The Ultimate Vampire Resource and Directory

To some people in Romania considered Count Dracula a hero for protecting his home land from the turks. But for those who sees Dracula outside of Romania and the way he punishes the Turks in the most inhuman ways known to man is considered as a monster or the infamous brutal warrior in ancient times.

The way I understood Count Vlad Tepes Dracula's story in the history channel. Its true he can be insane and cruel, but I think he did it for the love of his people. What started his vampire stories is that when the Turks came to Dracula's grave to cut off his head just to take as a prize to prove to the king of Turks that he is dead. But what is surprizing is that when the Turks open up his tomb, Dracula's body is for some reason missing. A possibility that he may have risen as a vampire as legends for told of his resurection. Did he really risen as a vampire or did someone came and stole his body just to make every one believe he's still alive?

that is a good question i have read that in the history of dracula he supposedly drank the blood of the turks to show not only strenghth and power but to ward off any more attacks and when he displayed there decapitated bodies on the pig poles the stories began and became more greusome as it went and turned him into a tyrant when they cut off his head and the body went missing they thought that he rose fron the dead and put a curse on his enemies in which ppl stated to die from the pleagues young giurls go missing and alot of things played in to the stories and it just manifested toward him being about a vampire

i forgot to add one thing i think he is both a hero to his ppl and villan to everyone else

I agree. Like so many other "heroes" or "inavders," "villains," or icky people - it depends on your perspective. If you were one of the people on his side, you'd probably like and honor him. If you were on the side he killed, well... you would likely get a different impression. Most famous figures are not clear-cut good or evil (like the rest of humanity and beyond), but a mixture of both depending on the color of glasses you are seeing through.

You think most Romanian gypsies practices the way of vampirism due to Draculas influence?

I've done a great deal of studying on the subject of Vlad and the deeds he became known for. It seems to me that he used the superstitions and shock value to make him appear evil, so others would fear to tread upon him or his people. He did what he had to do to make his point. And he also was spiritual enough that these acts and deeds did affect his life greatly. To this day, he is still revered in his home country as a hero. He knew the acts he commited were making history, with stories being passed down and told generation after generation. I have to wonder if he realized that Bram Stoker would help immortalize him as much as his own acts.
The fact that his body vanished from its burial site is indeed a curious one. Perhaps someone moved it to keep his body safe. Or perhaps he does indeed walk the earth undead. I always said- anything is possible.
I caught the Ghost Hunters episode where they spent the night in his castle. That was interesting, too, though they never mentioned the vampiric aspect of Vlad. Wonder why.

Vlad I can see being a hero to his people just like for a short time Hitler was a hero because he pulled the Germans out from their yoke. Not a good example I know but the point being is that from an outsiders perspective yes they look evil and insane, but from the point of view of the everyday individual that is suffering and suddenly this man comes along and changes it all.. yes a hero is born.

As for the stories and legends of Vlad, I think they are like gossip a lot of hearsay and rumours that grew beyond the man. Unless someone can go back in time and see things for what they were and meet the man, all we will have is what history tells us.

As for the gypsies practices, thats a good possiblility. I shall stop rambling now...

In my opinion, definitely a villian. He impaled people, and even drank his enemy's blood....that was common in the Transylvania for the time period....and most of the wars was fought over religion, and the killing and/or extinction of the religions and it's followers. He may have been a hero and righteous warrior to his followers, but not such a noble king, in general.

To my understanding that Dracul meaning Dragon and from Bram Stoker renaming him as Dracula meaning son of the Dragon. In religion beliefes that is considered that the Dragon is the Devil or Satan. Either if that Dracula or Dracul is indeed the Devil himself or he could be his son. I can see why many outsiders consider him as the villian. But there is no doubt in my mind that many of his followers is more than willing to die for him.

war and love can lead a man to do wierd things, yes vlad was defending his land and the turks were doing the same thing so who was worse it is the same story throughout history

Vlad Dracolya Tepes was not a vampire, he never practised anything that could be mistaken for vampirism.

