ARAM 26:1&2 (2014), 63-97 THE DRAGON FIGHTER: THE INFLUENCE OF ZOROASTRIAN IDEAS ON JUDAEO- CHRISTIAN AND ISLAMIC ICONOGRAPHY 1 SARA KUEHN (University of Vienna, Austria) Abstract Images of dragon-slaying by Eastern Christian warrior saints allegorise the overthrow of evil forces, a topos that appears first on the eastern confines of the Byzantine Empire in Transcaucasia. Representations of a triumphal rider trampling or slaying a fallen enemy are frequent in antiquity but acquire a moral significance only under the emperor Constantine in the early fourth century – a century later than analogous imagery on the investiture relief of Ardashīr I (r. 224–241) at Naqsh-i Rustam. Close parallels in iconography between the Iranian and the Judaeo-Christian traditions expressing the fundamental juxtaposition between victor and vanquished, and the latter often characterised by ophidian features, may in large part be due to the influence of Iranian dualistic notions, and specifically Zoroastrian eschatological thought systems. Conclusive evidence points to the fact that the iconographic semantics of the medieval Western Asian equestrian dragon-fighter in its heroic as well as saintly incarnation owe much to ancient prototypes that germinated in the syncretistic melting pot of the great Near Eastern religions. The visual representation of a fighter doing battle with a serpent or dragon employs a traditional and enduring iconographical formula of some antiquity and wide diffusion throughout the Near Eastern world. It is part of a stock of popular imagery that survived into medieval times. The fighter takes aim at an ophidian creature using a variety of weapons while the creature is shown either as a lively upright being imbued with fighting spirit, or, more commonly, in the guise of a vanquished being lying on its back beneath the horse’s feet with gaping upturned jaws. The idea of connecting the cult and iconography of the Eastern Christian warrior saints with a serpent-dragon can be traced to at least the early seventh century. 2 In the Christian church the dragon motif developed in the eastern confines of Byzantium, 3 where the so-called holy rider vanquishing a dragon was a well-established literary topos and was represented in early wall painting. 4 Depictions are found on portable items, ranging from magical amulets to luxury objects, as well as on sacred architecture, in particular churches and funerary settings. The motif fell on particularly fertile ground in the southern Caucasus region which was part of the pan-Iranian religio-cultural realm and was steeped in its artistic conventions. The antecedents of the victorious horseman fighting a serpent-dragon have been sought further west where they have been linked to Roman-period votive reliefs with Thracian horsemen, confronted or single, and a serpent sinuously rising towards the rider’s feet, or coiled around his staff or around a tree trunk. 5 Similarly the god Mithras is depicted as rider with an accompanying serpent next to his horse. 6 1 This article is a shortened version of chapter 6 of my Ph.D. thesis (Free University of Berlin, 2008) published as The Dragon in Medieval East Christian and Islamic Art, 2011. 2 Walter, 2003, p. 140. 3 Although the horseman was one of the most distinctive figures in the pictorial repertory of the Coptic arts of Byzantine Egypt, it is notable that he does not battle with a dragon. For a rare early Islamic example of a rider piercing a dragon on a Coptic tapestry band, see Lewis, 1973, p. 54, fig. 28 (pls. unnumbered). The dragon-fighting horsemen becomes more current in the late medieval Egypt, see, for instance, Badamo, 2011, figs. 29, 30. 4 Cf. Walter, 2003, p. 37. 5 Thierry, 1972, p. 259, fig. 22; Mazarov, I., “Opit za rekonstrukcija na hipomita v devna Trakija,” Izkustvo 35 III, 1985, pp. 20–30, as cited in Walter, 1989a, p. 664 and fig. 2; idem, 2003, fig. 11; Fursiyya, 1996, vol. 2, pp. 221–2. 6 Rostovtzeff, ed., 1939, pp. 112–6, pls. XIV, XV; Cumont, 1937, pp. 63–71. Cf. idem, 1939, p. 74. On the relationship between the Iranian and the Roman Mithra, see Zaehner, 1961, pp. 99–104.