1 2 7

-

1 5 0

Dragon and Hero or How to Kill a Dragon –on the Example of the Legends of Međimurje
about the Grabancijaš and the Dragon

2 0 1 0 ,Suzana Marjanić

X I I I-

“The Dragon is probably the best-known but also the mostunfortunate fantastic animal.”Jorge Luis Borges: The Book of Imaginary Beings 1

M Y T H O L O G I C A

S L A V I C AThrough interpretation of oral legends about the Čakovec pozoj, or Dragon, the emphasis is placed in this paper on the differential determinant in relation to the final statusof the Dragon (live status/cosmic renewal – dead) in proto-Slavic legends, in the oral legend
about the Čakovec pozoj and in the legend of St George, who slays the Dragon. Namely,
Christianity installs a once-only saintly finishing off of the Dragon, while it is a matter ofcyclic killings in the Indo-European myth of the conflict between, for example, Indra and theso-called Cosmic Monster (Vr.tra, Vala) the Snake/Dragon.
In the conclusion of this article, the Međimurean legends of the meteorological binomial, made up of the grabancijaš and the pozoj, are interpreted by way of the ecofeminist key
as legends in which an effort is made to conceal inconvenient historical truths (Christianisation, colonialism). In other words, the legend of the Čakovec Dragon – as is the case with all
similar legends of the vanquishing of so-called monsters – demonstrates what Roland Barthes
differentiated in mythic structure: that the myth can be very simply modified into a tool ofpolitical demagogy that confers a “natural” appearance upon a particular ideology. Trueenough, the case of the legend of the Čakovec Dragon is a weak myth, which Barthes denotes
in relation to the strong myth. Namely, in the former the political quantum is immediate, thedepolitisation is abrupt, and in the latter, “the political quality of the object has faded like acolour, but the slightest thing can bring back its strength brutally”. Needless to say, the slightest thing, trifles, are not at all unimportant.
Myth – oral legend – the legend about the dragon-like so-called monster

1

S T U D I A

On the basis of reconstructed Indo-European, and particularly Proto-Slavic, sacred
texts and/or their fragments, which tell of the cosmic struggle (the agon) between the
Gromovnik, or Wielder of Thunder (Indra, Perun) and the Snake/Dragon (Vr.tra/Vala,

Because of my boundless affection for this quotation, I am using it again as a motto in my (second) text on thetheme of mythic dragonology (cf. Marjanić 1997/1998:82).
This article was previously published in the Croatian language in the journal Narodna umjetnost (46/2, 2009).

127

Dragon and Hero or How to Kill a Dragon

Volos/Veles),2 one is able to commence reconstruction of the oral legend of the Čakovec
pozoj (dragon).3
By so-called “Pantheonic” reconstruction (cf. Kovačević 2006:47), and on the pathof the semiotic-philological research by Vjačeslav V. Ivanov and Vladimir N. Toporov, thesemiological-etymological approach of Radoslav Katičić and the ethnological-philological(hermeneutic) research of Vitomir Belaj, it can be established that one finds the main heroes from the Proto-Slavic myth in the mythic legend of the Čakovec pozoj – where Perunand Volos/Veles are replaced by their alopersonages: the grabancijaš4 with the attributes of
the Thunder God Perun and the pozoj with the attributes of Volos/Veles and/or the Snake/Dragon as rulers of the Netherworld – Vyrej/Virej – the mythic world of Eternal Spring. In
other words, Perun and Volos/Veles are the only two Proto-Slavic deities whose relationship can be partly reconstructed and we arrive at the following scheme on the Proto-Slavic
level of that mythic cosmic drama: Perun kills/chases the Veles/Snake with thunder (Belaj
1988:65-69). This is, as Calvert Watkins emphasises in his book How to Kill a Dragon, thebasic formula of the hero killing the serpent (Watkins 1995:301). In that way, we can assume that we have the fragments of a ritual text in the oral legend of the Čakovec pozoj,
a myth that was given a Christian foundation (Christianisation, colonialism) throughout
the centuries, which is underpinned by a mythic story (a pagan one, a Proto-Slavic matrix)of the conflict between the Thunder God – of the heavens – and his opponent as ruler the
Netherworld – Vyrej/Virej, or if we invert the mythic matrix in an ecofeminist manner – ofthe conflict between the so-called monster and his opponent.
Since a fragmentary mythic legend is in question here, where the basic heroes are
the grabancijaš and the pozoj, who figure on the Proto-Slavic level as the Thunder God
Perun (= the grabancijaš) and the serpent-like Veles/Volos (= pozoj), it is necessary toemphasise that this is not a matter of the aspects of Good and Evil of the deity since, inthe comprehension of the cosmic conflict in natural religions, by which the fructiferous
water is liberated from Veles’s Netherworld (Vyrej/Virej) as the mythic world of Eternal
Spring, both deities possess the determinants of a well-intentioned and of a dangerous
deity. However, that gives no indication that the Proto-Slavs had a dualistic conception of
a God of Good and a God of Evil (Belaj 1988:87). Apart from that, the so-called monster
gathers within himself a divine-demonic duality, as was emphasised by the psychologist ofchildhood, David Beaudet; for example, the Babylonian Tiamat figures simultaneously as

2

In comparison with Vala (the grotto), which imprisoned cows in the grotto or cave (Ježić 1987:81), Vr.tra isdenoted as a snake/dragon, which imprisoned water and thus, unlike Vala, had theriomorphic characteristics(ibid.:71, 208-209). Namely, Vr.tra is sometimes called áhi budhnyà – Dragon of the Deep, a snake from the bottom of the waters (Belaj 1998:80). The two main myths connected with Indra speak of his conflict with Vr.tra
and the opening of Vala who are sometimes equalised in the Rgveda (Ježić 1987:73,80-81). Mislav Ježić is of the
˚opinion that the myth of Vr.tra, thus, the myth of killing the Dragon
and liberating of Water, probably relates tothe part of the year when the world lacks water, and when the Sun is high in the sky – around the time of theSummer Solstice – while the myth of Vala denotes the period around the Winter Solstice (Ježić 2006:59).
3Čakovec is a city located in the northern part of Croatia, in the central part of the Međimurje County. As
indicated in the abstract, the Međimurean legends of the meteorological binomial, made up of the grabancijaš
and the pozoj, are interpreted in this article.
4
In the further text, it will be shown that this is a mythic creature (grabancijaš, Wandering Scholar) who,among other supernatural powers also has the capability of calling up storms and hail, which is linked with themytheme of driving dragons upon which those wizards ride and glide through the air.

128

Suzana Marjanić

a divine (symbolisation of the sea) and a demonic creature, where she denotes primordialchaos in an evil and negative context (Gilmore 2003:193).5
Furthermore, according to the “Pantheonic” reconstruction, Perun was modified
in the process of Christianisation into St Elijah the Thunder-Wielder, and Veles into the
Lord of the World of the Dead, and, due to theriomorphism as the Serpent/Dragon, he
is transformed in Christianity into the figuration of Satan, the Devil (V/vrag, đavao in
Croatian) – if we include all the basic Christianity-demonised synonyms (Belaj 1998:6769; Jagić 1948:183). I would like to point out that Veles/Volos’s name along with the Vedic
name Vala and the Lithuanian Velionìs is derived from the Indo-European *wel- meaninggrazing land, meadow, and land of the dead (Belaj 1998:81). The foregoing Christianised
attribution shows that the process of demonisation is carried out more easily with thosepagan deities who contain the morphology of a monster (Durand 1991:85) that is connected with the Netherworld; thus, Veles’s Netherworld of Eternal Spring (Vyrej/Virej) istransposed into Hell in the Christianised interpretation. Veles’s location is by water or inwater (by the roots of the Tree of the World – the arbor/axis mundi), which corresponds
to the attribution of the Čakovec pozoj as a water dragon.6 Thus, a legend of the Podravina[Drava River Basin] in Hungary speaks of St Elijah riding on a šarkanj – a Great Demon[veliki vrag], a pozoj or dragon (Franković 1990:131), which can confirm the above connection between the grabancijaš and the pozoj/Dragon as alopersonages of St Elijah/Perunand the Devil/Veles/Volos.7

Figure 1: Ninurta as the Sumerian warrior Storm God expelling the serpent-like eagle Zu, a relief in the temple
consecrated to Ninurta, Kalah, around 870 BC (Uehlinger 1995:91)7

5

So the Sumerians speak of the conflict between the dragon Asag and the god Ninurta, and the Babylonians of
the defeat of Tiamat, who was overpowered by Marduk (Višić 1993:55, 57).
6
Andrija Dolenčić (1909-1983), parish priest and catechist, who notated and studied Međimurean popular
customs and beliefs during the 1940s, defined the pozoj as a water dragon (Dolenčić 1952:356). About local
dragons being identified as local springs cf. Fontenrose 1959:548.
7
Since there are two versions of the myth, the Storm Bird Zu defeated either Marduk or Ninurta or even Lugalbanda (Fontenrose 1959:148).

