Legend of the Diamond Valley ii 



the Iskander-nameh of the Persian poet Nizaml (1141-1203); 1 here we 

 likewise meet the snakes, and it is now clear that Aristotle's lapidariutn 

 was the source of Nizaml's episode. 2 It is well known that in the Arabic 

 stories of Sindbad the Sailor, Sindbad, deposited by the Rokh in the 

 Diamond Valley, observes how merchants throw down flesh, which is 

 carried upward by vultures (also Nizaml speaks of vultures) together 

 with the diamonds sticking to it; enveloped by this flesh, he is lifted 

 in the same manner. 3 The gradual growth of the legend from the 

 simple form in which Epiphanius had clothed it is interesting to follow. 

 In the celebrated Arabic "Book of the Wonders of India," 4 written 

 about a.d. 960, our legend is told by a traveller who had penetrated into 

 the countries of India, and who localized it in Kashmir. He introduces 

 a new element, — a fire constantly burning in the valley day and night, 



1 J. Ruska, Steinbuch des Aristoteles, p. 14. 



1 Qazwlnl (1203-83) has the same story somewhat more amplified (J. Ruska, 

 Steinbuch aus der Kosmographie des al-Qazwlnl, p. 35); but it is interesting that he 

 communicates two versions of it, — one being a close adaptation of Aristotle's 

 account, the other staged on Serendlb (Ceylon) [where diamonds are not found] and 

 not connected with the name of Alexander. It is obvious that the Arabic polyhistor, 

 in his notice of the diamond, is reproducing two different sources, — the first being 

 introduced by the words "Aristotle says;" the second, by the words "Another 

 says." It is clear also that in this anonymous version the snakes are a purely inci- 

 dental accessory which was lacking in the original text. "The mines are located in 

 the mountains of Serendlb, in a valley of great depth, in which there are deadly 

 snakes." The snakes, however, are put out of commission in the capture of the 

 diamonds, which is due to the action of the vultures; and in order to justify the in- 

 troduction of the reptiles, it is added at the end that large stones have to remain in 

 the valley, as it cannot be reached for fear of the snakes. This observation is not 

 without value for tracing the origin and growth of the legend. It shows that the 

 feature of the snakes, however tempting this suggestion of its Indian origin may be 

 to a superficial judgment, was not conceived in India, but in the Arabic-Persian 

 sphere of the Alexander legends, with the evident object of aggrandizing the exploits 

 of the conqueror. Qazwlnl's duplicity of versions is mirrored by Marco Polo 

 (ed. of Yule and Cordier, Vol. II, pp. 360-361), who likewise offers two variants, — 

 one with serpents, and another without them. The dependence of Qazwlnl's story 

 on that in Aristotle's lapidariutn has already been recognized by E. Rohde (Der 

 griechische Roman, p. 193, note, 3d ed., Leipzig, 1914). Ruska is right in his con- 

 clusion that the traditions concerning stones are relatively independent, and par- 

 ticularly so from the Alexander cycle; many a story in its origin had no connection with 

 Alexander, but was subsequently associated with him in the same manner as King 

 Solomon became the centre of numerous legendary fabrics. This follows in particu- 

 lar from the thorough investigation of A. Ausfeld (Der griechische Alexanderroman), 

 who devoted a lifetime of study to the Greek romance of Alexander, and in whose 

 purified text, representing the oldest accessible version, these mineralogical fables 

 do not appear. 



* Compare also Benjamin of Tudela, p. 82 (ed. of Grunhut and Adler, 

 Jerusalem, 1903). 



4 P. A. van der Lith and L. M. Devic, Livre des merveilles de l'lnde, p. 128 

 (Leiden, 1883-86); or L. M. Devic, Les merveilles de l'lnde, p. 109 (Paris, 1878). 