His reputation for ruthlessness and some of his many castles looked really awesome so, I guess, that's why Bram Stoker was inspired to start a book that later became 'Dracula'

I thought the disappearance of his body was all to do with different districts claiming the right to bury him. I believe it was moved twice from Sighisoara, before it disappeared altogether

As a ruler, a real life 'king', he was probably a hero. He was protecting his country and his subjecst from an invading army using tactics that were common enough at that time.

In those days, most Kings led their own armies into battle. They had to spark up a fiercesome and terrifying reputation to put fear in their enemies - every leader did it.

The fact that Vlad impaled his victims might seem pretty gross but think that, at that time, the civilised british were clamping people in cages so they couldn't move to be eaten alive by birds, or being ripped apart by horses.

Similar acts were routine in those days.

Lonewolf2000,

Sorry I had missed your point about the language

In Romanian, Dracul etc. means 'evil' or 'devil / satan'

The romanian for Dragon is either 'dragon', 'zmeu' or 'balaur'

So your point is good, Vlad was called the evil one / devil, you just didn't need the Dragon step

Romanian gypsies weren't well-known for vampirism : from their arrival in Wallacia in 1385 until they were 'freed' in 1851 they were slaves.

He was a hero. He did what he had to do to protect his people.

I agree with BloodAngelX, he was a hero to his people.....we cannot really judge him now as he was around centuries ago when none of us existed =)

Dracula was a hero for his people dering the time of his rane he fought for the people and he even made things better where ever he went he was made in to some evil thing when he lost a war and the concarers desided that he was bad and they didnt want him to rase another army agains them

I'd say they moved his body. They probably knew the turks would come for his head & moved it, or maybe he asked someone before he died to move it & never tell :)

i would have to say dracula is a hero.

Well said Artemka, he was a hero,plain and simple, as to him being judged as to how he dealt whith the Turks,word of mouth was the way communication was back then,they didnt have CNN,and if the stories spread of how terrible he was, fine,it would make outsiiders or invaders think twice before attacking

It depends on who you ask. To his countrymen, he was a hero for defending his nation and religion from the infidel Turk. To the Turks and his political opponents, he was a monster.

i think niether he was more of a hunter than a hero who did he save no one as far as a villian he never really caused any conflicts with the world. he only take's what is needed to survive.. so not to sound rude but the qeustion is kinda irelavant..? how can someone be a hero if u never save anyone or a villian when u cause no conflct the the world thats what a villian does.. these guys r villians sadam heusane.bin ladin, terrorist those r our true villians as far as heros our U.S MARINES,NAVY,ARMY,GAURDS....THEY R OUR HEROS NOT SOME VAMPIRE WHO PROBABLY DOES'NT EXIST..

Basically hes like every other hero, if you're on their side there hero's. If you're not, he'll be seen as a cruel tyrant

He was a hero. a very great man and leader. he did what he had to do to protect his land and his people. i think he's a true leader and a great leader.

He was and still is a symbol in Romania for his heroism.

if you were on a stake an he was the one that impaled you villian would be what he was ..

come on hero to us and villian to most .... history lessons are in order here I think

I feel that was a hero in my eyes, but I do know many see him as a Villian. Everyone has hir or her opinion and I respect that.

definatly depend on your piont of view and if you are talking about the movie personna or the historical person.

the same question can be asked for another famous person rising from the dead

Darcula did so many good things to help his people. For his country as a whole he was a wonderful leader, to some of his people he was a heartless dictator. He was unwavering in his laws and would not bend them. But from what I read they were needed and under them his country flourished and became increasingly better.

In regard to his enemies he was a tyrant. He was a vicious killer who was a force to reckon with. He was a cunning opponent who you didn't want to go up against.