129

Dragon and Hero or How to Kill a Dragon

The dyadic location of the pozoj’s body, a threat of danger from earthquakes andstorms…
The following are three versions of the mythic legend of the Čakovec dragon: thefirst is taken from the Tourism Club: Međimurje web-page, the second fragment is from
Gönczi’s book Međimurje – ljudi, vjerovanja, običaji [Međimurje – People, Beliefs, Customs] (1895) while the third fragment is from Andrija Dolenčić’s manuscript collection(1952) referred to above.8
The Green Pozoj in Čakovec“A legend connected with Čakovec is that of the green pozoj whose head is situatedbelow the Old Town of Čakovec, while its tail is under the Church of St Nicholas; some saythat it is the other way round. Only a student grabancijaš [Wandering Scholar] could liberate [the town] from the Dragon. To disturb the Dragon underneath the Old Town would
be dangerous; it could lead to an earthquake and tempest.” (“Predaja o zelenom pozoju uČakovcu” [Legend of the green pozoj in Čakovec])
The Pozoj in Čakovec“The people of Čakovec and its surroundings constantly speak of such a dragon, whose
head is under the parish Church of St Nicholas, and the tail under the Old Town. In otherwords, he is lying beneath the town of Čakovec itself. Only a student grabancijaš (Black Student, črnoškolec) could remove him, but, in such case, part of Čakovec would come crashingdown. (…)” (Gönczi 1995:122-123)
The Pozoj under Čakovec and the Watery Abyss“So it was that a couple of decades ago they still believed that a pozoj was lying underČakovec, with its tail under the Old Town (the castle and the Zrinski Fortress), while thehead was under the ‘monks’ church’. As there are no longer any grabancijašes to extract itfrom there, a danger lurks that ‘all of Čakovec will collapse beneath the ground (into thewatery abyss)’.” (Dolenčić 1952:358)
It can be seen that these versions do not present the same information on the position of the pozoj’s head and its tail; still, the locations are the same – the Old Town (thecastle and the Zrinski fortress) and the parish church of St Nicholas.9 Another feature incommon is the fact that the pozoj can be extracted only by a student grabancijaš (a Black
Student), as is stressed in the second legend, that is, version, and both legends point out
8

I am providing the sources concerning the legend according to the order of their accessibility to the possible
reading public.
I would like to point out that I am attempting in this text to follow the distinction between the words variant
and version, as is done by Joseph Fontenrose. He stresses that a variant is the same story told with other protagonists (gods and people) as well as in different settings; while a new version emerges when the details arechanged – “when a theme or episode is given a somewhat different expression, when something is added or
subtracted, when the sequence of episodes is shifted – but the personal and place names remain unchanged”(Fontenrose 1959:5-6).
9For example, according to Nodilo’s interpretation, St Nicholas appears as an alternative name for Veles, bywhich, bearing in mind the pozoj’s location under the Church of St Nicholas, one can establish his possible linkwith Veles (Nodilo 1981:391).

130

Suzana Marjanićthat it would be dangerous to disturb the dragon, since an earthquake and a tempest could
follow and/or, as the second version tells us – in that case, a part of Čakovec would comecrashing down. In his literarily styled notation, Ferencz Gönczi continues that when thegrabancijaš harnesses the dragon and when the dragon rises up, a storm ensues, which indicates that we are speaking of a meteorological hybrid creature. The third version warns,
thus differing from the former two, that since there are no longer any grabancijašes now, adanger lurks that “all of Čakovec will collapse beneath the ground (into the watery abyss)”,
which introduces the attribution of the water dragon.
If we attach to this version the legend of the Štrigova Dragon, pozoj [Štrigova beinga village and municipality in Međimurje] which, unlike the version of the Čakovec dragonlegend, introduces a temporal deixis about Spring as the period of the awakening of theyoung pozoj, that can be paralleled with Mislav Ježić’s tenet that the myth of Vr.tra, that is,
the myth about the killing of the Dragon and the liberation of Water, most probably refers
to the time of year of the Summer Solstice (Ježić 2006:59). Namely, the point of reference about Spring in the Štrigova legend introduces the deixis about the beginning of theProto-Slavic New Year that began in Spring – around the date of today’s Christian Easterand/or St George’s Day as the beginning of the Summer part of the year. St George’s Day
is situated in a very important position in the calendar system between the Summer andWinter halves of the year (Belaj 1998:120, 169) and is often seen in the folklore conception
as the beginning of Spring, but also as the beginning of the year, that is, the economic year
when the livestock is first taken out to pasture after Winter.10
The Legend of the Štrigova Pozoj“The legend of the pozoj is also connected with Štrigova. It is said that the dragon is
on the high ground under the Church of St Jerome, while its tail is in the lowlands – near
the Church of St Mary Magdalene. It is dangerous to disturb the pozoj. In Štrigova they saythat the young dragon beats around with its tail every Spring, when high water rises in thelowlands.” (“Predaja o štrigovskom pozoju” [Legend of the Štrigova Pozoj], http)So we have emphasised again in the legend the pozoj’s physical dyad – head and tail,with respect to its subterranean location under one of the churches in Štrigova, as well as
the information that this is a water dragon, as also emphasised in the legend noted down
by Dolenčić. So it is characteristic to both Čakovec and Štrigova that the pozoj is linked
with the location of the local town church, while in that process it should be added thatthe pozoj’s physical dyad is also noted in individual legends from Croatian Zagorje – forexample, in the Ivanec region (cf. Šantalab 2008:39).
Let us pause briefly on the subject of the etymology of the words pozoj and pozojak that one encounters in Međimurje, Prekomurje, Podravina, Croatian Zagorje andPrigorje, and in Slovenia (Dolenčić 1952:359; Radenković 2006:206; Kropej 2008:117).1110

As far as Croatia is concerned, St George’s Day processions with the Green George personage are known onlyin North-western Croatia (in a largely Kajkavian-speaking region) while they are also known in North-eastern
Pannonian Slovenia (Belaj 1998:172-173), which we can also view as a link with the legends about the grabancijaš and the dragon (pozoj), that are largely connected to the Kajkavian areas in Croatia.
11
According to Fran Miklošič’s dictionary Etymologisches Wörterbuch der slavischen Sprachen, Nodilo notes
that, apart from to Croatian Kajkavian speakers, the word pozoj was also known to the Ukrainians (Nodilo
1981:436).

131

Dragon and Hero or How to Kill a Dragon

I would mention that the Academy’s Rječnik hrvatskoga ili srpskoga jezika [Dictionary of
the Croatian and the Serbian Language] defines the word pozoj as zmaj [dragon] and asaždaja/Azi Dahaka and does not differentiate between the two words, as Natko Nodilo
does, for example, in his study Stara vjera Srba i Hrvata [The Old Faith of Serbs andCroats] (1885-1890). Furthermore, the etymology of these words in the Academy’s Dictionary is interpreted from po-zoj; “the second part comes from the root, which is locatedin the verbs zinuti, zijevati [to gape, to yawn]” and mentions the word pozojica (a female
pozoj or dragon), of which it is later stated that it is mentioned in Ivan Belostenec’s dictionary, the Gazophylacium (1740) – in dracaena (Rječnik hrvatskoga ili srpskoga jezika
1935:325).12 In addition to the word pozoj the word pojzija was also in use in the Ivanec
area (in Croatian Zagorje) (Šantalab 2008:38-39).13
We could also mention Nodilo’s interpretation of the pozoj from Kajkavian and Slovenian legends, as noted down by Matija Valjavec Kračmanov and interpreted by Vatroslav
Jagić, which Nodilo defines as being a fiery dragon, that is, the opposite of Dolenčić’s
definition of water dragons mentioned here.14 Namely, in Nodilo’s interpretation that sets
a differentiating definition between zmaj (dragon) and aždaja (Azi Dahaka), the pozoj as
it appears in Kajkavian legends is not an anthropophagic dragon, which is the basis of eachteratology (Gk. téras, G tératos – monster, wonder; lógos; in the sense of researching the socalled monster or “freak”), but rather a stormy dragon, symbolising the lightning-packed
Fire, Agni – the Vedic deity of fire. In that process, Nodilo refers to the Rgveda, where it is
˚
15
Apart
noted that Agni consumes trees (RV I, 58, 5; RV I, 143, 5; Nodilo 1981:436-437).
from that, the Rgveda (RV I, 79,1) defines Agni as a snake (usp. Macdonell 1974:153),
˚ of Nodilo’s euphemisation of the dragon as the deity of fire, while hewhich is the source
inscribes only the teratology of the aždaja (Azi Dahaka)16 into the term demonic monster(monstrum horrendum).
12

We should also mention the plant called Dracaena [the Dragon Tree, or Drakon Tree], whose name is the
Romanised form of the Ancient Greek δράκαινα – drakaina, “female dragon” (cf. Wikipedia – “Dracaena
plant”).
13
In the framework of etymology of the word pozoj, it should be remembered that the word zmaj [dragon] has
the same origin as the word zmija [snake] and is connected with the earth [zemlja] (Skok 1973/III:649-650).
Both snakes and dragons are termed with the same word in Latin – draco (Sax 2001:233). The formation of
the Greek word drácon is motivated by the verb dérkomai (to look). It is probable that the Greeks, as a resultof fascination with the uncomfortable rigidity of the snake’s gaze, named that creature with the descriptive
syntagm the animal with the frozen gaze – drácon (Jöckel 1995:29).
Vitomir Belaj points to the Macedonian-Bulgarian adjustment of the meaning of the word zmaj [dragon]that was originally the male form of the word zmija [snake] – the dragon being the snake’s male mate (Belaj
1998:44). So it is that on the island of Korčula, as well as in some other places in Dalmatia, they say zmaja
instead of zmija for snake, which confirms the original meaning of the word zmaj [dragon]. And in Smokvica
on the island of Korčula they say guja for all snakes, but call only poison snakes zmaja (Hirtz 1928/I:179).
14
In his study about the grabancijašes (1877), Vatroslav Jagić starts out from the stories or legends collectedby Matija Kračmanov Valjavec, who accumulated the major part of his material while working as a teacher
at the high school in Varaždin, having it published in part in the Slovenian journal Slovenski glasnik (Jagić
1948:177).
15
In one of the Rigvedic hymns (RV II, 4.5), tree-eater – van-ád- (Loma 1997:158) is given as an epithet for the
god Agni.
16
Maja Bošković-Stulli points out that, to the Croatians, „the juxtapositioning of the terms zmaj (dragon) andaždaja (Azi Dahaka) is unusual; among the Croatians the term zmaj (dragon) denotes the same wicked monster as aždaja (Azi Dahaka) among the Serbians, but they, too, use the term zmaj in that sense” (BoškovićStulli 1969-1970:182). However, cf. the differential determinant between zmaj and aždaja in keeping with thebelief in Zaostrog (in Dalmatia) according to which the aždaja was more terrible than the zmaj “because it132

