Dracula E-Book

Elizabeth Miller

• Herausgeber: Parkstone International
• Kategorie: Gesellschafts- und Liebesromane
• Sprache: Englisch
• Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2018

Seitenzahl: 164

Beschreibung

Transylvanian mystique and legendary hauntedness surround the most infamous Bram Stoker’s protagonists, forming a legacy that allows the myth to continue into modern times, maintaining a cultish following, yet broadening to a general fascination. Intrigued by evil and gore, Stoker developed a literary presence that was effortlessly translated to screen by the likes of Murnau, Bela Lugosi, Christopher Lee and Francis Ford Coppola. Dracula became such an obsession as it embodied a taboo subject matter: the desire for blood and sex. Filled with extraordinary pictures of the Count, his literary companions, and the movie idols, this is a treasure only to be read by daylight!

Leseprobe

Author:

Elizabeth Miller

© Confidential Concepts, worldwide, USA

© Parkstone Press International, New York, USA

Image Barwww.image-bar.com

All rights reserved.

No part of this publication may be reproduced or adapted without the permission of the copyright holder, throughout the world. Unless otherwise specified, copyright on the works reproduced lies with the respective photographers, artists, heirs or estates. Despite intensive research, it has not always been possible to establish copyright ownership. Where this is the case, we would appreciate notification.

ISBN: 978-1-64461-621-5

Elizabeth Miller

Contents

Chapter I Dracula The Voivode

Early History Of Wallachia

Mircea Cel Batrin And Vlad Dracul

Vlad The Impaler (Dracula)

Sources Of Information

Policies And Atrocities

Vlad Dracula In The Nineteenth Century

Chapter II“The Blood Is The Life”

Origin Of The Vampire

Eighteenth-Century Vampire Sightings

The Satanic Lord

The Femme Fatale

ChapterIIIDracula The Vampire

Bram Stoker And The Genesis Of Dracula

Transylvania

Why Dracula?

Dracula As A Vampire Novel

Interpreting Dracula

ChapterIVDracula The Immortal

Shape-Shifting Text

The Count Of Many Faces

The Count And The Voivode

The Draculas In Romania

Dracula Tourism

The Ever-Widening Circle

Bibliography

List Of Illustrations

Notes

1. Portrait of Vlad the Impaler, 15th Century, oil on canvas. Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum.

CHAPTER I DRACULA THE VOIVODE

The name “Dracula” signifies for most people the figure of the vampire immortalized in the novel Dracula (1897) by Irish author Bram Stoker. But behind the name are two major traditions: the folkloric and literary vampire that culminated in Stoker’s novel and the history of a fifteenth-century Wallachian prince best known in Romania as Vlad Tepesş (Vlad the Impaler). While many Westerners are surprised to discover that there was indeed a Dracula and are puzzled that he is still considered a national hero, just as many Romanians are dismayed when their voivode is confused with vampire legends. The best way to unravel these incongruities is to explore the separate histories of both Dracula the voivode and Dracula the vampire, to examine how each has had his own impact on contemporary culture and to ascertain the exact nature of the connection between the two.

2. The Battle of Posada in 1330 where Basarab I, founder of Wallachia, defeated the invading Hungarian army, illumination from The Pictured Chronicle of Vienna started around 1458.

EARLY HISTORY OF WALLACHIA

The origins of Wallachia date back to the late thirteenth century when Romanians (descended from the ancient Dacians) migrated south out of Transylvania across the Carpathian range into the foothills and plains. Generally credited with founding this new state in the fourteenth century is Basarab I, who defeated an invading Hungarian army at Posada in 1330. His work was expanded and consolidated by later rulers such as Nicolae Alexandru and Vladislav-Vlaicu. By 1385, Wallachia was a clearly distinct and independent state, with its capital at Târgoviste. The dominant religious power in Wallachia was the Romanian Orthodox church. Though it had connections with the central Orthodox authority of Constantinople, the Romanian church was essentially autonomous, with its own chief bishop whose see was located at the original Wallachian capital, Curtea-de-Arges, where the first church had been built by Basarab I. The first Metropolitan of Wallachia, Iachint, was officially installed in 1359.

In addition, scattered throughout Wallachia were several monasteries which were centres of temporal as well as spiritual power. Many of the early voivodes supported the monasteries with significant endowments. There were some vestiges of Roman Catholicism in the form of a few abbeys, but this faith was far more prominent in Transylvania to the north. The Roman Catholic church had very little power and influence in Wallachia.

Indeed, it was viewed with suspicion, as it was the religious faith of foreigners, including Germans and Hungarians.