I think Vlad was overall a hero, he did what he thought he had to do (and in my opinion for the most part what was best for his people). He used tactics that were gruesome, but they worked. He was an extremely intelligent man who was a great leader.

i would have to say a hero to his kind.. bc as scared said... he only protected his own.. but to humans he was a villian for that same reason

so then does that make sadam huesane a hero for what he did . or those jawa's for cutting off our soldiers heads all in the name of war. r they heros as well. cuz vlad did all of those things to his victims even his own kind to set examples to all those who disobayed him.. no they r not hero's they r mad men power tripping killers not hero's or villians

When has violence brought any good to the world?

During those times there were a lot of atrocities by warlords. My friend from Romania gets angry when people call Vlad a count. The only Count was in Bram Stoker's book. He doesn't like Wallachia used either. He writes it with a V. He is not fond of the Saxon spellings of things. He grew up under communism and is in his late 20s and has told me horror stories of those times alone. He told me Vlad was a Crown Prince, I don't remember the exact word. At the time he was alive there was NO Romania. That area was part of Hungary with provinces. So, Hungary claims him too. Bram based his stuff on his times.

The warlords of many areas would drink the blood of the vanquished. They believed they took on their power. It was merely superstition. He was not the only one and it wasn't much or they would have thrown up since blood is a natural emetic. Only 30 percent of the population according to the Discovery channel in a show on Cannibalism can drink more than a tiny bit without throwing up. (human blood)

They don't think Vlad was a vampire and he isn't known to be, this all came about via the Dracula book and superstition. They say when he was imprisoned which leads me to believe he was insane he was impaling rats and tearing wings off of things and quite frankly impaling anything he could while in there. He may be considered a hero to some but I feel due to what went on with the Turks he went insane.

Most Romanians do not like the Roma (gypsies). My friend has told me they are theives and his Mother was knocked down and harmed and her purse stolen by gypsies in Romania. My personal belief is I have never been there so I have no feelings about them. He says the government wanted to send them out of the country but the UN won't let them so the US subsidizes with money to build roads and the like. He said in WWII when they were asked to send Jews to the camps they sent a lot of gypsies because they didn't want them in that country. That a lot of them were killed and most don't acknowledge this in the histories. He is a History teacher. He speaks a pure form of Romanian that is not what he calls the peasant version that is a mix with gypsie language ( he spells gypsy like I did previously)

Yes they consider him a hero but they are well aware of the downside but it has been chalked up to a sign of the times he lived in for a means to come to an end of Turks trying to overrun and take over the area.

i think he was a good man for his time period and his cultare and his up bring, he did what had to be done, even if it is not to good to our standards

He was definitely a hero for his people, and a villain to others. I also believe the body was stolen to frighten people.

I see him as both

villian... IMO...

misfitman101,

I don't want to get dragged into politics here, that would get the thread closed and its a nice thread, but no-one is answering your points

Usually the hero is the leader of the side that wins the battle - Vlad won his battles, no-one mentions what the Turks did to their captives and judges them by that.

There are many heros and to decide if a country's ruler (who was very real, just not a vampire) was a hero in the past, takes nothing away from people who may be hero today wherever they are

I see a few people here are talking about Vlad and 'humans' - Vlad was a human too!

artemka I wanted to thank you for pointing something out to me, I really dont know where I found some of the facts at some of the ideas came from historians from TV based on Vlad and comparison to Dracula.

As for violence its the only language to prove a point to any outsiders. Since reasoning with some people in other countries wont listen then the only option left is brute force. I dont approve of violence but when it comes to war then violence is all you got to go with.

Its true that Saddam and Bin Ladin are villians to our point of view, but you must consider the point of view to other countries of the world, right now they believe that president Bush is the villian and terrorist to the world. Only to the Americans hes considered as a hero. Im not the one to argue about what I would think of the president, but I could care less what I think of him. The government right now is all twisted and confusing America's believes, and all they ever want from us is our tax money and spend it all on warfare. Instead of spending it all on war, why couldn't we spend it for peace instead?

