{"collection":"myth-cosmogony","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_73461/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_73461","id":"gutenberg_73461","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/73461","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Archaeology & Anthropology","Category: Mythology, Legends & Folklore","Dragons","Perseus (Greek mythological character)"],"text":"PERSEUS\n\n\n\n\n             TO-DAY AND TO-MORROW SERIES\n\n\n  _D\u00c6DALUS, or Science and the Future_\n       By J. B. S. Haldane\n\n  _ICARUS, or The Future of Science_\n       By the Hon. Bertrand Russell, F.R.S.\n\n  _THE MONGOL IN OUR MIDST_\n       By F. G. Crookshank, M.D. _Fully Illustrated_\n\n  _WIRELESS POSSIBILITIES_\n       By Prof. A. M. Low. _With four Diagrams_\n\n  _NARCISSUS, An Anatomy of Clothes_\n       By Gerald Heard. _Illustrated_\n\n  _TANTALUS, or The Future of Man_\n       By F. C. S. Schiller\n\n  _THE PASSING OF THE PHANTOMS_\n       By Prof. C. J. Patten, M.A., M.D., Sc.D., F.R.A.I.\n\n  _CALLINICUS, A Defence of Chemical Warfare_\n       By J. B. S. Haldane\n\n  _QUO VADIMUS? Some Glimpses of the Future_\n       By E. E. Fournier d\u2019Albe, D.Sc., F.Inst.P.\n\n  _THE CONQUEST OF CANCER_\n       By H. W. S. Wright, M.S., F.R.C.S.\n\n  _HYPATIA, or Woman and Knowledge_\n       By Dora Russell (The Hon. Mrs. Bertrand Russell)\n\n  _LYSISTRATA, or Woman\u2019s Future and Future Woman_\n       By A. M. Ludovici\n\n  _WHAT I BELIEVE_\n       By the Hon. Bertrand Russell, F.R.S.\n\n  _PERSEUS, or Of Dragons_\n       By H. F. Scott Stokes, M.A.\n\n  _THE FUTURE OF SEX_\n       By Rebecca West\n\n  _THE EVOCATION OF GENIUS_\n       By Alan Porter\n\n  _AESCULAPIUS, or Disease and The Man_\n       By F. G. Crookshank, M.D.\n\n  _PROTEUS, or The Future of Intelligence_\n       By Vernon Lee\n\n               _Other Volumes in Preparation_\n\n                   E. P. DUTTON & COMPANY\n\n\n\n\n                                PERSEUS\n                                  OR\n                              OF DRAGONS\n\n                                  BY\n                   H. F. SCOTT STOKES, M.A. (Oxon.)\n\n\n                            [Illustration]\n\n\n                               New York\n                        E. P. DUTTON & COMPANY\n                           681 Fifth Avenue\n\n\n\n\n                            Copyright 1925\n                       By E. P. Dutton & Company\n\n\n                         _All Rights Reserved_\n\n\n               _Printed in the United States of America_\n\n\n\n\n              _If Jones of Chelsea should bedeck\n              With virgin\u2019s head a horse\u2019s neck,\n              And decorate this monstrous birth\n              With limbs of all the beasts on earth\n              And many-coloured wings, would you\n              Contain your laughter at the private view?_\n\n                                     Horace, _Ars Poetica_, 1\u20135.\n\n\n\n\n                     CONTENTS\n\n\n                                             _Page_\n\n      Preface                                    3\n\n      Introduction                              13\n\n   I. Of Dragons in General                     16\n\n  II. Of Dragons in Classical Antiquity         23\n\n III. Of Dragons in Early Christendom           29\n\n  IV. Of Dragons in Modern Europe               43\n\n   V. Of Dragons in Ancient Egypt               57\n\n  VI. Of the Birth and Death of the Dragon      63\n\n      Epilogue                                  72\n\n\n\n\n                                PERSEUS\n                                  OR\n                              OF DRAGONS\n\n\n\n\n                              OF DRAGONS\n\n\n\n\n                                PREFACE\n\n\nI have been asked to explain the purpose of this study. I find a\nridiculous difficulty in doing so, for it had none. My interest in\ndragons was aroused by some incidental paragraphs in Leslie Stephen\u2019s\n_The Playground of Europe_. I determined to find out all that there was\nto be known about dragons: with the unfailing assistance of that great\ninstitution, the London Library, I made a fairly careful search; and,\nwhen I had exhausted my authorities (to whom I am greatly indebted), I\nset down with some pleasure the facts that had come under my notice.\nThat is all.\n\nIn case it should be objected that no sane man could have done\nanything so elaborately purposeless, I will attempt a more plausible\nexplanation\u2015\u2015though the truth is exactly what I have said.\n\nThe first four sections give a fair account of the dragon as known\nto history: in ancient Greece, in early Christendom, and in modern\nEurope. The last two endeavour to explain how the dragon-story may have\noriginated from the myths and customs of prehistoric Egypt, and how\nhumanly foolish the whole thing is; and they close with the pious hope\nthat the species may in time become extinct.\n\nIt will be objected that the dragon is already dead, as has been shown\nin the course of the study. It is true that the living, breathing,\ndevouring dragon has passed away with Perseus and the gods of old;\nwe have to-day only an occasional saga, such as the \u201cJabberwock,\u201d\na pale reflection of the full-blooded ancient tales, lacking many\nessential details and almost apologized for by its author; a herald\u2019s\nact of piety, or the unreal enthusiasm of an \u00e6sthete vainly seeking\nde-sophistication. It is all a faint afterglow of the age of faith. And\nyet, in England at any rate, the dragon is not dead.\n\nWhat are the chief characteristics of modern Englishmen\u2015\u2015not the\nornaments of society, nor artists, nor any other lovely ones, but these\npoor plain people who earn their daily bread, with or without the sweat\nof their brows, because they must; who make up nine-tenths of our\npopulation; who control our political destinies; and whom the Carlton\nClub delights to honour?\n\nThey are respectability, bigotry, and cant. There can be no doubt\nabout this. The consequence is that the men have no character and\nthe women no charm, and we rule over a quarter of the world with\ncomplete satisfaction to ourselves. These three together make up our\nmodern dragon. Respectability is the deadliest, for it is a plausible\nsubstitute for better things; but it is a dead end, like innocence.\n\nMost men who have realized the existence of this monster apparently\ntry to meet it by joining the Labour Party. There is nothing immoral\nabout that, but I pin my faith to the less dogmatic method of general\neducation. It is curious, by the way, to note that the devil is\nhistorically associated with knowledge and not with ignorance. It would\ntake too long to explain how this bogey came to be hoisted, but it\nis still very commonly made use of to frighten children, and my true\npurpose is to plead that it _is_ only a bogey, and that ignorance is\nthe devil\u2019s most effective weapon.\n\nThe devil\u2019s advocate might argue much as follows:\n\n1. \u201cYou don\u2019t really like the \u2018vulgar\u2019\u2015\u2015they are not as interesting\n    as your own friends.\n\n2. \u201cIt will come to nothing. What _is_ the ultimate value of \u2018free\n    discussion\u2019 and \u2018reasoning without prejudice\u2019 among people who\n    don\u2019t read and can\u2019t think?\n\n3. \u201cIn so far as you do succeed, you will merely make them miserable:\n    as thus:\n\n      \u2018Happiness is the end of life.\n\n      \u2018It consists of (_a_) the admiring contemplation of the\n        truly admirable, and the delighted companionship of the\n        truly delightful. This is the best. (_b_) The second\n        best is to enjoy in imagination what you know to be\n        imaginary. (_c_) The third best is to enjoy mistakenly\n        what is in fact non-existent or ugly.