Printable View
this book its really gorgeous..... one of the things i had discover was that Bram Stoker in the romance... makes reference to real Romenian myths.... in my opinion it seems interesting search for more information about Vlad Dracul... he had really exist... do you know?
Vlad Dracul was indeed Vlad the Impaler's father, however, Dracula is based more on the the Impaler himself. The Impaler ruled a small country and defended it against the Turks. He has been portrayed as a very harsh and even sadistic man, but some of that may be exagerated propoganda published by both the Turks and the Germans. Some of the legends say that Vlad locked all the beggars and indigents in his kingdom in a banquet hall and burned them alive; that he disembowled his lover when she lied about carrying his child; that he nailed the Turkish ambassadors' turbans to their head; and, of course, that he really had a thing for impaling people.
I think everyone here refers to Vlad Tepes (also known as "Vlad the Impaler"). Though much of literature and the glamour of the cinema screen has romanticized and added some idolatry into his figure, yes, indeed, Vlad Tepes did exist, but had no ability to phenomenally grow fang-like canines, nor turn into a bat and fly. :lol:
*sigh* More's the pity. Wouldn't it be AWESOME to turn into a bat? ;)
I think it was that Stoker found the name Vlad "Tepes" Dracula in a book and decided the name would be good for his story. Dracula means son of dragon or son of devil. His father was Dracul because he was in the order of the dragon, hence the name Dracul. Tepes actually means "The Impaler", which Vlad's subjects so "affectionately" gave him since he impaled people on spikes among many other horrors.
See- Vlad Dracul was Vlad Dracula's father-- Drac meant Dragon, or Devil, and the "ul" was the definitive term, so ulea meant "son of", which is where Dracula came from. But Vlad Dracula wasn't ever considered a vampire, nor were there any myths that he was a vampire. However, Dracula WAS based on Vlad Dracula, in several things, including the fact that they both fought off the Turks. Also, Bram Stoker's Dracula held the title of Count, whereas Vlad Dracula never was a Count.
Vladislavs Dracula was born in 1431, and died in 1476. As a boy he was a captive of Sultan Mehmed II along with his brother. He ruled three times as Prince of Wallachia. Vlad Dracul died with his oldest son Mirceria, being buried alive. If you want more information on Vlad email me at [email protected]. I am currently working on a pyschological essay of Vlad.
P.S. Also look for the book Dracula: Prince of Many Faces, by Radu FLorescu and Raymond T. McNally. A great biogrophy of the Kaziglu (Impaler)
I suggest Elizabeth Kostovas The Historian to anyone interested in vampire lore. Vlad Tepes figures heavily in it.
/Claes
The Historian is a great book, but it dives too much into the vampire theme.
The stories of Vlad are true. He did kill the poor and handicaped by burning a banquent hall down, in which they were dining. Vlad did also nail turbans to Turkish messengers heads. When they refused to remove them. He was a brilliant strategist, and one of the first leaders to use cannons,
Yes. A thoroughly undesirable caracter, I'm afraid. That pyschological essay of Vlad you are writing should prove interesting to say the least.Quote:
Originally Posted by StokerFan1
/Claes
He was a unique character indeed, however, I have heard that he was sometimes considered to be fair ruler, harsh, but fair...I don't know if this rumour is accurate though.Quote:
Originally Posted by ClaesGefvenberg
There's a nice biography of Vlad III in a serial killer book I read a while ago,
he was a very sick person.
I have heard that Vlad The Impaler won the war against Turks without fighting. Instead he burned an pillaged every village they needed to pas to get to him and impaled all the people living there. Aprox (the number i heard) he impaled 20 000 people and put them next to the road. The Turks were so disgusted to see what he did to innocent people then what he will do to the enemy.
If Bram Stoker needed a evil guy to become Dracula I understand why he took Vlad The Impaler.
I hope StokerFan can confirm or deny this story. If he has detailed info about Vlad. I really want to know if this is true.
I see that here is a confusion: Vlad Dracul was the ruler of Walachia between 1390 and 1447 and he was the son of a great Romanian ruler, Mircea cel Batran (Mircea the Elder). Vlad Dracul had three sons, one of them called Vlad will become later the famous Prince Vlad Dracula, that we all know!
So, Vlad Dracul was the father of the future Vlad Dracula!
Please take note that even we know him as "Dracula", the Walachian people called Prince Vlad, "Draculea" after his father's name, meaning "the son of Vlad Dracul". After his death in December 1476, he was nicknamed by the Walachian people, Vlad Tepes (the Impaler).
How many people do you have to impale before you earn the sobriquet "The Impaler" I wonder?
It is interesting that Vlad Tepes Dracula was not famous because of using the impalement torture, but because of the great number of victims impaled!!
We should not forget that a cruelty atmosphere dominated Europe of the XV century! Many horrible methods of torture were created and used to all the European courts from Western Europe until Russia, as: the iron maiden, the saw, the impalement, the pulling on wheel, the hot iron, etc.
As usual, execution by impalement were used in Europe against the traitors, but Vlad Tepes expanded its use, by torturing also the thieves, the criminals, traitors, the enemies, etc; anyone who should have broken the law, betrayed to the enemies or attacked the country!
I think you have to get to double digits: minimum of ten. Of course we've all impaled two or three people, in our wild, younger days, but that, surely, is not enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by Paulclem