I know that has got anything to do with Dracula, but it is clear to me that Vlad tepes is real and he's never been a vampire either but always been human. It is clear to me that he has a huge appetite for spilling blood on the battlefield. Ever since the Bram Stokers Dracula, Im starting to think that Bram used the stake to the heart bit from the Vlad's history and used it to kill Dracula with. I kinda find it a bit ironic in Dracula's case, dont you? It's true he was a prince, and loosing his empire to the enemy didn't drive him crazy. What really drove him crazy is the lose of his wife the princess. She was insane due to Vlad's cruelty as she killed herself.

Why thank you :)

I think it would be very wise to avoid any discussion on current world leaders in this thread.

The main point has to be that what Vlad did was acceptable and, maybe, expected in his day. Some of the modern-day 'villains' are doing things that are not acceptable today.

Anyhow back to Vlad eh :)

In my opinion for you to be a hero there has to be a portion of villian.... how can their not be. So I believe he was both

Oh yes and, of course, to LadyNightdancer who raised some very good points - I always make the mistake of using Romanian language to deal with Vlad.

His region was in what is now Hungary, and was Wallachia at that time.

When I visited Romania I know the gypsies had a very bad rep - there were like whole towns of gypsies, ruling mainly by fear - and that was only a few years ago

I can understand why he would be considered a villain due to the terrible things he did, but I think that it's understandable why he did it. He wanted to protect his people from the Turks and loved his country. I consider him a hero for doing it.

its my belife that count dracula (vlad) was a hero.i think anyone put in his posistion would of reacted the same way.

i personally think that he was a hero. but in society he was hero to his people and a villian to all others.

Thanks artemka and you do make really good points and I would love to have you as my advisor when running the forum. Keep up the good work.

A hero to his people

i feel the he was a hero. for what he did for his people... and that the othrs are just jealous of what he had, and wanted t oblow out of porportion any evils he may have done..

Vlad was a hero to His people and is still reared as the Utmost supreme ruler. Dracul was the name of the order which his family did belong. the order of the dragon. Dracul-a was the son of the order. His treatment of the turks is no less severe than what Ganhis Kan had done, or some of other society rulers. Yet Dracula or Vlad in the eyes of the outside world was considered a butcher. Yet like the Tale of robin hood. during his regin romania did prosper and grow. his death is a mystery on it's own. his body is no where to be found. Even his sons body has turned up missing after his assasination in the church. maybe the society or gypsies have Placed them together. Vlad was a hero all the way.

cadrewolf,

were did you get the information about Vlad being in any order - or order of a Dragon ?

I also didn't know it was ever thought that he was killed by gypsies who would have been slaves at that time)

I know there's a lot of versions of his death from the records of that time:

some say he was killed in battle against the Ottoman near Bucharest, others say say he was assassinated by disloyal Wallachian boyars, others say he was slain in battle some say by his own men (in accident)

for me he's a hero he belived in his people and their ways i think anyone who would do that is a hero to me

you have to judge him in the context of his time and place. true - he tortured people, but he had been the victim of torture himself. torture and cruelty were pretty much the norm in those days, and he was just a product of his time. as for the name, Dracula would be apt, as Dracul was his father's name. this was not his father's true surname, as he had none - being illegitimate. Drakul does translate as Dragon, but the dragon was an heraldic symbol, and was adopted to denote the title of Prince, as is the English name Drake or Pendragon. he drove off invaders and protected his people, so i would say he was a hero. he was not a despot who hid in his tower, surrounded by bodyguards - he was a warrior who fought on the battlefield, a man of great will and emotional strength, and cannot be compared to the likes of saddam husein or george bush. he wasnt always victorious - sometimes he was defeated - but he still fought back. he was a true hero - just not exactly how we view heros today.

I tend to think that Dracula was a sociopath and probably psychotic from his imprisonment by the turks at a young age and the constant entanglements of royalty.

He famously committed many atrocities against his own people as well as his enemies including I believe, inviting all the poor and infirm to one of his smaller homes for a feast and then sealing it and burning it down with all the people inside. He was evidently trying to 'destroy poverty' in his own way.

