ParanetOnline
The Dresden Files => DF Spoilers => Topic started by: Yuillegan on March 01, 2021, 03:12:01 AM
-
This one is a bit tenuous, but just for fun let's go through it.
Ferrovax, or Mister Ferro (as he sometimes goes by) is a capital-D Dragon. According to Jim, this kind of Dragon is a semi-divine being such as in the more Asian concept of Dragons rather than the bestial fire-breathing lizards of Western legends.
Ferrovax claims to be the Eldest and the strongest of his kind. We know that being the eldest tends to carry weight amongst species such as the Fey, so it's possible that it is the same amongst the Dragons. Ferrovax has also claimed his true form would shatter the earth and destroy the sanity of those mortals who gazed upon him. Bob backs this up in Battle Ground and says that if Ferro came to the Earth in his true form reality would break down. This is also confirmed earlier in a WOJ.
So who is he really? What makes him so powerful? We know that there are only a few major Dragons and Michael (or potentially Ebenezer...or both) killed Siriothrax who was in some ways the weakest. We only know of Pyrovax as the other Dragon, although there is another.
Often the speculation has been (probably due to one Dragon being called Pyrovax) that each Dragon is tied to one of the 4 or 5 elements. So Ferrovax is earth/metal, Pyrovax is fire, Siriothrax is (some speculate) air, and the unnamed Dragon presumably is related to water.
But what if it's something else?
In Latin, Ferro (two "R"s) means steel/iron. Vax doesn't mean anything on it's own. However vox means voice. So Ferrovax could mean "Iron Voice" or "Voice of Iron". Certainly would make a good reason why Mab wouldn't fight him (not to mention that he has far more "horsepower" as Jim put it).
But there are other translations.
"Fero" meaning "bearer" and if we take "Vax" as "Vox" then we have: "Voice Bearer" or "Word Bearer". What if Ferrovax is none other than the Metatron, the Scribe and Voice of God?
But then what does that make the others? Pyrovax then becomes "Voice of Fire" and so on. Siriothrax doesn't neatly translate. But Sirio is close enough to be translated as Sirius (as in the wolf/dog). So just as easily Siriothrax could be
Then again. There is one more translation.
The name of Lucifer comes from the latin "Luci" and "Lux" meaning light, and the "fer" comes from "Fero" as in bearer or bringer. Lucifer is sometimes referred to as a Dragon. But that seems a bit crazy, even to me. More of an interesting aside than a straight up theory.
-
While I don't think Lucifer and ferrovax are the same, I do believe Lucifer was once a dragon before his fall. The loosing of his celestial position, the loss of his wings as it were, made him the serpent.
-
I don't see it, however you did provide some great information. Based on what you posted I think that he'd be a nightmare for someone like Mab or any Sidhe to face.....
-
While I don't think Lucifer and ferrovax are the same, I do believe Lucifer was once a dragon before his fall. The loosing of his celestial position, the loss of his wings as it were, made him the serpent.
I didn't think Michael was being quite that literal about 'blood of the Dragon, that old serpent' at the time he applied that insult to the Black Court, way back in GP. But given what BG and the WOJ's about Drakul / Vlad III / the BCV's origins have revealed since GP, it's certainly interesting.
So, if Lucifer also had a Dragon mantle / persona, and Michael was onto something about the Black Court carrying his blood in a way more specific than Lucifer as a vague root-of-all-evil ... with Drakul in the middle ... does that make Drakul the progeny of Lucifer? Essentially the Antichrist?
I'm not exactly ready to buy into that interpretation. It certainly explains the 'something monstrous, trapped in human form' WOJ description of Drakul. But the major sticking point for me would be how it's supposed to make sense that the one Archangel that fell overlapped as also a Dragon, but the others apparently don't.
-
While I don't think Lucifer and ferrovax are the same, I do believe Lucifer was once a dragon before his fall. The loosing of his celestial position, the loss of his wings as it were, made him the serpent.
Probably not the same. Mostly I was just interested in the similar parts of their names. As we know, names have great power. But I don't actually believe Lucifer was a Dragon per se...however I do suspect that we are not yet fully aware of what Dragons are and perhaps there is some connection to the Prince of Darkness in terms of duties. The loss of wings is an interesting idea, but then again it isn't like the Fallen lost their powers either. We haven't seen any Fallen (normally represented by shadows) have wings. We have seen "wings" present around Angels...after a fashion. See Butters when fighting Ethniu.
