The Ultimate Vampire Resource and Directory

Some of you have perhaps heard or read about Tuberculosis (also once known as consumption) accounting for what people used to think was vampirism. It is a disease which is believed to have been around for atleast 18,000 years before now, plenty of time for myths and stories to develop.
In a time where superstition was as normal a part of life as bread and butter, most people firmly believed that things like vampires, werewolves, and the creatures from their local lore really existed. Everyone thought that anyone who looked funny must have been a witch and was going to curse them and their family. Nowadays, very few people have the same firm beliefs, and most people think, or know these things to be only from stories. They've been brought up to know that they are not real, while their ancestors truly thought they existed. No one's beliefs are the same anymore, but over the past two centuries or so, these stories have been romanticised and embellished, to the point where people no longer fear them, but love them and want to meet one or be one. Because of this romanticism, and people enjoying the idea of such a creature existing, they have perhaps forgotten the roots from where the superstition started.

The following is taken from our beloved wikipedia:

Before the Industrial Revolution, tuberculosis may sometimes have been regarded as vampirism. When one member of a family died from it, the other members that were infected would lose their health slowly. People believed that this was caused by the original victim draining the life from the other family members. Furthermore, people who had TB exhibited symptoms similar to what people considered to be vampire traits. People with TB often have symptoms such as red, swollen eyes (which also creates a sensitivity to bright light), pale skin, extremely low body heat, a weak heart and coughing blood, suggesting the idea that the only way for the afflicted to replenish this loss of blood was by sucking blood. Another folk belief attributed it to being forced, nightly, to attend fairy revels, so that the victim wasted away owing to lack of rest; this belief was most common when a strong connection was seen between the fairies and the dead. Similarly, but less commonly, it was attributed to the victims being "hagridden"—being transformed into horses by witches (hags) to travel to their nightly meetings, again resulting in a lack of rest.
TB was romanticized in the nineteenth century. Many people believed TB produced feelings of euphoria referred to as "Spes phthisica" or "hope of the consumptive". It was believed that TB sufferers who were artists had bursts of creativity as the disease progressed. It was also believed that TB sufferers acquired a final burst of energy just before they died which made women more beautiful and men more creative. In the early 20th century, some believed TB to be caused by masturbation.

So, what do you believe? Was this grim and once incurable disease responsible for the idea that sparked stories and superstitions of vampires?

I feel that most past diseases and birth defects are most probably why we have myth and superstition today. And yet as I am some one who is skeptical and open minded I want to think that just maybe...just maybe lol

Though I do think that there are diseases out there that started some of the Vampire mythology....I do not think that Tuberculosis was one of them. I would place my bet on a type of Haemophilia.

A research gem indeed,

I often mention to people how centuries back Fakirs performed, much like
the Snake Oil Sales Caravans.

Their purpose, and intent was to ( and still is) to exploit those very same rehashed superstition.

Often I read post that avow " That is not what we mean when we say we are vampires." As in that is not the source of origin for their conclusion of being a vampire.

This post also brings to mind another question, what mental, or hormonal ( glandular) condition could account for those that fancy themselves " Psi Vamps".

First off anything Wikipedia has is half made up and half lies since anyone can add to it.Now with that said...consumption was in fact thought to be the cause of many vampire myths throughout early history.The paling of skin...the bleeding gums made people think the infected were drinking blood to survive.

Dabbler - there is unlikely to be any disease or disorder that would lead to the belief in psychic vampirism. It is my personal belief that psychic vampirism is bullsh*t, people wanting to call themselves vampires without having to touch blood.