Regardless of the intentions or reasoning, I think that someone capable of unspeakable acts of torture and horror, both for his military and national reasons as well as his more self righteous reasons of 'moral superiority'...someone like that cannot be considered stable or mentally sound...let alone truly considered a hero.

Other similar villains would include Torquemada, Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot, the Popes and Holy Roman Emperors that initiated the multiple Crusades...the list unfortunately goes on and on.

count vlad or the fictional dracula??

Queen Lillith - I'm pretty sure we're discussing the Romanian Count Vlad Tepes...Dracula...and not the Bram Stoker character...Dracula

He managed to fend off a much larger invading army mainly by intimidation. The original shock and awe campaign. Horrific or no, he saved his country, which is heroic at least on some level.

The Crusades vastly expanded Christian influence and European land while bringing home to Europe untold wealth and glory...though they did slaughter thousands upon thousands as well as commit atrocities, rape, murder, robbery, pilaging and more in the name of their god. So are they heroes on some level too because of what they accomplished for their nations?

I see the point, but mine was that he was acting in defense. In defense to save yourself is somewhat different than invading the countryside pillaging to make a point.

But my point is whether a sociopath can really be a hero...if he protected his nation and his title, it seems that it was largely for selfish reasons since he also murdered his own people when the mood or his inflated morality had him do.

My point with the Crusades and Vlad is this: Actions made for "national interests" often seem more to do with the leaders interests that the people's interests. That to me isn't heroic.

I understand and agree with your points. If he was simply holding onto power, that is far from altruistic. Whether he considered himself to be defending all of Christendom must also be a consideration. They were facing also the complete obliteration of their faith and way of life. That to me isn't all selfishness. Since I don't know what his motivations were altogether, I can't say he was being selfish or unselfish in all or any part of what he did.

True, that we can little know now what the absolute motivations were in the distant past. So perhaps, even if Vlad was a psychotic and a murderer, you're point might be correct in that at least one of his actions may have been to protect his people...whom he then felt he could murder and torture when he wanted AFTER he protected them from outsiders.

I wonder if half of the things they say about him are even true. My great grandfather, who immigarted from Romania when he was seven tells me the stories say he was like anyone else, neither good or evil. Wether being good makes you a hero, or being bad makes you a villian is in the eyes of the beholder, I guess it depends what side you are on.

adrienne, I lived for a time in the Ukraine and visited Romania very often, mostly Transylvania (which is sort of where Wallachia was).

Even that far north you could find very old records of what Vlad did, mostly pictures and carvings - most of what people have heard is really well recorded. I have visited many of his castles and seen the records there, they can't all be wrong !

I think that the history of Vlad is pretty accurate.

As in real life undead vampire? Because no-one appears to have even thought that in his home country until after Bram Stoker wrote the novel.

Wow, you guys sure can put up a real good arguement and I tend to learn more and more new things even I never knew about. I forgot that Vlad Dracula had a sone.
And what I've heard of how he died, he was killed instantly by something that came from behind him and hit him from behind his head. I think there where either traitors or spies that dressed up to fool him thinking that those where his soilders. But he has been decieved. Take in mind there are plenty of people who would love to take the chance to kill him in anyway possible.
And I wanted to thank for clearifying the meaning of Dracul and Dracula, I knew it had some meaning to the title of dragon. I do believe that the dragon is the family crest to his kingdom.
Speaking of kingdom, I've heard his fortress is a well guarded building and impossible to get through. And I do remember his castle that sits on top fo the mountain isn't entirely 100% constructed yet. But now most of the castle walls are now pretty much crumbled, if it were more completed would his castle be as effective as his fortress?

Well, as they say, all's fair in love and war. So, I would have to say he was a hero to his people. He did what he felt needed to be done to get his point across. He drank the blood of his victims, which I believe sent a very strong message to everyone. Some people may believe he was a villain, but in time's of war people do things out of the ordinary. Basically, wartime brings people to do things extremely different from the norm.