\n\n      \u2018There is no other good.\u2019\n\n\u201cAll this is A B C, and no longer worth arguing about. Then imagine\na man well content with a mistaken religion, a dreary home, and an\nunlovely wife (and this describes nearly all mankind). What happens\nwhen you educate him? It is difficult for him to change his wife, very\ndifficult to change his religion, and impossibly difficult to change\nhis home\u2015\u2015and the man is uprooted and miserable for life.\u201d\n\nThe answer is: This is all substantially true (which is the definition\nof caricature). Comfortable folk too commonly ignore the prosaic\nfoundations of imperishable things. Many of the more delightful virtues\nare impossible vices to men struggling for the bare necessities of life\n(as you may see any day if you try to practise ordinary courtesy in\nmounting a \u2019bus), and it is complacent cant to propose such virtues to\nthem. And men so struggling are not altogether delightful. The point\nabout them is, by what right or merit of yours do you live so much\nmore easily, with so many more opportunities of the good life; and do\nyou use your opportunities? And can you be of any use to others less\nfortunate than yourself? For the rest:\n\n(1) The argument defends too much. It defends every _status quo_\nagainst all change. But change, though not necessarily progress, is\nevidently necessary to progress; and, even if progress be despaired of,\nchange is in itself nearly always healthy. It prevents men from going\nto sleep.\n\n(2) When all the world is delightful, all men will be able to enjoy\ndelightful companionship. Meanwhile, the pioneers must suffer, and\nhope for better things for their children.\n\nIf it be argued that education does not make men delightful, in fact\nvery much the contrary, I answer that that depends upon the education,\nand that, if genuine education doesn\u2019t, nothing will; which is absurd.\n\n(3) When all the world loves lovely things, then lovely things will be\neasily come by, and ugly things will not be tolerated. This is not a\ngenerous illusion but a simple economic truth. Suppose I manufacture\npurple handkerchiefs adorned with green dragons: I do it because\nthere is a demand, and if you want one perfectly plain (and if nobody\nelse does) you will have to pay twice as much for it because it is a\n\u201cspecial\u201d; but if all the world wanted them plain, they would be a\nstock line and you could have them for half the money. Meanwhile, the\npioneers must pay double or go without.\n\n(4) When all the world has passed through the stage of intelligent\nscepticism and examined its foundations, it will worship the unknown\ngod without fear and without reproach\u2015\u2015a very right and proper thing to\ndo. Meanwhile, the pioneers must be damned dissenters.\n\nThat is the gist of this study: \u201cMethinks I see in my mind a noble and\npuissant nation....\u201d Good (_b_) is in itself better than (_c_); and it\nis a half-way house to (_a_), which (_c_) is not.\n\nAll the textbooks tell us about the nature and origin of belief. I have\nbut shown a few examples of what incredible things men believed almost\ndown to our own day, and still believe. One of the chief functions\nof History is to show what wrongs good men have tolerated, and what\nabsurdities wise men have believed, as a warning to their later sons\nto look warily about them for the like. In that sense this study may\nclaim to be true history.\n\n    That low man seeks a little thing to do,\n      Sees it and does it:\n    This high man, with a great thing to pursue,\n      Dies ere he knows it.\n    That low man goes on adding one to one,\n      His hundred\u2019s soon hit:\n    This high man, aiming at a million,\n      Misses an unit.\n\nWe may miss an unit and die; but at least we shall have striven to be\nworthy of a grammarian\u2019s funeral.\n\n\n\n\n                              OF DRAGONS\n\n                 (An Introduction to the Study of Man)\n\n\nI must first ask your pardon for troubling you with this digression,\nbut the facts and the theories are so many and curious and the whole\nsubject is of such vital importance, that I dared not trust to my\nmemory alone. It must be admitted that most of the facts recorded are\nobviously untrue and that most of the theories are unsupported by\nevidence and highly improbable; though the facts are guaranteed by the\nhighest authorities of the most ancient religions and the theories\nupheld by the most eminent modern scientists. Whence it is evident\nthat I, like Sir John Mandeville, \u201chave taken pains to ascertain the\nexact truth\u201d; and yet I think that from this jumble of superstitions\nand fables and conjectures and absurdities there does emerge something\nthat may repay you for the weariness of an hour, and throw some light\nupon the hopes and fears with which the unconquerable spirit of man has\nprogressed through the ages to the crowning triumphs of this twentieth\ncentury. Indeed, as Sir Thomas Browne finely says in his Preface: \u201cA\nwork of this nature is not to be performed upon one legg: and should\nsmell of oyl, if duly and deservedly handled.\u201d And, on second thoughts,\nI fully and unreservedly withdraw my apology.\n\nI shall begin with some attempt to define our subject, and then take\nyou through the dragons of classical antiquity and early Christendom\ndown to the twilight uncertainty of the sixteenth and seventeenth\ncenturies and the blank incredulity of our modern age. I shall then\ngo back to the earliest legends of all\u2015\u2015the Egyptian, and close with\nan attempt to harmonize the whole, and with a critical estimate of the\nplace of the dragon in human thought and experience.\n\n\n\n\n                                   I\n\n                         OF DRAGONS IN GENERAL\n\n\nIn Glastonbury, where St. Dunstan took the devil by the nose and where\nthe Pilgrim\u2019s Inn is dedicated to St. George and the Dragon, the dragon\nwill always be an object of peculiar interest, not to say veneration.\n(So true is this that on the 16th October, 1906, the Somerset County\nCouncil, on the advice of its Chairman, adopted as its sole device\n\u201cGules, a dragon rampant, or,\u201d though the recognition of its increasing\nimportance has since led it to add\u2015\u201515th October, 1912\u2015\u2015the mace of\noffice, \u201cat a cost not exceeding \u00a320.\u201d)\n\nFor Milton writes in one of his most harmonious numbers:\n\n    The old Dragon under ground\n    In straiter limits bound\n    Not half so far casts his usurp\u00e9d sway.\n    And wroth to see his kingdom fail\n    Swings the scaly horrour of his folded tail.\n\nand St. John (_Revelation_, xx, 2) speaks of \u201cthe Dragon, the old\nSerpent, which is the Devil and Satan,\u201d while the Serpent that tempted\nEve in Paradise has been familiar to us all since our earliest\nchildhood; though commentators differ as to whether it appeared with\na virgin\u2019s head (as some say) and how it was enabled to speak, and\nin Eve\u2019s own language; and why the event excited no surprise in her.