Something to think about...

[Nook]

I'm currently watching the History Channel.  They are investigating why different civilizations came up with the same mythical dragon.  How did they, being so far apart and different in ways, come up with the same creature?

Let's put myth to the test:

Sea serpants of old sailors tales-now known as the Oar Fish and the Giant Squid.
Troy was once a legend, till they found it.
Once, the known universe revolved around the earth, now....

The myths of old have a basis in fact.  Ancient texts talk of Camalot and Merlin (though 'Merlin' is not nearly how it was spelled.)  Different texts from around the world describe the city of Atlantis, though it is known by different names.

These things are dismissed as legend and myth because of lack of proof...nevermind the first two examples I gave once fell in this same catagory and the last example was simpley proved wrong.

I'm not saying to believe everything you hear or read, just to remember that somewhere at sometime, this legend was based off something that was fact....think about it.

[SuperMunch]

Been there, done that, about King Arthur at least, look for "The Quest for King Arthur" on the History Channel, came out when the latest Arthur movie came out.

[crazedgoblin]

*X Files music*

[Talan Va'lash]

What would you imagine a dead, half-rotted whale corpse washed up on the beach looks like?

Say it was a killer whale, its jawbone exposed showing rows of teeth set in a massive jaw. It would look a lot like an asian dragon. Asian dragons also supposedly lived in a wondrous kingdom under the ocean.

[LordCove]

Hell, the first explorers to reach Africa and India....what would they have made of some of the Animals. Long necked Giraffee - Ah....a bloody Hydra.
And of course....when some poor sod goes down to the river to fill his canteen, and is suddenly snapped and dragged underwater by Alligators. No wonder the old maps stated "here be Dragons"

[darkstorme]

Nook - 9/1/2006  10:41 PM
Sea serpents of old sailors tales-now known as the Oar Fish and the Giant Squid.

Dubious logic at best: while the Giant (or Colossal, the larger species) Squid would certainly fit the concept of the Kraken, neither was as large as the ship-consuming Krakens of myth.  The Oar Fish, due to its cartilagenous bone structure and pliable flesh, could certainly have been mistaken for a giant snake - though a harmless one.  So really, tales of sea serpents were the same as those of mermaids - fish stories based on creatures glimpsed while cabin fever raged.  So something similar exists, but no monsters of the deep who consume ships.

Troy was once a legend, till they found it. (emphasis mine)

Bear in mind the difference between legends and myths.

Once, the known universe revolved around the earth, now....

This one makes no contribution to your point at all.  By including this among your arguments, you may as well be saying, "People once believed in dragons, but now we know that there's no basis in fact for them whatsoever."  Broadly, I suppose you could still be talking about observational science (people saw the sun come up and go down and drew their conclusions from that) but it does not follow logically from your previous statements.

The myths of old have a basis in fact.  

"Prometheus was the son of Iapetus who was one of the Titans. He tricked the gods into eating bare bones instead of good meat. He stole the sacred fire from Zeus and the gods."

Basis in fact, if you will?  Granted, Creation Myths are not uncommon - everyone likes to have a "where did we come from?" story, but while (again) legends often have a basis in fact, myths are usually creative fiction, either to entertain or explain.  (Homer: "Hmmm.. I need to punch up Odyseus' journey a smidge.  I know!  I'll make him fight a giant one-eyed monster, and confront a sorceress who turns men into pigs!")  Prevalance of myth themes can simply come from different cultures borrowing (it's not under patent, so stealing isn't the right word. ) from one another.  Take the parallels between Pandora's box of Greek and Roman mythology, and the Tree of Knowledge.  "Here's a box, don't open it!"  "Here's some fruit that grants knowledge, don't eat it!"  A testament to the curiosity inherent to human nature - it's easily identifiable, and totally believable that the individuals involved behaved the way they did, once you get past the gods aspect.  A good dragon story could travel similarly cross-cultures.  When was the earliest reference?

Ancient texts talk of Camelot and Merlin (though 'Merlin' is not nearly how it was spelled.)  

It's misleading to talk of Camelot and Merlin in the same breath, as the two were never near each other.  Arthur, if he existed at all, was thought to have lived around 350 AD, while Myrddin, a Welsh bard who was mentionned in the same texts as Arthur, was present at a battle in 575 AD.  The first person to fabricate a link between the two figures was a 12th-century poet named Robert de Boron (though his last name has numerous spellings), upon whose work subsequent Arthurian legend which includes Merlin was forged, and upon one of whose poems the later work Morte d'Arthur, by Sir Thomas Mallory, was based.  So, yes, it is likely that the character of Merlin existed (moreso than Arthur, actually!) but he went from being a prophetic madman and bard to a shape changing sorcerer courtsey of the pen of a French poet.

