@@I_want_to_have_a_good_time I remember there being a division between four-limbed dragons and six-limbed dragons, and one notable detail was that the “Wyrm” was a six-limbed burrowing dragon with atrophied limbs and lacking eyes.
"I know my feeling on this are weirdly strong" Listen man, you run a channel talking mostly about world building and speculative evolution. It would be weirder if you didnt have strong opinions on the classification of mythical creatures.
@@ScionStorm1 Hippos body crocs. I'd say Ammit is all but one nightmare at once. Although eating souls is a step up from fire-breath so maybe it was an exchange program.
@@powerofanime1 Ammit had "forequarters of a lion, the hindquarters of a hippopotamus, and the head of a crocodile-the three largest "man-eating" animals known to ancient Egyptians." If a spirit was judged unworthy in the afterlife their 'heart' would be fed to this demoness beast and the spirit would languish in -hell- unrest forever in what was referred to as a 'second death'.
My opinion was always that Wyverns are a type/subspecies of dragon. Saying "that's not a dragon, that's a wyvern" is about as useful as saying "that's not a dog, that's a border collie!"
I always thought of wyverns still being in the clade of Draconia, just like how hexapod dragons and drakes and wyrms are also in the clade. so, at least in my book, the term "dragon" is a widespread term that can describe any order of draconomorph that is in the Draconia clade. so a wyvern would just be an order in Draconia which haves features that distinguish it as a wyvern, such as a lightweight body frame, a medium-length neck, large wings with membrane reaching to the legs like some pterosaurs, and don't have gas sacks to fly, like hexapodal dragons or four-limbed "true dragons"
They both come from different areas of the world. Wyverns originated in England and France, and dragons (at least the ones we commonly refer to as dragons) find origins in Wales. Then there’s also wyrms which come from Nordic and English myths
Wyverns are different, their hands are connected to their wings. It's like how a tiger and Mountain lion are different, they are from the same family but still seperate speciss
I actually pondered on how dragons would be able to breath fire and I brought the topic up to my mom. I had the idea that they had to have an organ in their body that would produce a highly reactive gas, or liquid, and that when it was forced out it would either ignite from the oxygen or something else would ignite it internally, which is where my mom got the idea that Dragons would have a crop like chickens have, and throughout a dragons lifetime they would eat rocks of Flint that would go into that crop. When the dragon needed to breath fire that crop would constrict extremely fast while the gas/liquid came up, igniting and sending out flames. The Dragons internals being protecting by a thick, flame retardant, mucus.
Me and everyone in my family all assumed they'd have the chemical reaction thing going on too. I think it's a common assumption. The flint one sounds like it needs actual studies to figure out if it's possible but it's also a cool idea
My idea is that there is a gland somewhere in their throat filled with highly reactive, boiling hot liquid chemicals that turn into a gas and ignite when exposed to oxygen
I remember watching a "documentary" on dragons as a kid, it was like a project trying to explain a world where dragons existed and went extinct, telling the story of a paleontologist obsessed with dragons. It was so good, and my little kid mind was blown away so hard
Until a few years ago, I didn't even know about the dragon - wyvern debate. I've always thought (and still do): all wyverns are dragons, not every dragon is a wyvern, just like every duck is a bird, but not every bird is a duck. Dragon is just a broad term for many different creatures. The one with four legs and two wings are european dragons (just my way of thinking, not saying it as a fact...not sure what most people's opinion is).
As I understand it, most of the debate regarding wyverns comes from the study of heraldry, where the distinction has a lot more importance as it was related to symbolism and involved in distinguishing people from one another by their coat-of-arms. Beyond that, it's just fantasy nerds being pedantic - I don't particularly care about the differences as it's all ultimately fiction, but to each their own.
It’s also important to remember that dragons are, ultimately, works of fantasy. So many cultures have come up their own draconic beasts, and the only feature they all share in common is that they’re reptilian in some way. You could make up any fantasy beast and call it a dragon if you wanted it to be.
John 3:16 King James Version 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. Accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior and you will be saved. John 3:16 (share the good news of the gospel around the world!) Have a wonderful day/night, may the LORD bless you all, and farewell!,.,,,,,, Galatians 3:26 King James Version 26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. .....
European Dragon is honestly the best description of the most recognizable form of a "dragon". Many myths & legends in & around Europe involving dragons have them with four legs & a pair of wings that more often than not also breath fire. So, classifying them as the "European Dragon" seems fitting.
Have you ever heard of the 1982 animated movie “A Flight of Dragons.” They answer a lot of Dragon biology questions like the fact that Dragons can fly because they are essentially organic hydrogen balloons and they breathe fire to vent it off.
They had like... 'pockets' in their body that expanded. It was a neat concept for the film and book. If you haven't read the book, I recommend it! I found it at my library once and read all through it. There's a lot of silly ideas in it though, the pocket idea is just one of many bizarre ideas he had for dragons.
I’m surprised there isn’t more dragons with names taken directly from mythical dragons. I could absolutely see Orochi, Gorynych, Lindwurms, Basilisks, Serrushes, Leviathan, Behemoth, Ziz, Python, Ladon, and even to an extent Typhon fitting in well to this family tree.
Of Behemoth, Leviathan, and Ziz, only Leviathan comes close to being a dragon. Behemoth is mostly a hippo/bovine, and the Ziz is a bird. For Python: Python is actually a snake.
I like how the "true dragons" didn't end up looking like the "stereotypical" dragon. Instead they had a very Quetzalcoatl appearance, which makes it believable. As cool as a dragon looking like Draco from Dragonheart would be, I could see a pterosaur-like dragon being more realistic.
@@catpoke9557 Except we have no bats this size, bats can't take of from the ground, and walking is not ideal for them, because their legs are not adapted for walking at all and having such long forelimbs extended to the sides would be even with other legs very tedious for walking. And bats are small, so they have not so much weight to lift for walking! Better directly under your body like in this video or you have an only cave/cliff/tree dragon that is more adapted to climbing and is small.
Monster Hunter also has some dragons that don't look like your stereotypical dragon, even though they do feature some few commonly stereotyped dragons.
One very important part included in this is that if you look at all tetrapods, every one has just 4 limbs, and all tetrapods that fly using wings have just 2 legs.
Only the most uncultured folks say: *it doesn't matter they are the same. Whats the difference. They are both Dragons* Me: i can tell you are eather clearly blind to see no difference or lack the brain to comprehend the body morph names.
Well first of, you're probably the best speculative zoology channel I've ever found, you all do it so well, I can't get enough of you all. The second thing I wanted to say is that I can guaranty you that there are many more speculative zoology projects on Deviantart, so it's a great place to go digging for more of those kinds of projects. I'm not telling you what to do or anything like that, I'm just trying to help this amazing channel in any way I can.
I remember when a science magazine I used to read as a kid once published an article about dragons as an April Fool's joke. They weren't so blatant as to claim that large fire-breathing reptiles like the ones from the legends really exist, but presented them as an order of winged reptiles inhabiting the jungles. Being a kid, I believed them.
Something similar to this with birds would be cool. Phoenix, Thunderbirds, Roc, Basilisk, Caladrius, Peng, Garuda, Quetzalcoatl, Pegasus, Hippogriff, Mothman, Sirens, Erinyes, Angels, and Valkyrie would all be interesting biographical subjects.
Actually, VikasRao, the creator of draconology is working on clades that allow those mythical creatures to exist. He has, for example, created his own clade of "Pegasuses" which is a very different take from horses but looks pretty awesome.
Fun Fact: VikasRao is actually working on other Mythical Creatures in the future, besides Dragons and Griffons. Like Manticores, Sphinxes and many others. Which I honestly look forward to seeing.
@@PeiceofNick He'd probably not make Centaurs the way they're often depicted in the Myths. I think Vikas will do Minotaurs in a similar way as ArchAngel23 did, I recommend checking out ArchAngel's Deviantart Contents if you want to know what I mean. Either that, or they'll just be Humans with boney soles and Ox-like horns protruding from their heads. As for Werewolves, I think it'll have something to do with a disease that reacts to certain Lunar Phases. He even confirmed doing Giants and Dwarves. Too bad he won't be doing Elves, though.
i'd have thought griffons would have fallen under Chimera this would have included griffons, hippogryph, manticore, and sphinx. then again this falls under the more more modern term for chimera which is denoted as any mythical creature that is a mix of any number of animal. (for example a hippogryph would technically be lion, eagle, and horse as it is the offspring of a mare and a griffon. and according to WoW it would have included deer in there somewhere as well)
@@ryonhatcher4561 oh i understand that, i'm just considering the idea that a griffon is more akin to chimera in the sense that the lore of a griffon is the offspring of a lion and eagle. as of late chimera has come to mean an amalgamation of two or more real world animals into one being. that is not to say i disagree with how he portrayed his version of griffon.
0:21 THAT BOOK! It's what made me obsessed with worldbuilding, had me discover this whole way to approach a fantasy world and while it hasn't turned me into a biologist to learn how I could better implement some sci- into the -fi, worldbuilding and interpreting more pseudoscientifically other fantasy worlds has entertained me countless hours.
The fact that this person has created an entire taxonomical tree of dragons that goes really in depth is amazing to me. The detail and individual concepts of each dragon are amazing and I love it. My only problem with this is how the dragons have these weird, janky proportions. Their legs look way to small to hold them up, they seem to stand way too upright, and their wings dont seem to have the surface area to lift such a massive creature. Overall, though, amazing concept.
I really appreciate the thought that went into their dragon phylogeny. It seems they they had a background in biology and know the rules of nature that would govern the evolution of such animals. The big one that I noticed was that they didn't just randomly add or subtract limbs and they adhered to keeping core anatomy consistent between the groups. I always find it frustrating when I see speculative zoology dreamt up by people that don't understand how anatomy works or how animals radiate and diversify through evolution, but try as I might, I actually can't fault this. They thought it out, they knew the rules and they worked within it to create a quite believable draconian family tree. I also greatly appreciate the fact that they branched the group off as a parareptillian offshoot rather than trying to shoe-horn dragons into true 'Reptiles' and thus either break the Reptilian lineage or severely box in the features of what dragons would have. On a divergent topic but still draconian in nature, I always imagined the 'flame gland' of dragons as being an evolution of a venom gland given that venom glands already provide the framework for such anatomy and provide enormous diversity in chemical cocktails produced. The fangs as a delivery system also keeps flames well away from soft tissues. If the animal was already evolved into a venom spitter (like some snakes employ), that's half the system in place with only the final jump needed in the composition before it becomes flammable. The incendiary venom would likely best work as an exothermic reaction created by mixing two components (such as in bombardier beetles) where the compounds are harmless by themselves but once mixed at the point of ejection and passing through oxygenated air, would catalyse into combustion.
I disagree on the pterosaur = wyvern part. Pterosaurs are not closely related at all to snakes, which dragons and wyverns are based on, and they don't look anything like them either. The only thing they have in common are wings made of membranes, and in that regard you could just as well call bats wyverns.