\n(Milton tells us\u2015\u2015_Paradise Lost_, ix, 550, and what follows\u2015\u2015that\nit did, and that \u201cnot unamazed\u201d she took up the matter with the\nSerpent, which explained that it had been elevated above all the\n\u201cother beasts that graze\u201d by tasting of the tree of knowledge. This\nanswer at once satisfied Eve and lured her on to her fall. The whole\naccount is circumstantial but undocumented.) Some say that Eve was\ninexperienced with animals, not having been present when Adam named\nthem; Eugubinus suggests that the Serpent was a basilisk, at that time\nharmless; and the Emperor Julian said roundly that the whole story\nwas a fable. However that may be, the dragon has been identified with\nnearly all the gods and devils of nearly all the religions of nearly\nall mankind\u2015\u2015primitive man does not distinguish between the two, both\nbeing primarily non-moral beings of enormous and terrifying power\u2015\u2015and\nChristian evidence is undivided in associating the dragon with the\npowers of darkness. And what could be more natural than that a dragon\nshould take up its abode in or near Glastonbury, this region of hills\nand swamps? For it is universally admitted that dragons are to be\nfound on the tops of mountains or in the depths of marshes, and it is\na generally accepted test of evidence that what has been believed by\nall men everywhere in every age is true\u2015\u2015absurd, perhaps, but not more\nabsurd than the modern opinion that what one man has once believed is\ntrue.\n\nWe need not pause long over those other meanings of \u201cDragon\u201d which so\nconfused our forefathers and so delight our contemporary compilers\nof dictionaries: we do not propose to study that Dragon (Draco) who\ngave stringent laws to the ancient Athenians, nor the variety of\ncarrier-pigeon known to natural history under that name, nor the\nstar called Dragon, nor quicksilver, nor (directly) the sea-serpent,\nnor the flying lizard; nor have we any concern with the dragoons,\nwho take their name either from the dragon wrought upon their guns\nor from the fact that they were originally mounted infantry, and so\na kind of fabulous monster or \u201cpopular mystery.\u201d Our subject is the\ncommon (or garden) dragon, one of the major vertebrates, blood-red\nor chameleon-hued, with huge snake-coils, web-feet, bat-wings, and\nthe head of a lion or an eagle, capable of snuffing up the wind\n(_Jeremiah_, xiv, 6) and holding companionship with owls (_Job_, xxx,\n29) though some say that the bird intended is the ostrich. It dwelt of\nold in mountain-caves, and lakes and marshes, and other inaccessible\nplaces (the fiercer sort favoured the mountains), and survives to-day\nonly in heraldry, for instance, in the arms of the City of London, and\nof His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales. More peculiar and detailed\ndescriptions of the animal will follow later, but it is well to note\nhere its special partiality for water and for swallows (whence swallows\nflying low are to this day popularly supposed to herald rain), and its\nhabit of guarding treasures\u2015\u2015gold, pearls, and precious stones\u2015\u2015and\nof emitting thunder and lightning. Eating its heart confers peculiar\nqualities, notably fertility and the gift of tongues, and the draconite\nor precious stone which lies embedded in its forehead has incredible\nproperties in the way of medicine and magic, but only if you catch the\nanimal alive and remove the stone without otherwise injuring it. (The\nrecorded instances of this feat are remarkably rare, most authentic\ndraconites having fortunately fallen from the head of the beast while\nin flight, very much as a meteorite might fall to-day.)\n\nWithout further theorizing or inquiry, we will pass on to the old Greek\nlegend of Perseus, pausing only for the pleasant task of exploding\none particularly absurd opinion about the origin of the dragon.\nSceptics have suggested that it is nothing but primitive man\u2019s hazy\nand terrified tradition of the antediluvian monsters which walked the\nearly earth and which adorn the first pages of Mr. Wells\u2019 _Outline of\nHistory_; but science now tells us that something like seven million\nyears elapsed between the passing of the last of these and the first\nappearance of the first of our fairly human forebears.\n\n\n\n\n                                  II\n\n                   OF DRAGONS IN CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY\n\n\nThere were numerous dragons in old Greece, \u201cgorgons and hydras and\nchim\u00e6ras dire,\u201d and all the best heroes had at least one apiece to\ntheir credit; but they were a confusing and unfriendly lot, and we will\nconfine ourselves to the central legend of Perseus.\n\n\u201cAn oracle warned Acrisius, King of Argos, that he would surely die by\nthe hand of his daughter Dan\u00e6\u2019s son. To prevent this, he locked the\nfair maiden in a tower of brass, which he built for the purpose. But\nZeus, king of Heaven, visited her in the disguise of a golden shower\nof rain, and, much to Acrisius\u2019 annoyance, she bore a son, Perseus.\nAcrisius then shut them up in a chest and cast them into the sea;\nbut, far from being drowned or inconvenienced by the motion, the babe\nslumbered as in a rocking cradle, and in due course the chest was\ndrawn safely ashore on Seriphos by Dictys, brother to Polydektes,\nking of that island, who took the pair under his protection. Time\npassed, and Polydektes sought to marry the unwilling Dan\u00e6, and, to\nget rid of Perseus, now a strapping lad, sent him off to kill Medusa\nand bring home her head. Medusa was a kind of dragon called a Gorgon,\nwho, though mortal herself, had two immortal sisters. Their parentage,\nthough obscure, was extremely distinguished, whence their troubles;\nfor as half-castes they had no lot or portion with gods or men, which\nto three lively young women (as they then were) was insufferably dull.\nTheir speaking countenances betrayed the depth of their more than\nhuman suffering, so much so that in course of time they became so\nterrible to look upon that any man who should see them would be turned\nto stone at sight. In this awkward predicament Perseus was fortunate\nin possessing friends in high places. The goddess Athene gave him a\nmirror, to strike the creature after the manner of a man shaving,\nwithout directly looking on her\u2015\u2015an awkward and unconvincing man\u0153uvre.\nThe god Hades gave him a helmet of invisibility, apparently of a higher\nclass than the device adopted by Old Peter in the Bab Ballad. (He, you\nwill remember, duly became invisible, but his clothes did not; whence\ndivers inconveniences.) Or perhaps the hero travelled in primitive\nsimplicity (but that wouldn\u2019t account for his weapons). The god Hermes\ngave him his own winged shoes, and the god Heph\u00e6stus a mortal blade.\nArmed with these contrivances, and luckily finding the Gorgons asleep,\nPerseus completed his task and started for home with the head in a\ntravelling-bag with which he had prudently provided himself (for the\nhead was still fatal to view). On his way he turned Atlas to stone (and\nyou can see the Atlas mountains to this day), either out of pity for\nhis sufferings\u2015\u2015he had to hold up all heaven on his head, and heaven\nwas, as in early Christendom, completely solid\u2015\u2015or, as some say, in\nrevenge for some trivial rudeness. If so, it is a regrettable blot\non his otherwise unsullied escutcheon; for even Medusa had longed to\ndie. Flying on, he next beheld Andromeda, daughter of Cepheus king\nof Ethiopia, bound to a rock and waiting to be devoured by a dragon.\nThis dismal scene had been staged by Zeus to appease the Old Man of\nthe Sea, because the king\u2019s wife had boasted that she (or, some say,\nher daughter) was more beautiful than the nymphs of the sea. Perseus\nrapidly appreciated the situation, pressed the terrified damsel to\nmarry him (about which in her distress she made no difficulty, though\nalready betrothed to her uncle Phineus, who was safely under cover at\nhome), killed the instrument of divine vengeance when it lumbered up\nclumsily from the sea, so that the waves ran red with its blood\u2015\u2015and\nduly married Andromeda. The skulking uncle made a regrettable scene\nat the ceremony, and the bloody fight was terminated only by Perseus\nproducing the fatal head of Medusa, which turned his enemies to\nstone. Returning home with his bride, he restored his grandfather,\nwho had been dethroned by a wicked brother, and reached Seriphos in\ntime to save his mother from Polydektes, whom he replaced by the\nfaithful Dictys. Shortly afterwards he was throwing the hammer at some\nsports organized by a neighbouring monarch, when his aged grandfather\nunluckily got in the way and received a fatal blow on the head; and\nthe old oracle was fulfilled. Perseus inherited his kingdom, and begot\na numerous progeny; but this idyllic scene was overshadowed by the\ngloom of the accident, and he found no peace until he exchanged thrones\nwith the king of Tiryns, where he lived to a ripe old age, and died,\nuniversally lamented, in the bosom of his family.