Suzana Marjanić

In addition to etymology, we can also devote a brief time to the etiology of pozoj.
Nodilo points to the legend in Valjavec’s notations from Bednja (Croatian Zagorje), which
speak of the dragon being a large winged horse (a hippogriff ) that emerges from a fish,
frog or even a snake (Nodilo 1981:227; Jagić 1948:177-178).17 And we must also mention
the legend from Prelog, not far from Čakovec, which links the dragon with earthquakes, asis the case with the Čakovec pozoj (Jagić 1948:178). In addition to that etiological legendfrom Prelog, which stresses that the dragon develops from a fish that digs itself deep into
mud (Jagić 1948:178), according to Međimurean legends, the pozoj can also come fromold snakes, frogs and roosters, “older than seven years”,18 and it also feeds on soil. This
metamorphosis takes place when the animal that is predestined to become a pozoj fasts fora few days, “and then squeezes into some ‘ditch’ or puddle full of water and starts graduallyeating the soil around it. (…) When it makes such a large and wide hole in the earth that it
can no longer hold itself up and falls into the water, then they say in Međimurje: the earthvjezerila [meaning to collapse]. In that way, after having been devoured by the pozoj, theearth beside it can collapse and/or ‘whole cities’ can collapse” (Dolenčić 1952:357-358).
According to notated legends,19 the Podravina Croatians in Hungary believed thata šarkanj, which develops from an old catfish and denotes a dragon or a fat snake, brings
ice and hail to the villages (Franković 1990:115).20 What is interesting for our theme is thefact that there is a connection in certain legends between the šarkanj (the pozoj) and thegrabancijaš. One of the determinants that is typical for the grabancijaš is the fact that hedrinks (soured) milk; namely, when he enters a village, he asks for soured milk from thehead of the household. It is intriguing to note that the above determinant also appears indevours people. St George kills the aždaja. It has more than one head. Now our people here think that the zmaj is
only the King of Snakes” (Banović 1918:213).
17
To mention another etiology of the dragon from Valjavec’s notations about a legend noted down in Ludbreg,
which speaks of old frogs and snakes transforming into dragons. Another legend that was noted in Zamladinec not far from Križevci points out, in the Christianised key, that the Devil can transform into a dragon (Jagić
1948:179-180), which is only one more confirmation of the fact that Satan figures as an evil spirit who does
not have his own body but occupies other bodies as a parasite, so that his morphology is incalculable (LevanatPeričić 2008a:537).
18
Concerning the beliefs that link the genesis of the pozoj with a rooster cf., for example, Dolenčić 1952:361-362;
Lang 1914:150; Stojković 1931:87. It is evident there that Milan Lang noted only beliefs about the pozoj in
Samobor under the heading “monsters and ‘freaks’”. On the ancient nature of beliefs about the origins of the
dragon from particular animals, cf., for example, Radenković 2001:207; Bandić 2001:165.
19
It should be emphasised, as pointed out, for example, by Ivan Lozica and Ljiljana Marks, that mythic (demonological) legends in ethnological literature are often equated with beliefs, by which it is forgotten that they arestill merely stories (Lozica, Marks 2001:454).
20
The term šarkanj in the meaning of zmaj [dragon] is witnessed to in the Charter of Herceg Stjepan (15thcentury), while this is a term that has been retained by both Serbians and Croatians, among the Hungarian
Slavs and the Bulgarians of Banat (Radenković 2006:206). Otherwise, the large winged dragon from the TransCarpathian part of the Ukraine is called a šarkan. The belief is that, where it flies, a tempest is raised that pulls
up trees by the roots (Gura 2005:219). Tekla Dömötör noted down that “the word sárkány was borrowed by
Hungarian from the ancient Turkish, and it is found in written sources from the twelfth century onwards,
mainly in place-names” (Dömötör 1985:73).
Đuro Franković grouped separately the legends of the zmaj (dragon), šarkanj and aždaja (Azi Dahaka) among
the Podravina Croatians in Hungary, even though these terms are sometimes interchangeable. Thus, a legend
about St George, which was notated by Franković, uses the terms šarkanj and zmaj as synonyms, mentioningthat these dragons have a ružica (a crest) like a rooster (Franković 1990:147). Dolenčić points out that in the
majority of the paintings that depict the mytheme of “St George Killing the Dragon”, the dragon has the headof a rooster and not of a snake, frog or, for its part, a crocodile-lizardly head, as the dragons who are struck
down by the spear or sword of St George are sometimes depicted (Dolenčić 1952:361-362).

133

Dragon and Hero or How to Kill a Dragon

certain legends in connection with the šarkanj, which obviously figures in those examples
as the grabancijaš’s alter ego/ego alter: for example: “That šarkanj drinks a lot of milk. Yes,
that is a šarkanj. The one who came into the village like a tramp and begged for milk, yes,that was a šarkanj” (Franković 1990:129).21 So, according to the legends, the grabancijaš
lives modestly and often seeks the help of others (a bed for the night and soured milk),
and, if he is refused either of these, he largely takes revenge on those inhospitable villages
by bringing down hail – and/or mounting the pozoj, urges it on and destroys their fields
and their harvests (Dolenčić 1952:359; Jagić 1948:181).22
The meteorological binomial pozoj – grabancijaš
After interpretation of the links between the Čakovec and Štrigova pozoj, we canturn our attention to the reconstruction of the mythic legend of the Čakovec pozoj in conjunction with legends about pozojs from other Kajkavian dialect areas (Valjavec 1866; Jagić
1877; Marks 1994; Šantalab 2008). In that way, we can separate the mythemes of mythic
legends that are mutually connected by theme in associative sequences in which one ofsuch associative links detaches the meteorological binomial of the pozoj – grabancijaš,
which can be seen as a remnant of cosmogonic myths that contain the meteorologicalmytheme of the conflict between the Wielder of Thunder, and his opponents – the Water
behemoth: for example, Indra – Vr.tra/Vala, Perun – Veles/Volos (Snake/Dragon).
Vatroslav Jagić established that the legend type featuring the grabancijaš and the
pozoj as it main protagonists appeared among the Hungarians and the Croatians; and/orthat the grabancijaš was restricted to only one part of Croatia – the area between the Mura,
Drava and Sava Rivers – where he was known as far back as from Ivan Belostenec’s time (asshown by his dictionary Gazophylacium dating from 1740) – the Croatian region that wasonce called pars adnexa Regni Hungariae.23 In that process, Jagić interpreted the CroatianHungarian connection24 by the fact that Northern-Croatian and Hungarian priests often
attended the same institutions of learning in Budapest, Vienna, Bologna and Trnava (Jagić
21

It seems that the description of the šarkanj as a dragon that drinks (soured) milk in the legends of the Podravina Croatians in Hungary can be linked with the snake known under the term kravosac or kravosas in
Croatian [Elaphe quatuorlineata quatuorlineata], that was widely believed throughout Croatia to suck themilk of cows. Hirc noted that Croatian popular beliefs about the kravosac snake that sucks milk from cows
are connected with three types of snake: the snake known by the Latin name Callopeltis Aesculapii, which
was dedicated to Aesculapius among the ancient Greeks; the snake known by the Latin name Elaphis cerrone(Coluber quaterradiatus) and lives in Dalmatia; and further, the snake known along the Littoral, the Quarnero
Bay islands and Istria as crni gad, črnec or crnčina [all these terms alluding to its dark, almost black scales](Zamenis carbonarius) (Hirc 1896:17-18).
22
This piece of information about milk can be linked with the Lithuanian custom of feeding house snakes withmilk (Orbini 1999:117-118). Confirmations of that totemic zoolatry can also be found in the Southern Slavic
regions (Nodilo 1981:431). One could, of course, speak of Illyrian influences, since the snake as a totemic
animal played a pivotal role in the mythological and religious system of the Southern Illyrians (Stipčević
1981:149, 152). On the connection between snakes and milk cf. Gubernatis 1872:407-408; Huxley 1997:8.
23
Leopold Kretzenbacher pointed out that the grabancijaš was known among the South-eastern peoples of Europe – among the Slovaks, Hungarians, Croatians (the Kajkavian-speaking Croatians) as well as among the
Hungarian Slavs (a part of the Štokavian-dialect Serbians) (Kretzenbacher 1968:102-103). One does, of course,
have to add the legends of the grabancijaš notated in eastern Slovenia and among the members of the Slovenian ethnic group in Porabje (Šmitek 2004:209; Kropej 2008:175-185).
24
In relation to the foregoing footnote, it is also possible to speak of Croatian-Slovenian links in which there aredescriptions of expelling the Dragon mentioned in the same way in legends (Kropej 2008:180).

134

Suzana Marjanić

1948:188-190). Is it not a little ironic that the Bologna Declaration – the joint declarationof European education ministries – was signed right in Bologna (19th June, 1999)?
In addition to the term grabancijaš and student of the thirteenth college one also encounters the following names – black student, student of the black school, and black school
student (črni dijak, dijak črne škole, črnoškolec),25 which were derived from the black robes
worn by such students (Jagić 1948:190).26 So one finds that Adam Baltazar Krčelić noted
down early on that the seminary in Zagreb was called the black school by ordinary folk (Jagić
1948:190; Marks 1994:24-25). He is encountered among the Hungarians under the terms
garabonczás, garabonczás-diák, and garabonciás (Jagić 1948:189; Dömötör 1985:133), andhas the same meaning as he does in Croatian oral legends – a person with supernatural
capabilities, a travelling student who became a wizard on completion of the Thirteenth
School27 and is able to exert influence on the weather, or, to put it more precisely – to callup storms and hail, which is linked with the mytheme of mounting dragons upon whichthose wizards ride and glide through the air (Jagić 1877:177; Dömötör 1985:73).
In addition to Jagić’s philological interpretation, we can give brief attention to Nodilo’s mythological interpretation of the grabancijaš, where the witches’ dance (the Wheelof Fortune to the Witches’ [Virgilian] Circle) with twelve spokes and twelve students isinterpreted by the sunny twelve-spoked wheel in the Rgveda (Nodilo 1981:228).28 Nodilo
˚ (RV I, 164, 12) described the andeparts here from the concept that the Rigvedic hymn
nual Sun as a wheel with twelve spokes – “a wheel of eternal order trundles around the sky,25

