The Story of the Dinosaur Thought to be a Griffin

Want more content like this? Check out my Jurassic Park Iceberg video, where I take a look at a list of Jurassic Park related topics that progressively get more strange and obscure as you go down.
• The ULTIMATE Jurassic ...
---------------------------------------------
Join our Discord server!
/ discord
---------------------------------------------
- CREDITS -
Articles:
The First Fossil Hunter (Book Synopsis) books.google.com/books/about/...
The First Fossil Hunters (Princeton University Press) press.princeton.edu/books/pap...
Griffins and Arimaspeans (Adrienne Mayor 1993 Paper)
www.jstor.org/stable/1260795?...
Griffin Bones (AMNH)
www.amnh.org/exhibitions/myth...
James Blaine Shackelford Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_B...
Mark Witton Blog Post markwitton-com.blogspot.com/20....
Protoceratops Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protoce...
Who Was Roy Chapman Andrews?
roychapmanandrewssociety.org/...
Music:
Marshmallow by Lukrembo
• lukrembo - marshmallow...
Better Days by Lakey Inspired
• LAKEY INSPIRED - Bette...
Videos/Clips:
Desert Clips
• Desert Stock Footage |...
• Desert Stock Footage |...
Dinosaur Planet - Protoceratops Clips
• Dinosaur Planet - Prot...
---------------------------------------------
#DinosaurTheory
#Paleontology
#DinoDiego

[@mihailpopa6051]

I bet that thing can fly higher than my hopes and dreams.

[@DinoDiego16]

it gets even sadder when you realize it doesn't fly at all and it's still higher than your hopes and dreams

[@superpish9527]

spittin straight and relatable facts, go off dude

[@amongussus4]

Ur not born to hope ur born to do and succeed

[@ifyoureadthisurfatherless6579]

@@amongussus4 you need to Dream and Hope to succeed at life,

[@Synthose1]

Here’s an idea: The people found a Protoceratops skeleton fragmented and lacking a frill. They saw and noticed similarities to an eagle and lion. Teeth were lacking in there discovery and they assumed it was a dead mythical beast

[@superpish9527]

I wrote about this in school for a paper a couple years back. Super cool to think that dinosaurs may have shaped the form of some mythological creatures without us even realizing.

[@makaylabachmeier-evans8043]

@Super Pish I am writing about this right now for a school paper how funny

[@samuraimecha1070]

Some people in the past totally found some fossils of theropod dinosaurs and misinterpreted it as dragons.

[@f.u.m.o.5669]

They Asian type dragons may be based on Asian Spinosaurs, like Ichthyovenator.

[@nightcorecat8873]

@@f.u.m.o.5669 and maybe the whole reason why dragons exist is because someone in medieval times found the skeleton of a pterosaur

[@f.u.m.o.5669]

@@nightcorecat8873 I mean ichthyovenator fossils, and European dragons are probably distorted views of multiple animals

[@Arachobia]

I agree with Witton's conclusion, but I think his argument about how protoceratops does not bear much resemblance to a lion or eagle is not a great one. We now know a lot of animals from Africa and Asia were the inspiration for many Greek and medieval myths - Indian Rhinos are most likely the original inspiration for unicorns. The idea of a horse with a spiral horn is not the way they were first illustrated - but over the years artists and Vikings selling narwhal horns solidified the idea of what a unicorn looked like. It's very plausible that "this creature has a beak like an eagle and claws like a lion" became "this creature is half-eagle, half-lion." Likewise, bones - especially fossils - often don't much resemble a living animal. Elephants are supposed to be the inspiration for Cyclopses, but a living elephant looks absolutely nothing like a humanoid, 1-eyed giant. If all you have is an ancient skull, however, and you live in ancient Greece and have likely never seen an elephant, living or dead, it becomes more plausible.

[@koalasandwich567]

It's also been thought antelope like oryx and chiru were also behind unicorns

[@mightyandray7260]

Right!? I love making connections between prehistoric animals and mythical creatures!