@@clara_corvus I agree. This would be an example of convergent evolution, rather than actually being related. It is an interesting concept though. If the medieval society that discovered them didn't know any better, maybe they would think that way.
I wish the artist had done some research about African dragons (past the commonly over-exposed cultures of north-Africa). They do exist in myth. They are always overlooked. Like Aido-Hwedo of the Fon people, a dragon the size of the universe/creation. And the greatly overlooked powerful Nubians of north-Africa, they worshipped a dragon like form of Apedemak (one of their lion headed gods). Africa is full of dragons that typically range from being dinosaur largely sauropod like in appearance, to being serpent like.
Wow, interesting. I never heard of African dragon. What was their general shape looks like? The East Asian and South East Asian dragon generally resembles giant snake or snake-like body.
@@RyujinNoKami Yeah. That is one thing I am curious about also. Could it be similar creature exists in the past, or it was origin part of a story frome somewhere that travelled around the world and people begin modified dragon according to their culture or views.
My favorite book! Edit: I've always perceived the Wyvern vs Dragon debate like how people compare Tortoises and Turtles. All Tortoises are turtles, but not all Turtles are tortoises. Likewise, all Wyverns are dragons, but not all Dragons are wyverns.
@@nuke2099 Aye, but that's where you can apply the "True Dragon" descriptor. Dragons can be the otherall group, but True Drsgons are what would be commonly called Dragons.
The dragon vs wyvern debate comes from English heraldry and was made popular by D&D. Heraldry outside the UK doesn't make this distinction. A heraldic lion is only facing the side while the heraldic leopard is often designed the exact same but facing the viewer. Also in heraldry a "lily" depicted as a flower and a "lily flower" the fleur de lys symbol are also separate, despite technically being different designs for the same thing. My point being heraldry is very arbitrary and only 1 countries heraldry makes this distinction. They are fictional creatures so if a piece of media wants to use English heraldry/D&D rules for wyverns/dragons that is fine, but it's stupid to impose that definition on every fictional story as if it's a hard rule everyone must follow. This is how I like to look at them: "Dragon" is used in ancient Greek to refer to any great serpent and "wyvern" comes from a Latin word "vipera" used for various venomous snakes and may mean "alive" and "bear" referring to many viper species giving birth to live young. If we use that as our bases "dragon" is the umbrella term and "wyvern" are a family of venomous dragons who may also give birth to live young. (regardless of limbs) But they are fictional and if the creator says they're dragons, they're dragons, if the creator says they're wyverns, they're wyverns, regardless of how many limbs or wings they have or if they breath fire, venom or whatever else or not.
I’d love this as a video game. Create a Skyrim-esque world except where dragons aren’t mythical creatures but wild animals that could have adequate intelligence and small levels of society (like a smart dolphin). I think the approach would be cool bc it could be a mechanism for keeping humans in a medieval age since dragons would prey on cities like wolves on sheep.
Until the invention of firearms results in a dramatic decline in dragon numbers, stopping only in the 21st century, the "Save the Dragon" movement takes off, culminating with U.S President George W. Bush adopting a pet dragon against the advice of his staff.
A game where you're a biologist studying fantasy creatures like the zoologists of today. No need for combat or survival, you're just sitting down and observing them in action.
I really hope the author goes back in and reworks the world, the fact they mentioned that the Tiamat sea serpent hunts giant squids, i immediately imagine this guy creating a biological version of krakens and their evolution. there's so many different fantasy animals that he could put into the world, to make it a living breathing eco-system containing only fantasy and mythological animals
I just love how Azhdarchid-like the biggest flying ones are, it really makes them feel more believable than the traditional mythological/fantasy depictions of dragons.
@@Littlekoji-df1cf Thank you very much, it's really nice to hear that! Yes, there will definitely be more. I concept out, draw, and edit everything myself so it just takes a little while to produce. Plus, life n' whatnot gets in the way. But rest assured I’m always working on ‘em.
honestly it's the opposite for me; as much as convergent evolution is a thing, it's almost uncanny how similar a parareptile is to a pterosaur in anatomy and physiology. then again there's dolphins and ichthyosaurs
I've always liked the idea that wyverns are more natural than magic, a cousin species, and less intelligent. As true dragons often depicted with near or even above human intelligence. Wyverns are apes-like to the dragons' human-like intelligence.
Same here. In most movies that feature wyverns, they are often shown as wild animals and/or the bad guys (Game of Thrones, Dragon Slayer, Smaug from The Hobbit, Reign of Fire). Four legged dragons are mostly shown as magical, intelligent creatures and/or the good guys (Dragon Heart, Eragon, How to train your dragon, Shrek etc). I guess wyverns look more intimidating, thats why they use them a lot for bad dragons.
Western dragons as a whole are represented as evil/animalistic due to the Christian association with Satan (Draco in Latin means Serpent, Serpent-Satan association). It was fairly recently that we started seeing more intelligent, wiser or even benign western dragons in media. (Glaurung being a cunning agent of evil, the dragons from the Inheritance Cycle having a complex morality system...) Wyverns are by all means dragons, most commonly in Italian and English folklore. Hell, some wyverns were portrayed as four-legged back in the Renaissance.
@@Karfunkelfuchs Game of Thrones does not feature wyverns, they are dragons that follow evolutionary biology. In fact, within the Game of Thrones universe, there are creatures called wyverns. They are similar to dragons, but smaller, less intelligent, more aggressive, and possess venom instead of fire-breathing abilities. The best way to tell the difference between a more proper wyvern and a four limbed dragon is that a wyvern will only walk on its hind legs, like a dinosaurs, while a four limbed dragon will walk on its legs and wings, like a bat or a pterosaur.
Y'know, I've been designing a Pokémon region called Le Mura, filled with "Lemurian" Pokémon, and totally forgot Lemurian was an actual word. It's based on Madagascar, so it's a spin on the word Lemur. Turns out the real one was named after Lemurs, too.
@@hakimdiwan5101 I'm aware. I did claim it to be a word, not a place. I only say "real" in the sense that it's used in fiction and by cults who don't realize it was made by a scientist trying to explain why fossils of a specific species of primate exists on both Madagascar and India
aw man this brings me back. I adored the Dragonology books as a kid. I still own them! I always tell people that dragons were my Barbie since I loved and collected them so much. Thanks for bringing back a part of what made my childhood!
I am so surprised and laughed at the same time when seeing this video but in a good way, I'm also very happy to see videos of dinosaurs, Kaijus and even Dragons because they are the best. Plus, I like this idea of Gryphon as sort of another subspecies of Dragons.
I freaking love this and Im especially glad to see that someone has managed to figure out how the do a cool looking scientifically accurate take on Griffins for once. This Dracology thing would make for a great docufiction miniseres on Netflix or something.
I still have my dragonology book and remember begging my mother for it. It was the coolest thing ever at the time and I still love looking through it. It’s just so magical:)
Casual Geographic making videos about these creatures in this reality: “Why this giant murder lizard with wings probably wants you dead.” “Why I don’t go swimming in the ocean and neither should you.” (Proceeds to be a video about the Jormungandr or the Tiamat)
Personally, I consider any serpentine creature that is powerful in some way a dragon. This definition actually includes mosasaurs, which I think is cool as hell.
If anything, most pterosaurs would be near considered as "Wyverns" if they were alive today, too. They're like the closest thing to a irl Dragon other than breathing fire or whatever as an ability.
Careful, he’s a hero. It’s thanks to individuals like yourself that take interest in smaller content creators early on that really help their drive sometimes. Can’t say that’s the case for CuriousArchives, might be. But that’s truly awesome, I had to look and see if you commented as well lol
This vid really reminds me of the art design in monster hunter. How real world biology could fit with dragons. The ecology, though fantastical at times, has been really well thought through. Take something like how tigrex and rathalos are both flying wyverns, but due to different ecological niches, they function completely different, or maybe how yian garuga convergently evolved to have traits to that of a rathian, while being a kut-ku descendent. Whatever applies in our world applies there too. Future video.......perhaps......?
@@HexaDecimus Yes but the majority of them have four legs and are with or without wings. Most are the typical western fantasy dragon. They also all have Elder Dragon blood.
@@nuke2099 @Nuke2099 Which is rad that they knew and understand that they're different. That I think that the game inspired from this book and classifications. The Bird Dragons reminds me of Qurupecos which are Bird Wyverns. Also, include the Manticores or Teostra and Lunastra dragons, which still classified as Dragons but different species. Don't forget the Eastern dragons and wryms like Lao shan lung or Shantien from Frontier. Also, that Velkhana is kinda of a Griffin species too.
The wyvern and dragon declaration is strongly tied to the fictional world where they are in. In dnd for example, the six liumbs = dragon, four limbs = wyvern rule is relieable. But in other worlds the rule to distinguish the two can be, for example, Dragon = human ore more then human intelligence. Wyvern = animalistic intelligence.
Generally I tend to assume in other people's work that a wyvern is a dragon with wings for arms, but in my own work I never have a distinction. Dragons range from bird like to lizard like to dromaeosaur like ETC when I draw them.
Ok now I always wanted to write a story with dragons (a lot like Wings of Fire by Tui T. Sutherland) and I’m definitely going to analyse the work of the artist way more than I should to get good biology in this story. Thank you for letting me discover this genius.
Funnily enough, there's a family of paraavian dinosaurs, the Scansoropterygians, that have batlike wings. They basically look like little feathered dragons. I like to imagine an alternate universe where dragons evolved from members of this group that survived through the end of the Mesozoic era.
You know, at first I expected these to be Hyrotrioskjan's dragons. You should do his lore next! really extensive, well thought-out spec-evo worldbuilding.
@Mullerornis They do though? I recall he mentioned that most dragons are covered in hair like filaments called dragonfuzz, which are convergent to bird feathers.
Finally SOMEONE thinking like a normal person about Wyverns and Dragons! Making the distinction in the powers instead of the count of legs makes SOO much more sense! I think making the distinction like that makes it much more interesting.
Here's an interesting fact about dragon legends: The earlier legends describe the dragons more along the lines of what dinosaurs looked like. The later legends attributed mythical powers to these creatures. Also, some old editions of some encyclopedias (I think one of the Encyclopedia Britannica editions of the 1800s) claims that dragons are "now rare". So it may be the case that the dragons are merely reptilian creatures that have only recently gone extinct. And their legends embellish the creatures a bit.