\u201d\n\nSuch is the old Greek legend: two dragons, a supernatural birth,\nsupernatural weapons, faithful and wicked brothers, a rescued maiden,\nand the inexorable doom of Fate. We shall come back to this in our\nconclusion.\n\n\n\n\n                                  III\n\n                    OF DRAGONS IN EARLY CHRISTENDOM\n\n\nThere were numerous dragons in early Christendom, \u201cgorgons and hydras\nand chim\u00e6ras dire,\u201d and all the best saints had at least one apiece to\ntheir credit; but they were a confusing and unfriendly lot, and we will\nconfine ourselves to the central legend of St. George.\n\n\u201cSt. George is one of that numerous class of Saints about whom nothing\nauthentic is known\u201d: but, piecing together the _Golden Legend_ and the\nPortuguese and Balkan variants, we arrive at the following:\n\n\u201cThe people of Troyan were sunk in all manner of iniquity, which\ngreatly shocked Our Lady, who happened to visit the place. Returning\nto Heaven, she protested to God, who sent bears to frighten them\ninto righteousness. This proved of no avail, and, on the suggestion\nof Elijah, God then sent them all manner of plagues and poxes for\nseven years, but without result; he then sent a drought for a similar\nperiod, and, as they still remained unconverted, he created a lake\nin the neighbourhood and in it a dragon which visited the city three\ntimes a day and devoured three hundred inhabitants at each visit; in\naddition to these \u2018hearty meals\u2019 it demanded a virgin nightly, and\nat last the lot fell upon the king\u2019s daughter; after obtaining eight\ndays\u2019 grace for lamentation, he was finally forced to abandon her with\nhis blessing; but the blessed George (a child of supernatural birth,\ninduced by his mother\u2019s eating a peculiar fish), passing by on his\ndappled courser with his mortal lance, greeted her in the name of God\nand inquired why she was there; after hearing her story and satisfying\nhimself as to her faith and morals (\u2018Had her heart always been pure?\u2019\netc.) he dismounted and planted his lance in the earth. He then laid\nhis head in her lap, saying: \u2018Pray examine my head a little, for I feel\nstrangely sleepy.\u2019 Under the soothing influence of her gentle fingers\nhe fell asleep, and the abrupt transitions of a traditional ballad do\nnot enable us to judge whether the damsel was long occupied in removing\nthe consequences of his saintly disregard for cleanliness; while he\nrested, the lake rose in waves and the dragon emerged. The bashful maid\nwas ashamed to waken her deliverer, but her tears rolled down upon his\nface and he leapt up like one possessed, and, fortified with the sign\nof the Cross, heavily wounded the dragon. \u2018Pass thy girdle round its\nneck, nothing doubting (said he) and lead it into the city, and bid\nthem be converted: if they refuse, set free the insatiable dragon and\nhe will destroy the people of Troyan.\u2019 The argument thus presented on\nhis behalf by the Princess proved irresistible and they were converted\nto the number of 20,000 excluding women and children. The fate of the\ndragon is uncertain, but one version tells, in some detail, how it\nwas then killed and how four pairs of oxen were required to remove\nit. The grateful monarch erected a Church to Our Lady and St. George\n(whose promotion appears to have been remarkably rapid) and offered\nhim money and his daughter to wife. But that holy and unambitious man\nreplied, \u2018Give the money to the poor, care for the Church, honour the\npriests, and diligently attend divine worship.\u2019 As to the daughter,\nthe difficulty is that George, by virtue of vows he has taken,\ncannot marry. At this critical moment his brother sees by a magical\nlife-token that George is in danger, and, hurrying off, arrives in time\nto accommodate his tender conscience by taking the lady himself and\nleaving George the honours of canonization.\u201d Virtue always triumphs in\nfairy-tales.\n\n                   *       *       *       *       *\n\nSuch is the early Christian legend: A dragon, a supernatural birth,\na helpful horse, a faithful brother, a life-token, and a rescued\nmaiden; and \u201cthe Church may be congratulated on having converted and\ncanonized the pagan hero Perseus.\u201d But before passing on to more modern\nevidence, it will be well to give some account of the popular variants\nwhich circulated all over the world as fairy-tales, superstitions, or\nromances, almost down to our own day. The point in this case is not so\nmuch who told or believed or guaranteed them, but the simple fact of\ntheir having been told.\n\nThey consist almost invariably of four incidents: the supernatural\nbirth, the life-tokens, the helpful animals or the magic weapons, and\nthe rescued maiden.\n\n(The most recent I believe to be the poem on the \u201cJabberwock,\u201d which\noccurs in _Through the Looking Glass_. The hero, though evidently\nsomebody\u2019s child (\u201cCome to my arms, my beamish boy\u201d), has no undoubted\nsire. The tum-tum tree (\u201cSo rested he by the tum-tum tree\u201d) is probably\na life-token. His vorpal sword (\u201cHis vorpal blade went snicker-snack\u201d)\nis without doubt a magic weapon, and the \u201cslithy toves,\u201d \u201cmome raths,\u201d\nand \u201cborogroves\u201d may well be helpful animals. The rescued maiden is not\nspecifically mentioned, but it is difficult to explain in any other\nway the behaviour of the monster (\u201cmanxome,\u201d \u201cwhiffling,\u201d \u201cburbled\u201d) or\nthe motives of the hero).\n\n_The Supernatural Birth._ \u201cHeroes of extraordinary achievement or\nextraordinary qualities were necessarily of extraordinary birth. The\nwonder or the veneration they inspired seemed to demand that their\nentrance upon life, and their departure from it, should correspond\nwith the impression left by their total career.\u201d It is scarcely an\nexaggeration to say that every old Oriental tale begins with the words:\n\u201cThere was a king who had no children,\u201d and the means adopted by them\nfor achieving their pious purpose may be the eating of fish, fruit,\nbarleycorns, eggs, saltpetre, or a dragon\u2019s heart. There are dangers\nin all these unusual methods, as in the case of the man who was given\na male and a female fish of which his wife was to eat one according\nto the sex desired. Wanting a son, and to guard against accident, the\nrash man ate the female fish himself, \u201cwith the wholly unexpected\nresult that he himself gave birth to a daughter.\u201d In another case,\nthe dragon\u2019s heart, while being cooked, \u201cbegan to emit a pitch-black\nsmoke so powerful in its effects that the condition not merely of the\nqueen (who tasted the heart) but of the maiden who cooked it, as well\nas of every article of furniture in the room, became interesting.