I think that whether you dictate Dracula a hero or a villan is all based on your beliefs. How far is too far to go for your people?

He didnt do what he did to protect his people he did it to protect and expand his empire for his own glory he was just as cruel to his own people as people in other regions and not everyone in that time was drinking the blood of thier foes and impaling them on large spikes to some in Germany during world war 2 hitler was a hero that doesnt mean he actually was one. Mark Macgwire(sp) the baseball player is a hero and he didnt have to be a villian.

Nothing is to far, if you have any love to fight what you do believe in.

I beleive that on both side they see it according to their own eyes, one side a hero another a vile demon, its all liek the saying goes, in the eye of the beholder.

hhmm this realy belongs to the beholder there is no right or wrong answer as long as you can justify it he, defended his country and did such cruel and terrible things to keep them away

From what I have read of him ..I would say he would be a hero.

I guess that it all truly depends on your beliefes in the mythology of olden day. I belive that dracula could have been both.

It's very true, you see someone as a hero or villian depending upon which side of the victory you (and they) stand. Basing my judgement not on todays standards or personal feelings on violence or politics, I would say he did what needed to be done and should be considered a hero.

And artemka, as far as the Order of the Dragon, here's a link:

http://members.aol.com/johnfranc/drac05.htm

Obviously, I can't tell you how accurate this information is, but I've come across it before. If you go to the bottom, you'll also notice this quote:

"On the other hand, it is worth mentioning that Vlad Dracula's political detractors - mainly German Saxons - made use of the other meaning of the Romanian word "Dracul" - "Devil" - in order to blacken the prince's reputation. Could the association of the words "Dragon" and "Devil" in Romanian language explain an earlier link between Vlad Tepes and vampirism? "

Could perhaps the word Dracul have two meanings?

i believe he was a hero, but maybe to those who don't know his motives, he could be a villain? i can see where that idea comes from, but to me, he is a hero because he did what he had to do no matter what people thought of him.

I suppose it depends on what story one has read.Most depict him as a murderer and power hungry nut-job.Most of the accounts I have read, I am pretty much going with crazy maniac guy.

Thank you BeautifullySadistic, I was beginning to think that no-one was actually reading the thread !

It's interesting to read that webpage, its written in quite an unusual way but its a start to see if I can find anything else on it. I have spent most of the day pouring through books on Vlad but still can't find anything about Vlad belonging to this order. I see that there is mention in the wikipedia listing but there is no reference to support the mention. I'm not saying there isn't I just can't find one

Although I have no interest in the Order (only if Vlad belonged to it), its interesting to see that that website says it was founded in 1387 by Holy Roman Emperor and his second wife, Barbara Cilli well she wasn't born until about 1390, so the order was more likely to have been founded in 1408

I still don't think that the word Dracul could have two meanings so far apart - it is more likely that the term was applied by Vlad's enemies for whatever reason, mostly because its a Romanian word and, as LadyNightdancer was so kind to point out, Vlad was from Wallachia which was (at that time) what is now Hungaria.

I just watch a documentary on The History Channel about Vlad. It took you to the castles and homes he had lived in and told his story. I believe Vlad was a hero to his people and a person that sought revenge against the people that murdered his father and brother. About his his body? Who knows? That is a very good question

In reguards to how far is too far to go for your country depends on whether what you are doing is actually for the betterment of people or largely initiated out of gross self interest. I think to evaluate this would nessesitate a study in the expected gains of his actions, and the ramifications of inaction... etc.

Now this descussion might be better served if one asked if you thought that Vladamir Tepes were going to find a reward after death (ie. in heavan.)

Of course thsi would also be judgemental... I prefer to think that he was a man and served his God and his State in equal measure, with self gratification making the balance.

*shakes head* You can only speak about Vlad so many times before you realize that it is a little boring. I like the history of Vlad and even use him in my story but I think I lack the interest I had when I first learned about him.