[@jamesflames6987]

When you see dinosaur "skeletons" in museums it's easy to imagine ancient peoples stumbling upon them. In reality they are usually reconstructed from piles of fragments themselves embedded in other rocks using painstaking techniques which didn't exist thousands of years ago.

[@freak6988]

Peoples interpretation of things are not always the best. There was an old mythical creature called the "questing beast", and when described or depicted in art had the head and neck of a snake, body of a leopard, and feet of a deer. Based on that description, you probably imagine some crazy looking creature...but in reality the "questing beast" was just a giraffe. Perhaps the protoceratops had some hand in the Griffin mythos. Maybe the person that saw a protoceratops fossil tried to describe what they saw to the best of their ability. "It had a beak like a bird, 4 legs and a long tail" Based on that description, while vague, could lead someone to imagine a griffin or something similar, even if the actual fossil itself isn't that similar. This is all just speculation, but that's half the fun!

[@balintkis490]

This had me laughing

[@liliaaaaaaaa]

I'm really glad you corrected yourself and put in the correction to your pronounciation of Scythians.. yes.. it's pronounced like.. scythe-ians.. I don't know how the agricultural implement relates to their name.. they had other names too, the Sakas, Skuti, (some clans from Scotland are said to have ancestor stories that date their histories back to the Skuti, Saka Scythians, the Alani also of the central Caucasus region.. they essentially represented an early nomadic tribal people that originally roamed the Eurasian steppe region after the last ice age that then migrated West and influenced various Eurasian / European cultures..).. I'm glad to see this video, I came up with this theory about a decade ago, that the mythology of the grifins probably related to protoceratops bones, similar to the mythology of unicorns relating to the wooly rhino. In my belief, I would look at the relationship between the mythological and heraldic griffin to the protoceratops and the Scythians as early nomadic gold diggers and traders in an anthropological perspective, rather than that of a more clinical modern day scientific approach. Science didn't exist back then, nor did the internet, nor photography or even books, since the Scythians were illiterate apart from their ability to communicate through their art, and their gold crafting skills. Therefore my belief is that the symbol of the griffin became prevalent predominantly through art and through the goldwork that the Scythians used as their primary trading medium. The remains of protoceratops being related with gold deposits from the Altai mountains to the Gobi most likely deriving from former river beds where they would have nested. Dinosaur eggs have since been found in the Gobi in the same regions, hence the bird like association. If nomadic tribes looking for gold encountered prehistoric bones and gold in the same desert, variable factors such as former gold mines where fossil remains were found, may have been depleted. The theory the nomads transported any bones anywhere also highly unlikely. They were on horseback, they lived in tents, they travelled lightly. It's likely they would have gathered gold, seen the remains as part of expeditions, then transported them to their own settlements in the Caucasus and Altai regions to smelt the gold and then the artisans would have created the symbol of the griffin as an artistic device afterwards based on 2nd hand stories. The Scythian society was highly stratified into caste typw feudal systems, so it's likely those that found the gold, sold it, and those that commissioned the gold art work to trade were different, the same as you would find today. A gold miner, an explorer, a royal elite commissioning them both, and then commissioning art work from the gold he collected, and the artist interpreting the creatures described to him, all different. The images found in Levantine artwork of griffins likewise more likely repetitions of the heraldic images the Scythians would have depicted in their goldwork that they used to trade with the Mediterranean / Greek and Levantines they encountered as part of their trading routes. At that time, heraldic devices and use of animal / eagle type icons were prevalent to depict protection as mythological gods and beasts, hence why the transformation of the griffin / protoceratops to the eagle / lion hybrid, representing images of protection and strength. ✌ Hope that helps explain some anthropological perspective to analyse the heraldic artwork of the time.

[@mojavefry2617]

It’s actually a coincidence that the word scythe resembles Scythian. The word scythe is of Germanic origin and originally lacked a c, the c being introduced in the 15th century due to an assumed connection to the word scissor. Scythian derives from one of the names the Greeks had for them (Σκύθη Skythē) which would have been pronounced something like sküt-heh (modern pronunciation schi-thi) which derives ultimately from the reconstructed Scythian term Skuδa, which likely meant “to shoot.”

