On Dracula and Vlad the Impaler

Last week, io9 ran an article titled “No, Bram Stoker Did Not Model Dracula On Vlad The Impaler,” which debunks the belief that Stoker’s legendary vampire was based on the notorious Wallachian prince. In fact, in early drafts of the novel, Stoker’s antagonist was apparently named “Count Wampyr.” You can’t make this up.

The historical Dracula

The truth is, there’s no evidence that Bram Stoker was even aware of the name Vlad III—much less that he was called “Vlad the Impaler.” Miller warns that we can’t assume that Stoker’s notes are the end-all, be-all of the creation of Dracula, but they do provide the only factual information we currently have about Stoker’s research. And the notes tell us exactly where Stoker got the name “Dracula.”

While in Whitby in the summer of 1890 (after, it should be noted, his much-discussed dinner with Vambery), Stoker came across a copy of William Wilkinson’s book An Account of the Principalities of Wallachia and Moldavia. We know that, because he copied sections of the book into his notes. Wilkinson’s book contains references to multiple voivodes named Dracula, and some of the sparse details on one such Voivode Dracula make it into Stoker’s text: that he crossed the Danube to attack Turkish troops and had some success. That’s it. There is no reference to a “Vlad,” no mention of a nickname Tepes or “the Impaler,” no detailing of his legendary atrocities.

So why did Stoker choose that name, Dracula? Well, we can infer that from his own notes. He copied information from a footnote from Wilkinson’s book that read in his own notes, “DRACULA in Wallachian language means DEVIL,” with those capital letters. The footnote explained that Wallachians gave the name “Dracula” to people who were especially courageous, cruel, or cunning. Stoker chose the name, it appears, because of its devilish associations, not because of the history and legends attached to its owner.

After reading the article, I tend to agree with its conclusion. There are no explicit references to Vlad III in Stoker’s Dracula, and his novel contains no historical details about the violent conflict with the Ottoman Turks that dominated the story of the historical “Dracula.” That said, I believe storytellers since Stoker have improved on Dracula by making a more direct connection between him and Vlad III.

History and Dracula combined

Coppola improved on the original

But that’s just my view – let me know what you think about the io9 article or whether others have improved on Bram Stoker’s original. And most of all, have a happy Halloween!