More than we wanted to hear on Dragons

[Steve Jackson <sj@io.com>]

On Thu, 26 Jan 1995 AnmlPeople@aol.com wrote:

> I don't buy Tom Holtz' claim that the dragons of medieval literature don't
> really resemble dinosaurs.  Look at any good collection of medieval paintings
> of saints slaying dragons.  You'll note two different common body patterns,
>  one of which is more-or-less therapod (with wings,  usually),  while the
> other is sauropod (either without wings or with very small wings.)

This is a fairly content-free remark . . . So medieval illustrators gave 
some dragons four legs like animals, and some two legs like men, and some 
no legs like snakes. So what? They drew unicorns, too - does that mean 
they were familiar with Monoclonius? It doesn't require either "ancestral 
memories" or "unrecorded fossil discoveries" to explain the medieval 
fabulists. Your speculations are very old ideas, and Occam's 
Razor shaves them away. Can we get back to dinosaurs?


** Steve Jackson - yes, of SJ Games - yes, we won the USSS case - fnord **
   yes, INWO is out - http://io.com/sjgames/ - dinosaurs, Lego, Kahlua!