The role of expeller of the pozoj in Slovenian legends is taken by the mythic Slovenian hero, Kresnik, describedby Šmitek as “the Lord and Master over Fire”. Šmitek stresses that the Dragon can be vanquished only by a hero
who himself has some “dragon-like characteristics”; he can thus be a blacksmith, a charcoal burner, or someother person who knows how to handle fire (cf. Šmitek 2009:176). I would remind readers that the shamanis the “Master over Fire” in Eliade’s definition (cf. Eliade 1974:474). Otherwise, it should be pointed out that
Monika Kropej defines K/kresnik as a student of the black school (črne škole dijak, kresnik) (Kropej 2008:180).
26
Although the etymology of the word grabancijaš, as we will show in footnote 27, does not derive from the word
klerik [cleric] or svećenik [priest], Ivan Grafenauer, along with Vatroslav Jagić, assumes that a young cleric is actually in question in the folklore concepts of the grabancijaš (cf. Grafenauer 1956:324; Kropej 2008:180-181).
27
Cf. Jagić 1948:186 about the Mediaeval, Jesuit concept by which a priest had to complete twelve schools – fourof grammar, two of the Humanities, two of Philosophy, and four of Theology. The imaginary thirteenth schooltaught the subject of casting spells and magic, so that Jagić derives the name grabancijaš from the Italian word
negromanzia and its abbreviated, bastardised form gramanzia, meaning magic spells – thus, the grabancijaš
is the bearer of gramanzia, and is a negromant [necromancer] (Jagić 1948:186). Molnár’s Dictionarium latinoungaricum (Nürnberg, 1604) gives the following links: garabontsa-magia, necromantia; garabontsás-magus,
necromanticus (Kretzenbacher 1968:108). Tekla Dömötör also points out that the Hungarian word garabonciás
is regarded as a bastardised borrowed word from the Italian word necromanzia, which entered the Hungarian
language through Slovenian and Croatian, and mentions that Dezső Pais assumes that this word could possible
derive from the word Brabantia, “the Mediaeval Latin name for the province of Brabant” (Dömötör 1985:133).
To look at another interpretation: Milan Budimir (1966:272) expressed the opinion that Jagić’s linguistic connection between the word grabancijaš and the Italian word negromanzia “had no link” with that Italian word
but rather with the Greek word meaning scribbling.
28
Here, Nodilo (1981:230-231) starts out from two studies that have the mytheme of the grabancijaš as their
themes: these are the study by Oskar Ásbóth (1880:611-627) on the Hungarian grabancijašes and Moses
Gaster’s (1884:281-290) study on Romanian “grabancijašes” (Scholomonar, Solomonar/ĭu, şolomonar), whichwere influenced by Jagić’s study. Nodilo does not accept Jagić’s contextual interpretation of the mytheme of
the grabancijašes that introduces the hypothesis that the legends about the grabancijašes are of Christian/Mediaeval origin (the scholarly mytheme of the sunken culture – of the influence of learned culture upon folk
culture) (Nodilo 1981:229). Namely, while Jagić recognised only one direction of influence – that is, the influence of high culture, “the influence from above”, in this case, priestly culture influences popular culture (Jagić
1948:177) – today one speaks of mutual influences (cf. Bošković-Stulli 1984:131).

135

Dragon and Hero or How to Kill a Dragon

but it never wears out; oh Agni, seven hundred and thirty twin sons climbed up upon thatwheetl” [in the sense of days and nights], “and ‘three hundred and sixty’ [days], according toanother version of the same hymn” (Nodilo 1981:227, 220). Furthermore, starting out fromthe legend noted down by Valjavec in Ludbreg (in Podravina), according to Max Müller’ssolar mythology, Nodilo interprets the grabancijaš as a solar deity who builds a warm yearwith the help of Oganj (Fire) – the Fiery Dragon, Agni – the Vedic deity of fire, and he callsthat mytheme a mythologeme in the wheel of the twelve-monthly Suns (Nodilo 1981:228,230), which is contrary to the interpretation given here that situates the grabancijaš – Pozoj binomial in the context of the meteorological binomial in cosmogonic legends about
the conflict between the Wielder of Thunder, and his snake-like/dragon-like opponent as
the representative of Chaos (Russell 1982:61).
Namely, Nodilo rounds out the mythological interpretation of the grabancijašes’role in the fruitful aspect, since they are active as the protectors of the harvest. In thatprocess, he establishes the fact that they are known in the Romanian tradition by thename Scholomonar (Solomonar/ĭu, şolomari), who have their opponents – protu-Scholomonare [contra-Scholomonars, Hagelmänner] who bring hail (Nodilo 1981:231; Gaster
1884:287).29 The foregoing is near to the Zagreb legend that speaks of young men who“went here to the black school, here on the Chapter [hill], to become priests. And there theylearnt how to make hail, so that when two priests quarrel, they send hail to one another todestroy the crops [of each other’s parishioners]” (Marks 1994:79). Andrija Dolenčić mentions that individual priests recounted how they had been accused of making hail before
World War I, and even later in some cases (Dolenčić 1952:359).30
After having interpreted the links between the Čakovec and the Štrigova pozojs, we
can move on in reconstruction of the mythic stories/legends of the Čakovec pozoj in theirconnections with other legends about the pozojs of Međimurje. I am therefore quoting infull the following legend about the pozoj in Čičanjska Jama (jama here meaning marsh,lake, river tributary) near Donji Vidovec (in Međimurje).
The pozoj in Čičanjska Marsh
It was long known that there was a pozoj in Čičanjska Marsh whose tail was under
the Church. Namely, when the pozoj turned over in the marsh, all the candles fell off thealtar in the Church.
It happened once that a young gentleman dressed in a black suit came to the village.
He went to the parish house and talked at length there with the parish priest. Then the parish
priest called the sacristan, who led that man to Čičanjska Marsh.
That man carried a large book under his arm. He was a grabancijaš.
When they reached the marsh, he went very close to it, and stood on the root of analder shrub and started thus to read from the book.
29

The Lexicon Valachico-latino-hungarico-germanicum (1825) lists the Romanian word Solomonarĭu with thefollowing synonyms: imbricitor, garabanczás deak, Wettermacher (the prime mover of weather), Wettertreiber(the driver of weather), Lumpenmann (raggedy person, a tramp or scoundrel) (Gaster 1987:283; Kretzenbacher 1968:120).
30
There is a group of beliefs about priests being able to call up hail which, sometimes because of envy of anotherpriest, they send to impoverish the members of his parish by crop destruction (Jagić 1948:182), linked with themytheme of the mutual agon of supernatural beings and persons with supernatural capabilities (cf. Marjanić
2006:173).

136

Suzana Marjanić

The sacristan hid a little further away in the reeds and watched all that was happening.
All of a sudden the water started to be disturbed and a pozoj’s head appeared. The
grabancijaš then grabbed a golden bridle and threw it over the pozoj. And he kept on reading from the book. When the pozoj’s body was half out of the water, the grabancijaš jumped
upon him and rode him to the south.
The pozoj had such a long tail that he dragged one part of it along the ground as he
flew.
Suddenly a wind came up, it clouded over and hail began to fall, as fat as a walnut, sothat it destroyed everything from the Dravica Stream to the Drava River.
The shepherds on the upland pasture grazing their cows could clearly see the pozoj’s
tail as well as his rear legs.
The reverend parish priest said later that the grabancijaš had ridden the pozoj toAfrica.
The pozoj has such cold meat that the Africans put a piece of it under the tongue and it
keeps them cool all day. (Zvonar, Hranjec, Strbad 1987II:306–307; emphasis S. M.)31

This mythic, demonological legend32 once again indicates the link between the pozoj and the grabancijaš who calls up storms and hail33 by riding on the pozoj; of how
the grabancijaš – pozoj meteorological binomial brings fructiferous rain after prolonged
periods of drought, just as Perun liberates the Water from Veles’s Netherworld of Eternal
Spring (Vyrej/Virej) in the Proto-Slavic matrix. While interpreting the meteorological pozoj – grabancijaš binomial, bearing in mind the mentioned fact that shows that there are
no indications that the Proto-Slavs had a dualistic conception of the God of Good and theGod of Evil (Belaj 1988:87), we can include the shaman matrix in which the pozoj, due
to the meteorological binomial relationship, can be viewed as the grabancijaš’s shamanic
animal alter ego/ ego alter (Dolenčić 1952:361).34 Just a reminder that the shaman’s animal
metamorphosis or, more precisely – metempsychosis – and his riding on animals sym31

Narrated by Stjepan Zvonar from Donji Vidovec around 1955. The notation is similar to that of Valjavec
according to Jagić’s example No. 12 from Haloze, Lower Styria region, Slovenia (Zvonar, Hranjec, Strbad
1987:306-307).
32
Cf. the real foundation of these stories – mythic, demonological legends (Zvonar, Hranjec, Strbad 1987:303304).
33
Here, the information from the legend of the Pozoj in Čičanjska Marsh is that only the grabancijaš’s riding
on the pozoj calls up the tempest and the hail, while Monika Kropej stresses from the Slovenian legends thatthe black student (the Kresnik) drives out the dragon because the dragon (that is, the dragon itself) causes thestormy weather or the serious weather predicament (cf. Kropej 2008:180). It could also be mentioned thatthe garabonciás is believed in Hungarian folk legends to be capable of whipping up storms or hail showers, oralternatively, of driving them away (Dömötör 1985:132). Absolutely the same holds concerning the dragon,
too, in Hungarian popular beliefs (cf. Dömötör 1985:122).
34
Vilmos Diószegi shows in his book A sámánhit emlékei a magyar népi műveltségben [Traces of Shamanism in
Hungarian Folk Culture] (1958) that the Hungarian táltos differs from the seemingly similar figures that one
finds in the countries neighbouring Hungary – the Romanian Scholomonar (Solomonar/ĭu), the Polish planetnik, and the Croatian grabancijaš, and establishes that only the táltos experiences the “shaman affliction”, “thesecond dream”, and the ritual death or the initiation dismemberment; “only the táltos undergoes an initiation,
has a particular costume and a drum, and goes into ecstasy” (Eliade 1974:225). Cf. Dömötör 1985:132-136 forsimilarities and differences between the garabonciás and the táltos.