[@koalasandwich567]

So what you're saying is my Hogwarts house should be Protcertopsador instead of Griffindor

[@SuperKingGhidorah]

How am I a week late for this? The fact that dinosaurs have been compared to mythical beasts has always astounded me. Like i can see where they're going with it and at the same time I feel like its just so far off

[@jpwarudo8488]

At least this isn’t sauropods walked on two legs somehow covered by Fox News. Good video as always mate👍🏽

[@testogel85]

it appears that the IPA spelling of Scythian is " sɪθiən " which would make its pronunciation something like "sithian"

[@marjae2767]

Scythi is a Romanization of Greek Σκυθοι. So it originally had a hard c, like in Caesar, which later got softened, like in Caesar. Mayor doesn't have the Scythians bring fossils west, but stories. While it's unlikely that this led to the idea of the griffin, I find it quite plausible that once the Scythians had an idea of griffins, they might see the fragmentary skeletons as remains of griffins.

[@Trike71171]

I mean to be honest think about it if you were a man from long back then with no knowledge of dinosaurs and such and you saw a protoceratops fossil what would you think it as? it has a beak so naturally a bird but the rest of the body screams something else so no clue what this thing could be till the word chimera pops into your mind and just like that with a little exaggeration you come back to your camp telling tales of beasts with feathers and fur

[@DinoDiego16]

The beak makes sense, but out of all things to compare the proto's body to, why a lion? That makes no sense even without the knowledge of prehistoric animals, because all would take at that point is simple comparisons. They were able to make these comparisons between the Proto skeleton and the eagle, yet they didn't when it came to the lion features the griffin had? I don't buy it.

[@VelociraptorsOfSkyrim]

@@DinoDiego16 TBH, I'd think the body would look more like a Malayan tapir but with maybe a Crocodile tail.

[@srirampatel1842]

Just like the livathan

[@HiperPivociarz]

@@DinoDiego16 Keep in mind, ancient people were pretty bad when it comes to describing LIVING animals. They thought bees are birds and are born from carcasses of oxen. I can totally see them calling that a lion body when it looks nothing like a lion.

[@diptube6563]

Maybe the original remains these nomads found were intermingled with other predator remains? And they either incorrectly assumed, or thought it would be more interesting to, affiliate the claws with the beaked skull.

[@markusnavergard2387]

bet the meeting went like this " Hi, iam Roy Chapman Andrews, and you will never be as cool as me, nice to meet you"

[@danielmalinen6337]

At least Protoceratops as a griffin is a less insane and anomalous explanation than the explanation that Europeans invented the European dragon because they found fossils of T. rex and Quezacolatus and mixed them up it is a theory whose biggest problem is, for example, that T. rex fossils and Europe are located on different continents and the European dragon existed long before the Americas were colonized.

[@wantedwario2621]

I feel like the second guy moreso interpreted the "protoceratops inspired griffins" as saying the dinosaurs lived with people, because he starts going on about how griffins and protoceratops look and act differently, as if the real life protoceratops behavior would have been known to ancient people who most definitely would only have fragmentary remains. Another thing is, perhaps there are no protpceratops along the routes because they had all either been excavated by the people who used the routes.

[@jimmyzilla]

Just watched this last night and then Monstrum comes out with a griffin video!

[@solidified-spinosaurus]

FLYING PROTOCERATOPS POG

[@williamwalsh4158]

Some creationists say the Chinese dragons are based on people observing living dinosaurs. Naturally, people in the past saw and interpreted dinosaur bones, and they could approximate what they looked like when alive.

[@OlegMilitaryHistory]

Your original pronunciation of the Scythians was actually more correct (Google's auto-generated pronounciation is wrong) - the real pronunciation of the term would be "si-thi-ans" with a short "si" (where the "i" is pronounced as short "ee") followed by a "thi" (also pronounced as a short "ee") followed by "ans" (where the "a" is pronounced like the vowel combination in "aunt" if you read it with a British accent). For a fun fact - in some other languages, they do also pronounce a separate "k" right after the first "s" - like in Russian it's "Скифы" (transliterated in English as "Ski-fy" where the "y" is pronounced like a long guttural "ee"), or in Greek it's Σκύθες (transliterated in English as "Ski-thes")

[@firstnamelastname-ry9mx]

Another quality video my dude. Appreciate the time and research. However, simple conclusion: they saw a real Griffin. Didn't consider that. Did you? 😒😤

[@averageutahraptor9079]

That’s the dumbest theory I’ve ever read.