\nThe old four-post bedstead gave birth to a cradle,\u201d and so on and so\nforth\u2015\u2015a very economical method of furnishing. In European tales, on\nthe other hand, \u201cthe medicine is more frequently used to gratify spite\nagainst an unfortunate maiden\u201d by putting her unwittingly in blessed\ncircumstances. In every case at least one child is born \u201cof powers, it\nneed hardly be said, as remarkable as his parentage.\u201d Other substances\nwhich are \u201csovran against barrenness\u201d are water, wind, sun, and a magic\ntouch.\n\n_The Life-tokens._ Very commonly the hero has one or two brothers born\nwith him in the same miraculous way, and they set out on their fortunes\ntogether. What enables them to keep in touch when they part is a magic\nlife-token, also born with them in the same way\u2015\u2015for instance, a tree\nwhich grows from part of the fish planted in the garden at the time\nthat their mother ate her part. Each one of them will have such a tree\nor branch which thrives or withers according to his own fortunes, and\nby this token each knows when the other is in danger, and comes to his\nrescue as in the case of St. George. Sometimes it is a magic mirror, in\nwhich only the party concerned can see the fate of his brother\u2015\u2015\u201cno\ndoubt the eye of faith was required to see anything in it.\u201d By this\nmeans the brothers invariably rescue each other, or, if they come\ntoo late or if a witch has turned the unlucky one to stone, either\nthe witch thoughtfully provides the elixir of life or she is killed\nand it is found among her effects, or the faithful animals find it.\nSafely reunited, they commonly agree upon the division of their very\nconsiderable spoils; but in some cases they fall out and one kills the\nother, in which case the \u201celixir of life\u201d comes into play again and\nthey all live happily ever after. It may well be that the repentant\nbrother will see two snakes fighting: one kills the other, but in\nremorse brings it to life again with a magic herb: the sagacious fellow\ntakes the hint, and all is well again.\n\n_The Helpful Animals._ These are often begotten together with and in\nthe same miraculous way as the heroes and the life-tokens. Arranged\naccording to what we may now call \u201cthe Bovril principle,\u201d they come\nin the following order: horses, dogs, hawks, lions, wolves, falcons,\nbears, foxes, eagles, ants, dog-fishes, bulls, calves, hares, boars,\ncats, winged horses, and deer.\n\n_The Magic Weapons._ These are an obviously later variant of the same\nidea and, on the same principle, stand in the following order: lance,\nshield, sword, pistol, gun, magic wand, stick, bow and arrow, knife,\nbeer, stole, magic water, powder-horn, air-gun, iron staff, 500-lb.\nclub, mace, and crucifix.\n\n_The Rescued Maiden._ In every case the function of the hero and all\nhis apparatus is to rescue a distressed maiden from a monster to whom\nshe is being sacrificed to appease the Gods. Often the hero, having\nrescued the lady, \u201cungallantly refuses to see her home, saying that\nhe wishes to see a little more of the world.\u201d But, before departing,\nhe takes some token\u2015\u2015the dragon\u2019s tongue or eye or other part, or\nthe lady\u2019s handkerchief or other ornament. His desertion leaves her\na prey to the first impostor who comes along, claims the victory for\nhimself and the lady in marriage. In the nick of time the hero returns\nand shows up the impostor \u201cand poetical justice is completed by his\nmarriage with the lady\u201d (who has always fallen in love with him at\nfirst sight), while her sisters (for she has two sisters) are commonly\ngiven to the two other princes (for he has two brothers).\n\nAs I have said, all the best Saints performed feats of this nature,\nincluding the Holy Apostles Philip and Matthew, St. Michael, St.\nMargaret, St. Hilarion, St. Donatus, St. John, St. Sylvester, Pope Leo\nIV, and a man named Smith (at Deerhurst in Gloucestershire). It is also\ntold of a boy who was carried off by a dragon that, after long years,\nhe was found in its cave \u201calive and reading the Gospel, which was held\nup before him by St. Friday, while St. Sunday further contributed to\nhis convenience by holding the candle.\u201d\n\nScarcely ten miles from Glastonbury a terrible dragon lived once on\nAller Hill over beyond High Ham. His fiery breath destroyed the people\nand their flocks and herds, and he was particularly partial to maidens.\nThe climax came when a young man called one morning to fetch his bride\naway to Church: her home\n\n    Was levelled to the ground,\n    And on its ruins, now a funeral pyre\n    Smouldered the ashes of her aged sire\n\nand the foul monster had carried her off to his cave. The bridegroom\nswore, in his despair, that \u201cearth should no longer hold a thing so\nvile,\u201d and, marching off with his friends, killed the dragon and\nrescued his bride; but the story ends on a classical note of tragedy,\nfor she died of horror in his house that very day.\n\n_Reference_: E. Sidney Hartland, _The Legend of Perseus_, 3 vols.\n(London, 1896).\n\n\n\n\n                                  IV\n\n                      OF DRAGONS IN MODERN EUROPE\n\n\nIt will be well to begin this section with short accounts of the two\nmost satisfactory Renaissance dragons: the Dragon of Rhodes and the\nDragon of Bologna.\n\n\u201cThe history of the ancient Order of the Knights of St. John (not\nyet removed to Malta) records that about the year 1330 Dieudonn\u00e9 de\nGozon, afterwards third Grand Master of the Order, joined the Knights\nin Rhodes, and was filled with pious zeal to kill a terrible dragon\nwhich ravaged the Island; but the then Grand Master considered such\nextravagant gaieties too dangerous for a knight vowed to the defence\nof Christendom, and roundly forbade it. On this de Gozon returned to\nthe castle of his ancestors near Tarascon in France, and, with the help\nof an ingenious dummy dragon (so little does the art of war change),\ntrained his horses and dogs to face the monster, and, returning, killed\nit and removed its tongue as evidence. A lying Greek (so little does\nthe Greek nature change) found the carcase and claimed the victory; but\nde Gozon showed him up by producing the tongue\u2015\u2015and was put in prison\nfor disobedience. The Pfalzgraf Ottheinrich made our first written\nrecord of this feat when passing through on a pilgrimage in 1521, and\nthe corroborative evidence is indisputable: the feat is said to have\nbeen recorded on the tombstone of the knight (we have the tombstone,\nand it isn\u2019t); there are said to be pictures of it in a wall-painting\nin a house in Rhodes (which cannot be found); and the family are said\nto have preserved the draconite taken by the hero from the monster\u2019s\nforehead (the family has disappeared); the head itself was seen by a\nseventeenth century traveller still nailed to a gate in Rhodes, though\nit disappeared during the last century. For countless years the simple\nislanders had displayed it for the glory of God and without thought of\ngain, and it would perhaps be uncharitable to connect its disappearance\nwith the recent development of transatlantic transport, or with the\ndiscoveries of modern science, which have shown that the skeleton of\nthe dun-cow at Warwick is simply that of a whale. And, finally, they\nwill show you to this day in Rhodes the cave where the dragon lived.\u201d\n\nThe story of the Dragon of Bologna is tame by comparison. It is\nrecorded in great detail in _The Natural History of Serpents and\nDragons_ by Professor Ulysses Aldrovandus, published at Bologna\nby Mark Antony Bernia in the year 1640, at his own charges, with\na dedication to the Prince-Abbot Franciscus Perettus, and with\nthe approval of the Holy Roman Emperor Rudolph, the Rector to the\nCardinal-Archbishop of Bologna, and the legal adviser to the Most Holy\nOffice of the Inquisition in that city.