Different texts from around the world describe the city of Atlantis, though it is known by different names.

The only texts which overtly mention Atlantis are Plato's Timaeus and his Critias.  All other texts that make reference to Atlantis do so through Plato's works - it is therefore possible that he made the whole thing up as a metaphor.  A number of his claims therein are suspect - that it was bigger than Asia (excusable because Plato didn't know the extent of Asia - or rather, the word meant something different at the time), that Poseidon sired a child there and gave the island its unique geography (it was described as being a central island surrounded by rings of land.)  However, as Plato claimed it was a true tale, much more credence was given to it than it perhaps deserves.  However, if the island existed ~900 years before 600 BC (rather than 9000 as Plato says), there are a number of possibilities as to its origin.  Near Minoan Crete (in the Mediterranean), there was a city-state on an island which consequently suffered the second-worst volcanic eruption in recorded human history (known alternately as the Minoan Eruption and the Thera Eruption).  The eruption destroyed utterly the island it was on (an island surrounded by rings of land, which, according to records, might have been a major trading centre), and the resulting tsunamis wreaked havoc on nearby Crete.  The dust and ash thrown into the sky by the eruption would've cooled the area for years and caused crop failure - for the Minoans, this was an epic disaster, and certainly could have been the foundation for an oral history that resulted in Plato's writings.  A continent with futuristic technology?  Impossible - you can't simply "lose" a continent without trace.  But an island, a trading centre (hence higher technology than the surrounding countries), destroyed by a volcanic eruption?  This could easily have been exaggerated into the tales of Atlantis.

I'm not saying to believe everything you hear or read, just to remember that somewhere at sometime, this legend was based off something that was fact....think about it.

Again, I take issue with your use of the word "legend".  Dragon tales, of whatever culture, are myth, rather than legend.  In my previous statements, we've seen cultural drift, exaggeration (think of oral history as a multi-generational game of "telephone"), and plain fabrication.  Occidental dragons bear little resemblance to Oriental dragons (indeed, it took a Dutch missionary to draw the initial parallel that let them wind up with the same name.)  The first romantic/germanic reference to anything like a dragon in literature would be Grendel in Beowulf, who would be better described as a troll than a dragon, and in fact, was likely the basis for both in folk literature.  Grendel was described as a "child of Cain", in reference to the biblical myth that all monsters were the progeny of the cast-out son.  The later tale of St. George and the Dragon (which gave us the dragon as it exists in literature today, all scaly and fire-breathing, as well as the concept of a dragonslayer) is judged, historically, to be a metaphor for any of a dozen things - most notably, the conquest of Christianity over a pagan religion - human sacrifice to the "dragon" ended by the virtuous knight, St. George.  Ironically, the parallels that can be drawn between that fight and Zeus' battle with one of the Titans are significant, so it may have been just another of the myths that the Christians adapted to better fit their new mythology.

So, while most legends are based in fact - and who knows, some pre-written-history humans may have stumbled across a few surviving Plesiosauri which could have given rise not only to the concept of dragons, but that of the Loch Ness Monster as well - most myths are based on half-truths, misrememberings, and total fabrication.  Dragons are a good story.. sadly, this counts against them, when one seeks the truth in the tale.

Edit:  Took too long writing this, and got beaten to the punch.  The point is well-raised that one needn't have an example of an extinct species to fabricate the myth of dragons - crocodiles do just as well - or vanishing ships.

[Nook]

Good catch, SuperMunch.  That's where I frist learned of it as well.  

I don't doubt that there are creatures out there that were called dragons but were something else.  If it were the 1200's and I unearthed a t-rex skull, well, that's a dead dragon.  I mean, we used to believe in tree fairies; what would probably have just been a woodland tribe...or pimies.

However, it's kinda difficult to explain all the different civilizations, some from the same time periods, some from different, both coastal bound and land locked, that they would all come up with a generalized dragon figure.  Where most of the dragons have different bodies, just about all have the same head type.

While I won't put one real to myth legend here, it may quash a young generations dreams...I will put the name however, and most of us will know what I'm talking about (St. Nick).  He's real, end of story.

Everything has a basis in the RL.  Weather or not they were what we believed them to be, well, heaven only knows.

Darkstorme, you make many good points, ones I will argue/discuss later...family day and all.

[Chongo]

Talan Va'lash - 9/2/2006  3:49 AM

What would you imagine a dead, half-rotted whale corpse washed up on the beach looks like?

