conquests Meinecke, 1989, p 58 Cf also Sarre and Herzfeld,
117 Cf Hauptmann von Gladiss, ed , 2006, p 115
1911, vol 1, pp 34–6
118 Sarre and Herzfeld, 1911, vol 1, pp 38–9
114 Cf Hauptmann von Gladiss, ed , 2006, p 115
119 Eidem, pp 39–40
115 Hartner, 1938, p 144
120 Cf Pancaroğlu, 2000, p 246
116 Pancaroğlu, 2001, pp 171–2, n 29 The lion’s asso-
121 Eadem, pp 246–7
the dragon in relation to royal or heroic figures
127
medieval mind the animal combat or the mastery
Baghdad of 618/1221–2 the central figure is hence
of beasts was associated with the timeless image
portrayed as holding tightly on to the dragons’
of a heroic and royal ideal associated with the
tongues (figs 139a and b) As has been shown,
ruler Representations of the ruler between two
this gesture is associated with the symbolism of
dragons, as emblematised in the Bāb al-Ṭilasm
subjugation by bridling the creatures and thereby
relief, show him constraining the great powers
rendering them defenceless Reference to taming
of the dragons within the control of his realm,
and mastering the (serpent-)dragon by means of
thereby demonstrating his mythical powers It is
holding its tongue is also made in al-Kisāʾī’s story
conceivable that when commissioning the visual
of Moses (Mūsa) and the pharaoh (firʿawn) To
metaphor and sculptural vision of the mythical
save the life of the latter from the attack of the
dragon-tamer for the monumental victory com-
Prophet’s rod turned giant serpent, Moses “cried
memoration, the caliph al-Nāṣir’s aim was to
to the serpent, which came to him as a tame dog
evoke the supernatural forces associated with the
comes to his master Moses put his hand in its
time-honoured Indo-Iranian concept as well as
mouth and caught its tongue, whereupon it was
to appropriate the associated royal charisma of
again a staff 122
ancient kingship
The vital organ of the tongue thus seems to
epitomise the seat or the extension of power of the
mythical creature This underscores the inference
c Symbolism of the dragon’s tongue
that the use of control over this potent emblem
permits the powerful creature to be overmastered
It is inherent in the dragon’s very nature that,
Establishing control over the dragon implies of
owing to its multivalent qualities, it escapes defi-
course not only the domination of its dark and
nition One of its many preeminent features is
evil nature, but also of its inherent beneficial
the conspicuous emphasis on the tongue, used to
qualities An attempt will be made in the next
denote the supernatural quality of the creature In
and subsequent chapters to describe the nature
most of the examples discussed earlier, the deep
of these qualities
gaping throats of the fabulous creatures reveal
Tongues are generally associated with the
tongues, which are invariably oriented towards
power of speech, a quality of the dragon that
the central motif In the Armenian examples at
will be addressed in chapter 13 According to the
the late ninth-century monastic complex of Saint
Qurʾān, the magician-king Sulaymān ibn Dāwūd,
Peter and Saint Paul in Siunikʿ (figs 120–122) and
the biblical Solomon, was acquainted with the
the mid-tenth-century cathedral of the Holy Apos-
speech of birds and animals ( sūra 27, 16–9), a
tles in Kars (figs 118 and 119), the outstretched
tradition based on I Kings 4 33 123 In Judaism as
ophidian tongues are clearly directed at the ears
well as in Islamic scriptural tradition the under-
of the human heads The serpent-headed staffs
standing of the language of animals was initially
that flank the seated frontally portrayed figures
associated with the story of Paradise 124 The early
depicted on twelfth- or thirteenth-century Islamic
Haggada speaks of Adam understanding the lan-
metalwork are also shown with the tongues pro-
guage of birds and beasts125 and of Eve126 speaking
jecting from the mouths towards the human
with the serpent127 who was considered to be the
heads (figs 113–116) This may be related to the
wisest, the cleverest and the most astute of all
fact that a snake’s tongue is known to dart out
animals 128 In the late Haggada non-Jewish folk-
before it strikes at a foe At the Bāb al-Ṭilasm in
lore was censored before it was assimilated; the
122 Qiṣaṣ al-anbiyāʾ, tr Thackston, 1978, p 228
al-anbiyāʾ, tr Thackston, 1978, p 46 Cf Book of Jubi-
123 Walker [Fenton], “Sulaymān b Dāwūd,” EI² IX,
lees 3 28; Philo of Alexandria, De Opificio Mundi 55 156
p 882b
Older rabbinic sources do not know of the original lan-
124 Al-Kisāʾī, Qiṣaṣ al-anbiyāʾ, tr Thackston, 1978,
guage spoken by man and the animals, but a passage in
pp 36–46 Cf Schwemer, 1994, p 137
the Lekah on Genesis, 3 1, maintains that before the
125 Adam lost this ability with the Fall of men but in
Fall only the serpent spoke the original language of
the Messianic period this condition will be re-established
man, Hebrew, whereas the rest of the animals spoke
Ginzberg, 1909–38, repr 1946 and 1955, vol 5, pp 94, n 54,
their own language which was only understood by Adam
119–20, n 113
See Ginzberg, 1909–38, repr 1946 and 1955, vol 1, p 181,
126 Idem, p 91, n 48
n 91, and vol 5, pp 91, n 48, 94, n 58, and 100–1,
127 In Paradise all animals could speak, but as punish-
n 83
ment for allowing Iblīs to seduce Eve (Ḥawwāʾ) the serpent
128 The wisdom of the serpents is also noted in the New
lost not only its legs but also the ability to speak (a skill simi-
Testament (Genesis 3 1; Matthew 10 16) Cf Schwemer,
larly denied to all the other animals) Al-Kisāʾī, Qiṣaṣ
1994, p 137
128