Wallachia’s history for the next several centuries would be inextricably linked with the presence in southeastern Europe of the Ottoman Empire. The Turks made their first incursion into Europe in 1353, summoned by the Byzantine emperors who wanted assistance in holding off the threats of Balkan (especially Serbian) challenges to their leadership. Once established, the Turks developed expansionist ambitions of their own. By 1371, they occupied much of Bulgaria and in the decisive Battle of Kosovo (1389) they achieved a major victory over Serbia, thus expanding their sphere of influence to the Danube River. While the invaders did not force their new subjects to abandon their Christian Orthodox faith, they recruited the best of the young male population, converted them to Islam and inducted them into the Turkish army. Thus they were able to secure a foothold that was to change the course of domestic and external politics in the region for centuries.

3. Central and Oriental Europe, French map, 17th century.

4. Fresco, above the stalls, inside the Cozia Monastery.

5. The setting of the Cozia Monastery.

6. The Church of Curtea de Arges.

MIRCEA CEL BATRIN AND VLAD DRACUL

The most famous of the early rulers of Wallachia was Vlad Dracula’s grandfather, Mircea cel Batrin. (The ruler of Wallachia was known as “voivode,” a word of Slavic origin, used in Romania for the leader of a principality, a warlord, or a supreme chief.) Mircea succeeded in consolidating an extensive Wallachian state which roughly comprises that part of present-day Romania between the southern range of the Carpathian Mountains and the Danube River. But his entire reign was dominated by struggles against the Ottoman Empire. In spite of a number of remarkable successes, eventually, he was forced to recognize Turkish control and agreed to pay a tribute to the sultan. But he succeeded in achieving what none of his Balkan neighbours did, the continuation of a degree of autonomy for Wallachia: an independent church, retention of land by the boyars and the exclusion of permanent Turkish settlement on Wallachian lands.

Mircea died in 1418 and was buried at the monastery at Cozia, located in the valley of the Olt River, where his tomb can be seen to this day. A stained glass window shows him with his only legitimate son, Mihail, who for several years shared power with his father. Referred to by one Greek historian as “the profligate voevod of Wallachia,” Mircea left behind a number of illegitimate children, a fact that was to have significant consequences in the absence of any clear rules of succession. The council of “boyars” (nobility) had the power to select as voivode any son of a ruling prince. Consequently, factional disputes were common, as branches of the family fought incessantly for the Wallachian throne. Not surprisingly, Mircea’s death led to a major struggle for power. Mihail’s death two years after his father’s initiated rival claims not only from his illegitimate brood (including Vlad, the father of Vlad Dracula) but by Dan, the son of one of Mircea’s brothers. This was the beginning of what historians refer to the Dracula-Dane ti feud, a struggle that was to play a major role in the history of fifteenth-century Wallachia.

The senior Vlad had spent much of his youth in the court of King Sigismund in Buda and Nuremberg where he would have been exposed to education and culture befitting a royal personage. After the death of his father and his brother Mihail, his eye was on the throne. He was not immediately successful, as he was competing against his cousin Dan and his half-brother Alexandru.

But Vlad’s ambitions received a tremendous boost in 1431, when Sigismund (the Holy Roman Emperor) granted him a singular honor. At the time, Vlad was serving in the military capacity of frontier commander with responsibility for guarding the mountain passes from Transylvania into Wallachia from enemy incursion. His residence was in Sighisoara, a Transylvanian town that was a former seat of Saxon power.

7. Portrait of Mircea Cel Batrin, Vlad Tepes’ grandfather, ruler of Wallachia and known as Voivode.

8. View of Târgoviste, capital of Wallachia.

9. The House of Vlad Dracul in Sighisoara in which he took up residence when he was frontier commander, guarding the mountain passes from Transylvania into Wallachia.

With its streets, thick citadel walls and defensive towers, it remains one of the best preserved medieval towns in all of Europe. Near its central landmark, a clock tower in the main square, stands the house in which Vlad took up residence, as well as a small museum of artifacts from the fifteenth century. Today, the house is marked by a small plaque which reads:

Casa Vlad Dracul

In aceasta casa a locuit între ani 1431-1435 domnitorul Tara Romane ti VLAD DRACUL fiul lui Mircea cel Batrin (“In this house lived between the years 1431-1435 the ruler of Wallachia Vlad Dracul son of Mircea the Old.”)

During a restoration in the 1970s a mural was discovered depicting a figure that historians believe may well be Vlad Dracul; if this is so, it is the only extant portrait of Vlad Dracula’s father.