The more I think about this subject, the more I think it likely that TB, or something similar, was what sparked the idea of vampires. It has been around for thousands of years all over the world, and the symptoms create that of a vampire.
People in the past thought that anything out of the ordinary was sent by the Devil, for most people were extremely religious, and also that anything particularly unusual could only be explained as something supernatural... disregarding sense, reason and science altogether. I mean heck, the Victorians believed that masturbation caused physical deformity and a condemnation to Hell.
That is how people used to think, and that is why we have so many marvellous myths and legends in the modern day. There was no division between what we would term 'fantasy' and 'reality'. Vampires, demons, werewolves and so on were just thought of as normal and real things. Whereas now, the general population can distinguish between the real and unreal, and know those things to be fantasy. If someone gets a bizarre illness in the twenty-first century, they're going to think, "It's an unusual illness, let's examine it" but centuries ago, if the same illness occurred, they might have thought, "This person's soul has been consumed by the Devil! To save them we must bind them in iron, cut off their head, drive a stake through their heart and bury them before they rise and curse anyone else!"

So with this archaic way of thinking, coupled with the romanticising of such supernatural creatures in recent times, and the even more recent 'sexing up' of creatures like vampires, is it not possible that the whole idea of it started from something as simple as an ailment?

Oops edit: "and the symptoms match that of a vampire."

i feel that the reason why pple would mistake simple things to be something paranormal...mostly beacuse pple were scared of things they did not understand!!

I agree CA, I was "Devils Advocating".

" fear what is unknown", are scared of things they( unbelievers, and skeptics, or those who believe differently, or more orthodoxed) don't understand"

These cliches' imply that those who convert/subscribe/ believe/ practice ate doing so only to appear to be " unafraid" considered " open minded" or " mundane" as if simple believing something makes them more then others.

Sadly most people lack any social adaptidude later in life because the stigma of such behaviour( if one let's it become a complex) is social isolation.


People want a universal monster, then they take that monster, and make sure fire ways to be able to destroy it. With ritual type methods.
then it loses a bit of Monster.. So you make it suductive.. " Your woman folk can be stolen." it progresses from there, next stop.. Affirmative action for people who identify as vampires?

The implication that people who see vampires as the lore genre icon it is, a lore that could well have been built on plague, and consumtion are somehow afraid that vampires ate something more is ludicrious, and rather cliché.

How about those who believe they, or someone they associate with is a vampire, are afraid they will have nothing to be social about unless they believe they are, or an associate is a vampire.

Nonexisting Creatures are only scary in Crafted Tales, Books with plots, Theature, and Movies, once the book is put down, the monster ( and usually the desire to be scared/ thrilled) goes away.

The perpetuity of " mysterious implications" is only so sustainable.

That's pretty interesting considering i'm a TB carrier. Someone kissed me as a baby in my church and that was something i was given. Does that mean the giver was vampiric? lol that would be pretty hilarious considering it was in a church....
Someone once told me that some believe diabetics could have been considered vampires because the gums of the teeth would be pulled back more exposing more tooth etc.
Thank goodness for our medical advancements for explaining these things in OUR time.

There are such things as vampires , not all like the myths, not all like the modern personification/adaptation of it, somethings are not like what you read on mythologies, or what you speculate of how people reacted to X things> in the end is just speculation, humans then and humans now aren't that different; "stupid/intelligent" for X things, apart for the time and limitations our behavior is correlative; we are just advanced in certain terms, furthermore they weren't stupid about such things as diseases, or separation of characteristic between one thing and the other. Just keep in mind/ avoiding negative reactionary/ not everything given is real, and everything that people perceive as real isn't also -given; somethings you have to pursuit to obtain. Archaeologist might shed light in X amounts of variables among the findings, healthy to society structure, it could take months, years, decades of study and to share the knowledge to other groups for further authencity, and then when is a validate source it could pass to the general public, but they (private/federal institutions) choose what to give and what not, to others there are no explanation or extent of deviation from 21st century validation of coverage, not everything is painted as reality, and not everything from the past is "fabula", you just have to shift what is seamed as: "demon", "vampire", etc, from what is (print characteristic here + reasonable personification). To say their is no -something- and backing your assertion with nothing but the pretense that their is no evidence to support such idealization; is like backing yourself with anything but what is fed by the ones that wants you to think the same thing> in conclusion; what really you do know is what others print in you- not something you indeed researched, regardless of how scientifically has been proven; when people understand that the foundations and institutions that hold the modern structure of society is corrupted to maintain the absolution; is when they understand truth is far from here-says of the same source you look for "facts" in regards of furthering your "knowledge" of topics with books and links.

