by God in his right hand with its projecting
was principally erected between 1250 and 1350
tongue 185 This ambiguity inherent in the figure
(figs 48 and 49) 180 The points of resemblance are
of the serpent(-dragon) is elucidated in a pas-
noted by Rogers who hypothesises that the overall
sage from the Epistle of Barnabas in which Moses
decoration of the richly carved tombstones, some
says:
177 Der Nersessian, 2001, p 110 In the Armenian
181 Four steles carved with dragons are said to be extant;
Hymnal the rod is referred to as Holy Cross and Tree of Life,
Süslü, 1987, p 640 Cf Karamağaralı, 1972, p 187, nos 734–
a staff that gives life (kensatu), a staff of power (zawrutʿean)
234a (no 72, epitaph dated 23 Ṣafar 700/7 November 1300)
Russell, 2004, p 1148
Öney, 1969a, fig 11
178 Cf Rogers, “Saldjūḳids,” EI 2 VIII, 936a
182 Rogers, 1988, p 120
179 Izmailova, T A , “Edesskaia rukopis 1171 goda (M
183 Researched by Preusser, 1911, n 11, pp 5–6, pls 5,
313),” Kultura i iskusstvo nardo vostoka 8, Trudi gosudarst-
6 2 Cf Fiey, 1965, vol 1, pp 565–09, esp pp 605–6; Kühnel,
vennogo Orgena Lenina Ermitazha, 19, Leningrad, 1978,
1950 (church of Khiḍr Ilyās)
pp 84–101 (English summary, pp 117–8), as cited in Der
184 Genesis Rabbah 20; Wallace, 1985, p 148
Nersessian and Agemian, 1993, p 30
185 Tr Lake, 1914, vol 1, p 385
180 Rogers, 1988, p 109
68