In 1431, Sigismund summoned to Nuremberg a number of princes and vassals that he considered useful for both political and military alliances. His primary objective was to initiate the group into the Order of the Dragon.

One of these was Vlad. Thanks to recent research conducted by Romanian historian Constantin Rezachevici, much is now known about the origins, nature and iconography of this Order (German name “Drachenordens” and the Latin “Societatis draconistrarum”). It was, in fact, an institution, similar to other chivalric orders of the time, modelled on the Order of St George (1318). It was created in 1408 by Sigismund (while he was still king of Hungary) and his queen Barbara Cilli, mainly for the purpose of gaining protection for the royal family.

The statute which survives in a copy dated 1707 states that the Order also required its initiates to defend the Cross and to do battle against its enemies, principally the Turks. The original Order comprised twenty-four members of the nobility, including such notable figures as King Alfonso of Aragon and Naples and Stefan Lazarevic of Serbia.

It adopted as its symbol in 1408 the image of a circular dragon with its tail coiled around its neck. On its back, from the base of its neck to its tail, was the red cross of St George on the background of a silver field. With the expansion of the Order, other symbols were adopted, all variations on the theme of dragon and cross.

For example, one class of the Order used a dragon being strangled with a cross draped across its back; another presents a cross perpendicular to a coiled-up dragon with an inscription “O quam misericors est Deus” (vertical) and “Justus et paciens” (horizontal). Other emblems of the Order included a necklace and a seal, each with a variant form of the dragon motif.

Vlad was obviously proud of this achievement. Later he had coins minted which show on one side a winged dragon, similar to the Paolo Uccello painting “St George and the Dragon” (Italy). His personal coat-of-arms also incorporated a dragon.

It is important to note that in all of these cases, the dragon was intended to convey a favourable image drawn from medieval iconography in which the dragon represents the Beast of Revelation (Satan) who is slain by the forces of good (Christianity).

Most important for our story, Vlad took on the nickname “Dracul” in reference to his induction into the order. As a sobriquet adopted by Vlad (and later by his son), the original association was positive. After the death of Sigismund in 1437, the Order lost much of its prominence, though its iconography was retained on the coats-of-arms of several noble families.

While at Nuremberg, Vlad also received Sigismund’s pledge to support his claim to the throne of Wallachia, provided that on accession he support Catholic institutions in the Orthodox principality. But it would be another five years before his ambition could be realized. Between him and his goal stood the current voivode, his half-brother Alexandru Aldea.

In 1436, learning that Alexandru lay deathly ill, Vlad gathered an army, marched on Târgoviste and gained the throne. His wife and two sons (a third would be born two years later) joined him and took up residence in the princely palace. Vlad Dracul remained voivode, with a brief interruption in 1442-1443, until 1447.

10. Vlad Tepes, engraving printed in Dracole Wayda, Barth. Ghotan Edition, Lybeck, 1485.

11. Rapha‘l, St. George Fighting the Dragon, 1505. Wood, 30 x 26 cm. Musze du Louvre (Paris).

VLAD THE IMPALER (DRACULA)

The same year that saw Vlad’s initiation into the Order of the Dragon appears also to have been the year of young Vlad’s birth. The second of three legitimate sons (the others were Mircea and Radu), his mother was likely Princess Cneajna, of the Moldavian princely Musat family. After the move to Târgoviste, young Vlad was educated at court, with training that was appropriate for knighthood. But his father’s political wiliness was to have major consequences for Vlad and his younger brother Radu.

On the death of his patron, Sigismund, Vlad Dracul ranged from pro-Turkish policies to neutrality, to protect his own country’s interests. The Turkish sultan was so unsure of the reliability of Dracul’s support (or even his neutrality) that he required of Vlad that two of his sons – Vlad and Radu – be held in Turkey as tangible guarantees that he would actively support Turkish interests. It is estimated that the two boys spent up to six years under this precarious arrangement.

Young Vlad would have been about eleven at the time of the internment, while Radu would have been about seven. According to Turkish account, the two boys were held for part of the time at the fortress of Egregoz, located in western Anatolia and later moved to Sultan Murad’s court at Adrianople. At times, the situation became quite tense.

On one occasion, Vlad Dracul actually allowed his older son Mircea to cooperate with Christian forces at the battle of Varma, thus risking the lives of his two hostage sons.

What effect this might have had on young Vlad and his concept of trust we cannot ascertain. Some historians claim that Vlad’s later sadistic tendencies were due at least in part to these formative years spent in captivity.