This is interesting. My personal concept of dragons is that they evolved from ancestors with 6 legs, so they have four legs plus a separate set of wings. They glide more than they flap, often climbing trees or rocks to jump out of, and using their flight to skim down and try to catch fish, one of their favorite foods. (They love climbing up, but are even more poorly designed to climb down trees than cats are.) Sadly I was unable to find any information on how sharp teeth effects speech sounds- some groups of humans have traditionally sharpened their teeth but no one cared about the phonetics, just how exotic it was. /facepalm
I'd actually think an elongated snout would effect speech more than sharp teeth. I'm very interested in how a dragon could talk and what it would sound like non-magically. They could probably make more sounds with their tongue, since it's longer inside a longer snout. But I imagine it's pretty much impossible in that construction for the skin (or, in most cases, scales) around their mouths to be malleable enough to make most of the sounds we can make with our lip and cheek movements, along with the fact that the longer snout creates much smaller cheeks, much farther back, barely cheeks at all sometimes. Altho, if their lips are quite malleable, they could once again probably produce more sounds, as there is more surface area to use in different ways. And what about the construction of their tongue? It needs to function similarly to a human's tongue, being a big muscle capable of fine movements, otherwise that would also limit its capabilities. Could they have similar speech if it was forked? What if it was basically just a snake tongue? Would that really produce more S sounds like we always associate with snakes? How in fact would sharp teeth effect speech? Needles, shark teeth, teeth like mammals where they have four larger sharp teeth - what kind of differences would there be? How would their voice sound coming out of such a long neck? How much would size of the dragon play a role in how deep or loud their voices are? Could a large dragon have a high pitched, soft voice? Surely a small one couldn't produce a particularly deep voice, right? It probably has more to do with the size of its vocal cords, but that is limited to body size, so smaller ones couldn't have large vocal cords. But is there a limit on how small a large dragon's cords could be? Oh and the airway thru the nose. I imagine that opening and closing this airway would have a significant effect on the sounds, based on how large the nasal passage is. You got me on a roll lol. Based on all of this, I think most of them would have a very unique and complex language, and thus accent. If all of the parts required for speech have a significant enough amount of malleability, they could produce a *lot* more sounds than a human can. On the other hand, if the parts are more restricted in movement, they might be able to make some unique sounds, but would be otherwise unable to perform a lot of the finer motor control, and might resort to more growls and other such noises - which, to be clear, would not make them automatically less intelligent with some kind of "savage" simple language. It would just be *very* different from any human language.
@@blankflank3488 Thank you very much, you gave me a lot of other elements to consider. I'd imagined a long, thin and flexible tongue. Not forked, and not quite as broad and thick proportionally as ours, but longer and tapering more at the tip. They'd mostly use it to eat small fruit as the non-retractable claws on their hands make certain things difficult to do. (In addition to not picking individual small fruits like currants easily, dragons would also be horrible at sewing or other needlework and at making or repairing books.) Sort of like giraffe tongues, but not exactly the same. I imagine they could make similar tongue sounds as we can, more or less. Flexible lips would be necessary as their home planet was largely desert, so protecting themselves from blowing sand and from unnecessary moisture loss would be important. But they'd also need to be able to draw those lips out of the way when catching fish, either down/up or back, or both. So vowel sounds would be possible, depending on their vocal cords, but only when they weren't fishing or fighting. The other main issue aside from their vocal cords is their teeth- their front teeth are pointy, slightly sharper, and more closely spaced than crocodile teeth, also slightly less conical and more triangular with the flat side facing inward. That would allow them to eat their preferred diet of fish, meat, fruit, and vegetables, but would also mean that dental frictatives and africtatives would be out. Their k and g sounds wouldn't be the same as ours, and the probably wouldn't have an L sound. But would also have more chirp-like and purring or crooning sounds, as well as screeching sounds. Not necessarily as part of words, but still important for their social interaction like parents and child interaction or interjections, and with many onomatopoeic words based on them. And some word sounds are based off of those, like growling "gr" sounds being part of words with bad connotations. It would be hard for them to imitate human speech, and vice versa. Thanks again, you've really helped. If you have any other ideas please let me know.
@@blankflank3488 i'm imagining lots of points of articulation, probably a wide variety of vowels and consonants. Probably less labials, but a lateral labial would be quite interesting (L but with the lips). Generally lots of laterals, they would be easier with a long mouth. Given serpentine similarities, lots more fricatives (hissing sounds, e.g. F, V, S, Z), and probably a lateral fricative like Welsh LL, but less approximants, trills, liquids, etc., and perhaps several series with sort of nasal obstruents, where perhaps something in the nose can block the airflow like in the mouth. Plus a few more different types of glottal sounds. However, there would be no open vowels (AH, AA, AW, OR), since their tongues probably would have less space to go down due to their narrow jaws. And likely any dental sounds (TH) which might exist would sound quite different due to sharp teeth having gaps between them, so would sound like people saying TH with a tooth having fallen out. And the glottal fricative (H) would sound more like a hiss, like how snakes do it. Of course, this all assumes that air can pass through the mouth as well as the nose - but they might actually have to speak through their nose instead of their mouth, since for many animals the mouth only connects to the oesophagus. And it assumes that dragons have a similar tongue to humans, which is all speculation.
This is pretty cool. Though, most of these just look like dinosaurs. I'm also confused as to why the author chose to Gryphons part of the dragon species when they are nothing like dragons at all... Maybe it's just the name.
Most-likely because Birds come from Dinosaurs, so it only makes "logical" sense that Gryphons would be basically, Birds if birds were evolved from Dragons, instead of Dinosaurs. Prob came from the fact that "terror birds" of the pre/early ice age existed, So a dragon species would in theory, at some point evolve into bird like animals, that later would become giant like the Terror birds, looking like Gryphons of lore. Much like how unicorns in real life were actual rhino relative fossils that created the legend of horned horses. Lol
Seeing that Dragonology cover sent me on a nostalgia trip. That damn book really had me doing rituals with friends trying to contact a dragon at recess.
Imagine if life on Earth went extinct, and those who would rediscover it would only have these books as source material to speculate what life here looked like.....
when i was watching this video i imagine the other people on this who had dragons in that alternate earth who also modernized, domesticated or conserve their fauna made a speculative video about our animals "here we see this mammalians of beasts like, lions, peacocks, tasmanian tigers,to the aquatics like funny dolphins to the horned narwhal,etc" it would be an interesting story like the mockumentaries we see are from a segment of media from another world (that dragons doc is my fave in childhood)
My take on dragons vs wyverns- for my fantasy world, dragons have 6 limbs (4 legs 2 wings), wyverns have 4 (2 legs 2 wings), and wyrms have 2 (no legs, two wings). Different breeds of each have different abilities, with some wyverns breathing fire and some dragons having venom. Also, in my mind drakes have always been smaller dragons, not flightless dragons. So you could have a wyvern drake or a wyrm drake. I accept everyone who says that this is wrong, but I don’t care
I agree. your world, it's yours to rule. everyone takes on dragons are different. it's subjective afterall. hell, even in my fantasy world project, wyverns aside, there're lesser dragons too. the true dragons and lesser dragons. it's like us humans and apes, while the true dragons viewed as ultimate sentient magical beings and the lesser viewed as animals.
When the first concepts of velociraptors covered with feathers appeared, i designed some dragons based on that dinosaurian form, replacing the membrane wings with feather ones.
I completely agree with your take on the differences between dragons and wyverns. In general, the depictions of mythical creatures (dragon or otherwise) tend to be very subjective.
I love this guys comment section! His channel is the channel that got me into speculative biology, and seeing so many people like me is so inspiring! I’ve found my people.❤
Okay but now imagine the types of fascinating health problems the true dragons could have, like if they have their mouth forced shut by another creature while shooting out their flames they could end up burning their own face off (in a similar way to how if a bombardeer beetle gets clogged up they'll probably just pop from all the boiling hot chemicals building up pressure in their blast chamber)
dragons with four limbs and two wings might have evolved from small gliding lizards like the Draco. over time the wings get bigger and muscular granting the dragon's ability to fly along with other adaptations such as a second pair lungs as flight bladders, hollow bones for a lighter body.
I came up with the same exact idea, but the ancestors of dragons were a fictional lizard that used two structures on its back as a mating display. But as they got meatier and bigger, they allowed flight.
@@dougrious_diswiggle that could also work. and as for the fire breathing, i think it started as spitting out acid or partially digested food. but over time that becomes more combustible and then fire.
If we're going by "exist on earth" standard, four limb + wings combo can't exist, as all wings in all vertebrates are highly modified forelimbs. Ie, if you want four functional legs and two wings, it means rather alien planet, or the entire vertebrate life on earth came from a 6+ lobed fin fish, instead of the 4 lobed fin fish our real world life came from.
Problem: This wouldn't be scientifically accurate (which is what the author of this project was going for.) Here, on planet Earth, it's basically a rule that Vertebrates can only have 4 limbs. You'd basically have to change the evolution of all Vertebrates in order to get a 6 limbed dragon.
7:55 The "Titan Drake" (Dirosuchus Maximus) is a majestic scaly critter, I imagine this drake as a deity and would has been voiced by "Liam Neeson" who voiced the great Lion "Aslan" form C.S. Lewis The Chronicles of Narnia. I also give him an individual name "Igby"
This is how everyone sees him as very Big and Intimidating. Everybody knew "Igby", and nobody cared to cross his path; for he was as cunning as the Pacific Coastal Sea Serpent, as bold as the Tyrannosaurus, but as reckless as the wound Mammoth. But he had a voice as soft as wild honey dripping from a tree, and a fork tongue softer than down.
If the "Titan Drake" is anything like the "Tyrannosaurus" it would share the same similar behavior and would be based on the Tyrannosaurus from Walking with Dinosaurs (1999) & Prehistoric Planet (2022-2023) same with the "Lemurian Dracolisk" But would share the same direct parallel with "Godzilla" (Titanus Gorjia) from the MonsterVerse.
If the Titan Drake has a powerful fire breath it should be similar to Godzilla atomic breath but instead of a blue color his fire breath is to be a rainbow trolls color (DreamWorks Trolls) his charge up glows from his tail to his dorsal osteoderms plates and expelled from his mouth, His color comes in seven shades, Violet, Indigo, Blue, Green, Yellow, Orange, and Red then BOOM! Firepower! 🌈🔥 at his enemies. (Man or Beast)
The dragon-wyvern debate is indeed fierce. I had personally taken the two-leg four-leg stance before, but you've raised an interesting point by depicting the scene of a Skyrim-like dragon. Most dragons come with a breath attack of some sort while wyverns do not. However, wyverns are in modern stories almost never depicted with four legs. Thus, dragons are dragons if either four legs or a breath attack are present, and wyverns are wyverns when they have two legs and no breath attack (there can be non-venomous wyverns, so I do not count venom as a distinguishing feature). All dragons and wyverns have wings, otherwise, they would fall under the drake classification or similar. If a wyvern evolves the ability to spit acid or venom, they have acquired a breath attack and thus fit under the classification of dragons. It is important that we give our monster-taming and adventurer guilds meaningful classifications in our fantasy worlds. The most important distinction to be made is the relative safety in distance. Imagine preparing to down a wyvern by disabling its wings only to realize it has four legs and can definitely outrun you on the ground. Likewise, imagine thinking you're at a safe distance from a wyvern only for it to nail your comrade with an acidic spitball. Against a downed wyvern, you can reasonably assume safety in distance, but not so with a dragon. Proper dragon classification saves lives.
