I only have a moment to look this up, I have to go, but I found about 5% Scorpius with curled tail (I have to check that number later when I have more time), but they are mostly dragons, not lizards. Dragons are frequently depicted with curled tails. What is different about the VMS is that it is a lizardy shape, not a more obvious dragon, and the direction of the tail. Not unique, but definitely uncommon.
There are many images of "fire lizards" in medieval manuscripts (not associated with the lizard-Scorpio) and the way they are drawn is all over the map, but since many are drawn from above, it's difficult to know how they would have drawn them from the side.
Quite a number of the lizard-Scorpios have six legs, which might be an allusion to the tarasque/tarask and which might explain longer legs since the tarask is a mythical animal (which was drawn in many different ways). I don't know how much overlap there is between the lizard-Scorpios and the tarask-Scorpios in terms of how illustrators perceived them.
Many of the drawings are so far from expert that sorting out WHAT they were trying to draw from how they drew them is a real challenge.
I'm beginning to wonder if the strange animals in the VMS green pond are difficult to identify as specific animals because they represent "beasts". I've noticed in quite a few manuscripts that when they talk about "beasts" in the text they often drawn nonspecific animals next to it, not quite mythical, not quite natural.
There are many images of "fire lizards" in medieval manuscripts (not associated with the lizard-Scorpio) and the way they are drawn is all over the map, but since many are drawn from above, it's difficult to know how they would have drawn them from the side.
Quite a number of the lizard-Scorpios have six legs, which might be an allusion to the tarasque/tarask and which might explain longer legs since the tarask is a mythical animal (which was drawn in many different ways). I don't know how much overlap there is between the lizard-Scorpios and the tarask-Scorpios in terms of how illustrators perceived them.
Many of the drawings are so far from expert that sorting out WHAT they were trying to draw from how they drew them is a real challenge.
I'm beginning to wonder if the strange animals in the VMS green pond are difficult to identify as specific animals because they represent "beasts". I've noticed in quite a few manuscripts that when they talk about "beasts" in the text they often drawn nonspecific animals next to it, not quite mythical, not quite natural.