137

Dragon and Hero or How to Kill a Dragonbolically express ecstasy: the temporary death is denoted by the soul’s departure from thebody in animal form (Ginzburg 1991:172).
Let us examine the individual mythemes as associative sequences in the legends
mentioned about the Međimurean pozojs.
(1) The mytheme of the dyadic position of the pozoj’s body below the ground (especially beneath the church locality) and/or in the marsh. Otherwise, it is a feature of thisMeđimurean dragon whose hybrid body, as we have established, is dyadically distributed,
that what is in question is a combination between a water (or marsh/swamp) dragon and awinged dragon (Jagić 1948:182-183), while, in respect of its marsh nature or, for that part,its subterranean location, we can also define it as a chthonian creature, which is connectedwith the Christianised ideosphere of those legends and its bimorphic structure – the capability of flight (the celestial symbolism of a bird) coupled with a snake (the chthonian
symbolism of a reptile).
(2) The mytheme that only the grabancijaš (a graduate student of the 13th School) is
capable of liberating the community from the pozoj, which represents an imminent threat toit, and that with the help of the magical book or even by magic spells – reading prayers
from that book (Jagić 1948:180-181, 193). In that process, in addition to the book, there ismention of a means of mastering the dragon in the legend of the pozoj in Čičanjska Jama
by way of the golden bridle that enables the grabancijaš to control and to ride upon it.35(3) The so-called mytheme paradox indicates that the pozoj can be extracted (fromits subterranean location or, for its part, from the marsh) only by the student grabancijaš(the black school student), but that Čakovec would come tumbling down in that case, as
the legend tells us in the version of the Čakovec pozoj written down by Ferencz Gönczi
(Gönczi 1995:123). In other words, it would be dangerous to disturb the dragon underneath the Old City; an earthquake or a terrible storm could ensue, as the first legend saysin the version about the Čakovec pozoj (“Predaja o zelenom pozoju u Čakovcu” [The legend of the green pozoj in Čakovec], http).36(4) The meteorological mytheme and the mytheme of the earthquake.37 According to
the belief, an earthquake resulted from the pozoj’s movements in the bowels of the earth,while its flight led to extremely bad weather (a tempest and hail). It should be noted thatboth types of movement on the part of the pozoj (beneath the ground and in the air) comeabout because of the grabancijaš’s activity, that is, at the moment when the community
wants to drive out the dragon. Examining the dragons connected with grabancijašes in
Hungarian legends, Sándor Erdész, found that this was a case of the dragon/snake-type
dragon by which people used once to explain natural catastrophes (Erdész 1971:103, 106).
35

It should be borne in mind that Billeraphon, who appears otherwise as the first Greek melancholic (CrnojevićCarić 2008:228), managed to master Pegasus with a golden bridle given to him by the goddess Athena, andwas able with the help of the winged horse to kill the Chimaeras – the monster who lived deep in an abyss
near to the main city of Lycia and killed everyone who come near her. Otherwise, Zamarovský points out that
Billerophon was obviously of Asia Minor descent. Namely, in the beginning he figures as a personage of the
Lycia Sun god, who travelled through the heavens on a winged horse and tamed with his arrows Humankind’s
natural hostile forces, primarily volcanoes and earthquakes, of which the Chimaeras became the personification (Zamarovský 1989:52).
36
The legend noted down by Valjavec in Hum in Lower Styria in Slovenia states that if the dragon is locatedunder the church or some castle, people beg the black student to drive the dragon “since it would cause greatdamage destroying the church or the castle” (Jagić 1948:181).
37
In a nutshell, the grabancijaš can drive the pozoj out by the wet method (a terrible hail storm) or by the dry
method (an earthquake) (cf. Jagić 1948:179; Marks 209:324).

138

Suzana Marjanić

The belief was that if the grabancijaš succeeded in mounting the pozoj, the pozoj would fly
off with him and, by way of the waving of its tail, cause a storm that was often accompanied by heavy hail-stones that were interpreted in Međimurje and some parts of Croatian
Zagorje as the dragon’s excrement (kumer) “since everywhere it flies the pozoj leaves ‘dropping of hail’ (hail = excrement)” (Dolenčić 1952:359).
(5) The mytheme of the end of the grabancijaš’s flight to the south or the east (usp.
Kropej 2008:180) or even the west of the Globe, where he kills the pozoj – selling its meat,
which means that the cosmic cycle of revitalisation is interrupted. So we are speaking of
the grabancijaš’s flight to the south (Africa) on the pozoj, as recounted in the legend of
the pozoj in Čičanjska Jama: “The pozoj has such cold meat that the Africans put one piece
under their tongue and then cool themselves with it all day”,38 and/or, in addition to Africa,
another destination to which the grabancijaš drives the dragon is in the east – Arabia (Jagić
1948:178, 181, 195),39 while Dolenčić emphasises as a particularity of the Međimurean
pozoj that the grabancijaš rides it to western India, where it is killed and its meat sold tothe local inhabitants, who place the meat of this cold-blooded hybrid creature under the
tongue in order for it to cool them (Dolenčić 1952:359). In other words, the dragon has tobe driven out into non-Christian regions, the regions of the Other.
Cosmic and Christian slaying of the Dragon
Finally, let us emphasise the differential determinants in relation to the final status of
the Dragon (live state/cosmic revitalisation – dead) in the Proto-Slavic legend where Perun pushes Veles/Volos/the Dragon/Serpent below (to the roots of the Tree of the World),
and in the legend of the Čakovec pozoj, as in the legend of St George, who transfixes andfinishes off the Dragon in a single instance.40 In other words, Christianity inaugurates the
single instance of saintly slaying of the pagan dragon, while, in the Indo-European myth ofthe conflict between, for example Indra and the so-called Cosmic Monster (Vr.tra, Vala), it
is a case of the cyclical changes in the seasons of the year. So, for example, Vr.tra/Vala, Veles/Volos, Azi Dahaka, Fenrisúlfr (Fenris, Fenrir),41 and Leviathan will be enslaved again
at the end of each cosmic cycle (Gaster 1987:76). It is to this group of cosmic dragons thatthe dragons from Međimurje belong, although it is obvious that the Christian legend of
the Dragon Slayer has taken supremacy over the legends of the Međimurean pozoj.42
38

Nonetheless, on the other hand, Ferencz Gönczi mentions that the grabancijaš always flies on the dragon towards the setting Sun, where he butchers it and sells its meat to the local inhabitants, who buy it because it isvery hot there and the inhabitants of that clime refresh themselves with the meat of the marsh dragon (Gönczi
1995:123).
39
As regards East as a cardinal point of the compass, it is worth remembering that the Chinese dragons represented that direction – the point of rising of the Sun, Spring and fertility (Huxley 1997:87).
40
Admittedly, we should add here Belaj’s differential determinant in which he stresses that the folklore George(Green George) figures as Perun’s son and decapitates the Snake with a forged sword (not to be confusedwith the one-off Christian slaying of the Dragon), while that decapitation is quite contrary to the embedded
Christian iconographic depiction in which St George transfixes the Dragon with a spear (Belaj 1998:206), andfinishes the battle with a flourish of his sword (Leksikon ikonografije… [Lexicon of Iconography] 1990:310).
41
According to the Iranian legend, the mortal hero Thraetaona killed the Azi Dahaka, which had three heads
and six eyes (Watkins 1987:464), while according to Edda, Fenrisúlfr, a monstrous wolf fettered by chains will
open wide its huge jaws in order to swallow the entire world at the end of days (Ragnarök).
42
As we are located textually and regarding interpretation in the Međimurean region, just a reminder that thecoat-of-arms of the commune of Sveti Juraj na Bregu [St George on the Hill] shows St George as a knight who

139

Dragon and Hero or How to Kill a Dragon

Namely, it is obvious that the oral legends of the Čakovec pozoj contain a twofold
matrix – pagan and Christian. The pagan, cosmic matrix, that is, the matrix of natural
religions, shows that, prior to the arrival of the grabancijaš, the dragon is located below,
underneath the particular localities, that are largely ecclesiastical or, for their part, marshlands. Furthermore, the grabancijaš and the pozoj act initially as a meteorological binomial; the grabancijaš extracts the dragon (from beneath the ground or the marsh), by which
an earthquake or hail is created (the liberation of fructiferous water). Thus, in comparison
with the Christian legend of St George, the grabancijaš’s supremacy over the pozoj was
originally conceived to operate within the framework of the meteorological binomial: thegrabancijaš does not defeat the pozoj as, for example, St George does with his sword ora spear, but rather with a book (The Bible obviously) as well as by magic spells (reading
selected prayers from the book in question) just as he takes control of him with a golden
bridle, as in the case of the legend of the pozoj from Čičanjska Jama, referred to above.
Some versions emphasise the fact that The Bible appears in the function of the grabancijaš’s
necromantic book, by which direct symbolism is established of Christianity suppressing
paganism (cf. Novak 2007:252). True enough, one can also set up a differential determinant in the mastery over the dragon in the fact that the grabancijaš figures in the folklore
conception as a young cleric (Grafenauer 1956:324), while St George is a saint-warrior.
The Christian matrix of the Čakovec pozoj legend, in addition to the mentioned
established supremacy over the pozoj by magic spells and The Bible, shows that is it ismore appropriate to keep the dragon below43 and not to waken it, so as to avoid its cosmic
renewal, just as the pozoj is killed in the end in the Međimurean legends, as is shown, forexample, with the pozoj in Čičanjska Jama, which concludes with the mytheme of the saleof the pozoj’s meat in Africa.
Although the pagan and Christian matrices imbue the Međimurean legends of the
pozoj, it is quite evident that the Christian legend of the Dragon-Slayer and of the permanent conquest of the so-called monster is what is paramount since, in the end, thegrabancijaš in the south, east or even west of the Globe kills the pozoj – and sells its meat,
which means that the cosmic cycle of revitalisation is interrupted. Thus, when the positionof the monster in physical space is in question, it always happens that an effort is madeto remove what is heterogeneous to a neighbouring, hostile and distant space, just as the
Cosmos is ostensibly populated today by extra-terrestrial intelligence that is largely represented as a hostile Other in the cinema imaginary.
Apart from that, as Dolenčić noticed, those pozojs were not at all dangerous or warlike as in certain other civilisations; they “submit to the magical sayings and prayers of an
impoverished, modest and ‘preškolanoga’ (slightly kinky! = crazy, quirky) grabancijaš andend up in ‘Indian’ butcher shops so that their meat can save the lives of others” (Dolenčić
kills the Dragon with his spear and his sword. There is a legend of a black pozoj in Sveti Juraj na Bregu thatwas slain by St George on a white horse. It is significant to note here that the old name of Sveti Juraj was, intranslation, St George over or among the Waters, which definitely indicates the privileged high position of thesettlement and the church, from which there is a broad vista of all of Međimurje County and the Drava andMura River flatlands (“Sveti Juraj na Bregu”[St George on the Hill], http).
43
The Proto-Slavic word zmьjь or zmьja denotes, as the words say, “the one who belongs to the Earth” and thosewords are derived from the word zeml’a (zemlja). That force that belongs to the earth (zemlja), as Katičić mentions, was equalised by the Christianised Slavs with the vrag (Devil), the Christian Satan (Katičić 2008:185186, 269; cf. footnote 13).