Bro, go old school. "The Flight of Dragons," by Peter Dickinson came out in 1979 and is still my favorite explanation for the abilities of dragons, from speech, to flight, to firebreathing, and even accounts for their limb configuration. Please check it out, its an incredible work, and the art in it is lit.
Apep, or Apophis, of Ancient Egyptian mythology is classed as a dragon despite being described as a giant golden snake, so yeah, I don't think number of legs matters.
I mean.. the entire reason the 'dragons' in this project have to have two legs and not four is that four legs and wings evolving together is almost impossible from our established vertebrates.
Exactly. But I have to admit that I was a bit dissappointed with how the "true dragons" look in this book. They look too much like pterosaurs. If I were creating a new world with dragons in it, I would have figured out how to give them four legs.
I appreciate your Dragons vs Drake argument because its the same one I've made for years after a bunch of internet nerds kept getting salty about the Game of Thrones dragons being called dragons.
Dragons are such a cool and mysterious myth that tbh i love the idea of them being real and even if its unrealistic riding a ral life dragon would be so cool
Throughout history terms like wyrm, drake, wyvern, and dragon were used interchangeably to describe just about every morphology you can think of. As far as I can tell distinctions like "dragons have SIX limbs!" and "wyverns have FOUR limbs!" are purely an Internet phenomenon. Dragons can have six limbs, four limbs, two limbs, or no limbs, and everyone who gets mad about the taxonomy of fantasy creatures can get over it.
It's always fun to see people on the internet arguing about the proper distinctions between words that were historically either synonymous or regional. Sword nerds can be the worst about it because we've inherited all these loan words that meant the same thing but modern people want to make them different things.
It's not a internet phenomenon. The franchise Monster Hunter has the separation. In Monster hunter Wyverns have two legs and two wings that they can also use for two front legs. Dragons have four limbs and can be with or without wings. They're most of the time more powerful than Wyverns and a lot more rare.
@@nuke2099 Did that idea originate from Monster Hunter, though? Or did the developers of the Monster Hunter franchise read up about dragons on the Internet? You can't point to franchises that likely drew their inspiration from modern sources and then say that it's not strictly an Internet phenomenon; because, well no, it's not *anymore*, because they GOT IT from the Internet. In that case my statement that it originated as an Internet phenomenon holds true. Does that make sense?
@@nuke2099 And I realize I worded it as being a "purely" Internet phenomenon, but inevitably ideas that originated on the Internet are going to find their way into other media, so yeah, maybe it isn't a purely Internet phenomenon anymore, but that's where it started as far as I can tell.
@@DragonProtector Like CA said, the medieval manuscripts and illustrations disagree. If the people that made up dragons said it's so, who are we to argue, imo?
@@blackdragon5274 valid point i guess 😆. But who says we can't have our own thoughts. I believe my own thoughts on what i think. I don't agree with others ideas.
In Hungarian folklore, dragons tend to have multiple heads (most commonly 7, but sometimes 3, 9 or 12 are used). We had a kid's show back in my time about a friendly, one-headed dragon who felt a bit left out for only having one head.
Another version of fire breathing also seen in ''How to train your Dragon'' is producing a flamable gas and lighting it on fire using some kind of ''bones'' and exhaling air so strong that its like a flamethrower.
THANK YOU!!! It also drives me nuts when people say it's a wyvern if it only has 2 legs and 2 wings. I appreciate the historical examples you present but there is something I would add for any outside historical examples. If a source of media calls it a dragon, it's a dragon end of discussion.
Curious Archive there is another archive of speculative dragons by artists "Joshua Knüppe"(Hyrotrioskjan) his project is "Dragons Of The World" 🐉🌎, Hopefully you'll do a video about them.
I mean some pterosaurs are extremely dragonlike and even some dinosaurs are Spinosaurus doesn't look to far from a big semi aquatic dragon and postosuchus looks very drake-like so in a way we did get dragons, who knows maybe someday we'll discover some kind of new order of carnivorous dinosaurs that somehow breathed fire.
Generally speaking I think wyvern fits into the category of dragons. I think most people who arent nerds have never even heard of a wyvern, and the quickest way to describe it to them in the moment is some variation of "its like a dragon". People these days just like to "umm actually" :P These are really cool, fire breathing doesn't seem to be that unrealistic of a natural adaptation, i mean fireflies exist and use magnesium igniters and chitin ignition chambers, gas bladders are already a thing, all you need is to turn H20 into H2 and 0, which is maybe the hardest part? "endogeneously producing pyrophoric compounds" lol, were you trying to say that in a way where people wouldnt understand? :P. So basically, internally made oxygen combusting compounds? Like magnesium probably, like the lightning bug lol The heads of these things seem a little large across the board, no?
but those are wyverns, I understand how everybody trying to make "realistic" dragons nowdays, but if their front legs and wings are combined i only see a wyvern no matter how large it is. Also, restricting dragons with a four-limbed or other evolutionary patter just make them fictional dinosaurs.
Aw man, I wish this video had been out in Spring 2021! I actually did a research project that included analysis of dragon anatomy and how that affected people’s perceptions of them depending on which ways they were portrayed. Very informative and interesting video!
I remember a high-school biology project in which we had to create a basic phylogeny graph for dragons, including drawings. It was very fun.
That sounds awesome
@@I_want_to_have_a_good_time I remember there being a division between four-limbed dragons and six-limbed dragons, and one notable detail was that the “Wyrm” was a six-limbed burrowing dragon with atrophied limbs and lacking eyes.
hope I get this in high school, would be cool
Wish I'd had a biology teacher like yours.
I would have loved that. That's a great idea to get kids interested in biology.
"I know my feeling on this are weirdly strong"
Listen man, you run a channel talking mostly about world building and speculative evolution. It would be weirder if you didnt have strong opinions on the classification of mythical creatures.
👏👏👏
I, for one, love it when people are passionate about random shit lmao, immediately peaks my interest in what they're talking about
@@lawofseven1465 oh absolutely. I love hearing about my friend's current interests. There is always so much cool shit going on
Same
@@lawofseven1465 I’m gonna be that guy, ‘cause ‘proper’ word usage is my passion, but it’s piques
"If hippos were carnivores that lit their prey on fire."
So all the nightmares at once.
And I thought Anubis' pet soul eater, Ammit, was all the nightmares at once.
@@ScionStorm1 Hippos body crocs. I'd say Ammit is all but one nightmare at once. Although eating souls is a step up from fire-breath so maybe it was an exchange program.
Add firebreath to one of the deadliest creatures on the planet and you get something you'd rather not want to meet.
You forgot the flying part as well lol
@@powerofanime1 Ammit had "forequarters of a lion, the hindquarters of a hippopotamus, and the head of a crocodile-the three largest "man-eating" animals known to ancient Egyptians." If a spirit was judged unworthy in the afterlife their 'heart' would be fed to this demoness beast and the spirit would languish in -hell- unrest forever in what was referred to as a 'second death'.
My opinion was always that Wyverns are a type/subspecies of dragon. Saying "that's not a dragon, that's a wyvern" is about as useful as saying "that's not a dog, that's a border collie!"
Ive always thought that wyverns were 2 legged, bony offshoots of dragons.
I always thought of wyverns still being in the clade of Draconia, just like how hexapod dragons and drakes and wyrms are also in the clade. so, at least in my book, the term "dragon" is a widespread term that can describe any order of draconomorph that is in the Draconia clade. so a wyvern would just be an order in Draconia which haves features that distinguish it as a wyvern, such as a lightweight body frame, a medium-length neck, large wings with membrane reaching to the legs like some pterosaurs, and don't have gas sacks to fly, like hexapodal dragons or four-limbed "true dragons"
Exactly
They both come from different areas of the world. Wyverns originated in England and France, and dragons (at least the ones we commonly refer to as dragons) find origins in Wales. Then there’s also wyrms which come from Nordic and English myths
Wyverns are different, their hands are connected to their wings. It's like how a tiger and Mountain lion are different, they are from the same family but still seperate speciss
I actually pondered on how dragons would be able to breath fire and I brought the topic up to my mom. I had the idea that they had to have an organ in their body that would produce a highly reactive gas, or liquid, and that when it was forced out it would either ignite from the oxygen or something else would ignite it internally, which is where my mom got the idea that Dragons would have a crop like chickens have, and throughout a dragons lifetime they would eat rocks of Flint that would go into that crop. When the dragon needed to breath fire that crop would constrict extremely fast while the gas/liquid came up, igniting and sending out flames. The Dragons internals being protecting by a thick, flame retardant, mucus.
I love that your Mom entertained this idea and came back with legit suggestions!!!
somone probably got offended at the word retardent
Me and everyone in my family all assumed they'd have the chemical reaction thing going on too. I think it's a common assumption. The flint one sounds like it needs actual studies to figure out if it's possible but it's also a cool idea
My idea is that there is a gland somewhere in their throat filled with highly reactive, boiling hot liquid chemicals that turn into a gas and ignite when exposed to oxygen
@Daniel Gill she works as a vet tech. Not exactly a job where you'd be thinking about the internal workings of a dragon, but still fun nonetheless!
I remember watching a "documentary" on dragons as a kid, it was like a project trying to explain a world where dragons existed and went extinct, telling the story of a paleontologist obsessed with dragons.
It was so good, and my little kid mind was blown away so hard
I remember that it was awesome
Dragons: a fantasy made real is the name
@@jamesgabor9284 I am aware
You can find the full "mockumentary" on youtube if you're feeling nostalgic.
I saw that
Until a few years ago, I didn't even know about the dragon - wyvern debate. I've always thought (and still do): all wyverns are dragons, not every dragon is a wyvern, just like every duck is a bird, but not every bird is a duck. Dragon is just a broad term for many different creatures. The one with four legs and two wings are european dragons (just my way of thinking, not saying it as a fact...not sure what most people's opinion is).
As I understand it, most of the debate regarding wyverns comes from the study of heraldry, where the distinction has a lot more importance as it was related to symbolism and involved in distinguishing people from one another by their coat-of-arms. Beyond that, it's just fantasy nerds being pedantic - I don't particularly care about the differences as it's all ultimately fiction, but to each their own.
It’s also important to remember that dragons are, ultimately, works of fantasy. So many cultures have come up their own draconic beasts, and the only feature they all share in common is that they’re reptilian in some way. You could make up any fantasy beast and call it a dragon if you wanted it to be.
John 3:16 King James Version 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior and you will be saved. John 3:16 (share the good news of the gospel around the world!) Have a wonderful day/night, may the LORD bless you all, and farewell!,.,,,,,,
Galatians 3:26 King James Version 26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
.....
European Dragon is honestly the best description of the most recognizable form of a "dragon". Many myths & legends in & around Europe involving dragons have them with four legs & a pair of wings that more often than not also breath fire. So, classifying them as the "European Dragon" seems fitting.
One hundred percent correct.