Say it was a killer whale, its jawbone exposed showing rows of teeth set in a massive jaw. It would look a lot like an asian dragon. Asian dragons also supposedly lived in a wondrous kingdom under the ocean.

Asians in the Himalayan and Krakoram region believed that the glaciers, always building or receding thus changing shape and seemingly sliding down the mountain, were sleeping dragons. And with the significant noise (creaking, cracking, and groaning) that a good large glacier creates, I can see why.  You'll notice in a lot of regional artwork that dragons have a long winding body with a very broken up snout like the typical ablation area.

Though these ideas were probably formed after rather then before the myth of dragons began... thus my contribution here is really a sidestep.  Sorry.

[Stephen_Zuckerman]

Wow. Darkstorme for the win. As usual, he has all the dragonlore under his belt that I have under mine, plus a good bit. *Applauds.*

I never thought about that whale bit, though... Interesting point.

[NEXUS7]

I worked on a TV show called Dragons whichs was the kind of same thing, I think in the US it was called some eale

[Nook]

Darkstorme:
First, I know the difference between myths and legends, however, the majority allow them to fall under the same heading (fantasy).  That's where I was going with that.

Second, Thanks for the refference about Arthur and Myrddin (Merlin).  I was just using it as a point, and as you have shown, niether existed (if at all) during the same time period.  If the texts are taken as fact, then they did exist, as my point, but not anywhere near the time of one another.

As far as Atlantis, don't forget Hyrogliphics (probably not spelled right) that show the ringed city.  Though the name was not Atlantis, it is still described as the same city.  Atlantis is a really touchy story though; everyone thinks it existed in different places, and while there are examples of ocean bound volcanos erupting there way to utter destruction, no one is sure if there was a city on one.  Funny though, if Atlantis was on a volcano that blew itself to bits, how would one find any evidence that it existed other than stories.

While I do agree with your points, this post may have started out with me talking of dragons, it was meant for people to think not only of them though.  Somerwhere out there, lost in time, are facts that started these stories.  I say that it's unfair to dismiss them as completely untrue...not when they span through different cultures, continents, etc.

Too much is out there that we will simply never know.  I say it's good to keep an open mind about it.

As a side note...Loch Ness is a good story, and as I believe, just a story...that doesn't mean I'm right, just that I don't understand how it could have made it this long without being seen (by news crews, scientists, governments, and those nasty alien hunters who would probably disect it as soon as they swam up next to it).

NEXUS7...You worked on that?  Is it the one where they came up with how it was able to fly and breathe fire?  SWEET!!  
Just for the record, had dragons ever truely existed, I do not believe they breathed fire nor flew.

[darkstorme]

Nook - 9/2/2006  3:38 PM
...the majority allow them to fall under the same heading (fantasy).

Except that's not where I was going.  Legends are often based on fact, and distorted by oral tradition - stories like the fall of Troy, for example.  Myths, in contrast, are generally created as a) a good story, or b) an explanation for something the progenitor culture cannot explain with what they know.  Creation myths, as I said, are a great example of this.

If the texts are taken as fact, then they did exist, as my point, but not anywhere near the time of one another.

Well, Myrddin (or someone using his name) contributed poetry to the Welsh Triad, so it's fairly likely that the person on whom the eventual character of Merlin was based once lived.  Arthur has often been thought a metaphor for the concept of kingship, so whether or not he existed is more nebulous.

As far as Atlantis, don't forget Hyrogliphics (probably not spelled right) that show the ringed city.  ...  Funny though, if Atlantis was on a volcano that blew itself to bits, how would one find any evidence that it existed other than stories.

As a simple answer: from their trading partners, naturally!  The island that was destroyed was slightly north of Nea Kameni, in the Agean.  Satellite imaging shows the remains of the caldera-formed rings (a ringed island), and Egyption, Minoan, Greek, and Chinese records all show a volcanic winter (and the tsunamis which destroyed a large portion of Minoan culture.)  However, there are also records of trade with the city/state on the island (while they weren't writing epic histories in 1500 BC, they made a point of recording financial dealings.  Clearly, they had their priorities straight.)  The Egyptians were particularly fastidious in this regard.  Given that Plato wrote of it, the theory that Atlantis was actually a Mayan city can probably be discounted - lots and LOTS of research was done to determine if anyone travelled across the Pacfic or Atlantic prior to the Norse, and other than possibly the Polynesians, we have nothing.  Even 9000 years isn't long enough for a land bridge to have vanished without a trace.  As for the hieroglypics - source, please?  I searched online extensively, and found nothing.