140

Suzana Marjanić

1952:362).44 About the fact that in the pagan matrix of popular tradition – with the exception, of course, of behemoths that symbolise the initial chaos in the cosmogonic myths –the pozoj is more a docile hybrid creature as is also shown in this illustration of a dragon
from the manuscript of Mediaeval bestiary known as MS. Ashmole 1504.45

Figure 2: A Dragon (MS. Ashmole 1504, Bodleian
Library)

Let us pause briefly on another St George legend that tells of how the city of Selene/
Selena (in Libya today) had to pay tribute to the Dragon – in the form of virgins and children (Huxley 1997:49).46 When it was the king’s daughters turn, George killed the Dragon
and thus saved the princess. That legend has been interpreted in several ways; the interpretation that marks it as an allegory of the victory of the Church over Paganism is interesting for our inconvenient historic truth of the eternal conflict between the true faith andheresy.47 Thus, the most frequent depiction of the St George and the Dragon motif sincethe 13th century, which was adopted from the East (Belaj 1998:169-170), is the customary
iconographic one in which St George mounted on his steed pierces the gaping jaws of
the Dragon with his spear, while the Dragon is lying on the ground with his tail wrappedaround the horse’s rear legs; the spear often breaking from the blow, so that George has tobring the fight to a finish with a flourish of his sword (Leksikon ikonografije… [Lexicon of
Iconography] 1990:310). In other words, the heroic gesture exists only in relation to the44

However, a saying that still circulates in Međimurje is „You are as unsightly as a dragon“ (“Grdi si kak pozoj”)
meaning “You are as ugly as a dragon” (“Legenda o šaranu bez repa” [The legend of the carp without a tail],http).
45
What is evident is that the dragon is attributed a snake-like body with hybrid grafts of diverse morphology andcombinations of certain other animals (Sax 2001:233). These are some descriptions of dragons: Ad de Vries
mentions that the dragon is usually described as a snake with two or even four feet, to which are added a headwith a crest, bats’ wings, scales, terrifying claws, a barbed tail (or only some of those) (De Vries 1974:145). J.
Baltrušaitis has monitored the iconographic evolution of the dragon in European visual art and emphasisedthat it was a “snake without wings or legs, or a bird with the tail of a lizard in Romanesque art. In Gothic art
it had wings with membranes. (…) A dragon with the wings of a bat started to appear more often towards thesecond half of the 13 century” (Baltrušaitis 1991:135-137).
46
Victory over a monstrous Dragon that besets the land or even imprisons princesses or demands virgins is astandard motif in heroic legends.
47
Cf. the Croatian variant of the modification of this legend into a dragon legend (more precisely, a legend of anaždaja/ Azi Dahaka with seven heads) from Klanjec Lake in Croatian Zagorje in: Đurić 1996:161-162.

141

Dragon and Hero or How to Kill a Dragon

blood-thirsty strategy of conquering the enemy. Or, as Campbell observes: “The hero ofyesterday becomes the tyrant of tomorrow, unless he crucifies himself today” (Campbell
2007:370).
The inconvenient historical truth
At first glance, there would not seem to be any element of a dangerous story in theoral legend of the Čakovec pozoj. However, if the legend is read off through the instruments of political anthropology, the mythic legend of the Čakovec pozoj can be interpretedby the allegorical key as the process of suppressing paganism – the Proto-Slavic religious
matrix (symbolised by the pozoj that is incarcerated, concealed and even interred deep under the ground: we recall the iconography of the Dragon as the Devil or Satan, the politicalenemy in the Christian interpretation, as well as the Hebrew word Satan in the meaning of
opponent) in the name of the Christian religious matrix (symbolised by the grabancijaš).
Namely, because pre-Christian Europe was packed with its visual imaginaries of dragons,
Mediaeval Christianity made use of the dragon as a symbol of the pagan world, so thatthe slaying of the dragon was transposed from the gods and heroes to the Christian saints(Kramer 1972:77). Otherwise, there is an entire series of variants of similar events connected with popes and bishops who, by slaying dragons, annihilate pagan enemies, being
given the telling name of cultura draconis (Cambi 2003:42; Boyle 1978:25).
In this process, one should also point out the transfiguration of history in the myth
(Eliade 2007:55), that is, great rulers were regarded as imitators of primordial heroes:so, for example, Darius saw himself as the new Thraetaona, the Iranian mythic hero ofwhom it was said that he slew the three-headed monster, the snake Azi Dahaka (cf. Eliade
1974a:37; Fontenrose 1959:209). For example, in Darius’s case it is a matter of an eliteinterpreting contemporary history by way of myths, in which one can read off politicalpropaganda. However, Eliade points out that such reading of the transfiguration of history
into myths as political propaganda is erroneous, because it does not take into account thestructure of the archaic mentality that derives, among other, from the fact that “popularmemory applies a strictly analogous process of articulation and interpretation to historical events and personages” (Eliade 1974a:38). In other words, man in traditional cultures
recognises himself as being real only if he stops being himself and in that process imitates
and repeats (imitatio) a particular archetype.
In the framework of the political set of monsters, in each epic culture, the hero is
an idealised, deified, god-like Utopian personification of society (in the legend of theČakovec pozoj this is the grabancijaš), suitable therefore for identification, while mastering the monster is usually the only mission upon which that heroic identity is founded(Levanat-Peričić 2008:44-45; 2008a:532).48 Manipulation with fear – fear of any type of
so-called monsters, and/or something that is outside of the homogeneous community andthus denoted as the Other – heterogeneous, different, dissimilar, detached, has as its objective a closing of ranks among the frightened potential victims, which contributes to the48

142

Let us include an interpretation of analytical psychology: in other words, Jung stated that the snake in myths
is often a double of the hero and that there are numerous stories about their closeness. So the hero can have,for example, eyes like a snake‘s or can transform into a snake after death or even be venerated in the form of asnake, or his mother may have been a snake, etc. Thus, the presence of a snake almost always indicates a mythabout a hero (Jung 2004:252).

Suzana Marjanić

homogenisation of the threatened community (Levanat-Peričić 2008:44-45). The historyof the monotheistic religions (Christianity in our case) developed as a history of demonisation of the Other, while this demonisation concept can be seen in Christian iconography, the attribution of the dragon/pozoj as a symbol of evil and demonic aspirations – theDevil (Satan). Just a reminder that Satan is shown in Christian iconography as a serpent(the original sin), a dragon (the Apocalypse), a deformed animal hybrid, a lion, or a basilisk (Leksikon ikonografije… [Lexicon of Iconography] 1990:54).
Apart from that, since the mythic beginning of the world, a battle has been waged
between the hero and the monster for territory and distribution of natural resources. In
ancient cosmogonic myths, that struggle was connected with the liberation of fructiferous
water; in any case, the Čakovec legend stresses that disturbing the pozoj could lead not
only to earthquakes but also to stormy weather (hail). A myth of this type often concealsa certain inconvenient historical truth, such as, for example, forced colonisation, the seizure of territory and the plunder of original settlers’ treasure (Levanat-Peričić 2008:4445), while the dragon is denoted in numerous legends as the guardian of hidden treasure,of gold, whereas his opponent – the hero – tries to snatch away those natural resources.
For example, the dragon in Greek mythology is the guardian of the Golden Fleece, which
Jason manages to capture in the end. All over, snakes and dragons represent the masters ofplaces, they are autochthonic and have to do battle against newcomers, conquerors – they
who must give form, create and capture territory (Eliade 2007:58).
We must underscore that Marti Kheel’s ecofeminist interpretation points out that
it is usual in such processes that the slain monster is a deity from an earlier matriarchal
world. Within the framework of the subjugation of that ostensible Other, according tofeminist historians, patriarchal mythology transformed the serpents, dragons, and horned
gods, who were once (in matriarchal mythology) worshipped as divinities, into devils andmonsters that must be slain (Kheel 2008: 42). Thus, snakes were connected in the ancientworld with the great goddesses, for example, the Greek Athena (who had a snake – a draco– as a female help-mate), the Mesopotamian Ishtar, the Egyptian goddess Buto – the snake
goddess and provider of the Nile – the Babylonian goddess Tiamat – the primordial goddess from whose blood the world came into being (Sax 2001:228-229).49 However, as thepatriarchal gods came to power, there was also a revolt against the snake cult, which also
caused the attribution to the snake of symbolic destructive, and evil and negative energies
in numerous mythologies and/or religions. So, the Egyptians, for example, believed thatthe snake Apep (Apophys) tried to swallow the boat of the god Ra as he travelled over theland every night. As has already been pointed out, in the structure of the monomyth (inCampbell’s definition, which he developed on the basis of the matrices of heroic biographies) the so-called monsters – snakes – were killed by almost all the great heroes. So, forexample, the Babylonian Marduk killed the goddess Tiamat, the great whale – a dragon
or a cosmic dragon – from whose body the Universe was created; Zeus killed the original
snake, Typhon; Apollo, the son of Zeus, finished off the Python, Geia’s constrictor, in orderto gain the shrine at Delphi, formerly sacred to the goddess Geia (Sax 2001:228-229). The
death of the Beasts in symbolisation of the original Chaos in natural religions is often in-

49

With Freud‘s interpretation of the snake as a phallic symbol, the snake came to be thought of as a male creature(Sax 2001:234).