Have you ever heard of the 1982 animated movie “A Flight of Dragons.” They answer a lot of Dragon biology questions like the fact that Dragons can fly because they are essentially organic hydrogen balloons and they breathe fire to vent it off.
More like "belch" fire, I recall.
A Flight of Dragons was a childhood favorite of mine. I've never really liked just how potbellied the dragons are, though.
They had like... 'pockets' in their body that expanded. It was a neat concept for the film and book. If you haven't read the book, I recommend it! I found it at my library once and read all through it. There's a lot of silly ideas in it though, the pocket idea is just one of many bizarre ideas he had for dragons.
The silliest idea for dragons I have ever heard is suckling their newborns like women breastfeeding their babies.
Out of curiosity, did they explode on occasion?
I’m surprised there isn’t more dragons with names taken directly from mythical dragons. I could absolutely see Orochi, Gorynych, Lindwurms, Basilisks, Serrushes, Leviathan, Behemoth, Ziz, Python, Ladon, and even to an extent Typhon fitting in well to this family tree.
But the Behemoth is depicted as Bovine.
You forgot Naga
here be dragons
Yurlunggur (The aboriginal Rainbow Serpent) would be a good species name for an Australian Wyrm
Of Behemoth, Leviathan, and Ziz, only Leviathan comes close to being a dragon.
Behemoth is mostly a hippo/bovine, and the Ziz is a bird.
For Python: Python is actually a snake.
I like how the "true dragons" didn't end up looking like the "stereotypical" dragon. Instead they had a very Quetzalcoatl appearance, which makes it believable. As cool as a dragon looking like Draco from Dragonheart would be, I could see a pterosaur-like dragon being more realistic.
It's either that or a dinosaur-like dragon. MAYBE a bat-like one.
@@catpoke9557 Except we have no bats this size, bats can't take of from the ground, and walking is not ideal for them, because their legs are not adapted for walking at all and having such long forelimbs extended to the sides would be even with other legs very tedious for walking. And bats are small, so they have not so much weight to lift for walking! Better directly under your body like in this video or you have an only cave/cliff/tree dragon that is more adapted to climbing and is small.
Monster Hunter also has some dragons that don't look like your stereotypical dragon, even though they do feature some few commonly stereotyped dragons.
they look nothing like Quetzalcoatl i think you meant Quetzalcoatlus.
(Quetzalcoatl is a mayan god}
One very important part included in this is that if you look at all tetrapods, every one has just 4 limbs, and all tetrapods that fly using wings have just 2 legs.
YAAAAAAAY DRAGONS! MY FAVORITE!
How to set up a alteori trap: just place it in the comments of a curious archive video
:)
yo u watch him
That was fast
Report: Trap laid for next week's video. Standing by until release of footage. Will advise.
AYYYYYYY!!! (Your videos are pretty cool)
Wrong. You don’t have unusually strong feelings on wyverns vs dragons. Any cultured individual has a strong opinion on wyverns vs dragons
Only the most uncultured folks say: *it doesn't matter they are the same. Whats the difference. They are both Dragons*
Me: i can tell you are eather clearly blind to see no difference or lack the brain to comprehend the body morph names.
Yeah monster hunter made it clear
@@brawmankerlexterminateurde860 mh wyverns are basically the dinosaurs while the elder dragons are basically dragon gods.
@@marcusgo1160 that's false the elder dragons are just sentient ecosystems while the black dragons are the equivalent of Gods
@@brawmankerlexterminateurde860 But still they are more fantstical than the wyvern groups.
Well first of, you're probably the best speculative zoology channel I've ever found, you all do it so well, I can't get enough of you all. The second thing I wanted to say is that I can guaranty you that there are many more speculative zoology projects on Deviantart, so it's a great place to go digging for more of those kinds of projects. I'm not telling you what to do or anything like that, I'm just trying to help this amazing channel in any way I can.
I agree, there are so much great projects on DA, have you heard of nijin konai?
Can you recommend some?
I second this!.
Yes, DA is a fun place.
Ok but are you a porcupine?
I remember when a science magazine I used to read as a kid once published an article about dragons as an April Fool's joke. They weren't so blatant as to claim that large fire-breathing reptiles like the ones from the legends really exist, but presented them as an order of winged reptiles inhabiting the jungles. Being a kid, I believed them.
Jaki to był magazyn?
@@mariahanczewska8109 Wiedza i Życie
Something similar to this with birds would be cool. Phoenix, Thunderbirds, Roc, Basilisk, Caladrius, Peng, Garuda, Quetzalcoatl, Pegasus, Hippogriff, Mothman, Sirens, Erinyes, Angels, and Valkyrie would all be interesting biographical subjects.
And centaurs too
Why not Minotaur and all kinds of mythical creatures while you're at it
Actually, VikasRao, the creator of draconology is working on clades that allow those mythical creatures to exist. He has, for example, created his own clade of "Pegasuses" which is a very different take from horses but looks pretty awesome.
Fun Fact: VikasRao is actually working on other Mythical Creatures in the future, besides Dragons and Griffons. Like Manticores, Sphinxes and many others. Which I honestly look forward to seeing.
Same, I wonder how he'll do some of the more human-hybrid creatures such as Centaurs, Minotaurs, and Werewolfs?
@@PeiceofNick He'd probably not make Centaurs the way they're often depicted in the Myths. I think Vikas will do Minotaurs in a similar way as ArchAngel23 did, I recommend checking out ArchAngel's Deviantart Contents if you want to know what I mean. Either that, or they'll just be Humans with boney soles and Ox-like horns protruding from their heads. As for Werewolves, I think it'll have something to do with a disease that reacts to certain Lunar Phases. He even confirmed doing Giants and Dwarves. Too bad he won't be doing Elves, though.
i'd have thought griffons would have fallen under Chimera this would have included griffons, hippogryph, manticore, and sphinx. then again this falls under the more more modern term for chimera which is denoted as any mythical creature that is a mix of any number of animal. (for example a hippogryph would technically be lion, eagle, and horse as it is the offspring of a mare and a griffon. and according to WoW it would have included deer in there somewhere as well)
@@signolias100 in Vikas's case, they're a subspecies of Bird Dragon, specifically the Garuda.
@@ryonhatcher4561 oh i understand that, i'm just considering the idea that a griffon is more akin to chimera in the sense that the lore of a griffon is the offspring of a lion and eagle. as of late chimera has come to mean an amalgamation of two or more real world animals into one being.
that is not to say i disagree with how he portrayed his version of griffon.
This channel has introduced me too so many new speculative zoology projects that I’ve never heard of, amazing work, keep it up!
I know right he’s amazing
My thoughts exactly
Glad to hear it, thank you!
I also love speculative biology but sadly there arent much channels for that so CA is really great😊
Same! There are so many speculative biology artists I never would’ve found if it wasn’t for this channel.
0:21 THAT BOOK! It's what made me obsessed with worldbuilding, had me discover this whole way to approach a fantasy world and while it hasn't turned me into a biologist to learn how I could better implement some sci- into the -fi, worldbuilding and interpreting more pseudoscientifically other fantasy worlds has entertained me countless hours.
Holy crap I used to have that too when I was little, it was my favorite thing ever
Last year i borrowed the book from my school library and loved it so much was tempted to steal it.
The fact that this person has created an entire taxonomical tree of dragons that goes really in depth is amazing to me. The detail and individual concepts of each dragon are amazing and I love it. My only problem with this is how the dragons have these weird, janky proportions. Their legs look way to small to hold them up, they seem to stand way too upright, and their wings dont seem to have the surface area to lift such a massive creature. Overall, though, amazing concept.
I really appreciate the thought that went into their dragon phylogeny. It seems they they had a background in biology and know the rules of nature that would govern the evolution of such animals. The big one that I noticed was that they didn't just randomly add or subtract limbs and they adhered to keeping core anatomy consistent between the groups. I always find it frustrating when I see speculative zoology dreamt up by people that don't understand how anatomy works or how animals radiate and diversify through evolution, but try as I might, I actually can't fault this. They thought it out, they knew the rules and they worked within it to create a quite believable draconian family tree. I also greatly appreciate the fact that they branched the group off as a parareptillian offshoot rather than trying to shoe-horn dragons into true 'Reptiles' and thus either break the Reptilian lineage or severely box in the features of what dragons would have.
On a divergent topic but still draconian in nature, I always imagined the 'flame gland' of dragons as being an evolution of a venom gland given that venom glands already provide the framework for such anatomy and provide enormous diversity in chemical cocktails produced. The fangs as a delivery system also keeps flames well away from soft tissues. If the animal was already evolved into a venom spitter (like some snakes employ), that's half the system in place with only the final jump needed in the composition before it becomes flammable. The incendiary venom would likely best work as an exothermic reaction created by mixing two components (such as in bombardier beetles) where the compounds are harmless by themselves but once mixed at the point of ejection and passing through oxygenated air, would catalyse into combustion.
I had a book called dragonlogy, the dragon eye and lots of interesting stuff. And we can call pterosaurs wyverns since they flying reptiles
I disagree on the pterosaur = wyvern part. Pterosaurs are not closely related at all to snakes, which dragons and wyverns are based on, and they don't look anything like them either. The only thing they have in common are wings made of membranes, and in that regard you could just as well call bats wyverns.
@@clara_corvus I agree. This would be an example of convergent evolution, rather than actually being related. It is an interesting concept though. If the medieval society that discovered them didn't know any better, maybe they would think that way.
I was just going to make a comment about the Draconology book. It has all of whats in the video and more. Great piece of worldbuilding!
I had a couple books in that series - had me fuming at this depiction of a knucker as it had no vestigial wings lol
No. The Definition Of Wyvern Is A Genus In The Dragon Species With No Front Legs And Enlarged Wings.
I wish the artist had done some research about African dragons (past the commonly over-exposed cultures of north-Africa). They do exist in myth. They are always overlooked. Like Aido-Hwedo of the Fon people, a dragon the size of the universe/creation. And the greatly overlooked powerful Nubians of north-Africa, they worshipped a dragon like form of Apedemak (one of their lion headed gods). Africa is full of dragons that typically range from being dinosaur largely sauropod like in appearance, to being serpent like.
Wow, interesting. I never heard of African dragon. What was their general shape looks like? The East Asian and South East Asian dragon generally resembles giant snake or snake-like body.
Looks like unrelated cultures around the world had roughly the same idea for how a dragon should look like
@@RyujinNoKami Yeah. That is one thing I am curious about also. Could it be similar creature exists in the past, or it was origin part of a story frome somewhere that travelled around the world and people begin modified dragon according to their culture or views.
@@marcoanthony6747 it could be that the story originated with the original habitat of modern humans, and spread with them to the rest of the world
@@marcoanthony6747 No, the myths are all probably based on dinosaur fossils
My favorite book!
Edit: I've always perceived the Wyvern vs Dragon debate like how people compare Tortoises and Turtles. All Tortoises are turtles, but not all Turtles are tortoises. Likewise, all Wyverns are dragons, but not all Dragons are wyverns.
