• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Dracula was not inspired by Vlad the Impaler

Status
Not open for further replies.

karasu

Member
Apparently the book that he sourced this from either has shit information or he is bad at taking notes.

Vlad III was called Dracula because his dad was Vlad II Dracul. Dracul means DRAGON and adding an "a" to the end makes Vlad III "SON OF THE DRAGON". This comes from the fact that Vlad II joined The Order of the Dragon. Vlad II received the surname Dracul in 1431, after being inducted into the Order of the Dragon, founded in 1408 by the King Sigismund of Hungary.

The devil is also called the dragon, or the great dragon.
 

genjiZERO

Member
Gawker article is poorly cited (read: not cited at all) and scholarly work on Stoker that has gone on for about a hundred years seems to have more bearing with reality. It's undeniable that the world of Count Dracula is inspired by Eastern European folklore, of which Vlad II played an important role.

The note about the naming of Dracula is just bizarre ... Sure, "Dracul" is the Romanian word for Devil, but this was also the taken family name of the descendants of Vlad II, and Stoker would have come upon the word while reading about Vlad II in William Wilkinson's book...

Wikipedia says it better than I can:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dracula#Background

Agreed... The article doesn't even back up the claims of the title of it (or this thread)

I think you're right on. They're clearly overanalysing the name "Dracula". It's clear that it is simply a derivation of draco/drakon (dragon) -> draconian (severe) and taking on the quality of demon along the way.
 

Trojita

Rapid Response Threadmaker
The devil is also called the dragon, or the great dragon.

In this case though that is irrelevant. Vlad II was named Dracul because of his joining The Order of the Dragon. The naming of figures that were popularly courageous were called a Zmaj (Slavic for Dragon l has routes in Snake). In this case the two are seperate and both have no connection with the Devil. In fact The Order of the Dragon was a Christian organization. Why would they name their order and someone in their order the devil?
 

karasu

Member
In fact The Order of the Dragon was a Christian organization. Why would they name their order and someone in their order the devil?

I reckon for the same reason since dragons are seen as evil in the christian tradition. To sound big and scary.
 

Trojita

Rapid Response Threadmaker
I reckon for the same reason since dragons are seen as evil in the christian tradition. To sound big and scary.

It was be more prudent to say dragons are fearsome and a lot of folklore from Europe depicts them as an antagonist.

The Order of the Dragon was based on the earlier Order of St George. The order adopted St. George as its patron saint, who was known for slaying a dragon in Christian folklore. The dragon was used as a symbol for the military and religious ethos of the order. In a way it was imparting the strength of A Dragon and in another way the strength to destroy something of that caliber of strength.
 

Seth C

Member
The imagery associated with Dracula was clearly inspired by the Romanian area of Transylvania. Dracula's home is said to be Transylvania. There was a dude known as Vlad Dracul (dragon) from the area. It's kinda hard to imagine there is no connection.
 

Kaladin

Member
Dracul in Romanian means dragon or devil. Same word for both. He could have seen the reference in the book and got Dracula = devil and never known about the Order of the Dragon or Vlad Tempes. This was the 1800s you know. People forget that there was no internet and no immediate way to cross check facts.
 

injurai

Banned
Castlevania redeemed.

tumblr_n6lik12eBA1txuduso1_500.gif
 

Fuu

Formerly Alaluef (not Aladuf)
Yeah, after having read the article, their entire evidence is "there's no references to Dracula in his notes other than this one note having to do with a different Dracula," which is incredibly flimsy. We have decades of research and lots of connections between Dracula the novel and Vlad Tepes the ruler and one blog writer with one flimsy piece of evidence definitely claims that there is no inspiration? Please.
Yep. I read the article expecting to have my mind blown but it doesn't even try to confirm what the title proposes.
 
This is crap, Stoker even mentions a Dracula who's brother betrayed his people to the turks.

"Woe was it that his own unworthy brother, when he had fallen, sold his people to the Turk and brought the shame of slavery on them!"

Vlad III's brother who like Vlad was ransomed to the Ottoman empire became Muslim and fought in the Turk armies that invaded. He was used as a figurehead as they thought the Wallachians would accept him easier than a Turk. So Stoker did know about Vlad III. My guess is Dracula was an amalgamation of a number of characters from that period. Which I think was sort of known already.

And Vlad III's exploits were quite well known in Eastern Europe and Germany. Anyone doing any research on that time period would have come across Vlad the Impaler.
 

Retro

Member
Dracula was a real piece of shit. Only Hollywood can make a cruel bloodthirsty tyrant a hero.

He's a national hero in Romania, celebrated as a Defender of Christendom against the Ottomans who overran Constantinople, the seat of Orthodox Christianity and the Eastern Holy Roman empire. He was celebrated and mourned by princes and popes alike and vilified by his MANY political enemies. He sat the throne of Wallachia no less than three separate occasions, overthrown by rival families and even his own Ottoman-allied brother Radu.