I always have wondered whether Jim will discuss the relevance of wings when it comes to Angels. Mostly in art they represent flight, as that is the only way to access the sky and therefore the Heavens. He has hinted that Angels look more...Hellboy than Renaissance art. Eyes on wings, made of triangles and flaming wheels etc. He said it was to do with the human mind failing to process a being and so get a distorted view.
There is also the argument that Lucifer is merely fulfilling his part in the Great Plan. Power has purpose after all, and an all-knowing omnipotent Creator (TWG) should theoretically have included this in the plan. Otherwise it suggests a few things:
1) The Creator isn't all-powerful and/or all-knowing (in which Lucifer has somehow outplayed or is able to defy the will of the Creator) OR;
2) The Creator isn't as benevolent to it's creations as believed (So Lucifer and all his evil is actually a creation of the Creator) OR;
3) The Creator doesn't really care/is focussed on other things (The Creator either can't or chooses not to care for Creation i.e. The Creator is off doing other things OR The Creator is more like an amoral force such as Gravity and it simply isn't in it's nature to care).
Of the 3, I think the last is least likely due to a variety of reasons like having Angels in the first place and protections for Creation, plus actually taking a part in events. Not to mention Uriel saying TWG is everywhere and experiences everything all at once...therefore can't actually not care about Creation. This also makes 2 quite unlikely but not impossible. TWG might have a different view on Creation to us...in fact by definition it must. That could mean it views Lucifer and his evil as necessary.
But mostly I think 1 would be the most likely. Not because TWG can't do anything per se...but because of self-imposed limits (planned or otherwise) and the fragility of reality. But I will leave it at that for now.
I don't see it, however you did provide some great information. Based on what you posted I think that he'd be a nightmare for someone like Mab or any Sidhe to face.....
I suspect he would be regardless. Tbh...the only being that has frightened him is Ethniu (although I'd bet the Mothers and other high-level gods could too), and he was wary of Vadderung. Also, he must be wary enough of Mab otherwise why would he sign her Accords? Mab, like Harry, can clearly fight well outside her weight-class and win.
I didn't think Michael was being quite that literal about 'blood of the Dragon, that old serpent' at the time he applied that insult to the Black Court, way back in GP. But given what BG and the WOJ's about Drakul / Vlad III / the BCV's origins have revealed since GP, it's certainly interesting.
So, if Lucifer also had a Dragon mantle / persona, and Michael was onto something about the Black Court carrying his blood in a way more specific than Lucifer as a vague root-of-all-evil ... with Drakul in the middle ... does that make Drakul the progeny of Lucifer? Essentially the Antichrist?
I'm not exactly ready to buy into that interpretation. It certainly explains the 'something monstrous, trapped in human form' WOJ description of Drakul. But the major sticking point for me would be how it's supposed to make sense that the one Archangel that fell overlapped as also a Dragon, but the others apparently don't.
Nor did I when I read it. All the same I think Jim keeps toying with us around it. I have heard both very good and very bad theories about Drakul and what he might be and his purpose. I like the idea of him being the antichrist - you'll see why below.
It's interesting you suggest Lucifer as the root-of-all-evil. Jim mentioned in that interview with Priscilla (20 years of Dresden I think, right after the release of BG) that Lucifer was in-part responsible for why the Gods don't have good recollections and conflicting accounts of the beginning of Creation. Jim has also mentioned Lucifer's argument with The Almighty has bent the universe out of shape, and that it all starts back at the Fall. He vaguely hinted this is connected to the starborn (as the starborn thing has been going on since the beginning of time apparently). So perhaps there isn't "an" Antichrist but potentially thousands upon thousands of potential Antichrists. Perhaps Drakul is a version of one. If you look at things from the perspective of beings that exist outside of linear time, I suspect everything in the beginning is connected to events at the end. I mean, to them there might hardly be a difference (at least the way we see it).
What I have never been able to reconcile in the series is where Lucifer fits in with the Outsiders. Did they corrupt him? Or did he somehow just break down (which suggests in part he was able to change himself, and therefore make choices)? We know the Outsiders end goal is basically the end of all Creation. But Lucifer's doesn't seem to be that. It does seem to require the continuation of Creation (at the very least so he can argue with the Creator). So who was evil first, and which influenced what?
