I’m wondering if medieval depictions of dragons were borrowed from elsewhere (like China) or arose independently in Europe. They are remarkably similar in both places. Where did the mythological creatures we call dragons first appear in pictures or words?
There seems to be evidence that the two conceptions, though outwardly similar, arose independently. A passably good write-up on European dragons in Wikipedia, and a related article on the Chinese dragons. The former suggests that there may actually have been a link of sorts through Parthia (i.e., Roman-times Persia).
Pshaw.
We all know the similarities exist because ancient people had first-hand experience with such dread creatures.
I mean, maps used to say, “Here there be dragons.” Now, they wouldn’t lie, would they? Exactly. I rest my case.
WRS/Thû - darn those ring-consuming dragons. JRRT wouldn’t lie either, would he? 
You could also make the case that the dragon is manifest in mesoamerican cultures in the form of Quetzalcóatl.
This question is a varation on one of our more popular questions.
It has been addressed on numerous occasions, including the thread Where the hell did “dragons” come from? which concluded with a couple of posts that provided links to seven (or so) similar threads. If you’re interested in dragons, nearly all the threads are worth pursuing.
I will point out (as I did in post #6 of the linked thread), that dragons in northern Europe bear little resemblance to dragons in the Middle East which bear little resemblance to Chinese dragons that bear little resemblance to Meso-American dragons.
They all share the single characteristic of a generally serpentine body, but they differ in nearly every other category. It is my (often expressed) opinion that Europeans, having already conflated the Norse wyrm and the Mesopotamian (by way of Greece) drakon, simply applied the word “dragon” to every mythological serpentine creature they encountered in any other culture.
Completely OT, but it has to be said:
Pshaw?!?!?
What kind of Archmaia of Evil says “Pshaw”? That term belongs in the mouth of Whistler’s Mother, or Grant Wood’s dentist. Even Esmeralda Weatherwax would never say “Pshaw”!
Do we KNOW they exist. What supports that assertion?
Figments of the imagination of the superstitous and uninformed!
spingears, I think someone’s irony meter needs to be adjusted.
I think the dinosaur bones hypothesis is about as plausible as any. It would even lend itself to variations in form. Occasional discoveries of dinosaur fossils must have occured and they would have appeared reptilian or serpentine in a general way. Makes sense to me.
As I’ve mentioned in at least a couple of the threads linked to in tomndebb’s link above, I find the dino bones hypothesis to be particularly poor. The lack of understanding as to what fossils are, the lack of knowledge regarding comparative anatomy, and the fact that the vast majority of dino fossils aren’t complete skeletons lying exposed on the surface all lead me to conclude that any connection between dinosaurs and dragons is post hoc. Dinosaur fossils are highly unlikely to have initiated the myth.
No they aren’t. Dragons in European stories tend to have little if any inteligence. They are malevolent. The Eastern dragon is wise and good. European images of dragons vary wildly.
I’m shocked that somebody with the name of Rusalka doesn’t know these things.
True. Many European dragons are simply giant snakes or giant lizards. Nothing too exotic.
My theory is that they originated in the Naga legends of Southeast Asia and spread by diffusion north to China and then west to Europe. Also that their origin is very old and the diffusion happened far back in prehistory. Nagas are mythical intelligent serpents who guard hoards of treasure. They are known in India, but, as the British scholar Stewart Wavell found in his research for his book The Naga King’s Daughter, tracing back Naga legends points to an origin in Southeast Asia. Indian Nagas, Chinese dragons, and European dragons could all be explained by being derived from Southeast Asian Nagas. The earliest recorded Naga legends point back to the ancient Khmer kingdom of Funan, but for the diffusion to have reached so far it would need to have begun far back in prehistory. Wavell looked for the origin of the legends among the Orang Asli (aborigines) of Malaysia, who speak Austroasiatic languages related to Khmer.
Is this theory based on any evidence?
I take that to mean no. So, seriously, what makes you think this?
We’re all Dungeons&Dragons playing geeks here. We know what a Naga is. (Before anybody asks if all my knowledge of such things is from roleplaying books and comics, the answer is no.) From the naga to the Norse linnorm is a short trip- linnorms are giant, animal to stupid human intelligent snakes, and Fafnir certainly was associated with treasure. But, what about wyverns (D&D did not invent these)? What about Cromm Cruach? What about all the dragons that are completely unlike nagas?
Possibly. Is there any reason to think so? And again, European dragons are not a homogenous group. Teutonic dragons were different from Slavic dragons. Neither group was like Celtic dragons etc.