The younger brother Radu, a handsome lad who attracted the attention of the future sultan, fared better than Vlad, a factor that helps explain the bitter hatred and rivalry that developed between the brothers later. Apparently, no serious physical harm came to the boys during these years of captivity, though the psychological impact on Vlad is difficult to assess. After their subsequent release in 1448, Radu chose to remain in Turkey. Not so Vlad.

Dracul was assassinated in 1447 by the boyars of Târgoviste on the orders of John Hunyadi, who had decided to support a member of the rival Dane ti branch of the family (Vladislav II). Also murdered was the eldest son Mircea (reportedly buried alive), thus eliminating any threat, as Dracul’s other two sons were still in Turkish captivity. Hunyadi placed his protégé, Vladislav II, on the Wallachian throne.

When news of Dracul’s death reached Turkey, Vlad not only was released from his imprisonment in Turkey but was given the sultan’s support to supplant Vladislav. Taking advantage of Vladislav’s absence (he had led a contingent of troops to support Hunyadi in the ill-fated second Battle of Kosovo), he was successful in gaining the throne, albeit for a short time.

Little is known of this initial period of Vlad’s rule, except that by the end of 1448 the former voivode was back in control and Vlad had left the principality. He spent the next several years contriving to regain power in Wallachia. Much of the time was spent in Moldavia, in the company of his cousin Stephen (later known as Stephen the Great). In 1456 he was finally successful and held power for the next six years, the period about which most is known.

12. Portrait of John Hunyadi, Prince of Transylvania (1441-1456) and Governor of Hungary (1446-1453).

13. Representation of the Order of the Dragon created in 1408. Vlad Dracul was initiated into the Order of Dragon in 1431 by Sigismund the Holy Roman Emperor.

14. Castle of Hunedoara, engraving.

15. Movie still from a Romanian film (Doru Nastase), 1978, The Arrest of Vlad Tepes by Hungarian soldiers.

16. Movie still from a Romanian film (Doru Nastase), The Arrest of Vlad Tepes by Hungarian soldiers,. He was held as a prisoner until the mid-1470s.

After major battles against the Turks in 1462, he escaped across the mountains into Transylvania and was held as a prisoner by the Hungarian king Mathias Corvinus until the mid-1470s.

His recovery of the throne for a third time in 1476 was short-lived, for he was killed in battle during the coming winter.

Vlad is known by two separate names: Vlad Tepes (the Impaler) and Vlad Dracula. As with much concerning this voivode, there is controversy over which sobriquet carries the greater validity. As surnames were rarely used in the nomenclature of the voivodes, chroniclers found it useful to append epithets to distinguish one Vlad or Dan from another. So we find “Mircea the Old,” “Stephen the Great,” “Peter the Lame,” “Vlad the Monk,” and so forth.

Vlad is much better known in Romanian history as “Tepes” (the Impaler), derived from the Turkish nickname “kaziklu bey” used by Ottoman chroniclers of the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries because of his predilection for impalement as a means of execution.

That the epithet echoed the fear that he instilled in his enemies may account for why it has been embraced to such an extent in his native country. No evidence exists to suggest that Vlad ever used this term in reference to himself.

By contrast, the appellation “Dracula” (or linguistic variations thereof) was widely employed in fifteenth- and sixteenth-century manuscripts and printed texts: by Pope Pius II; by Antonio Bonfini, official court historian of Corvinus; and by the great humanist Nicolae Olahus, an indirect descendant of Dracula who referred to himself as “ex sanguine Draculae.”

In fact, it was even used on occasion by Vlad himself, for example in two separate letters written to citizens in Sibiu and Brasov in 1475. Yet the term “Dracula” has met (and still meets) with some opposition among his countrymen. The explanation lies in the fact that the designation was made popular by late fifteenth-century German pamphlets which, as we shall see, emphasized the negative aspects of his rule and thus contributed to his notorious reputation.

The issue is further complicated by the fact that “dracul” has acquired a second and more familiar meaning –“the devil”– though it is doubtful that Vlad himself used it with that in mind. For him, “Dracula” identified him as the son of Dracul, the son of the one who belonged to the Order of the Dragon.

The name would have been used as a badge of honour, without the negative connotations that have since accrued to it, especially as a result of Bram Stoker’s decision to appropriate the nickname for the vampire in his novel Dracula. Though Romanian historians have been reluctant to use the term (and in some cases have even challenged its authenticity), it is being more widely acknowledged.

17. Missal of Cardinal Domenico della Rovere, 1490s. New York, The Pierpont Morgan Library, M. 306.

18. Theodor Aman, The Boyars, 1886. Oil on canvas, 150.5 x 236.6 cm. Bucarest.

SOURCES OF INFORMATION