-
I didn't think Michael was being quite that literal about 'blood of the Dragon, that old serpent' at the time he applied that insult to the Black Court, way back in GP.
insult? It was more of a curse really, and generally, you insult someone by picking at something about them. Not just random stuff. Like people calling me fat... that was quite common in school, but nobody called me stupid because without a grain of truth to it it really wouldn't effect me much now would it? Calling Uriel demon spawn for instance, wouldn't earn you no great favor, but he'd probably just look at you like you were a particularly slow monkey.
But given what BG and the WOJ's about Drakul / Vlad III / the BCV's origins have revealed since GP, it's certainly interesting.
it certainly catches my interest. The key is what exactly Drakul was born from I do suppose... I'm kinda thinking he's synonymous with Mammon. Iirc he's prehumanity, so his original identity would be something very old indeed.
-
insult? It was more of a curse really, and generally, you insult someone by picking at something about them. Not just random stuff. Like people calling me fat... that was quite common in school, but nobody called me stupid because without a grain of truth to it it really wouldn't effect me much now would it? Calling Uriel demon spawn for instance, wouldn't earn you no great favor, but he'd probably just look at you like you were a particularly slow monkey. it certainly catches my interest. The key is what exactly Drakul was born from I do suppose... I'm kinda thinking he's synonymous with Mammon. Iirc he's prehumanity, so his original identity would be something very old indeed.
Insults generally depend on the intention of the giver, and the self-esteem of the recipient. Michael may or may not have intended it as an insult. Normally Michael doesn't seem the type to insult...but he does throw a bit of shade at people/beings he believed crossed the line. In his book (literally), association with Dragons and Serpents tends to be a bad thing. To say someone was of that blood would be like calling them bastard spawn. But even if he didn't intend it to be an insult as such, Mavra might well have taken it that way depending on her views. It works the other way too, even if Michael did intend it to be an insult Mavra might take it as a complement. Look at Cowl's reaction to being called a Kemmlerite - he hated it despite it perhaps being true.
I agree, Drakul has had many names and been around since the dawn of man. If he has a "true" identity I am sure it is beyond mortal understanding. I am hoping to understand his first identity and how it relates to the inhuman entity trapped in the mortal shell.
-
was of that blood would be like calling them bastard spawn
probably true enough of Blamps.
-
Blood of was used as a courtly insult for bastards.
My pet theory is Lucifer and Ferrovax are the same being different mantles. Course than my question turns to does Vadderung have an angelic alias or is the fact that he has Spulfire an angelic substance enough.
As for the translations arguments. I did a similar deep dive into the denarians and angels a couple years back about ancient babylonian. Jim actually did a shout out when answering a question about fan theory and said "as long as i don't have to learn ancient babylonian!". My lame claim to fame lol. Just saying deep dives into language are usually overextended at best. Spefially cause Jim says he prefers reading children section myths rather than any anthropological books. Too much freudian analyses.
-
Maybe ax just means dragon.
So Siriothr-dragon, Ferrov-dragon, Pyrov-dragon (or maybe -vax means Elder Dragon, Thrax means lame dragon)
Or it's even simpler and the couple-letters are just to make it sound cool. Ferro is otherwise just iron, Pyro fire, and Sirio either dog or the dog-star Sirius. So you could have a dragon of iron, fire, and stars. Not sure what really fits in there, because iron was often of meteoric origin in ancient times, and then iron, fire, and meteor/stars just are a nice trifecta.
-
The loss of wings is an interesting idea, but then again it isn't like the Fallen lost their powers either. We haven't seen any Fallen (normally represented by shadows) have wings.
There are a couple of Denarian forms with wings or wing like features. There's "Shaggy Feathers" as Harry calls it and Rosana's Denarian form had the classic bat-like wings of a demon.
As to the appearance of angels, I think Jim might be basing that off the Bible. https://overviewbible.com/angels-demons/; https://biblia.com/books/nasb95/Eze1. The descriptions are often pretty wild stuff that bears no relation to the Renaissance paintings that have come to dominate the iconic imagery of beautiful humans with wings or fat babies with wings. In other parts of the Bible, it's the reaction of the human who the angel appears to that makes me think they look startling.
As to the Creator issue, I think a less than all powerful creator is a good choice for a fictional fantasy setting, or just don't directly answer the question. It makes avoiding or addressing "the Problem of Evil" a lot easier. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_evil. But Jim has answered that question with free will. It might be an unsatisfactory answer for real life, but it's more than enough for me in a book series that I've repeatedly heard described as "popcorn" or "palette cleansers."