\n\nThe story is as follows (p. 402): \u201cIn the early summer of the year\n1572, to wit on the 13th of May, the dragon appeared in the outskirts\nof Bologna, hissing horribly. It was caught the day after Ascension\nDay by a cowherd called Baptista of Camaldulus, about 5 P.M. and about\nseven miles out from the City, on the high road. His cows saw it and\nstopped dead, and Baptista, who was behind with his cart, pricked them\non with his goad; but they went down on their knees and wouldn\u2019t\nbudge. Then he heard a great hissing and beheld the astounding monster:\nbut though frightened out of his wits, he up with his stick and knocked\nit on the head so that it died. The brave herd, fearing it might not be\ndead, cut off one of its feet and brought it into Bologna as evidence.\nAfter three days the noble Horatius Fontana gave orders for the carcase\nto be sent to the great naturalist Aldrovandus, who declared it to be\nunique in all Italy and all Europe, and had it stuffed and put in the\nmuseum (whence it has unluckily disappeared). It was about this same\ntime that the flying dragon appeared by night in the sky, and no sane\nman will doubt that these portents were sent in honour of Pope Gregory\nXIII, who took office in that year and who sported a dragon on his\ncoat-of-arms.\u201d\n\nThis same Aldrovandus is our chief source of information on the modern\ndragon. He sets out, in due scholastico-scientific style, first the\nalternative meanings of the word \u201cdragon,\u201d with a note that Virgil\nis very haphazard in his use of \u201cdragon\u201d or \u201cserpent\u201d for snakes in\ngeneral; then the synonyms, as \u201csyren,\u201d \u201cleviathan,\u201d and the Hebrew\n_oach_ (whence perhaps our word \u201choax\u201d); then size\u2015\u20155 to 100 cubits (we\nmay split the difference and safely say about 50); habitation\u2015\u2015Libya,\nIndia, Atlas, \u00c6thiopia, Florida, etc. (with a caution that the species\nborn of a wolf and an eagle is probably fabulous and nowhere to be\nfound); colour\u2015\u2015red, black, ashen, pea-green, indeed the evidence is\nhopelessly conflicting; description\u2015\u2015head of a virgin or wild-boar,\ngoose-feet or talons or hoofs (they probably vary); St. Augustine\nconfirms Herodotus\u2019 opinion that they fly; poison\u2015\u2015more virulent in\nthe hotter climes; jaw\u2015\u2015some say very large, some say very small,\nsome say two rows of teeth, some say three, and the number is in\nany case uncertain; manners and customs\u2015\u2015very vigilant and fond of\ngold (so we see why they are normally set to guard treasures), not\nafraid of men, and able to throw elephants with their tails: four or\nfive, says Pliny, will twine their tails together for a long flight\nand so cover the distance at an incredible speed; very fierce, but\nHeracleides, the philosopher, had one so tame that it followed him\nabout like a dog; birth\u2015\u2015the evidence is conflicting as to whether\nfrom eggs or immediately. Remedies against their poison\u2015\u2015red mullet\napplied externally or (better) internally, or (best of all) the head\nof a dragon skinned and applied to the bite. Capture\u2015\u2015men of the\nmost magnificent courage drug them with opium-seeds, so as to obtain\nthe draconite; a scarlet cloak and the appropriate incantation are\neffective, and an axe has been tried with success: a useful trick is\nto catch them when they are preoccupied with an elephant-fight (their\ncustomary recreation), and another very good plan is to put down\nsulphur, which the creature eagerly gulps down and then moving to the\nnearest river drinks until it bursts. (This was the device of the\ngreat Cracus, who gave his name to Cracow. It is an elaboration of the\nProphet Daniel\u2019s method of dealing with Bal\u2019s dragon\u2015\u2015that holy man\u2019s\nmixture, it will be remembered, itself exploded the dragon; but the\nmarch of science and the closer study of animal-habits no doubt made\nCracus\u2019 scheme more convincing.)\n\nThe eyes are precious stones and the teeth ivory; the fat is a\nsovereign remedy against poison, fever, and blear-eyes; the spine is a\ngreat cure for toothache; the gall-bladder and intestines mixed with\nwine effect more than was ever claimed for Colman\u2019s mustard in the\nbath, removing warts. It is very lucky to bury a dragon\u2019s head under\nthe front doorstep, and the eyes make a fine poison and send away\nnightmares: and so on and so forth\u2015\u2015all this less than three centuries\nago.\n\nA little later, about 1660, the learned Jesuit Kircher visited the\nAlps, and, though discounting many devils as due to the credulity\nof the peasantry, could not resist the conclusion that so horrid\nand inhospitable a country could only have been intended by God to\nharbour dragons, especially when a public notice in the Church of St.\nLeodegarius (our old friend St. Leger, the patron-saint of bookmakers?)\nin Lucerne told how a man \u201cpaused some months in a cave with two\ndragons, who were either naturally amiable or were calmed by his\nenergetic appeals to the Virgin, and finally escaped by holding on to\ntheir tails when they flew away after their period of hybernation\u201d\n(History does not record whether they adopted Pliny\u2019s plan, or whether\nby a merciful dispensation of Providence they flew so close together\nthat he suffered no strain).\n\nThe anonymous author of _The Golden Coast, or a Description of Guinney_\n(London, 1665) has little reliable information on this or any other\nsubject. The people, he tells us, are Nigrit\u00e6 \u201cfrom their colour,\nwhich they are so much in love with that they use to paint the Devil\nwhite\u201d; and of the elephant, \u201cwhich some call Oliphant,\u201d that \u201cthey\nhave continual war against dragons which desire their blood because\nit is very cold.\u201d The book abounds in such old tales out of Pliny and\nBartholomew Anglicus, and has all the appearance of a literary puff\nof the Company of Royal Adventures of England trading to Africa (est.\n1662); for what honest man could have waxed so enthusiastic over that\ndeath-trap of a country, where (says he) \u201ca man may gain an estate\nby a handfull of beads, and his pocket full of gold for an old hat;\nwhere a cat is a tenement and a few fox tails a Mannor; where gold is\nsold for iron, and silver given for brasse and pewter?\u201d The Company\nfailed shortly afterwards and was replaced by the Royal African Company\n(1672), and this may well have been to over-spending in the Advertising\nDepartment.\n\nDoctor Thomas Browne, in his \u201c_Enquiries into very many received\ntenents, and commonly presumed truths_\u201d (London, 1686) (commonly called\nBrowne\u2019s _Vulgar Errors_) is more modern, but, he, like a sensible\nman takes a middle path between scepticism and faith\u2015\u2015thinks we cannot\nsafely deny that there is such an animal as the basilisk; but we are\nnot to confuse it with the cockatrice, a mere hieroglyphical fancy,\nthough even the cockatrice he will not declare to be impossible (he\ndoes not see how such an oddity _can_ be hatched from \u201ca cock\u2019s egg\u201d\n(_sic_: the phenomenon occurs only in a cock\u2019s eighth year, and causes\nit acute discomfort put under a toad or serpent)); but many inventions,\nhe says, are really \u201cthe courteous revelations of spirits,\u201d and we must\nnot be too cocksure of our merely human faculties.