I highly disagree with you on the term "There are a such thing as vampires".Humans may live like a "vampire" even foolishly drink blood.But Vampires as known through history and in myths do not exist.A "vampire" is every sense of the word does not exist no matter how mad people may get about this.Until there is 100% proof you died from a bite or feeding and came back as a soulless body inhabited by that of a demon.You are NOT a "vampire"...but people still have the belief they exist.In which you have every right to believe you may be one or they are out there.

A wonderful topic, CherryAdvocaat, and I believe you are very close to the truth: Tuberculosis was, indeed, considered the disease most associated with a vampire "attack." However, none of the original accounts makes any mention of puncture marks or of blood loss.

What the original accounts do state is that the female victims of such "attacks" became "...exhausted and emaciated." This, then, resembled the dreaded disease "Consumption" (i.e., Tuberculosis), hence the association of vampires with this particular disease.

However... these same accounts also very specifically name what was eventually discovered to have actually caused these symptoms so reminiscent of "Consumption," which symptoms had absolutely nothing to do with blood sucking:

"Gypies thought of the vampire as a sexual entity. The male vampire was believed to have such an intense sexual drive that his sexual need alone was sufficent to bring him back from the grave. His first act usually was to return to his widow, whom he engaged in sexual intercourse. Nightly visits could ensue over a period of time, with the wife becoming exhausted and emaciated."

-- The Vampire Book, J. Gordon Melton, 1999; pp. 616-617


"Mullos (Gypsy word for Vampire) also return to satisfy their prodigious sexual appetites... They are so insatiable that their human partners are likely to weaken and become ill with exhaustion."

- The Complete Vampire Companion (R Guiley, pp. 9-10) (emphasis added)


"The sexual nature of the act is plainly indicated in the following examples. Heinrich von Wlislocki*, in his researches into Roumanian superstitions tells us: ...With young people it (the vampire) indulges in sexual orgies until they get ill and die of exhaustion. It often happens that women are impregnated by this creature and bear children..."

- On the Nightmare, E. Jones, pp. 117-118 (emphasis added)
* a noted Austrian Gypsologist


I can't help but note here that had these women truly "...die(d) of exhaustion", as it was so often claimed, how could they have still been alive nine months later to "...bear children"? Me thinks this evidence of scare tactics taken by local men attempting to scare women from consorting with those known as "vampires."

Anyway... the point here is that it was not from blood-sucking nor from Tuberculosis that these symptoms of "exhaustion and emaciation" in women were caused during "vampire attacks." Instead, as evident from the actual and original Eastern European accounts, it was from days and nights of endless lovemaking with very active participation by their female "victims" (no... not rape) that led to the complete exhaustion and eventual emaciation such very actively participating females experienced.

And as after such marathon sex sessions such women did indeed look as though they had "Consumption" (exhaustion, emaciation, and listlessness following such long-term, non-stop, hyper-orgasmic euphoria), the townspeople, most of whom had no clue of what had really occurred, invented a new term for the vampire: "Nosferatu" (plague-carrier). And from this point on, the "vampire" became associated with Tuberculosis.

Great forum topic!


- Upir'

Oh.. by the by... should anyone truly wonder why historically women truly did love vampires (referring now to another active forum topic)... my previous post here also explains exactly why this was so. Only with those unique men known as "vampires," were women finally able to commune both sensually and emotionally with men who were truly equal with them. Hence, the days and nights of endless lovemaking... of continuous hyperorgasmic euphoria... and the "exhaustion and emaciation" that followed that was so often mistaken for "Consumption."

The downside was that, from that time on, anyone who actually got the REAL disease was believed to have been the victim of a "vampire." And that sparked vampire hunts that often resulted in the same idiocies as well as atrocities as occurred during all witch hunts.


- Upir'