One of the things I really like about reading the DF is Jim addresses what we call touch topics with enough skill and knowledge so as to not make a caricature of anyone's beliefs. That's typically what I see in pop culture. It's annoying whenever I know enough about the subject matter to catch it even if I don't share those beliefs.
On the Antichrist point, there's a bunch of argument over whether there's an antichrist, a bunch of antichrists, or both, so having every starborn be a potential antichrist (and several being more than just potential ones) isn't stretching things too much.
-
Siriothrax has an older meaning than that. we associate Sirius with the dog star because that was the god Sirius's animal symbol in greek mythology. That god's name goes back further to mean "the scorcher" or glowing, relating to being the brightest star in the sky. Technically, his name is most connected to Lucifer, in both stars and Lightbringer/glowing titles. But I'm seeing similarities in all the dragons' names. perhaps they were created to fulfill Lucifer's original purpose when he fell, or in case he did fall?
-
The suffix for the Dragons isn't just -vax. It's also -thrax, like in Siriothrax. It could be that the true suffix is the shared -ax, which has a meaning as a suffix.
Suffix
-āx (genitive -ācis); third-declension one-termination suffix
used to form adjectives expressing a tendency or inclination to the action of the root verb; -ish, -y
audeō (“I dare”) > audāx (“bold”)
edō (“I eat”) > edāx (“gluttonous, voracious”)
loquor (“I talk”) > loquāx (“talkative”)
pugnō (“I fight”) > pugnāx (“combative, fond of fighting”)
As for the names, Ferro is Latin, whereas Pyro and Sirio are Greek. Collectively they could be Light, Fire, and Iron, as others have said.
We know Light, particularly sunlight, can kill some supernatural things. So can Fire, and so can Iron.
So what's the fourth vulnerability for the supernatural world? That might help us identify the nature of the fourth.
I doubt it's faith, hope, or love, as those seem to fall under specific purviews.
Salt, maybe? How do we feel about Salivax/Salithrax or Alavax/Alathrax, keeping it to Latin or Greek?
Silver? Argentivax/Argentithrax or Asimivqx/Asimithrax?
-
The suffix for the Dragons isn't just -vax. It's also -thrax, like in Siriothrax. It could be that the true suffix is the shared -ax, which has a meaning as a suffix.
As for the names, Ferro is Latin, whereas Pyro and Sirio are Greek. Collectively they could be Light, Fire, and Iron, as others have said.
We know Light, particularly sunlight, can kill some supernatural things. So can Fire, and so can Iron.
So what's the fourth vulnerability for the supernatural world? That might help us identify the nature of the fourth.
I doubt it's faith, hope, or love, as those seem to fall under specific purviews.
Salt, maybe? How do we feel about Salivax/Salithrax or Alavax/Alathrax, keeping it to Latin or Greek?
Silver? Argentivax/Argentithrax or Asimivqx/Asimithrax?
(Running) Water also has some anti-magic properties, so Hydrax or Aquax could work.
And Hydrax sounds a lot like Hydra...
-
Siriothrax has an older meaning than that. we associate Sirius with the dog star because that was the god Sirius's animal symbol in greek mythology. That god's name goes back further to mean "the scorcher" or glowing, relating to being the brightest star in the sky. Technically, his name is most connected to Lucifer, in both stars and Lightbringer/glowing titles. But I'm seeing similarities in all the dragons' names. perhaps they were created to fulfill Lucifer's original purpose when he fell, or in case he did fall?
That's an interesting idea. The Dragons are just fill-ins for Lucifer. Or perhaps like the Queens, representing different parts of Lucifer (but then why would an Archangel be in parts?). I think your idea works. Which would then suggest that Lucifer was originally responsible for the orderly procession of things - which is what the Dragons are meant to have been doing.
The suffix for the Dragons isn't just -vax. It's also -thrax, like in Siriothrax. It could be that the true suffix is the shared -ax, which has a meaning as a suffix.
As for the names, Ferro is Latin, whereas Pyro and Sirio are Greek. Collectively they could be Light, Fire, and Iron, as others have said.
We know Light, particularly sunlight, can kill some supernatural things. So can Fire, and so can Iron.
So what's the fourth vulnerability for the supernatural world? That might help us identify the nature of the fourth.