Was about to post this, but then saw it was already done :)
And how people compare frogs and toads. All toads are frogs, But not all frogs are toads.
In Monster Hunter Wyverns and Dragons are related but completely different.
@@nuke2099 Aye, but that's where you can apply the "True Dragon" descriptor.
Dragons can be the otherall group, but True Drsgons are what would be commonly called Dragons.
The dragon vs wyvern debate comes from English heraldry and was made popular by D&D. Heraldry outside the UK doesn't make this distinction. A heraldic lion is only facing the side while the heraldic leopard is often designed the exact same but facing the viewer. Also in heraldry a "lily" depicted as a flower and a "lily flower" the fleur de lys symbol are also separate, despite technically being different designs for the same thing.
My point being heraldry is very arbitrary and only 1 countries heraldry makes this distinction. They are fictional creatures so if a piece of media wants to use English heraldry/D&D rules for wyverns/dragons that is fine, but it's stupid to impose that definition on every fictional story as if it's a hard rule everyone must follow.
This is how I like to look at them: "Dragon" is used in ancient Greek to refer to any great serpent and "wyvern" comes from a Latin word "vipera" used for various venomous snakes and may mean "alive" and "bear" referring to many viper species giving birth to live young. If we use that as our bases "dragon" is the umbrella term and "wyvern" are a family of venomous dragons who may also give birth to live young. (regardless of limbs)
But they are fictional and if the creator says they're dragons, they're dragons, if the creator says they're wyverns, they're wyverns, regardless of how many limbs or wings they have or if they breath fire, venom or whatever else or not.
I’d love this as a video game. Create a Skyrim-esque world except where dragons aren’t mythical creatures but wild animals that could have adequate intelligence and small levels of society (like a smart dolphin). I think the approach would be cool bc it could be a mechanism for keeping humans in a medieval age since dragons would prey on cities like wolves on sheep.
Until the invention of firearms results in a dramatic decline in dragon numbers, stopping only in the 21st century, the "Save the Dragon" movement takes off, culminating with U.S President George W. Bush adopting a pet dragon against the advice of his staff.
A game where you're a biologist studying fantasy creatures like the zoologists of today. No need for combat or survival, you're just sitting down and observing them in action.
I really hope the author goes back in and reworks the world, the fact they mentioned that the Tiamat sea serpent hunts giant squids, i immediately imagine this guy creating a biological version of krakens and their evolution.
there's so many different fantasy animals that he could put into the world, to make it a living breathing eco-system containing only fantasy and mythological animals
@@tinobemellow Well, in this game gunpowder doesn't exist!
@@mapache-ehcapam if gunpowder didn't exist, the world would be a better place for humans and animals alike.
I just love how Azhdarchid-like the biggest flying ones are, it really makes them feel more believable than the traditional mythological/fantasy depictions of dragons.
I liked your spec alien videos.
They really catch me.
Will there be more?
@@Littlekoji-df1cf Thank you very much, it's really nice to hear that! Yes, there will definitely be more. I concept out, draw, and edit everything myself so it just takes a little while to produce. Plus, life n' whatnot gets in the way. But rest assured I’m always working on ‘em.
honestly it's the opposite for me; as much as convergent evolution is a thing, it's almost uncanny how similar a parareptile is to a pterosaur in anatomy and physiology.
then again there's dolphins and ichthyosaurs
@@GreysToons the fact you do it all your self makes watching them even more better.
Love from Finland.
@@Littlekoji-df1cf Aaaw shucks 😊, much love to you too!!
I've always liked the idea that wyverns are more natural than magic, a cousin species, and less intelligent. As true dragons often depicted with near or even above human intelligence. Wyverns are apes-like to the dragons' human-like intelligence.
Same here. In most movies that feature wyverns, they are often shown as wild animals and/or the bad guys (Game of Thrones, Dragon Slayer, Smaug from The Hobbit, Reign of Fire). Four legged dragons are mostly shown as magical, intelligent creatures and/or the good guys (Dragon Heart, Eragon, How to train your dragon, Shrek etc). I guess wyverns look more intimidating, thats why they use them a lot for bad dragons.
Western dragons as a whole are represented as evil/animalistic due to the Christian association with Satan (Draco in Latin means Serpent, Serpent-Satan association).
It was fairly recently that we started seeing more intelligent, wiser or even benign western dragons in media. (Glaurung being a cunning agent of evil, the dragons from the Inheritance Cycle having a complex morality system...)
Wyverns are by all means dragons, most commonly in Italian and English folklore. Hell, some wyverns were portrayed as four-legged back in the Renaissance.
Agree
@@Karfunkelfuchs Game of Thrones does not feature wyverns, they are dragons that follow evolutionary biology. In fact, within the Game of Thrones universe, there are creatures called wyverns. They are similar to dragons, but smaller, less intelligent, more aggressive, and possess venom instead of fire-breathing abilities.
The best way to tell the difference between a more proper wyvern and a four limbed dragon is that a wyvern will only walk on its hind legs, like a dinosaurs, while a four limbed dragon will walk on its legs and wings, like a bat or a pterosaur.
how dare you say I have low intelligence grrr1!@!!!!@@!!12
Y'know, I've been designing a Pokémon region called Le Mura, filled with "Lemurian" Pokémon, and totally forgot Lemurian was an actual word. It's based on Madagascar, so it's a spin on the word Lemur. Turns out the real one was named after Lemurs, too.
Lemuria doesn't exist it's a myth like Atlantis.
@@hakimdiwan5101 I'm aware. I did claim it to be a word, not a place. I only say "real" in the sense that it's used in fiction and by cults who don't realize it was made by a scientist trying to explain why fossils of a specific species of primate exists on both Madagascar and India
@@oblivionslefthand Oh ok I'm from India and many people here actually believe it 😅
Concerning wyverns vs. dragons, I always saw wyverns as a subcategory of dragons with only two legs.
aw man this brings me back. I adored the Dragonology books as a kid. I still own them! I always tell people that dragons were my Barbie since I loved and collected them so much. Thanks for bringing back a part of what made my childhood!
"Who you notice have two legs but yet, aren't wyverns." That statement cracked me up. Keep up the good work, Archivist!
I am so surprised and laughed at the same time when seeing this video but in a good way, I'm also very happy to see videos of dinosaurs, Kaijus and even Dragons because they are the best. Plus, I like this idea of Gryphon as sort of another subspecies of Dragons.
His pokemon video was really neat
I freaking love this and Im especially glad to see that someone has managed to figure out how the do a cool looking scientifically accurate take on Griffins for once.
This Dracology thing would make for a great docufiction miniseres on Netflix or something.
I still have my dragonology book and remember begging my mother for it. It was the coolest thing ever at the time and I still love looking through it. It’s just so magical:)
Casual Geographic making videos about these creatures in this reality:
“Why this giant murder lizard with wings probably wants you dead.”
“Why I don’t go swimming in the ocean and neither should you.” (Proceeds to be a video about the Jormungandr or the Tiamat)
now I want that to happen
Personally, I consider any serpentine creature that is powerful in some way a dragon. This definition actually includes mosasaurs, which I think is cool as hell.
It would most likely that if Mosasaurs were alive today they would be called sea dragons in some regions
If anything, most pterosaurs would be near considered as "Wyverns" if they were alive today, too. They're like the closest thing to a irl Dragon other than breathing fire or whatever as an ability.
13:39 ay! Thanks bud! Happy to be the 19th subscriber ;)
Thank you!
Careful, he’s a hero.
It’s thanks to individuals like yourself that take interest in smaller content creators early on that really help their drive sometimes. Can’t say that’s the case for CuriousArchives, might be. But that’s truly awesome, I had to look and see if you commented as well lol
This vid really reminds me of the art design in monster hunter. How real world biology could fit with dragons. The ecology, though fantastical at times, has been really well thought through. Take something like how tigrex and rathalos are both flying wyverns, but due to different ecological niches, they function completely different, or maybe how yian garuga convergently evolved to have traits to that of a rathian, while being a kut-ku descendent. Whatever applies in our world applies there too. Future video.......perhaps......?
Yeah but in MH the Wyverns are not dragons. They're classed as lesser cousins.
@@nuke2099 In the monster hunter world, the category elder dragons are for any monster that cannot be classified.
@@HexaDecimus Yes but the majority of them have four legs and are with or without wings. Most are the typical western fantasy dragon. They also all have Elder Dragon blood.
@@nuke2099 @Nuke2099 Which is rad that they knew and understand that they're different. That I think that the game inspired from this book and classifications.
The Bird Dragons reminds me of Qurupecos which are Bird Wyverns.
Also, include the Manticores or Teostra and Lunastra dragons, which still classified as Dragons but different species.
Don't forget the Eastern dragons and wryms like Lao shan lung or Shantien from Frontier.
Also, that Velkhana is kinda of a Griffin species too.
@@paulandreig.sahagun34 Well "bird dragons" would be straight up dinosaurs. Velkhana btw looks nothing like a Gryphon. In some concept art it did.
The wyvern and dragon declaration is strongly tied to the fictional world where they are in.
In dnd for example, the six liumbs = dragon, four limbs = wyvern rule is relieable.
But in other worlds the rule to distinguish the two can be, for example, Dragon = human ore more then human intelligence. Wyvern = animalistic intelligence.
Wyverns cannot carry as much precious metals in one trip as those with a proper amount of limbs, it is a most unfortunate situation for them.
Generally I tend to assume in other people's work that a wyvern is a dragon with wings for arms, but in my own work I never have a distinction. Dragons range from bird like to lizard like to dromaeosaur like ETC when I draw them.
@@JadeDragon407 Sure they can. They just need a specialized pouch for carrying metals.
@@catpoke9557 Well yea, if you're going to cheat and build pockets and such >>:=p
It warms my heart to see Dragonology referenced.
Ok now I always wanted to write a story with dragons (a lot like Wings of Fire by Tui T. Sutherland) and I’m definitely going to analyse the work of the artist way more than I should to get good biology in this story. Thank you for letting me discover this genius.
Too many people don't recognize that wyverns are a *type* of dragon. They aren't separate things altogether. Thank you for addressing this.
Fuck, I remember the book Dragonology, it actually convinced little me for a time dragons were real.
The possibility of dragons originating from pterodactyl fossils found in antiquity is such an interesting concept to me.
Funnily enough, there's a family of paraavian dinosaurs, the Scansoropterygians, that have batlike wings. They basically look like little feathered dragons. I like to imagine an alternate universe where dragons evolved from members of this group that survived through the end of the Mesozoic era.
You know, at first I expected these to be Hyrotrioskjan's dragons. You should do his lore next! really extensive, well thought-out spec-evo worldbuilding.
That's a good one actually
@Mullerornis They do though? I recall he mentioned that most dragons are covered in hair like filaments called dragonfuzz, which are convergent to bird feathers.