Somerwhere out there, lost in time, are facts that started these stories.  I say that it's unfair to dismiss them as completely untrue...not when they span through different cultures, continents, etc.

Not to be too harsh on this particular comment, but what do you suppose bards were?  They weren't spell-wielding theives, 'tis true, but they did carry stories from population centre to population centre.  Even before the trouvères, troubadors, and jongleurs took up instruments in Europe, there were people who made their living telling stories.  A really good story could make it around the known world.  Now, each culture would customize it as they felt appropriate, but it would still travel as fast as news does, even pre-information-age.  So culture-spanning information doesn't imply validity, nor does it imply the converse.  I'm simply saying it isn't a point in your favour.  In addition, for dragons in particular, serpents occupy a place of unusual prestige in the human psyche.  It has been suggested by anthropologists that when and where Homo Sapiens Sapiens was learning to walk upright and poke things with sticks, snakes were prevalent and a primary threat, and it got ingrained into our collective psyche.  I can believe that.  Snakes are cool, but their eyes are creepy on a viscereal level.

Too much is out there that we will simply never know.  I say it's good to keep an open mind about it.

This strikes me as a defeatist attitude.  Given enough energy and time, there is, quite literally, nothing that cannot be known (except for the velocity and position of a subatomic particle, simultaneously, but they're working on it, scarily enough.)  Keeping an open mind is one thing - speculating on long-shot or "new age" (quotes delivered with heavy cynicism) theories is quite another.

As a side note...Loch Ness is a good story, and as I believe, just a story...that doesn't mean I'm right, just that I don't understand how it could have made it this long without being seen (by news crews, scientists, governments, and those nasty alien hunters who would probably disect it as soon as they swam up next to it).

Probably the case.  In any event, if "Nessie" existed when she was first reported, she could easily be long dead now.  There are extensive underwater caverns in Loch Ness which lead to other lakes throughout Scotland and the British isles, so a complete underwater survey could never be completed... but it makes for good tourist trade, regardless.

[Nook]

As for the hieroglypics - source, please? I searched online extensively, and found nothing.

I'll be honest here, I watched something...I want to say on the History channel, that was talking about Atlantis.  They only showed one set of hieroglyphics that showed a ringed city.  This only had a 3 minutes spot on the whole show; why so little time, I could only guess.

I love debates like this.

[Stephen_Zuckerman]

Nook - 9/3/2006  8:13 AM

I love debates like this.

I love watching DS work. My paltry points in Knowledge [Errata] are nothing next to his.

Here's a question, though. How powerful would an eruption have to be to cause a volcanic winter throughout the Eastern hemisphere, and parts of the Western? And... If it were that powerful, why didn't it take out, for example, Mycenia?

[darkstorme]

Nook - 9/3/2006  8:13 AM
I'll be honest here, I watched something...I want to say on the History channel, that was talking about Atlantis.  They only showed one set of hieroglyphics that showed a ringed city.  This only had a 3 minutes spot on the whole show; why so little time, I could only guess.

I suspect that it might have been the hieroglyphic in the mayan temples which resembled a ringed city - the History channel would lend little credence to it in that case.  However, if not, a source would still be useful - if the History channel offers online transcripts, say.  (There are a plethora of sites out there that offer user-submitted information, which is generally unsourced and poorly spelled.  Wikipedia is acceptable, if the article is sourced, of course. )

How powerful would an eruption have to be to cause a volcanic winter throughout the Eastern hemisphere, and parts of the Western? And... If it were that powerful, why didn't it take out, for example, Mycenia?

Mycenia?  Sorry, where?  Regardless, the complete destruction of a volcanic island is more than sufficient to cause a planetary volcanic winter.  Take Krakatoa for instance.  That occurred in (relatively) recent history, and so was well-recorded, even in the days leading up to the eruption.  The force involved is/was equivalent to a 200 MT bomb - bigger by a factor of four than the biggest thermonuclear weapon ever detonated on Earth.  The island destroyed by the Thera eruption was larger still, and Krakatoa threw 25 cubic kilometres of rock and dust into the air.  Fossil records show that the nearest surviving island (Nea Kameni) had been covered with up to 60 meters of ash.  (So, really, "taken out" is a relative term.)  But it takes a fair amount of power to utterly destroy a landmass.  Taking out the island is pretty impressive for a volcano, you have to admit.  Add to that the fact that the eruption is likely the reason that the Minoan civilization died out in favour of later arrivals to the Agean region, and you can stop making fun of it.  It did its best, darn it!  

[Stephen_Zuckerman]

Mycenia, ancient Greece. Back before the city-states were unified, I believe.

But really. That kind of explosion... Wow. Just wow.