I doubt it's faith, hope, or love, as those seem to fall under specific purviews.
Salt, maybe? How do we feel about Salivax/Salithrax or Alavax/Alathrax, keeping it to Latin or Greek?
Silver? Argentivax/Argentithrax or Asimivqx/Asimithrax?
Very nice! Yes, upon rereading this I think it might just be the "ax" as the relevant suffix. I might have got a bit too excited earlier.
Salt isn't bad, or silver. But not a lot of uses of both in the series. Fire, Water, Spirit, Metal all seem to be the main ones.
(Running) Water also has some anti-magic properties, so Hydrax or Aquax could work.
And Hydrax sounds a lot like Hydra...
This works, as it ties back to the idea of elemental Dragons. But Harry puts the five elements as Fire, Water, Earth, Air, Spirit. The Chinese five elements are Fire, Water, Iron, Earth, Air (also meaning spirit). So it's hard to know how they fit.
Perhaps it is something like this?
Ferro: Iron
Sirio: Light/Spirit/Air
Pyro: Fire
Hydra: Water
Unknown fifth Dragon: Earth
-
(Running) Water also has some anti-magic properties, so Hydrax or Aquax could work.
And Hydrax sounds a lot like Hydra...
Water is good, but in the series it's mostly been seen used against wizards. Have we seen it used against anyone else?
Very nice! Yes, upon rereading this I think it might just be the "ax" as the relevant suffix. I might have got a bit too excited earlier.
Salt isn't bad, or silver. But not a lot of uses of both in the series. Fire, Water, Spirit, Metal all seem to be the main ones.
This works, as it ties back to the idea of elemental Dragons. But Harry puts the five elements as Fire, Water, Earth, Air, Spirit. The Chinese five elements are Fire, Water, Iron, Earth, Air (also meaning spirit). So it's hard to know how they fit.
Perhaps it is something like this?
Ferro: Iron
Sirio: Light/Spirit/Air
Pyro: Fire
Hydra: Water
Unknown fifth Dragon: Earth
In the video about dragons, Butcher says these are the big Western dragons, and that the Eastern dragons are off doing their job, or something to that effect. So trying to tie these to Eastern principles might be misplaced.
My take is that very pure things of reality are bad for things of the never-never, and the dragons are like pillars of reality. They are the avatars of things that dangerous to the supernatural, and are therefore different from them, and also a guard against them.
And almost all the guards are dead...
-
Water is good, but in the series it's mostly been seen used against wizards. Have we seen it used against anyone else?
Titania deployed it with great effect against Ethniu and the Eye of Balor. LtW used it against the Naagloshii. Vadderung says part of the reason Demonreach Island is surrounded by water is to reduce the efficacy of magic deployed against it (or something along those lines). Black Court Vampires supposedly cannot cross running water. I think even Harry tried to cross a river to escape the Demon that the Shadowman summons.
In the video about dragons, Butcher says these are the big Western dragons, and that the Eastern dragons are off doing their job, or something to that effect. So trying to tie these to Eastern principles might be misplaced.
My take is that very pure things of reality are bad for things of the never-never, and the dragons are like pillars of reality. They are the avatars of things that dangerous to the supernatural, and are therefore different from them, and also a guard against them.
And almost all the guards are dead...
I am unfamiliar with the video about Dragons. I had a brief look but couldn't find anything beyond when Dragons will next show up and their use as terraformers. Do you have a link?
If that's the case though that Ferro and his compatriots are merely the Western team, what are the Eastern ones up to? I thought though that there were only 3 or 4 Dragons in the whole world (not including the lower-case dragons who are merely beasts and servants created in the "image" of the big D Dragons).
Interesting follow-up idea. If the Dragons are also the guards to reality (or at least the pillars holding back the tide) what happens when they are gone? What happened after Siriothrax died I wonder, and what things have been possible with his death?
-
Titania deployed it with great effect against Ethniu and the Eye of Balor. LtW used it against the Naagloshii. Vadderung says part of the reason Demonreach Island is surrounded by water is to reduce the efficacy of magic deployed against it (or something along those lines). Black Court Vampires supposedly cannot cross running water. I think even Harry tried to cross a river to escape the Demon that the Shadowman summons.
I am unfamiliar with the video about Dragons. I had a brief look but couldn't find anything beyond when Dragons will next show up and their use as terraformers. Do you have a link?
