Dracula Really Existed
Dracula really existed but he was not the monster described by Bram Stoker though perhaps some would say he was a different kind of monster.
Unlike the Frankestein creature that was entirely a fictional creation, Dracula was real and his name was Vlad Tepes. He was truly a noble, not a count but a prince, The ruler of a territory known as Wallachia in Eastern Europe which he defended against the Ottoman empire that was at the time (the mid-XV century) threatening to invade Europe crossing the river Danube engulfing Bulagaria and what is now Romania11.
Also called Vlad the Impaler (for a good reason) created for himself a reputation so cruel that the Ottomans themselves who were fierce warriors came to fear him. His patronimic name was Dracula but he definitely was not a vampire.
The myth of vampires, the undead, those who cannot rest after dying seems to have originated in the Balkans a region where Vlad Tepes was from, though many scholars say that references to similar creatures can be found in some ancient cultures. Bram Stoker (1847 - 1912 ) was the Irish writer who took the figure of Vlad Tepes and made him a vampire in order to create his novel Dracula.
It is said that when Vlad Tepes's tomb was opened no trace of his body was found. Whether this is real or not that only added to the already dark and mysterious figure that Stoker helped create. This custom of unearthing coffins to collect what was left and bury it somewhere else was perhaps what indirectly created the idea that some dead people could not rest in peace. The problem was that at the time autopsies were uncommon and very few people knew about Catatonia, the state that makes a person look dead when actually is still alive meaning that there were people who were buried alive. When those "woke up" inside the coffin they obviously tried to leave actually dying in the process by asphixiation. Whent those coffins were opened the sight of a cadaver that obviously had moved inside the coffin began this belief that some of these dead people had actuaaly become vapires.
Stoker only had to imagine a basic storyline for his novel because everything else was already there, and that's what he did. He wrote other novels and short stories but if he had only wrote Dracula that would have been enough. His character has trascended time and crossed over other cultures. Vampires have been depicted in so many ways, even as good guys (Blade anyone) that the theme seems exhausted and still that is far from being true: vampires are here to stay and for good.
One more thing that is true is this fact about Dracula and vampires in general: they may be cruel and we may be what they feed upon, but vampires are not mass murderers. We, the living, have that potential to become mass murderers and have proved it in the past infinite times. Vlad Tepes himself is said to have been responsible for the deaths of around 80,000 people with 20,000 of those being impaled. Even in our time those numbers are overwhelming and so it begs the question:
Who's the real monster, Dracula, or the man who inspired his creation?
Also called Vlad the Impaler (for a good reason) created for himself a reputation so cruel that the Ottomans themselves who were fierce warriors came to fear him. His patronimic name was Dracula but he definitely was not a vampire.
The myth of vampires, the undead, those who cannot rest after dying seems to have originated in the Balkans a region where Vlad Tepes was from, though many scholars say that references to similar creatures can be found in some ancient cultures. Bram Stoker (1847 - 1912 ) was the Irish writer who took the figure of Vlad Tepes and made him a vampire in order to create his novel Dracula.
It is said that when Vlad Tepes's tomb was opened no trace of his body was found. Whether this is real or not that only added to the already dark and mysterious figure that Stoker helped create. This custom of unearthing coffins to collect what was left and bury it somewhere else was perhaps what indirectly created the idea that some dead people could not rest in peace. The problem was that at the time autopsies were uncommon and very few people knew about Catatonia, the state that makes a person look dead when actually is still alive meaning that there were people who were buried alive. When those "woke up" inside the coffin they obviously tried to leave actually dying in the process by asphixiation. Whent those coffins were opened the sight of a cadaver that obviously had moved inside the coffin began this belief that some of these dead people had actuaaly become vapires.
Stoker only had to imagine a basic storyline for his novel because everything else was already there, and that's what he did. He wrote other novels and short stories but if he had only wrote Dracula that would have been enough. His character has trascended time and crossed over other cultures. Vampires have been depicted in so many ways, even as good guys (Blade anyone) that the theme seems exhausted and still that is far from being true: vampires are here to stay and for good.
One more thing that is true is this fact about Dracula and vampires in general: they may be cruel and we may be what they feed upon, but vampires are not mass murderers. We, the living, have that potential to become mass murderers and have proved it in the past infinite times. Vlad Tepes himself is said to have been responsible for the deaths of around 80,000 people with 20,000 of those being impaled. Even in our time those numbers are overwhelming and so it begs the question:
Who's the real monster, Dracula, or the man who inspired his creation?
Comments