\n\nScheuchzer, the learned Botanist who toured the Alps in the first\nten years of the eighteenth century, frankly adopted the compromise\nimplicit in Aldrovandus\u2015\u2015always to believe half of what he was told;\nbut he thought the dragon-stone in the museum at Lucerne entirely\nconvincing; for (says he) a dishonest man would not have invented so\nsimple a story as its falling from the sky\u2015\u2015but rather some fabulous\ntale about its coming from the farthest Indies; and the stone not only\ncures simple h\u00e6morrhages, which ordinary jasper or marble might well\ndo, but dysentery and fevers and all those ills of which, to judge\nfrom the advertisements in the local press, Glastonians may now rid\nthemselves so much more simply. Item, a respectable citizen returned\nhome one evening lately \u201cwith a swimming in the head and a marked\nuncertainty about the motions of his legs, and how can we doubt his\nword when he attributes these unprecedented phenomena to the influence\nof the dragon who encountered him in the forest?\u201d Scheuchzer\u2019s\nscientific journals were published at the expense of the Royal Society\nof London. Credible witnesses of to-day maintain that \u201cnot the vestige\nof a dragon is to be found, even in those wildest regions of the Alps\nwhich ... were especially adapted for their generation.\u201d Thus do beauty\nand romance fade before the advance of Winter Sports and Grand Babylon\nH\u00f4tels.\n\n_References_: Aldrovandus, _op. cit._\n\nThomas Browne, _op. cit._\n\nLeslie Stephen, _The Playground of Europe_ (London, 1871).\n\nE. Ray Lankester, _Science from an Easy Chair_ (London, 1910).\n\nF. W. Hasluck, _The Dragon of Rhodes_ (British School at Athens, 1914).\n\n\n\n\n                                   V\n\n                      OF DRAGONS IN ANCIENT EGYPT\n\n\nIt is reported of Mr. Winston Churchill that, being challenged one day\nby a Frenchman as to the remarkable uniform he was wearing, he replied\nin the same language that he was an Elder Brother of the Trinity. \u201cAh!\u201d\nsaid the Frenchman, \u201cthat is indeed a unique distinction.\u201d\n\nIt is not so unique as might be supposed. If we could betake ourselves\nto the Egypt of 5,000 years ago, we should find them worshipping a\nTrinity of their own: Isis the all-Mother; Osiris the Son, and Horus.\nIsis, the forerunner of all the gods of all mankind was the goddess of\nfertility\u2015\u2015goddess, not god, for what could be more evident than the\nfemale fact of birth, whereas male assistance went long unrecognized.\nThe savage mother, finding herself with child, would attribute her\ncondition not to a \u201ccommonplace event which took place perhaps many\nmonths before,\u201d but to a recent thunderstorm or other striking\nphenomenon to which all could bear witness.\n\nSo Isis ruled alone for a while, and then in her own inimitable fashion\ngave birth to the water-god Osiris; and between them in due course they\nproduced the warrior Horus, who in the fullness of time became the\navenger of Osiris, when the powers of darkness slew him.\n\nThis is the bald and essential outline of their faith. The details\nare extremely confusing, partly because of variants, but principally\nbecause the savage-mind _is_ so confused. \u201cAnne\u2019s Mother\u2019s daughter,\nMother\u2019s Anne\u2019s daughter,\u201d reasons my baby; and the small boys who\ndeliver messages round the factory find a similar difficulty in\ndistinguishing between the Buying Department and the Sales Department.\nIn exactly the same way the gods of old Egypt became inextricably\nmixed. The tale told of one is easily applied to another, and God\nthe doer easily becomes God the done-by; while the symbol of the god\nwill equally well pass for (say) the enemy of the god, or the weapon\nwith which he fought. Like the old lady in the story, they \u201cdo not\ndistinguish.\u201d (Compare how our Arthur and the Saxon Cedric, whom he\nfought at Langport, were both identified with the dragon.)\n\nAfter this warning, the chief events of the Egyptian Old Testament may\nnot seem so absurd. They centre round \u201cThe Destruction of Mankind,\u201d\nthe original of all our myths.\n\nThe story is that Isis became angry with mankind because of their\ninfidelity, and determined to slay them all. She set about it with a\nwill and the earth ran red with their blood; but when she was near the\nend of her task, the other gods took pity on those who were left, and\ndetermined to thwart her. This they did by giving her some doctored\nbeer, whereupon she became \u201cgenially inoffensive\u201d\u2015\u2015and so the remnant\nescaped; and to this day their descendants generally regard beer\nwith an almost superstitious veneration. The Flood is an obvious and\nworld-wide variation of this theme.\n\nThe next stage is that Isis the slayer becomes Isis the slain, whose\nsacrifice will atone for the sins of mankind. The grandmother goddess\nthen becomes a mere mortal, \u201ca beautiful and attractive maiden\u201d\u2015\u2015say\na virgin: the virgin is then abandoned to her fate, and rescued by the\nconquering hero, and we are hot on the trail of Perseus and St. George.\n\nBut, you will say, what has all this to do with dragons? It must be\nadmitted that in Egypt, \u201cthe great breeding-place of monsters,\u201d no\ndragons survive in full-blown splendour; but these legends are the\ngerm of all, and from them springs the essential dragon-conflict, the\nvendetta of Horus against the powers of darkness. The dragon has also\nbeen identified with Osiris the good controller of water, with Set\nthe evil who killed him, with Isis in so far as she is confused with\nOsiris, and with Horus as the successor of Osiris, but we shall only\nbecome confused if we try to follow all its transformations.\n\nWe have come now to the end of all our tales, and I shall try in the\nlast part of this section to link up all the parts; to show you how\nremarkably little essential change there has been in man\u2019s thinking\nfor fifty centuries, and how the commonplace incidents of originally\nprosaic stories became distorted and elaborated with corroborative\ndetail, quite regardless of the original and often forgotten meaning.\n\n_Reference_: Elliot Smith, _The Evolution of the Dragon_ (London,\n1920).\n\n\n\n\n                                  VI\n\n                 OF THE BIRTH AND DEATH OF THE DRAGON\n\n\nThe chief satisfaction which learned men appear to derive from these\ntales is quarrelling about their common or separate origin. The\nSeparatists say that their resemblances merely show how very much\nalike men are, the world over; the Communists that they are so very\nintricate and so far from obvious that they must have sprung from a\ncommon stock (_cf._ Mr. W. J. Perry\u2019s and Professor Elliot Smith\u2019s\ntheories as to the common\u2015\u2015Egyptian\u2015\u2015origin of militarism, mining, and\nmany other branches of megalithic and modern culture). Personally I am\na Communist; for it is a perfectly good principle, common to science\nand theology, that miracles are not to be multiplied, beyond necessity.\nThe question is, in any case, of no fundamental importance to us, but\nit will simplify what follows if I make my standpoint plain.\n\nWhen our first fathers found themselves at large in this already\nancient world, the first fact they noticed was that they were alive.\nLike all their descendants after them, they wisely worshipped facts,\nand they made a religion of fertility; like us too, and like all those\nwho will follow us, they knew nothing certain of the two infinities\nfrom which we come and to which we go, before birth and after death.\nThe next fact they noticed was that other men died, though their minds\nshrank in horror from the fact that they too must die, and could not\nentertain it. They hankered after immortality, for their dear ones\nand (later) for themselves, as we hanker after it, and as our children\nwill; for in course of time it became a commonplace of all the world\nthat all men must die, and this doom of the \u201csad-eyed race of mortal\nmen\u201d is the theme of pathos throughout antiquity. Their souls rebelled\nagainst the bitterness of death, and the search for the elixir of\nlife (to renew man\u2019s youth and to give him immortality) has been \u201cthe\ninspiration of most of the world\u2019s great literature in every age and\nclime, and not only of our literature but of all our civilization.