If that's the case though that Ferro and his compatriots are merely the Western team, what are the Eastern ones up to? I thought though that there were only 3 or 4 Dragons in the whole world (not including the lower-case dragons who are merely beasts and servants created in the "image" of the big D Dragons).
Interesting follow-up idea. If the Dragons are also the guards to reality (or at least the pillars holding back the tide) what happens when they are gone? What happened after Siriothrax died I wonder, and what things have been possible with his death?
https://amp.reddit.com/r/dresdenfiles/comments/50f12n/dragon_names_spoilers_all/
I'm linking to the Reddit post because their link jumps to the part about dragons.
In summary, he says there were three left on Earth and Michael killed one of those. Someone asks about Eastern dragons and Butcher says the Eastern dragons are doing their cosmic job, and the Western/European dragons were the disgruntled workers that got involved in mortal affairs and tied up on Earth.
-
https://amp.reddit.com/r/dresdenfiles/comments/50f12n/dragon_names_spoilers_all/
I'm linking to the Reddit post because their link jumps to the part about dragons.
In summary, he says there were three left on Earth and Michael killed one of those. Someone asks about Eastern dragons and Butcher says the Eastern dragons are doing their cosmic job, and the Western/European dragons were the disgruntled workers that got involved in mortal affairs and tied up on Earth.
It's a bit confusing because Jim almost contradicts himself, then recovers. Having seen Jim get a bit confused over his own stuff a few times I'd be willing to bet that he was a bit confused then too. Which isn't to say that what he said isn't true. But it sort of contradicts other WOJ on Dragons.
2009 WoJ forum post:
6. ferrovax – is this because he’s the OLDEST dragon? (i thought it was an empty boast) or because he’s a dragon?
Ferrovax feels absolutely no need to boast. It’s because he /is/ a Dragon, large D, an elemental force of the cosmos. He isn’t some kind of Smaug hanging around a nice apartment. He’s a Dragon in a more Asian sense of the concept, a semi-divine being who was once given authority over various portions of the mortal universe, and who was responsible for their orderly procession. There /are/ Smauglike dragons (though not nearly as many now as there have been in the past, thanks George!) but they are essentially nothing but emissaries and servitors created in the image of the real thing.
Regardless of big D or little d, dragons almost universally resent humanity for usurping the balance of power in the world.
#189 “Was Sirothrax a major dragon like Ferrovax or a minor dragon?”
He was the real deal, though he was in some ways the weakest of the remaining great dragons.
Ferrovax wouldn’t have given a damn about some nobody minor dragon being slain. :)
The other dragon still walking the earth is named Pyrovax
Once & Future Podcast @~60m
Dragons are the kind of forces that you put in charge of things like..
“It’s time for another ice age, you- go handle that.”
“We really need this continent to be split by a giant river, arrange it.”
“Ok.”
That’s the kind of thing that Dragons would be doing
The link you posted occurred a few years after those questions were answered, so being the latest information it's more likely to be true. But it seems strange that Ferro and Sirio and Pyro are both semi-divine beings in the more Asian sense of being Dragons (as in capital-D Dragons) yet also are the workers and Western Dragons...and yet there are also lower tier servant (lowercase-d) dragons who are just emissaries and workers themselves but are mostly just beasts. It just seems like too many concepts have been confused.
Myself, I think the questioner (I forget her name) confused him. I don't know where she got the idea that Ferro and Pyro were Western dragons - because prior to that video as far as I know there was no indication of that. So either she was privy to information most fans didn't have (maybe Jim told her something) or she was confused herself and asked Jim a poor question which caused him to give a confusing answer. I don't know what the case is though.
Also, his terminology that there is only three before Michael killed one left is interesting (and further evidence of contradictory information on the death of the dragon). Could it be that there were quite a lot around at one time. Not four or five or six but perhaps a multitude?
-
It's a bit confusing because Jim almost contradicts himself, then recovers. Having seen Jim get a bit confused over his own stuff a few times I'd be willing to bet that he was a bit confused then too. Which isn't to say that what he said isn't true. But it sort of contradicts other WOJ on Dragons.
The link you posted occurred a few years after those questions were answered, so being the latest information it's more likely to be true. But it seems strange that Ferro and Sirio and Pyro are both semi-divine beings in the more Asian sense of being Dragons (as in capital-D Dragons) yet also are the workers and Western Dragons...and yet there are also lower tier servant (lowercase-d) dragons who are just emissaries and workers themselves but are mostly just beasts. It just seems like too many concepts have been confused.