143

Dragon and Hero or How to Kill a Dragon

terpreted as an augur of the birth of Light and Order, either at the beginning of the Worldor at its end (Kheel 2008:42).
Additionally, Christianity, too, continues the tradition of slaying dragons. Thus, according to the well-known words of St John the Evangelist – at the end of the world, anangel with a key will overcome the Dragon, the old Snake that represents the Devil, andSatan – “And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, andbound him a thousand years.
And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, thathe should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and afterthat he must be loosed a little season. (King James Version: Revelation Ch. 20, Verses 2
and 3)50 There is intervention in the faith and the deities in those myths of violence andconquest by new dragon-slayers, in the hope of establishing a new order in the world(Kheel 2008:42-43).51 So, according to Marti Kheel, it is necessary to establish a differential
determinant in the pagan matrix between the matriarchate, where the cult of the snake
dominated, and the patriarchal era, which destroyed the snake goddesses of the matriarchate. In that process, as we have pointed out above, from the pagan slaying of the Snake/Dragon, which – in relation to the concept of the changing seasons of the year – was cyclic
and cosmic, Christianity moved on with its saintly dragon-slayers to establish the single
instance slaying of the Snake/Dragon.52
Apart from that, it should be mentioned, as Nancy Hathaway observed that the
Greeks, nevertheless, kept the most exciting adventures for the males, and that particular
prejudice has continued up until the present day, something that can easily be proven in acinema near you, as the above mythologist mentions (Hathaway 2006:232). It is really rare
for a heroine to slay the monster: we can, however, give one example – the Hittites spokeof the defeat of a sea snake/dragon called Illuyankas (cf. Fontenrose 1959:121-125), thishaving been achieved through the combined forces of the goddess Inaras and a mortal
hero, or, for its part, in co-operation with the Storm God, Teshub (Matasović 2000:141144; Višić 1993:83). And it was some three hundred years after Homer and Hesiod wrote
about heroes that the word heroine first appeared in literature, which shows the secondary
position of female heroes, that is, heroines (Hathaway 2006:231).53
In conclusion, we may say that this legend about the Čakovec pozoj – as, for thatmatter, do all similar legends about the subjugation of the so-called monsters – shows
what was differentiated by Roland Barthes in relation to mythic structure: that the mythcan very easily be modified into a tool of political demagogy which confers a “natural”
appearance to a particular ideology (Meletinski 1985:95). True enough, in the case of the50

Here, the pagan matrix about the cyclic slaying of the dragon has been retained; however, that cyclical natureis reduced to the Christian, saintly single event slaying of the Dragon, the old Snake, something that will happen only once – after which Satan will once again be free. In other words, the destruction of the Dragon-Satantakes place in four stages: Satan is bound, shackled, and imprisoned for a thousand years; during that time
Christ‘s „thousand-year kingdom“ will flourish; Satan is once more set free; after that, the Last Judgement follows and the „new Heaven and the new Earth“ begins („Uvod i napomene – Novi zavjet“ [The New Testament– Introduction and Remarks] 1990:1272).
51
On Christian dragon-slayers cf. Gould 1995:198-199.
52
The anthropologist Clyde Kluckhohn stresses that the monster-slaying motif appeared in 37 of the 50 cultures
included in his research (Kluckhohn 1963:163). Cf. motif type AT [ATU] 300 The Dragon Slayer (according to
Antti Aarne and Stith Thompson).
53
Christian saints (e.g. St Margaret), unlike the warrior-like saints on steeds, do, of course, employ a different
practice in slaying dragons (cf. Leksikon ikonografije… [Lexicon of Iconography] 1990:393).

144

Suzana MarjanićČakovec pozoj what is in question is a weak myth, which Barthes denotes in relation to astrong myth. Namely, in the former the political quantum is immediate and the depolitisation is abrupt, and in the latter, “the political quality of the object has faded like a colour,
but the slightest thing can bring back its strength brutally” (Barthes 1972:143-144). Needless to say, the slightest things, trifles, are not at all unimportant54

Figure 3: Painting of a dragon-snake on the panelled ceiling of the Reformed Church at Csengersima (Hungary) (adopted from the book: Tekla Dömötör: Hungarian Folk Beliefs. Budapest,
1985)

Translated by Nina H. Antoljak

References citedÁsbóth, Oskar. 1880. Der Garabónczas diák nach der Volksüberlieferung der Magyaren.
Archiv für slavische Philologie 4, 611-627.
Baltrušaitis, Jurgis. 1991. Fantastični srednji vijek. Antičko i egzotizmi u gotičkoj umjetnosti.
Sarajevo: Svjetlost.
Bandić, Dušan. 1991. Narodna religija Srba u 100 pojmova. Beograd: Nolit.
Banović, Stjepan. 1918. Vjerovanja (Zaostrog u Dalmaciji). Zbornik za narodni život i običaje Južnih Slavena 23:185–214.
Barthes, Roland. 1972. Mythologies. New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux.
Belaj, Vitomir. 1998. Hod kroz godinu. Mitska pozadina hrvatskih narodnih običaja i vjerovanja. Zagreb: Golden marketing.
54

Namely, in Barthes‘s definition of the myth, its function is to empty reality: „it is, literally, a ceaseless flowing
out, a haemorrhage, or perhaps an evaporation, in short a perceptible absence. (…) myth is depoliticized speech” (Barthes 1972:142).

145

Dragon and Hero or How to Kill a Dragon

Bošković, Stulli. 1969-1970. Dagmar Burkhart, Untersuchungen zur Stratigraphie und
Chronologie der südslavischen Volksepik. Slavistische Beiträge, Bd. 33, Verlag Otto
Sagner, München 1968, 549 pp. Narodna umjetnost 7, 177–184.
Bošković-Stuli, Maja. 1984. Usmeno pjesništvo u obzorju književnosti. Zagreb: Nakladni
zavod MH.
Boyle, John Andrew. 1978. Historical Dragon Slayers. In: Animals in Folklore. J. R. Porterand W. M. S. Russell, eds. Ipswich and Cambridge, England; Totowa, New Jersey: D.
S. Brewer Ltd and Rowmand & Littlefield, 23–32.
Budimir, Milan. 1966. Vampirizam u evropskoj književnosti. Anali Filološkog fakulteta VI,
269–273.
Cambi, Nenad. 2003. Zmajeva pećina kod Murvice na otoku Braču. In: Nenad Cambi,
Heinrich and Ingrid Kusch, Ivan Mužić: Mjesec u Hrvata i Zmajeva pećina. Split:
Naklada Bošković, 37–45.
Campbell, Joseph. 2007. Junak s tisuću lica. Zagreb: Fabula nova.
Crnojević-Carić, Dubravka. 2008. Gluma i identitet. O glumi i melankoliji. Zagreb: Durieux.
Dolenčić, Andrija. 1952. Pretkršćanski ostaci i kršćanski elementi u međimurskim narodnim običajima i vjerovanjima u okviru hrvatskoga i inog folklora na kugli zemaljskoj. Rkp. (Hrvatska akademije znanosti i umjetnosti, Odsjek za etnologiju) NZ
120b.
Dömötör, Tekla. 1985. Hungarian Folk Beliefs. Budapest: Athenaeum Printing House.
Durand, Gilbert. 1991. Antropološke strukture imaginarnog. Zagreb: August Cesarec.
Đurić, Tomislav. 1996. Sto najljepših legendi i povijesnih priča iz hrvatske prošlosti. Zagreb:
Nakladna kuća Dr. Feletar, 161–162.
Eliade, Mircea. 1974. Shamanism, Archaic Techniques of Ecstasy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press.
Eliade, Mircea. 1974a. The Myth of the Eternal Return: or, Cosmos and History. New York:Princeton/Bollingen.
Erdész, Sándor. 1971. Drachentypen in der ungarischen Volksüberlieferung. Acta Ethnographica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 20/1-2, 85–128.
Fontenrose, Joseph. 1959. Python. A Study of Delphic Myth and Its Origins. Berkeley and
Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Franković, Đuro. 1990. Mitska bića u podravskih Hrvata. Narodne predaje. EtnografijaJužnih Slavena u Mađarskoj. Budimpešta: Tankönyvkiadó.
Gaster, Moses. 1884. Scholomonar, d. i. der Garabancijaš dijak nach der Volksüberliefernug der Rumänen. Archiv für slavische Philologie VII, 281–290.
Gaster, Theodor H. 1987. Monsters. In: The Encyclopedia of Religion. Volume 10. Mircea
Eliade, ed. New York - London: Macmillan Publishing Company, Collier Macmillan
Publishers, 76–80.
Gilmore, David D. 2003. Evil Being, Mythical Beasts, and All Manner of Imaginary Terrors.
Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Ginzburg, Carlo. 1991 (1989). Ecstasies. Deciphering the Witches’ Sabbath. London: Penguin Books.
Gönczi, Ferencz. 1995 (1895). Međimurje – ljudi, vjerovanja, običaji. Čakovec: Chak.
Gould, Charles. 1995. Mythical Monsters. Guernsey: Senate.
Grafenauer, Ivan. 1956. Zmaj iz petelinjega jajca. Razprave SAZU, II. razr. 2, pp. 313–333.
146