Seriously, read up on it, the Impaler stuff is messed up but so were the times he lived in and the situation of the world around him.
 

Clydefrog

Member
This is crap, Stoker even mentions a Dracula who's brother betrayed his people to the turks.

"Woe was it that his own unworthy brother, when he had fallen, sold his people to the Turk and brought the shame of slavery on them!"

Vlad III's brother who like Vlad was ransomed to the Ottoman empire became Muslim and fought in the Turk armies that invaded. He was used as a figurehead as they thought the Wallachians would accept him easier than a Turk. So Stoker did know about Vlad III. My guess is Dracula was an amalgamation of a number of characters from that period. Which I think was sort of known already.

And Vlad III's exploits were quite well known in Eastern Europe and Germany. Anyone doing any research on that time period would have come across Vlad the Impaler.

image.php


calm down, LSP
 

Binabik15

Member
This reminds me, I had a free copy of Bram Stoker's Dracula on my HTC Sensation, but my screen cracked before I finished it and my Experia Z only has some stupid "whatever" books on it D:


Well, and Faust, but as an educated German I read that already.

And no, Dracula was at least partially based on a guy impaling his foes, because that's just too good of an inspiration.

PS: Is Dracula Untold any good?
 

SkyOdin

Member
In this case though that is irrelevant. Vlad II was named Dracul because of his joining The Order of the Dragon. The naming of figures that were popularly courageous were called a Zmaj (Slavic for Dragon l has routes in Snake). In this case the two are seperate and both have no connection with the Devil. In fact The Order of the Dragon was a Christian organization. Why would they name their order and someone in their order the devil?

To be fair, the Order of the Dragon that Vlad II joined was named after the dragon from the story of St. George and the Dragon. It was modeled after a similar chivalric order called the Order of St. George. St. George was thus also the patron saint of the Order of the Dragon. The dragon that appears in that story was long associated with the devil, which can seen quite clearly in a lot of medieval artwork.

So, the Order's use of the name and imagery of the dragon is in part referencing the story of a dragonslaying saint. However, they still used an image of a dragon coiled into a circle with its tail wrapped around its neck as their badge, and sometimes called themselves the Draconists. So the imagery is a little mixed, but it does mostly make sense.

On a tangent, since you mentioned the root of Zmaj, the word 'dragon" itself comes from the Greek "drakon", which meant serpent or giant seafish. I think "drakon" literally means "fire-spitter", but that was actually a reference to the intense burning sensation caused by snake-venom rather than literal fire originally.


wasn't Vlad called Dracul, meaning Son of Dragon?
Actually, Vlad the Impaler was named Vlad III Dracula (also written as Drăculea). "Țepeș" (the Impaler) was a nickname used by either him or his enemies. Dracula was actually part of Vlad III's name. Dracula meant "son of the dragon", coming from the fact that Vlad III's father took on the name Vlad II Dracul (which just meant dragon).

The name Dracul actually led into what their entire branch of the ruling family of Wallachia was called: the House of Drăculești. Members of the House of Drăculești occasionally ruled Wallachia from 1436 to 1600, so the family name stuck around for a while. Of course, that entire period say a lot of violence, war, and assassination, with the House of Drăculești fighting for control against their rival family, the Dănești. As a piece of videogame trivia, one of the allies of Trevor Belmont was a member of the House of Dănești; they just butchered his name in translation and called him Grant DeNasty.
 

Vagabundo

Member
The article is complete bunk.

Considering Van Helsing says that is exactly who he is IN THE NOVEL!!!

Van Helsing said:
He must, indeed, have been that Voivode Dracula who won his name against the Turk, over the great river on the very frontier of Turkey-land.

Of course Bram just picked a historical character at random knowing nothing about the real Vlad or his "accomplishments". Just cause he liked the name. lol
 
Gawker article is poorly cited (read: not cited at all) and scholarly work on Stoker that has gone on for about a hundred years seems to have more bearing with reality. It's undeniable that the world of Count Dracula is inspired by Eastern European folklore, of which Vlad II played an important role.

The note about the naming of Dracula is just bizarre ... Sure, "Dracul" is the Romanian word for Devil, but this was also the taken family name of the descendants of Vlad II, and Stoker would have come upon the word while reading about Vlad II in William Wilkinson's book...

Wikipedia says it better than I can:



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dracula#Background



Agreed... The article doesn't even back up the claims of the title of it (or this thread)

Thank you.
 

MechaX

Member
I thought Dracula had reincarnated into a japanee high-school student and or an american exchange student in Japan

He did, only after his castle was sealed in an eclipse in what must have been the most epic battle ever not-told.

Yes, I'm still bitter about the Battle of 1999.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom