Buzz
Vlad the Impaler, the infamous medieval leader often linked to the Dracula legend, is surrounded by numerous stories of his brutal methods, including impalement, blood-drinking, and tyrannical rule. However, the line between historical fact and fictional embellishment remains unclear, as much of Vlad Tepes’s life is obscured by myths and legends.
10. He Wasn’t the Real Inspiration for Dracula
Although Vlad Tepes is widely believed to have inspired Dracula, Irving Stoker, Bram Stoker’s son, stated that his father conceived the idea in a dream. For years, evidence was scarce, as Stoker’s research notes were lost until they were discovered at the Rosenbach Museum & Library in Philadelphia in 1972. During the period between Stoker’s death in 1912 and the rediscovery of his notes, historians speculated that Stoker might have learned about Vlad Tepes from a conversation between Henry Irving and Hungarian scholar Arminius Vambery at a dinner party.
The connection between Dracula and Vlad III was first proposed in 1958 by researcher Basil Kirtley. He cited Abraham Van Helsing’s biography as evidence, and this theory was repeatedly echoed until Stoker’s notes were uncovered, leading researchers to retract the claim.
After examining Stoker’s notes, there is no indication that Vlad III played any role in shaping the iconic vampire. However, the myth continues to endure.
9. Vlad’s Name Might Have Been Coincidental
The sole link between Vlad Dracula and Bram Stoker’s famous vampire is the name, and even that connection is tenuous. While the association between vampires, staking, beheading, and Vlad the Impaler seems obvious, Stoker’s notes reveal no evidence that he was familiar with a historical figure known as “Vlad the Impaler.”
During a vacation in Whitby in 1890, Stoker came across a book titled An Account of the Principalities of Wallachia and Moldovia. His notes include a reference to a footnote in the book, which states, “DRACULA in Wallachian language means DEVIL.” It’s plausible that Stoker selected the name for its meaning rather than any association with Vlad III, who is never mentioned in the notes. Interestingly, Stoker initially planned to name the character “Wampyr.”
8. The Significance and Usage of ‘Dracula’ Remains Controversial
Although Stoker claimed that “Dracula” translates to “devil,” the true meaning of the name remains a topic of debate. Generally, “Dracula” is believed to reference Vlad’s father (shown above) and to denote Vlad III as the “son of Drakul.” This has been interpreted as “son of the Dragon” or “son of the Devil,” aligning with his infamous reputation.
Romanian scholar Aurel Radiutiu offers an alternative theory, suggesting it’s unlikely a tyrannical ruler would embrace being called “the Devil.” He argues that the name stems from a misspelling of the Slavic-Romanian term “Dragu,” meaning “the dear one.” According to him, “Drakul” was likely a distortion of “Dragu”, influenced by the German-speaking Saxons residing in the territories of Vlad II and Vlad III.
7. The Concept of Blood Drinking Originated from a Translation Error
Vlad III’s brutality was infamous, but the notion that he consumed the blood of his foes likely stems from a simple translation error.
In 1463, a poem titled “Von ainem wutrick der heis Trakle waida von der Walachaei” (“Story of a Violent Madman Called Voivode Dracula of Wallachia”) was presented to Holy Roman Emperor Frederick III. When translated in the 20th century, it suggested that Vlad III soaked his bread in the blood of those he impaled, including men, women, and children.
However, even the translation by scholars Radu Florescu and Raymond McNally includes the word “basically,” indicating uncertainty about the poem’s true meaning. A closer examination reveals that the verse actually states he washed his hands in blood. While this remains grim, it may have been a metaphorical expression rather than a literal act.
6. He Likely Never Resided in Transylvania
Transylvania’s tourism thrives on its association with the legendary vampire and its infamous ruler, but many historians argue that Vlad III likely never resided there.
Florin Curta, a professor of archaeology and medieval history at the University of Florida, believes this is another instance where Dracula’s legend has influenced tales about Vlad Tepes. He definitely never lived in Bran Castle, the iconic residence linked to Dracula. While some speculate he was born in Sighisoara, his father’s home, others argue he may have been born in Targoviste, the royal capital of Wallachia.
5. Vlad as a Folk Hero
By the late 19th century, Vlad III was celebrated as a heroic figure rather than a reviled tyrant. Many literary works highlighted his valiant efforts to liberate his people from Turkish rule. He was revered as a national icon, admired for his strategic brilliance and dedication to his homeland. While some writings criticized his brutal methods, the debate over whether Vlad was a despot or a savior remains intensely contested.
Stoker’s Dracula faced a ban under Nicolae Ceausescu and only became available in Romania 11 months after his death. Today, Romania embraces tourism centered around a fictionalized portrayal of its most renowned leader, once praised for resisting Turkish domination. While it’s undeniable that Vlad’s orders led to the deaths of 100,000 people, the combination of vampire lore and the moral ambiguity of his actions makes Vlad III a deeply complex historical figure.
4. He Formed an Alliance with Pope Pius II
Following their time as hostages of the Ottoman Empire, Vlad and his brother harbored strong resentment toward their captors. While Radu embraced the Ottoman ways and converted, Vlad took a defiant stance. As the Turks aimed to expand into Italy, Pope Pius II sought allies to form a defense, and Vlad eagerly joined the cause.
While other European leaders hesitated to acknowledge the Turkish threat, Vlad was ready to take drastic measures to halt their advance. With the Church’s support, he ceased the annual tribute of soldiers to the Turks and instead used impalement to send a stark warning. Over six years, he executed approximately 20,000 Turks, earning praise from Pius II for his military prowess and religious devotion.
However, after Vlad’s death, the full extent of his brutal actions reached the Pope. By the time Pius II penned his autobiography, his opinion of the Wallachian ruler had significantly changed.
3. Some Accounts Portray Him as a Fair Leader
While Vlad Tepes’s reign was marked by brutal actions, he also implemented policies that led some to view him as a fair leader. Folklore depicts him as a ruler who enforced strict discipline, confiscated property from traitors, and rewarded the faithful. Stephen the Great of Moldovia, an ally, described Vlad’s methods as harsh yet fair, essential for safeguarding the state he ruled.
Although his campaign against poverty resulted in the burning of the poor to eliminate societal burdens, Vlad also targeted economic issues like excessive imports. He imposed heavy taxes on Saxon German merchants, limiting their trade to specific towns, and executed those who defied his orders. He also eliminated numerous boyars to redistribute wealth, famously declaring, “My sacred mission is to establish order . . . Everyone in my land must feel secure.”
2. . . . Or the Fate of His Remains
Numerous accounts exist about the fate of Vlad’s remains. Most sources agree that he was decapitated, and his head was delivered to Sultan Mehmed as evidence of his demise.
His body is said to have been transported to Snagov Church. However, Stefan the Wanderer claims he wasn’t buried there and that his remains were later moved to Constantinople, then to Sveti Georgi, a Bulgarian monastery, where monks allegedly sought to redeem his soul. Excavations at Snagov revealed only horse bones, leaving his final resting place a mystery.
Various unconventional theories surround Vlad’s burial. A student from the University of Tallinn once proposed that a dragon-like figure in an Italian church indicated his burial there, suggesting his death was staged and he was ransomed to his daughter in Naples. (Spoiler: This theory is unfounded.)
1. The Circumstances of His Death Remain Unknown . . .
Following his retreat across the Carpathian Mountains, Vlad was held captive by Matthias Corvinus for 13 years. After his release in 1475, he launched a final attempt to regain his throne. Although he succeeded temporarily, he died under mysterious circumstances near the end of 1476.
One account claims he was killed in battle during a Turkish ambush. Others propose that his own soldiers struck him down, either by mistaking him for a Turk or intentionally ending his life. Given his notorious brutality and recent return to power, some believe he was assassinated by those unwilling to endure his rule again.
