The latest episode of HOUSE OF THE DRAGON, “The Red Dragon and the Gold,” delivered the dragon action many fans craved with the spectacular Battle of Rook’s Rest. It’s natural to wonder if any dragon battle in cinema history can truly rival it. Perhaps REIGN OF FIRE boasted sheer numbers, with dozens of dragons filling the skies, but was it a better battle? For fans of A Song of Ice and Fire, the dragons of Westeros represent something more deliberate and carefully considered.
Dragons, of course, are creatures of myth. In our reality, they never existed, though echoes of them resonate in legends across cultures. Some believe dinosaur fossils may have sparked these ancient tales. Regardless of their origins, dragons have become cornerstones of fantasy literature for centuries, captivating imaginations worldwide. The allure of dragons is deeply personal for many, including the creator of Westeros himself, George R.R. Martin.
Interestingly, Martin shares a name with a famous dragonslayer, St. George. This connection to dragon lore seems almost predestined. Long before A GAME OF THRONES, Martin penned his own dragon stories, including “The Ice Dragon” and “The Way of Cross and Dragon,” showcasing his enduring fascination with these magnificent beasts.
The concept of a dragon varies greatly across cultures. Chinese dragons, for example, are wingless, benevolent creatures associated with good fortune, quite unlike their fire-breathing Western counterparts who often symbolize destruction. Modern fantasy has further diversified the dragon archetype. The dragons in ERAGON and HOW TO TRAIN YOUR DRAGON, like the endearing Toothless, are vastly different from the more traditional, fearsome dragons.
Toothless from How to Train Your Dragon with a playful expression
Tolkien’s dragons, iconic figures like Smaug from The Hobbit, occupy a darker space in fantasy. Servants of Morgoth and Sauron, they are forces of evil, akin to orcs and trolls. While not friendly, Tolkien’s dragons possess intelligence, exemplified by Smaug’s ability to speak and his characteristic hoarding of gold, a classic dragon trait. Smaug’s cinematic portrayal has become a benchmark for dragon depictions.
Smaug from The Hobbit, guarding his treasure hoard
Before Smaug graced the silver screen, Vermithrax Pejorative from DRAGONSLAYER was considered by many to be the pinnacle of cinematic dragons. This creature, with its two legs and two wings, embodies danger and fire-breathing ferocity, a stark contrast to the dragon in DRAGONHEART. The latter, voiced by Sean Connery, is a four-legged, talking, “good guy” dragon, a character in a film Martin considers far inferior, highlighting the spectrum of dragon portrayals in media.
Vermithrax Pejorative from Dragonslayer, a menacing two-legged dragon
In crafting A SONG OF ICE & FIRE, Martin aimed to fuse epic fantasy with the grounded realism of historical fiction. Magic exists in Westeros, but it’s less prevalent than in many fantasy worlds, taking inspiration from Tolkien’s relatively low-magic Middle-earth. The goal was to create a world that felt tangible, echoing the Crusades, the Hundred Years’ War, and the Wars of the Roses, rather than solely relying on fantastical elements.
Dragons were essential to this vision, partly influenced by Martin’s friend, the late Phyllis Eisenstein. However, these dragons needed to feel “real” within the fantasy context. Martin meticulously designed them, prioritizing biological plausibility. They breathe fire and fly, core dragon attributes, but their anatomy is carefully considered. Westerosi dragons possess two legs and two wings – crucially, the wings are the forelegs. Martin firmly rejects the four-legged dragon design common in heraldry, stating that no earthly animal has ever possessed six limbs. He draws parallels to birds, bats, and pteranodons, all of which have two legs and wings evolved from forelimbs.
The confusion surrounding dragon leg count, Martin explains, stems from medieval heraldry. While both two and four-legged dragons appeared initially, heraldic tradition eventually distinguished them, labeling four-legged beasts as “dragons” and two-legged ones as “wyverns.” This distinction, however, was arbitrary, given that neither creature actually existed. Martin emphasizes the lack of zoological accuracy among medieval heralds.
In Westeros, both dragons and wyverns are real. Therefore, Westerosi heraldry, in Martin’s view, should reflect biological accuracy. The Targaryen sigil, ideally, should depict a two-legged dragon. Why, Martin questions, would anyone in Westeros depict a four-legged dragon when they could observe the real creature and count its limbs? Wyverns in his world, found in Sothoryos, also have two legs but are distinguished by size, coloration, and their inability to breathe fire. He notes that while the Targaryen sigil correctly features two legs, it’s not anatomically perfect, with wings disproportionately small and the symbolic addition of three heads.
Martin expresses frustration with inconsistencies in the GAME OF THRONES and HOUSE OF THE DRAGON series. While early seasons of GAME OF THRONES correctly used two-legged dragon sigils, later seasons and HOUSE OF THE DRAGON adopted four-legged versions, much to Martin’s dismay. He laments that these incorrect four-legged dragons have even crept onto book covers, despite his objections.
RIGHT
Correct two-legged Targaryen sigil
WRONG
Incorrect four-legged Targaryen sigil
Valyrian dragons differ from dragons like Smaug, Toothless, and Vermithrax in other significant ways. They do not speak; they are intelligent beasts, not sentient beings. They form bonds with certain individuals, a connection explored in detail in forthcoming books like THE WINDS OF WINTER, A DREAM OF SPRING, and BLOOD & FIRE. While trainable, like wolves, bears, or lions, they are never fully tamed and remain inherently dangerous. Each dragon possesses a unique personality, often mirroring that of their rider due to their bond. Unlike stereotypical dragons, they have no intrinsic desire for gold or gems, unless perhaps influenced by a rider obsessed with such things.
Dragons in A Song of Ice and Fire have biological needs. They require food, water, and oxygen. The idea of a dragon sleeping for decades, as Smaug did, is implausible for Valyrian dragons. As creatures of fire, they need oxygen to survive. While they might snatch a fish from the sea, they cannot remain submerged for long and would drown like any other land animal.
Westerosi dragons are predators and carnivores, preferring cooked meat. They are territorial creatures who establish lairs, ideally on mountaintops, especially volcanic ones, befitting their fiery nature. They shun cold, damp caves favored by dragons in other fantasies. Man-made structures like the Dragonstone stables, Valyrian towers, and the Dragonpit of King’s Landing are acceptable alternatives, often with the added benefit of humans providing food. Young dragons, if necessary, will find and fiercely defend their own lairs.
Though capable of flying vast distances, dragons in Westeros are not nomadic. During Valyria’s peak, despite hundreds of dragons and dragonriders, they remained close to the Freehold and the Lands of the Long Summer. While occasional visits to colonies occurred, permanent relocation was rare. Martin argues that if dragons were nomadic, they would have overrun Essos, and the Doom of Valyria wouldn’t have eliminated most of them. Similarly, in Westeros, dragons largely stay near Dragonstone or the Dragonpit. Instances of dragons traveling with riders, like Arrax to Storm’s End and Jace to Winterfell, are exceptions, not the norm. You won’t find wild dragons roaming freely across the Seven Kingdoms.
Martin concludes by emphasizing the importance of grounding fantasy in consistent rules and internal logic. While Smaug and Toothless are both dragons, they exist in fundamentally different fictional ecosystems. Ignoring established canon and internal consistency can unravel a created world, making it as fragile as tissue paper. For A Song of Ice and Fire, the dragons are a carefully considered element, adding to the world’s richness and depth through their unique and internally consistent design.
