Skip to main content

history of - Where did the notion that Dragons could speak originate?


There are different sources in which dragons are able to speak and not speak.


Speaking examples:



  • Smaug in The Hobbit

  • Skyrim

  • DragonHeart



Non-speaking examples:



  • Game of Thrones/A Song of Ice and Fire

  • Beowulf poem


Where did this notion that a dragon could speak come about? Or is it more that it was always seen as speaking and the non-speaking dragons are "newer"?



Answer



TL;DR: The oldest mention of a talking dragon would be from Chinese mythology.




It's important to note that the modern concept of dragons is an amalgamation of two primary sources - the European "Classic" dragon myth, and the Chinese Dragon of Asian mythology. Both are tales of large, serpent-like creatures but that's about where the similarities end.


In classic European mythology, dating back to at least the 8th century, the dragon was seen as a large, hostile creature which did not speak or fly. These creatures were typically seen as the embodiment of evil, and may have had their origins in the Middle East (where both the Muslim Quran and the Christian Bible make mentions of evil manifesting as large serpents).


Going even further, however, we find that the Chinese dragon first appeared in Asian mythology some time between 5000-2000 BC. In contrast to the evil creatures found in Western culture, Eastern culture depicts dragons as benevolent and wise creatures who represent celestial power. Eastern dragons almost always talk, and in some traditional stories it was, in fact, dragons who first taught mankind to speak. Eastern dragons also flew, albeit without wings. As part of their celestial power, they "rode the winds".


Modern dragon depictions have, for the most part, kept the traditional two modes separate. The "classic" dragon is still depicted as a large, dinosaur like creature with wings. Over the centuries, however, the classic dragon has begun to take on aspects of its Eastern counterpart - intelligence, ancient power, and (sometimes) benevolence. Although much of this merger has been popularized by recent depictions, aspects of the Asian dragon can be seen in Western culture as far back as Roman battle standards from around 270 AD.


The Chinese dragon, on the other hand, has changed very little in over 5000 years. Numerous Yangshao clay figurines & statues from the Neolithic Period have been found which bear a remarkable resemblance to the modern Chinese dragon. Even in modern Asia, dragons are seen as wise, benevolent, ancient creatures who represent good luck & success. They are almost never seen as evil or hostile, however, unless provoked by extraordinary circumstances brought about by men.


So, to summarize, modern dragons like Smaug are about 80% classic European dragon (looks & intent) with maybe 20% Chinese dragon thrown in (speaks & possesses ancient knowledge).


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Was the "pure soul" of Harry's what had really hurt Voldemort?

In the Order of the Phoenix, Voldemort possesses Harry, and it hurts. Greatly. I think that Dumbledore explained that it was because Voldemort's rotten soul was incapable of assimilating Harry's pure soul, that Voldemort didn't understand the love and friendship etc that Harry has in his heart. But, I think it was a lie. Remember that in Deathly Hallows, while looking for information regarding Horcruxes, it is discovered that it is in fact possible to merge a soul fragment back, but that the process was extremely painful. Now then, if Voldemort tried to possess Harry, and Harry had a fragment of Voldemort's soul, I think that it could have been the true cause of Voldemort's pain: the fact of having his soul so close of another fragment. I think that Dumbledore knew that fact, but had to lie to Harry because it was inappropriate to let him know that he had one of Voldemort's soul fragments at the moment. Is that right? Or was it truly the pure soul of Harry's...
Post a Comment
Read more

languages - Do we ever see written English in the Star Wars films?

In Empire Strikes Back , we see a transcription of what R2's beeps and bloops mean, but it's not English (sorry for the low quality, it's from the 2004 DVDs): I'd assume it's what Basic looks like when written, but is there some point in the the Star Wars films we see written English instead? (This sort of spun off from a discussion in How do people understand astromech droids? .) Answer At one point there was English but it has been phased out in subsequent versions of the films. Chris Gould at DVD Active did a comparison of all versions of each of the Star Wars films, and in his comparison of Episode 4 , there are a couple of screenshots showing how the power gauge for the Death Star tractor beam was changed. I imagine there are probably more to be found in his other comparisons but I haven't got around to reading those yet.
Post a Comment
Read more

star wars - What "exactly" happens when someone turns to the Dark Side?

When I saw the original Star Wars saga as a kid, the concept of the Dark Side imprinted in me was quite simple. You did a bad thing, so you're a bad person so you go to the Dark Side and keep doing bad things. Now, obviously this doesn't hold true in reality. In my mind it is perfectly reasonable for Luke to kill the Emperor and Vader and then just flee the Death Star and rejoin the Alliance. After all they are at war, those are enemy officers that have captured him and are taunting him by threatening with death of all loved ones and the whole operation was intended to kill the Emperor anyway. The same would hold true for Anakin. He could have killed Mace Windu to save the Chancellor and Padme but that doesn't mean he's going to then go mad and kill all Jedis including children. It doesn't add up from a merely psychological point of view. He had a set of objectives and that made him want to keep the Chancellor alive (quite valid by the way, Mace Windu is quite clums...
Post a Comment
Read more

star trek - Warning regarding forward saucer section in Nemesis?

In Star Trek: Nemesis , just before the Enterprise rams into the Scimitar, Picard sends a text message from his captain's chair arm pad to Troi — who is manning the helm in lieu of the crewman who was just blown out through what was once the view screen — indicating that she should put full impulse on standby. (Literally, if you watch the scene closely, Troi's console prefaces the order with "TXT MSG" !) My question is: Did Picard also somehow warn crew members in the forward saucer section about what was about to happen? The ramming of the Scimitar was a heat of the moment decision. Considering that he also resorted to calling the auto-destruct sequence shortly after (which ended up being offline), he probably was of the mindset that any losses would be acceptable in order to hault Shinzon's march to Earth. Still, I'm curious. Answer The original script indicates that he called for the crew to " brace for impact ". Whether that call (or the comma...
Post a Comment
Read more