Finally SOMEONE thinking like a normal person about Wyverns and Dragons! Making the distinction in the powers instead of the count of legs makes SOO much more sense!
I think making the distinction like that makes it much more interesting.
When I was in elementary, I read Dragonology every time I went to the school library. Thanks for including the amazing book!
Here's an interesting fact about dragon legends: The earlier legends describe the dragons more along the lines of what dinosaurs looked like. The later legends attributed mythical powers to these creatures. Also, some old editions of some encyclopedias (I think one of the Encyclopedia Britannica editions of the 1800s) claims that dragons are "now rare". So it may be the case that the dragons are merely reptilian creatures that have only recently gone extinct. And their legends embellish the creatures a bit.
So you mean saurosuchians that for a time live along us (look into em thier badass)
If they recently went extinct come we haven't found any remains? Surely there'd be some skeleton lying around somewhere.
@@AxisChurchDevotee komodo and australia have dragons right now, so not extinct. personally the eastern water dragon is my favourite
@@MrOsmodeusbruh are you serious?Komodo dragons just name they not litteral dragons,just massive monitor lizards
I remember getting Dragonology a long time ago...
WAYY before I could concept what speculative biology was about,
This brought back nostalgia
This is interesting. My personal concept of dragons is that they evolved from ancestors with 6 legs, so they have four legs plus a separate set of wings. They glide more than they flap, often climbing trees or rocks to jump out of, and using their flight to skim down and try to catch fish, one of their favorite foods. (They love climbing up, but are even more poorly designed to climb down trees than cats are.) Sadly I was unable to find any information on how sharp teeth effects speech sounds- some groups of humans have traditionally sharpened their teeth but no one cared about the phonetics, just how exotic it was. /facepalm
I'd actually think an elongated snout would effect speech more than sharp teeth. I'm very interested in how a dragon could talk and what it would sound like non-magically. They could probably make more sounds with their tongue, since it's longer inside a longer snout. But I imagine it's pretty much impossible in that construction for the skin (or, in most cases, scales) around their mouths to be malleable enough to make most of the sounds we can make with our lip and cheek movements, along with the fact that the longer snout creates much smaller cheeks, much farther back, barely cheeks at all sometimes. Altho, if their lips are quite malleable, they could once again probably produce more sounds, as there is more surface area to use in different ways.
And what about the construction of their tongue? It needs to function similarly to a human's tongue, being a big muscle capable of fine movements, otherwise that would also limit its capabilities. Could they have similar speech if it was forked? What if it was basically just a snake tongue? Would that really produce more S sounds like we always associate with snakes? How in fact would sharp teeth effect speech? Needles, shark teeth, teeth like mammals where they have four larger sharp teeth - what kind of differences would there be?
How would their voice sound coming out of such a long neck? How much would size of the dragon play a role in how deep or loud their voices are? Could a large dragon have a high pitched, soft voice? Surely a small one couldn't produce a particularly deep voice, right? It probably has more to do with the size of its vocal cords, but that is limited to body size, so smaller ones couldn't have large vocal cords. But is there a limit on how small a large dragon's cords could be?
Oh and the airway thru the nose. I imagine that opening and closing this airway would have a significant effect on the sounds, based on how large the nasal passage is.
You got me on a roll lol. Based on all of this, I think most of them would have a very unique and complex language, and thus accent. If all of the parts required for speech have a significant enough amount of malleability, they could produce a *lot* more sounds than a human can. On the other hand, if the parts are more restricted in movement, they might be able to make some unique sounds, but would be otherwise unable to perform a lot of the finer motor control, and might resort to more growls and other such noises - which, to be clear, would not make them automatically less intelligent with some kind of "savage" simple language. It would just be *very* different from any human language.
@@blankflank3488 Thank you very much, you gave me a lot of other elements to consider. I'd imagined a long, thin and flexible tongue. Not forked, and not quite as broad and thick proportionally as ours, but longer and tapering more at the tip. They'd mostly use it to eat small fruit as the non-retractable claws on their hands make certain things difficult to do. (In addition to not picking individual small fruits like currants easily, dragons would also be horrible at sewing or other needlework and at making or repairing books.) Sort of like giraffe tongues, but not exactly the same. I imagine they could make similar tongue sounds as we can, more or less. Flexible lips would be necessary as their home planet was largely desert, so protecting themselves from blowing sand and from unnecessary moisture loss would be important. But they'd also need to be able to draw those lips out of the way when catching fish, either down/up or back, or both. So vowel sounds would be possible, depending on their vocal cords, but only when they weren't fishing or fighting. The other main issue aside from their vocal cords is their teeth- their front teeth are pointy, slightly sharper, and more closely spaced than crocodile teeth, also slightly less conical and more triangular with the flat side facing inward. That would allow them to eat their preferred diet of fish, meat, fruit, and vegetables, but would also mean that dental frictatives and africtatives would be out. Their k and g sounds wouldn't be the same as ours, and the probably wouldn't have an L sound. But would also have more chirp-like and purring or crooning sounds, as well as screeching sounds. Not necessarily as part of words, but still important for their social interaction like parents and child interaction or interjections, and with many onomatopoeic words based on them. And some word sounds are based off of those, like growling "gr" sounds being part of words with bad connotations. It would be hard for them to imitate human speech, and vice versa. Thanks again, you've really helped. If you have any other ideas please let me know.
It would probably be easier for a dragon to talk if it had a syrinx like a bird, than it could mimic sounds like a parrot or raven.
@@blankflank3488 i'm imagining lots of points of articulation, probably a wide variety of vowels and consonants. Probably less labials, but a lateral labial would be quite interesting (L but with the lips). Generally lots of laterals, they would be easier with a long mouth. Given serpentine similarities, lots more fricatives (hissing sounds, e.g. F, V, S, Z), and probably a lateral fricative like Welsh LL, but less approximants, trills, liquids, etc., and perhaps several series with sort of nasal obstruents, where perhaps something in the nose can block the airflow like in the mouth. Plus a few more different types of glottal sounds.
However, there would be no open vowels (AH, AA, AW, OR), since their tongues probably would have less space to go down due to their narrow jaws. And likely any dental sounds (TH) which might exist would sound quite different due to sharp teeth having gaps between them, so would sound like people saying TH with a tooth having fallen out. And the glottal fricative (H) would sound more like a hiss, like how snakes do it.
Of course, this all assumes that air can pass through the mouth as well as the nose - but they might actually have to speak through their nose instead of their mouth, since for many animals the mouth only connects to the oesophagus. And it assumes that dragons have a similar tongue to humans, which is all speculation.
This is pretty cool. Though, most of these just look like dinosaurs. I'm also confused as to why the author chose to Gryphons part of the dragon species when they are nothing like dragons at all... Maybe it's just the name.
I like the idea of their scales growing to look feather-like, though.
I’d Consider Griffins To Be Closer Related To Hippogriffs And Maybe Even Manticores.
Most-likely because Birds come from Dinosaurs, so it only makes "logical" sense that Gryphons would be basically, Birds if birds were evolved from Dragons, instead of Dinosaurs. Prob came from the fact that "terror birds" of the pre/early ice age existed, So a dragon species would in theory, at some point evolve into bird like animals, that later would become giant like the Terror birds, looking like Gryphons of lore. Much like how unicorns in real life were actual rhino relative fossils that created the legend of horned horses. Lol
@@gigithespiderantnostalgiaa1689 hippogriffs are the offspring of a griffin and a horse.
My first introduction to dragons as a Sci-Fi creature instead of just Fantasy was through the writings of Anne McCaffrey and her Pern series.
I am a maths student but biology is my hobby. I have found this gem of a channel and subscribed.
Please keep making these videos. 😁
Seeing that Dragonology cover sent me on a nostalgia trip. That damn book really had me doing rituals with friends trying to contact a dragon at recess.
Your "unusually strong feelings" about Wyverns vs Dragons are more than welcome and interesting.
Imagine if life on Earth went extinct, and those who would rediscover it would only have these books as source material to speculate what life here looked like.....
when i was watching this video i imagine the other people on this who had dragons in that alternate earth who also modernized, domesticated or conserve their fauna made a speculative video about our animals "here we see this mammalians of beasts like, lions, peacocks, tasmanian tigers,to the aquatics like funny dolphins to the horned narwhal,etc" it would be an interesting story like the mockumentaries we see are from a segment of media from another world (that dragons doc is my fave in childhood)
@@disunityholychaos7523
Yeah, Curious Archive actually have a speculative video similar to that... How would aliens see Fossils on Earth be like....
Really cool - I wouldn’t mind an episode about the speculative biology of the monsters in Monster Hunter
That would be cool. It would be neat to see the biology of Bazel.
Dragons a fantasy made real was an awesome movie! I remember watching it as a kid. So glad someone posted it for free on here!
i actually did my senior thesis on the theoretical biology of dragons and it ended up shockingly similar! makes me wish we could all collaborate :D
My take on dragons vs wyverns- for my fantasy world, dragons have 6 limbs (4 legs 2 wings), wyverns have 4 (2 legs 2 wings), and wyrms have 2 (no legs, two wings). Different breeds of each have different abilities, with some wyverns breathing fire and some dragons having venom. Also, in my mind drakes have always been smaller dragons, not flightless dragons. So you could have a wyvern drake or a wyrm drake. I accept everyone who says that this is wrong, but I don’t care
I agree. your world, it's yours to rule. everyone takes on dragons are different. it's subjective afterall. hell, even in my fantasy world project, wyverns aside, there're lesser dragons too. the true dragons and lesser dragons. it's like us humans and apes, while the true dragons viewed as ultimate sentient magical beings and the lesser viewed as animals.
@@hh-kto oh that’s a really cool take! I love it
in my mind wryms have 2 front legs, and small wings
The 6 limb animal never existed
@@proudexmuslim2354I beg to disagree, ants have 6 limbs...
When the first concepts of velociraptors covered with feathers appeared, i designed some dragons based on that dinosaurian form, replacing the membrane wings with feather ones.
Unfortunately, that wouldn't work for Dragons above a certain size.
But it still is rather creative!
I completely agree with your take on the differences between dragons and wyverns. In general, the depictions of mythical creatures (dragon or otherwise) tend to be very subjective.
I love this guys comment section! His channel is the channel that got me into speculative biology, and seeing so many people like me is so inspiring! I’ve found my people.❤
Okay but now imagine the types of fascinating health problems the true dragons could have, like if they have their mouth forced shut by another creature while shooting out their flames they could end up burning their own face off (in a similar way to how if a bombardeer beetle gets clogged up they'll probably just pop from all the boiling hot chemicals building up pressure in their blast chamber)
Oh yeah, I remember reading the Dragonology books as a kid! Man, I loved those things.
dragons with four limbs and two wings might have evolved from small gliding lizards like the Draco. over time the wings get bigger and muscular granting the dragon's ability to fly along with other adaptations such as a second pair lungs as flight bladders, hollow bones for a lighter body.
