'Draconology' Explained | Dragon Biology

preview_player
Показать описание
What would the biology of a realistic order of dragons look like? A detailed exploration of VikasRao’s speculative Draconology project.
---
VikasRao Social Media:

Curious Archive Social Media:

Classic books like Dragonology and fictional documentaries like Discovery Channel’s Dragon Special have entertained the hypothetical idea of realistic dragons in the past, but I’ve been looking for more scientific takes on these mythical creatures.

Enter Draconology — a meticulously-detailed spin on the concept that imagines dragons as a parareptilian offshoot which emerged millions of years ago, and have survived until the modern day. The project was created by the artist VikasRao, and his Draconology series is unbelievably comprehensive.

So, for this entry into the archive, let’s make our own dragon documentary, and explore the awesome fictional science of Draconology…

0:00 Realistic Dragons
1:17 Draconology
1:45 Sea Serpents
3:59 Wyrms
5:13 Bird Dragons
6:07 Gryphons
7:36 Drakes
8:33 Wyverns
10:10 Wyvern vs. Dragon
11:27 True Dragons
13:26 Thank You & Outro

Copyright Disclaimer: Under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research. All video/image content is edited under fair use rights for reasons of commentary.

I do not own the images, music, or footage used in this video. All rights and credit goes to the original owners.

♫ Music: Infinite
SergePavkinMusic

Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0

#CuriousArchive #Dragons #SpeculativeBiology
Рекомендации по теме
Комментарии
Автор

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.

robertgerman
Автор

"If hippos were carnivores that lit their prey on fire."
So all the nightmares at once.

powerofanime
Автор

"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.

sunlocked
Автор

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!"

ghostgabe
Автор

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.

flamingphoenix
Автор

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

UnwiseWords
Автор

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).

AcidNeku
Автор

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.

johnkrappweis
Автор

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.

purplehaze
Автор

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.

Ractrin
Автор

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.

adamlatosinski
Автор

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.

notaporcupine
Автор

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.

FrostFireTiger
Автор

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.

quasar
Автор

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.

ryonhatcher
Автор

Wrong. You don’t have unusually strong feelings on wyverns vs dragons. Any cultured individual has a strong opinion on wyverns vs dragons

throstlewanion
Автор

This channel has introduced me too so many new speculative zoology projects that I’ve never heard of, amazing work, keep it up!

ivy
Автор

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.

demetrialowther
Автор

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.

tatsudragneel
Автор

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.

cdgonepotatoes