[@TheRoadrunnerFromHell]

I always felt that these kinds of theories suggest ancient people were incapable of imagination, which is horribly offensive

[@chubibi06]

The first three Dinosaurs identified were portrayed as giant lizards. Quadrupedal, chubby, giant lizards. . . Based on comparison of what little remains we had, to what we knew of wildlife at that time. . . But our ancestors might have found broken pieces of bones, partial remains of fossilized beast, and came up with cyclops, griffin and dragons. . . If anything, they didn't lack "imagination" ; but rather, proper knowledge.

[@omegaforcezero5440]

I don't think that. Much more like they used the remains to inspire their histories.

[@srirampatel1842]

Livathan is also very cool

[@frogboyclips]

Protoceratops pog

[@diakritika]

Asterix and the Griffin :)

[@aitornavarro6597]

Actually you pronounce Scythian wrong in both instances lol "Sith" "ee" "un"

[@DinoDiego16]

Damn, guess I gotta trash the video

[@srstriker6420]

I thought they think Dinosaurs are Dragons

[@srirampatel1842]

Any prehistoric creature for livathan dude iam looking for this

[@awesomelyshorticles]

I dont buy that debunking. Has that guy never seen a questing beast? It's just a frickin giraffe but is depicted very differently, and that's even with a LIVING animal that the myth holders didn't get to see. And so what if it's actually far away from gold? They could talk about it and mingle stories into something new, or got it from contact with other people.

[@freak6988]

The questing beast was exactly what I thought of as well!

[@jastermereel4946]

teh ancient greeekes knew dinosaurs are birds

[@lick816]

I'm pretty sure that's exactly what the chinese thought when they first uncovered fossils, I mean even name for dinosaur includes the character for dragon.

[@luistheteleporter951]

0:15 No its not anyways, I thought of a depressing fact, more people think about this than me and most people

[@dartoney]

I agree with you mate, have no idea how such a stupid idea became a known "fact" in the comunity.

[@LmaoMoni]

I have one thing to say on this. Unicorns and hippos.

[@bananahammock1067]

14000 BCE?????

[@melaniepotter6381]

Why did old architectures and painters place Griffin's and other mythological creatures in their works instead of that of dinosaurs 🤔🤔🤔

[@vlork666]

I'm on the side of them NOT being the inspiration. It's a cool idea but the proof is minimal and mostly just speculation.

[@srirampatel1842]

I dont believe mythologies as many people i think they all are real and somewhere in the multiverse or in our very own universe

[@lonnieshurtleff4807]

You are indominus Rex is fake

[@yutyrannushuali5872]

Can you explain what you said

[@Jojozilla426]

Can you explain what you said

[@bigbananae]

Can you explain what you said

[@Algeriawindows69]

Can you explain what you said

[@aestheticimagery6335]

Can you explain what you said

[@joebugg8172]

You need lots of work you sound unprofessional! Why are you spending time explaining why your wording is wrong when you could just rerecord it right in a professional response. That's kind of lazy don't you think. I think your content is really good people want to learn and this is a really cool idea however your confidence in what you're presenting Lacks the confidence needed to present the story. You don't even believe what you're saying. Or it would seem that way you're on the fence. This is very annoying. Just some feedback I think you got potential pure potential. But you need to say what you want to say and present it the right way rather than defending yourself after the fact. That's just lazy! There's art and there's crap it's only art if you make it art be a professional!

[@DinoDiego16]

Well, this is a youtube channel so it's not really meant to be extremely professional. More of an outlet to share stuff I find interesting. And this is an older video anyways, so I'm sure that my presentation style has improved, even if it's only slight.