I came up with the same exact idea, but the ancestors of dragons were a fictional lizard that used two structures on its back as a mating display. But as they got meatier and bigger, they allowed flight.
@@dougrious_diswiggle that could also work. and as for the fire breathing, i think it started as spitting out acid or partially digested food. but over time that becomes more combustible and then fire.
@Mullerornis Weigeltisauridae 'wings' are still ribs. Highly modified ribs, but still ribs.
If we're going by "exist on earth" standard, four limb + wings combo can't exist, as all wings in all vertebrates are highly modified forelimbs.
Ie, if you want four functional legs and two wings, it means rather alien planet, or the entire vertebrate life on earth came from a 6+ lobed fin fish, instead of the 4 lobed fin fish our real world life came from.
Problem: This wouldn't be scientifically accurate (which is what the author of this project was going for.)
Here, on planet Earth, it's basically a rule that Vertebrates can only have 4 limbs. You'd basically have to change the evolution of all Vertebrates in order to get a 6 limbed dragon.
7:55 The "Titan Drake" (Dirosuchus Maximus) is a majestic scaly critter, I imagine this drake as a deity and would has been voiced by "Liam Neeson" who voiced the great Lion "Aslan" form C.S. Lewis The Chronicles of Narnia. I also give him an individual name "Igby"
This is how everyone sees him as very Big and Intimidating. Everybody knew "Igby", and nobody cared to cross his path; for he was as cunning as the Pacific Coastal Sea Serpent, as bold as the Tyrannosaurus, but as reckless as the wound Mammoth. But he had a voice as soft as wild honey dripping from a tree, and a fork tongue softer than down.
If the "Titan Drake" is anything like the "Tyrannosaurus" it would share the same similar behavior and would be based on the Tyrannosaurus from Walking with Dinosaurs (1999) & Prehistoric Planet (2022-2023) same with the "Lemurian Dracolisk"
But would share the same direct parallel with "Godzilla" (Titanus Gorjia) from the MonsterVerse.
If the Titan Drake has a powerful fire breath it should be similar to Godzilla atomic breath but instead of a blue color his fire breath is to be a rainbow trolls color (DreamWorks Trolls) his charge up glows from his tail to his dorsal osteoderms plates and expelled from his mouth, His color comes in seven shades, Violet, Indigo, Blue, Green, Yellow, Orange, and Red then BOOM! Firepower! 🌈🔥 at his enemies. (Man or Beast)
So cool. I LOVE THE JORMUNGANDR!!!!! Great vid as always. Keep up the great work!!!!!
The dragon-wyvern debate is indeed fierce. I had personally taken the two-leg four-leg stance before, but you've raised an interesting point by depicting the scene of a Skyrim-like dragon. Most dragons come with a breath attack of some sort while wyverns do not. However, wyverns are in modern stories almost never depicted with four legs. Thus, dragons are dragons if either four legs or a breath attack are present, and wyverns are wyverns when they have two legs and no breath attack (there can be non-venomous wyverns, so I do not count venom as a distinguishing feature). All dragons and wyverns have wings, otherwise, they would fall under the drake classification or similar.
If a wyvern evolves the ability to spit acid or venom, they have acquired a breath attack and thus fit under the classification of dragons.
It is important that we give our monster-taming and adventurer guilds meaningful classifications in our fantasy worlds. The most important distinction to be made is the relative safety in distance. Imagine preparing to down a wyvern by disabling its wings only to realize it has four legs and can definitely outrun you on the ground. Likewise, imagine thinking you're at a safe distance from a wyvern only for it to nail your comrade with an acidic spitball. Against a downed wyvern, you can reasonably assume safety in distance, but not so with a dragon. Proper dragon classification saves lives.
Bro, go old school. "The Flight of Dragons," by Peter Dickinson came out in 1979 and is still my favorite explanation for the abilities of dragons, from speech, to flight, to firebreathing, and even accounts for their limb configuration. Please check it out, its an incredible work, and the art in it is lit.
Apep, or Apophis, of Ancient Egyptian mythology is classed as a dragon despite being described as a giant golden snake, so yeah, I don't think number of legs matters.
I mean.. the entire reason the 'dragons' in this project have to have two legs and not four is that four legs and wings evolving together is almost impossible from our established vertebrates.
Exactly. But I have to admit that I was a bit dissappointed with how the "true dragons" look in this book. They look too much like pterosaurs. If I were creating a new world with dragons in it, I would have figured out how to give them four legs.
@@AnnaLuna I feel exactly the same way
@Mullerornis Yes! Some variation of that.
Technically a dragon doesn't even need wings to be a dragon. See Kirin based on the Qilin in Monster Hunter or Lao Shan Lung.
I appreciate your Dragons vs Drake argument because its the same one I've made for years after a bunch of internet nerds kept getting salty about the Game of Thrones dragons being called dragons.
Definitely watched the Discovery Channel Dragon faux documentary and loved it a lot as a kid
Yeah it's amazing!!!
Yeah it's amazing!!!
I was supposed to be doing something productive but instead I'm here looking at draconology and realistic looking mythological creatures
OMG THIS BOOK WAS SUCH A PART OF MY CHILDHOOD
Wish I had one of those you know… a childhood
Dragons are such a cool and mysterious myth that tbh i love the idea of them being real and even if its unrealistic riding a ral life dragon would be so cool
In this world River Monsters must be crazy
I was so into Dragonology as a kid. Read it over and over
I grew up with the mockumentary dragons: a fantasy made real and the dragonology book (in Icelandic). Best parts of my childhood
Throughout history terms like wyrm, drake, wyvern, and dragon were used interchangeably to describe just about every morphology you can think of. As far as I can tell distinctions like "dragons have SIX limbs!" and "wyverns have FOUR limbs!" are purely an Internet phenomenon. Dragons can have six limbs, four limbs, two limbs, or no limbs, and everyone who gets mad about the taxonomy of fantasy creatures can get over it.
It's always fun to see people on the internet arguing about the proper distinctions between words that were historically either synonymous or regional. Sword nerds can be the worst about it because we've inherited all these loan words that meant the same thing but modern people want to make them different things.
It's not a internet phenomenon. The franchise Monster Hunter has the separation. In Monster hunter Wyverns have two legs and two wings that they can also use for two front legs. Dragons have four limbs and can be with or without wings. They're most of the time more powerful than Wyverns and a lot more rare.
@@nuke2099 Did that idea originate from Monster Hunter, though? Or did the developers of the Monster Hunter franchise read up about dragons on the Internet? You can't point to franchises that likely drew their inspiration from modern sources and then say that it's not strictly an Internet phenomenon; because, well no, it's not *anymore*, because they GOT IT from the Internet. In that case my statement that it originated as an Internet phenomenon holds true. Does that make sense?
@@nuke2099 And I realize I worded it as being a "purely" Internet phenomenon, but inevitably ideas that originated on the Internet are going to find their way into other media, so yeah, maybe it isn't a purely Internet phenomenon anymore, but that's where it started as far as I can tell.
@@rickcharlespersonal MH started before such a thing was widespread on the internet. 2004 I doubt people were arguing the difference.
10:24 thank you for that, can't tell how many times i'v heard those horrendous lies, dragons with two legs are not necessarily wyverns
Wait huh how do you not have at least a million subs yet this is some of the best content on youtube
I really love the design of the gryffs! Just like my gryff character with 4 limbs
Yes! The dragon/wyvern dichotomy is totally arbitrary! A dragon is whatever you want it to be!
I'm also very passionate about this subject too, lol
4 leg 2 wing dragon!
@@DragonProtector or 2 leg 2 wing, or 4 legs no wings, or just 2 wings, or no limbs at all! Or almost anything else!
@@blackdragon5274 i don't like non wing. They are not dragons in my eyes
@@DragonProtector Like CA said, the medieval manuscripts and illustrations disagree. If the people that made up dragons said it's so, who are we to argue, imo?
@@blackdragon5274 valid point i guess 😆. But who says we can't have our own thoughts. I believe my own thoughts on what i think. I don't agree with others ideas.
The planet Pandora from the borderlands franchise has some pretty unique wildlife. Not sure how much lore there is on the species though
In Hungarian folklore, dragons tend to have multiple heads (most commonly 7, but sometimes 3, 9 or 12 are used). We had a kid's show back in my time about a friendly, one-headed dragon who felt a bit left out for only having one head.
So, Hungarian dragons are all hydras? Or, well, mostly?
This was so fun!
Another version of fire breathing also seen in ''How to train your Dragon'' is producing a flamable gas and lighting it on fire using some kind of ''bones'' and exhaling air so strong that its like a flamethrower.
THANK YOU!!! It also drives me nuts when people say it's a wyvern if it only has 2 legs and 2 wings. I appreciate the historical examples you present but there is something I would add for any outside historical examples. If a source of media calls it a dragon, it's a dragon end of discussion.
Including Alolan Exeggutor?
Curious Archive there is another archive of speculative dragons by artists "Joshua Knüppe"(Hyrotrioskjan) his project is "Dragons Of The World" 🐉🌎, Hopefully you'll do a video about them.
His dragons are very impressive and fascinating.
I mean some pterosaurs are extremely dragonlike and even some dinosaurs are Spinosaurus doesn't look to far from a big semi aquatic dragon and postosuchus looks very drake-like so in a way we did get dragons, who knows maybe someday we'll discover some kind of new order of carnivorous dinosaurs that somehow breathed fire.
This is hands down my favorite channel!
The SCP called 'Where the Dragon Went', or something similar, is a story very much worth hearing.
Generally speaking I think wyvern fits into the category of dragons. I think most people who arent nerds have never even heard of a wyvern, and the quickest way to describe it to them in the moment is some variation of "its like a dragon". People these days just like to "umm actually" :P
These are really cool, fire breathing doesn't seem to be that unrealistic of a natural adaptation, i mean fireflies exist and use magnesium igniters and chitin ignition chambers, gas bladders are already a thing, all you need is to turn H20 into H2 and 0, which is maybe the hardest part?
"endogeneously producing pyrophoric compounds" lol, were you trying to say that in a way where people wouldnt understand? :P. So basically, internally made oxygen combusting compounds? Like magnesium probably, like the lightning bug lol
The heads of these things seem a little large across the board, no?
1:18 The clouds look like a dragon
2 legged dragons are much more scientifically accurate.
In worlds where the majority of creatures have 4 limbs.
but those are wyverns, I understand how everybody trying to make "realistic" dragons nowdays, but if their front legs and wings are combined i only see a wyvern no matter how large it is. Also, restricting dragons with a four-limbed or other evolutionary patter just make them fictional dinosaurs.
@@eralfion5316 being fictional dinosaurs isn't too much of an insult, considering that Dinosaurs are the closest things to Kaiju we've had IRL.
This is so awesome. Great job!
Aw man, I wish this video had been out in Spring 2021! I actually did a research project that included analysis of dragon anatomy and how that affected people’s perceptions of them depending on which ways they were portrayed.
Very informative and interesting video!