\u201d\n\nThey worshipped life, and feared and hated death. And so they\nworshipped women, and the womb from which they all sprang. For good\nluck they carried amulets, shells especially; and from being amulets\nthese shells came to be worshipped as the actual source of life, were\npersonified and made symbols again of the Great Mother, the giver of\nlife. (So Aphrodite, the goddess of love, came floating in a shell on\nthe foam of the sea to gladden the hearts of men). They noticed, too,\nthat water was the first necessity of men and beasts and plants, and\nthat dead men and things stiffened and withered as though the water\nwas gone out of them; and so they worshipped water as the principle\nof life, and the water-god was the second-born. Then, turning their\nvision further a-field, they took note of the regular motions of the\nmoon, her monthly course, and her strange connection with the tides\nof the sea; and so the Great Mother became identified with the Moon.\nAnd then as they pondered they felt the greater glory of the Sun, and\nset him up above his mother the Moon; but the moon long remained the\npersonification of order and light and goodness, set over against\nchaos and darkness and evil\u2015\u2015though in time it was the sun, or his\nsuccessor-sun, who came to be regarded as the prince of light.\n\nThey hated death, and in the presence of it protested their belief that\nsomehow, somewhere, the dead continued to live, needing all the gifts\nhis family could bring\u2015\u2015a primitive doctrine of immortality. And then,\nin the presence of corruption, they made plans to preserve the body:\nthey burnt incense to restore the odour of life; they poured libations\nto replace the vital juices. They tried to infuse blood, the life-giver\n(for \u201cblood,\u201d as we say still, \u201cis thicker than water\u201d) or to find some\npainted substitute. They hung the tomb with magic shells, that the dead\nmight be born again. And when, after all, the body still decayed, they\nmade statues instead for the soul to inhabit, and tried their charms\non them; and from the idea that statues can come to life grows the\ncontrary idea that men can be turned to stone. The crowning triumph of\ntheir statuary was the eye, making the statue (as we say) \u201ca living\nimage\u201d; and from the idea that the open eye means life, came the belief\nin the power of the eye for good or evil. To this day the neglect of\nthe poorest grave is regarded as a more than callous crime, and there\nare not wanting those amongst us who shudder at the desecration of the\nage-old tombs of Egyptian kings.\n\nThus it was in the beginning. And when in process of time a wise king\ndiscovered the arts of irrigation (it may be that this discovery made\nhim king; or perhaps kingship originated with the discovery of the\ncalendar, which conferred the gift of prophecy: \u201cking\u201d here is in\nany case premature), and spread fertility throughout the land, they\nworshipped him too and made him a living god, and cherished him as the\nsoul (as it were) of their land\u2019s fertility. And when he grew old,\nand his powers began to wane, terror fell on them lest their fortunes\nshould fail with him and they be all dead men. So they transferred\ntheir worship for the king to his office, killed him, and made his son\ndivine. And when he too began to age, they killed him in turn, and his\nsons after him, so that they always had a young and vigorous king-god.\nUntil in time an ageing king refused to submit, and this was the origin\nof the story of the wrath of the gods and the destruction of mankind.\nTime passed, and the monarch was replaced by a maiden among his\nsubjects, and we are at the stage of ordinary human sacrifice, \u201chuman\nblood being thought of as the only elixir.\u201d But in time that, too, was\nended, by a kind of religious reformation, through the belief that any\nother blood would do as well; and this was the origin of the story of\nthe rescued maiden and her deliverer.\n\nThey worshipped water, and they worshipped shells, and so the pearl\nwithin the oyster-shell; and diving for pearls, their natural enemy was\nthe shark, the guardian of the treasure and the only true and original\ndragon. But in the course of ages all this was naturally forgotten,\nand the dragon came to be adorned with all the terrors of all the\nmonsters of travellers\u2019 tales, from the python to the octopus and the\nlion that lives in the waste. Any terrible or impressive fact of life\nor nature\u2015\u2015the existence of evil, or of hoary mountains\u2015\u2015gave rise to a\nfresh dragon-tale; and the fact was then brought in as evidence of the\ntruth of the tale, very much as a politician to-day will convince men\nof his general veracity and wisdom by stating some obvious truth; and\nin the absence of facts, the vague terrors of untutored minds became\nembodied in similar monsters; and so in a sense they are still, though\nnowadays we call the result a \u201ccomplex.\u201d\n\n\n\n\n                               EPILOGUE\n\n\nI would not wish man rid of the dragon as death; partly, no doubt,\nbecause I know it to be impossible (\u201cThis business of death is a plain\ncase and admits no controversy\u201d); partly because death is such a\nsatisfactory thing: it is always something to look forward to. Death is\nperhaps the oldest of the dragons, long since domesticated and become\nthe friend of man through familiarity.\n\nBut there remains that dragon of which we spoke in the beginning,\ncompounded of respectability and bigotry and cant; or rather these\nthings are the evidence that the dragon still exists, for they are all\nthe effects of terror: terror of truth and knowledge and hard fact,\nthe old terror of man \u201ca stranger and afraid, in a world he never\nmade.\u201d This monster dwells not in the desert places of the earth, but\nin the hearth and home of every man. Its appetite is enormous and its\ndestructive powers are equalled only by its fertility. Like all the\nother dragons, it is begotten by dogma out of ignorance.\n\nIt would be a mistake to suppose (as some have done) that religion\nis altogether a bad thing because it has fostered many errors, or\naltogether a fraud because it is profitable to priests. Every science\nunder the sun has fostered innumerable errors, and every doctor on\nearth practises pious frauds daily, seldom solely for his private\nends. Mankind as a whole has had a hand in these imaginings for\nhalf-a-hundred centuries; our certain knowledge of our surroundings\nis to this day infinitesimal; and \u201cit is part of our human make-up to\nbridge the gaps in our experience with rumours, with conjectures, and\nwith soothing traditions.\u201d\n\nNot many months ago there came to these shores a Chinese game, Mah\nJongg, so perfected in the course of centuries that not even a Chinaman\ncan cheat at it. Is it too much to hope that, with the general increase\nof knowledge and the general recognition of the limits to which our\nknowledge can attain, this old world may yet produce some saint or hero\nwho will finally rescue Andromeda from the dragon?\n\n\n                   *       *       *       *       *\n\n\n Transcriber\u2019s Notes:\n\n \u2015\u2015Text in italics is enclosed by underscores (_italics_).\n\n \u2015\u2015Printer\u2019s, punctuation, and spelling inaccuracies were silently\n   corrected.\n\n \u2015\u2015Archaic and variable spelling has been preserved.","title":"Perseus : $b or, Of dragons","tradition":"myth-cosmogony","translated_text":null,"word_count":9965}