Anyway I do think he is one of those guys that did what he did because the times he lived in. You can't blame him and much of the myth surrounding him is that myth. He was not a Vampire and I doubt he drank blood. He did impale people (hence his nick name Vlad Tepes) but I doubt he was blood drinking vampire.

That only came around cause of the book Stoker written. If it was not for that book I doubt people would have been fascinated with Vlad or even with vampires for that matter. Much of the mythology surrounding vampires did not become popular until Stoker's book. There have been plenty on the subject but it was Stroker that put the word fear in vampire and caused a world wide interest.

Been trying to find other vampire characters who would be based on real people. The only one who does is Vlad Tepes himself. In my research when looking at Count Orlok or Countess Carmilla, they people are not based on anyone that I know of. Would anyone know other people who's life been transformed into vampires other than Dracula?

imo i think he is a little bit of both. He has done some good things and some bad. So I couldn't put him in one catagory.

I was deeply honored and awe struck when my late husband, turned out to be related.................PARDON THE PUN, by blood to Count Vladimar Von Dracula, yes margaret he existed,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,and I am also honored to say I dont think he was hero or villian, the truth of the matter was in the old ways of the transylvanian medical community there was a disease we now call"proferia" that was highly toxic to the bearer of that disease,,,,,it consists of awful skin lesions that resemble blisters and it causes severe body pain when exposed to sunlight and yes it definetly can drive that person quite mad with pain and suffering,,,,,,,,,,,,,,it is also very true ,,,,,,,,,,,,I did research on it,,,,,,,,,,,,,,the old way they thought u could treat this disease was quite literally to "drink" blood,,,,,,,,,,,,,well since cadavours did not last long in that day and age the only way to consule blood was to access it from a live body,,,,,,,,,upon archives of the Counts family they found a "hand held peircing trowel" that would open a small to medium slice of skin when pressure was applied,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,HE WAS ILL I BELIEVE,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,because my late husband suffered the very same disease his ancestor did,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,I swear to u this IS a true story

ravenswing,

I don't think that anyone disputes that Vlad existed, his reigns are very well documented with lots of historical paintings, drawing, texts, statues etc

He was never known as 'Count Vladimar Von ...' - He wasn't a Count, he was a prince - Vlad was short for Vladislavs not Vladimar - Von would be a german title and he was Wallachian

You mentioned that he was Transylvanian but only Bram Stoker's fictional Count was, Vlad was from Wallachia which was much further south.

I think you mean Porphyria as the disease [Porifera are sponges]

I don't honestly thing that anyone who suffered such a crippling disease could have been outdoors fighting battles and surely would not have ruled a troubled country twice

Apologies, I hit post instead of my spell check and I forgot to ask my question.

I'd be curious to know more about this piercing trowel, what was it used for ?

It just seems odd that a man who would carry a sword and probably a dagger, who was known to behead people and impale them on spikes - would need a small trowel to draw blood.

Hell yeah he's a hero.

I believe he was a hero to his people and a villain to his enemies. That's my opinion though.

yepperz! i agree!

he did what he had to so I would say he is a hero

hes a hero because he gave others the gift

My question for the person claiming to have been married to a direct descendent of Vlad Tepes is, where's your proof?

While I'm no expert and I don't claim to be, I've heard there weren't any direct descendents. I've heard that there were some adoptions, but no DIRECT descendents.

What has everyone else heard on this?

By the way, I'm frankly tired of the claims to be related to Vlad.

this is a good question. there are many myths of the great vlad. just as inhumane as he was is just as powerful of a person as he was. he had a lot of love too. in many depicitions of his story there is always tales of his lover and i cant think of her name at all right now.

i think he was a hero. but all heros have their fall.

he is a herro

Ditto Hero!

Hes a hero !!

He would be one of my hero's (if I had one) you just can't expect to go to war and catch your enemy, give them a little spank on the butt and send them on their merry little way. Things just don't work like that. Tear them to shreds. Eat their eyeballs and their guts and drink their blood and urine. THAT WILL SHOW EM! >:D heh heh

This thread has been automatically closed for length.