Myself, I think the questioner (I forget her name) confused him. I don't know where she got the idea that Ferro and Pyro were Western dragons - because prior to that video as far as I know there was no indication of that. So either she was privy to information moist fans didn't have (maybe Jim told her something) or she was confused herself and asked Jim a poor question which caused him to give a confusing answer. I don't know what the case is though.
Also, his terminology that there is only three before Michael killed one left is interesting (and further evidence of contradictory information on the death of the dragon). Could it be that there were quite a lot around at one time. Not four or five or six but perhaps a multitude?
I'm not seeing much conflict between the video and the previous comments. Maybe he said at some point that there were four and only four Big D Dragons, but I think it's just how we interpreted what he really said.
In all, there are likely a bunch of Dragons, Asian or not, that are still being Cosmic Avatars. They're doing their job.
A handful, specifically four (or five) were disgruntled workers among the other worker Dragons, and they descended to Earth in earthly forms. Those were Ferro, Sirio, Pyro, and the unnamed fourth. And possibly Lucifer.
For all we know, Dragons might be Angels, or Angels might be Dragons. The earthly Dragons might be the Dragon equivalent of the Grigori or the Fallen. (I'm not saying they're either, just the Dragon-pantheon equivalent)
So only two remaining on earth doesn't preclude others not being on alive but not on earth.
As for European vs Asian, it could be that the Four were responsible for European regions (like Grigori had specific tasks on Earth) and they kinda sorta transubstantiated, but the Asian and other Dragons kind of tsked and went about their business.
...
Or, be hedged his answer to avoid accusations of euro-centric mythologies being predominant in the series, and tried to give an out so as to not offend anyone.
-
Maybe like Odin and other immortals, dragons were given a choice by TWG. The choice to give up some of their power and influence but remain in the mortal world or keep their power and go away like the old gods. Maybe the 4 or 5 Dragons that we see are the few that decided to stay in/around the mortal world so they lose the ability to transform into their true form (without breaking reality) but gain the ability to live among mortals and continue to collect and hoard gold and other treasures.
-
I'm not seeing much conflict between the video and the previous comments. Maybe he said at some point that there were four and only four Big D Dragons, but I think it's just how we interpreted what he really said.
In all, there are likely a bunch of Dragons, Asian or not, that are still being Cosmic Avatars. They're doing their job.
A handful, specifically four (or five) were disgruntled workers among the other worker Dragons, and they descended to Earth in earthly forms. Those were Ferro, Sirio, Pyro, and the unnamed fourth. And possibly Lucifer.
For all we know, Dragons might be Angels, or Angels might be Dragons. The earthly Dragons might be the Dragon equivalent of the Grigori or the Fallen. (I'm not saying they're either, just the Dragon-pantheon equivalent)
So only two remaining on earth doesn't preclude others not being on alive but not on earth.
As for European vs Asian, it could be that the Four were responsible for European regions (like Grigori had specific tasks on Earth) and they kinda sorta transubstantiated, but the Asian and other Dragons kind of tsked and went about their business.
...
Or, be hedged his answer to avoid accusations of euro-centric mythologies being predominant in the series, and tried to give an out so as to not offend anyone.
I get what you're saying. I guess we will find out more later when he is next asked about it/it makes it into the series. Yeah, I think we all originally assumed there was only three or four total Big D Dragons but he hasn't actually ruled out that there may have been more, in fact he seems to have suggested that there is more than four (as you pointed out).
There's surely a relationship between Dragons, Angels, and Gods. I have zero idea what it is but they all seem to have been involved in setting up the universe and responsible for maintaining it before things went south and wars happened etc.
Also, I really hope he didn't hedge his answer for that reason. The poor man is a western man writing about mostly western mythologies and magic systems, set in a western country. Of course euro-centric mythos is going to be predominant. Yes, even I would love to see more stuff from the rest of the world. But I don't necessarily think he needs to do that or that he should do that. I certainly am not offended by his lack of inclusion. I could perhaps understand if someone was a bit annoyed if he had a more global series that either omitted or washed out certain mythos so that western mythos was preeminent. But that's not the situation he is in. As far as most authors go, he takes great care to be quite respectful of people's religions and cultures (including non-western mythologies). He might not be perfect and perhaps others do it better, I don't know. But I think he does a damn good job and he tries hard to get it right.