Suzana Marjanić

De Gubernatis, Angelo. 1872. Zoological Mythology or the Legends of Animals. In two volumes. London: Trübner & Co.
Gura, Aleksandar. 2005. Simbolika životinja u slovenskoj narodnoj tradiciji. Beograd: Brimo, Logos, Globosino - Aleksandrija.
Hathaway, Nancy. 2006. Vodič kroz mitologiju. Priručnik za bolje upoznavanje čudesnog
svijeta bogova, božica, čudovišta i heroja. Zagreb: Mozaik knjiga, Grupa Mladinska
knjiga.
Hirc, Dragutin. 1896. Što priča naš narod o nekim životinjama. Zbornik za narodni život iobičaje Južnih Slavena 1, 1–26.
Hirtz, Miroslav. 1928. Rječnik narodnih zoologičkih naziva. Knjiga prva: dvoživci (amphibia) i gmazovi (reptilia). Zagreb: JAZU.
Huxley, Francis. 1997 (1979). The Dragon. Nature of Spirit, Spirit of Nature. London: Thames and Hudson.
Jagić, Vatroslav. 1948 (1877). Izabrani kraći spisi. Mihovil Kombol, ed. Zagreb: Matica
hrvatska.
Ježić, Mislav. 1987. Rgvedski himni. Izvori indijske kulture i indoeuropsko nasljeđe. Zagreb:
˚
Globus.
Ježić, Mislav. 2006. Indoeuropska pozadina Perunova kulta. Mošćenički zbornik 3, 53–62.
Jöckel, Markus. 1995. Woher kommt das Wort Drache?. In: Auf Drachenspuren. Ein
Buch zum Drachenprojekt des Hamburgischen Museums für Völkerkunde. Bernd
Schmelz and Rüdiger Vossen, eds. Bonn: Holos Verlag, 25–31.
Jung, Carl Gustav. 2004. Sjećanja, snovi, razmišljanja. Zagreb: Fabula Nova.
Katičić, Radoslav. 2008. Božanski boj. Tragom svetih pjesama naše pretkršćanske starine.
Filozofski fakultet Sveučilišta u Zagrebu, Katedra Čakavskog sabora Općine Mošćenička Draga: Ibis grafika.
Kheel, Marti. 2008. Nature Ethics: An Ecofeminist Perspective. Lanham, Boulder, New York,
Toronto, Plymouth: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
Kluckhohn, Clyde. 1965. Recurrent Themes in Myths and Mythmaking. In: The Study of
Folklore. Alan Dundes, ed. University of California at Berkeley: Prentice-Hall, Inc,
158–168.
Kovačević, Ivan. 2006. Mit i umetnost. Beograd: “Srpski genealoški centar”, Umetnička grupa“Bazaart”, Odeljenje za etnologiju i antropologiju Filozofskog fakulteta u Beogradu.
Kramer, Samuel Noah. 1972 (1961). Sumerian Mythology. A Study of Spiritual and Literary
Achievement in the Third Millennium B.C. Philadelphia: University Of Pennsylvania
Press.
Kretzenbacher, Leopold. 1968. Teufelsbünder und Faustgestalten im Abendlande. Klagenfurt, Verlag des Geschichtsvereines für Kärnten.
Kropej, Monika. 2008. Od ajda do zlatoroga. Slovenske bajeslovna bitja. Celovec: Mohorjeva.
Lang, Milan. 1914. Samobor. Nemani i nakaze. Zbornik za narodni život i običaje Južnih
Slavena 19/1, 150.
Legenda o šaranu bez repa. (http://webograd.tportal.hr/vukovarski-som/hrvatske-zmajske-price/sarkanj).
Leksikon ikonografije, liturgike i simbolike zapadnog kršćanstva. 1990. Anđelko Badurina, ed. Zagreb: Sveučilišna naklada Liber, Kršćanska sadašnjost, Institut za povijest
umjetnosti.
147

Dragon and Hero or How to Kill a Dragon

Levanat-Peričić, Miranda. 2008. Fundamentalizam epske kulture u vrlom novom svijetu.
Zarez, 237/238, 4 Septembar 2008, 44–45.
Levanat-Peričić, Miranda. 2008a. Morfologija mitskog čudovišta. Croatica et Slavica Iadertina IV, 531–550.
Loma, Aleksandar. 1997. Drvojedi. Kodovi slovenskih kultura (Hrana) 2, 153–162.
Lozica, Ivan and Ljiljana Marks. 2001. Usmena književnost. In: Hrvatska tradicijska kultura na razmeđu svjetova i epoha. Zorica Vitez and Aleksandra Muraj, ed. Zagreb:
Barbat, Galerija Klovićevi dvori, Institut za etnologiju i folkloristiku, 451–456.
Macdonell, Arthur Anthony. 1974 (1898). Vedic Mythology. Delhi: Varanasi: Patna: Motilal Banarsidass.
Marjanić, Suzana. 1997/1998. Tragom (i razlikom) Nodilove eufemizacije (zmije i) zmaja.
Otium: časopis za povijest svakodnevice 5-6, 82–95.
Marjanić, Suzana. 2006. Witches’ zoopsychonavigations and the astral broom in the worlds of Croatian legends as (possible) aspects of shamanistic techniques of ecstasy(and trance). Studia mythologica Slavica 9, 169–202.
Marks, Ljiljana. 1994. Vekivečni Zagreb. Zagrebačke priče i predaje. Zagreb: AGM.
Marks, Ljiljana. 2009. Legends about the Grabancijaš Dijak in the 19th century and incontemporary writings. Acta ethnographica Hungarica 54/2, 317–335.
Matasović, Ranko. 2000. Kultura i književnost Hetita. Zagreb: Matica hrvatska.
Meletinski, Eleazar M. 1985. Poetika mita. Beograd: Nolit.
Nodilo, Natko. 1981 (1885-1890). Stara vjera Srba i Hrvata (Religija Srbâ i Hrvatâ, naglavnoj osnovi pjesama, priča i govora narodnog). Split: Logos.
Novak, Marija. 2007. Tragovi hrvatske mitologije. Zagreb: Institut za etnologiju i folkloristiku.
Orbini, Mavro. 1999 (1601). Kraljevstvo Slavena. Zagreb: Golden marketing.
Predaja o štrigovskom pozoju. (http://www.tourism-club.com/index.php?option=info&ta
sk=details&ID=36&entityID=0&Itemid=1&levelID=590&tb=0).
Predaja o zelenom pozoju u Čakovcu. (http://www.tourism-club.com/index.php?option=i
nfo&task=details&ID=34&entityID=0&Itemid=1&levelID=590&tb=0).
Radenković, Ljubinko. Zmaj. In: Slovenska mitologija: enciklopedijski rečnik. 2001. Svetlana M. Tolstoj, Ljubinko Radenković, eds. Beograd: Zepter Book World, 206–211.
Rječnik hrvatskoga ili srpskoga jezika 11, 1935. Zagreb: JAZU.
Russell, Jeffrey B. 1982 (1977). Mit o đavolu. Beograd: Zenit.
Sax, Boria. 2001. The Mythical Zoo. An Encyclopedia of Animals in World Myth, Legend,& Literature. Santa Barbara, California - Denver, Colorado - Oxford, England: ABC– CLIO.
Skok, Petar. 1973. Etimologijski rječnik hrvatskoga ili srpskoga jezika. Vol. 3. Zagreb:
JAZU.
Stipčević, Aleksandar. 1981. Kultni simboli kod Ilira. Građa i prilozi sistematizaciji. Sarajevo: ANUBiH.
Stojković, Marijan. 1931. Čudo od kokota. Zbornik za narodni život i običaje Južnih Slavena 28/1, 87–100.
Sveti Juraj na Bregu. (http://webograd.tportal.hr/vukovarski-som/hrvatske-zmajske-price/crni-pozoj-sv-juraj-nb).
Šantalab, Daniel. 2008. Legenda o pozoju u dolini rijeke Bednje. Ivanečka škrinjica 4. 37–
39.
148

Suzana MarjanićŠmitek, Zmago. 2004. Mitološko izročilo Slovencev. Svetinje preteklosti. Ljubljana: Študentska založba.
Šmitek, Zmago. 2009. Zmajsko seme. Topografija slovenskega izročila o Kresniku. Studia
mythologica Slavica 12, 169–185.
Uehlinger, Christoph. 1995. Drachen und Drachenkämpfe im alten Vorderen Orient undin der Bibel. Auf Drachenspuren. Ein Buch zum Drachenprojekt des Hamburgischen
Museums für Völkerkunde. Bernd Schmelz and Rüdiger Vossen, eds. Bonn: Holos
Verlag, 55–101.
Uvod i napomene – Novi zavjet. In: Biblija. 1990. Zagreb: Kršćanska sadašnjost, 1231–
1272.
Višić, Marko. 1993. Književnost drevnog Bliskog istoka. Zagreb: Naprijed.
De Vries, Ad. 1974. Dictionary of Symbols and Imagery. Amsterdam - London: NorthHolland Publishing Company.
Watkins, Calvert. 1995. How to Kill a Dragon. Aspects of Indo-European Poetics. Oxford New York: Oxford University Press.
Zvonar, Ivan, Stjepan Hranjec, Andrija Strbad. 1987. Usmena narodna književnost na tluMeđimurja. Knjiga II. Čakovec: TIZ Zrinski.
Zamarovský, Vojtech. 1989. Junaci antičkih mitova. Leksikon grčke i rimske mitologije. Zagreb: Školska knjiga.

149

Dragon and Hero or How to Kill a Dragon

Zmaj i junak ili kako ubiti zmaja na primjeru međimurskih predaja o grabancijašu ipozojuSuzana Marjanić
Interpretacijom međimurskih predaja o čakovečkom pozoju u članku je istaknuta
razlikovna odrednica u odnosu na završni status zmaja (stanje živ/kozmičko obnavljanje – mrtav) u praslavenskoj predaji (mitu), u predaji o čakovečkom pozoju i konačno
u legendi o svetom Jurju koji ubija zmaja. Naime, kršćanstvo ustoličuje jednokratno
dokrajčivanje zmaja, dok je u indoeuropskome mitu o sukobu između npr. Indre i tzv.
kozmičkoga čudovišta Zmije/Zmaja (Vr.tra, Vala) riječ o cikličkim ubojstvima. Upravoovoj skupini – skupini kozmičkih zmajeva pripadaju međimurski zmajevi, iako je očito
da je u međimurskim predajama o pozoju nadjačala kršćanska legenda o zmajoubojici,o trajnom svladavanju tzv. čudovišta jer u završnici grabancijaš na jugu, istoku ili zapadu
Globusa (odnosno, kako zapisuje Andrija Dolenčić – u indijskim mesnicama) pozoja ubija– prodaje njegovo meso, što znači da je kozmički ciklus, ponavljanje prekinuto.
Završno su međimurske predaje o meteorološkome binomu, koji čine grabancijaši pozoj, interpretirane u ekofeminističkom ključu kao predaje kojima se nastoji prikriti
neugodna povijesna istina (kristijanizacija, kolonijalizam). Naime, predaja o čakovečkom
pozoju, kao uostalom sve slične predaje o podjarmljivanju tzv. čudovišta, pokazuju onošto je razlučio Roland Barthes u mitskoj strukturi – da se mit vrlo jednostavno modificira
u oruđe političke demagogije koja određenoj ideologiji pridaje “prirodan” izgled. Istina,
u predaji o čakovečkom pozoju riječ je o slabom mitu, koji Barthes u odnosu na jaki mit,
u kojemu je politički kvantum neposredan, a depolitizacija nagla, označava kao mit u
kojemu se politička kvaliteta predmeta izgubila, ali pridodaje kako ga sitnica može naglo
ponovno oživjeti. Dakako, sitnice nisu nimalo nevažne.

150