Universal horror and world phenomenon: Count Dracula or Vlad III the Impaler. Where did Dracula live?

Arriving in, we discovered that almost all of our ideas about such a popular Romanian character as Vlad Dracula were not at all correct. Having stayed in the country for several days, we also became convinced that even guides often “float” in many issues related to it. Having received a couple of questions after the publication of the Romanian reports regarding the same ambiguities in the story of Dracula, I decided to do a little research and write about what I managed to find out.

Vlad Dracula is the most controversial figure in Romanian history. In terms of fame, among famous Romanians, only the Soviet-era dictator Ceausescu can compete with him, but he is rapidly becoming a thing of the past, while Vlad is still interesting to thousands of people around the world.

There are so many blank spots, assumptions and myths in the history of Vlad that almost no statement about him can be made without the prefixes “according to legend”, “commonly believed” or “allegedly”. Moreover, on top of the crumbs of historical truth, huge layers of fiction, artistic and not so, were layered. In general, the way the personality of Vlad Dracula is now imagined by an ordinary person who is not interested in the history of Romania is so far from the truth that it has even ceased to resemble it. And “the true story of Dracula” is an almost unattainable concept.

So, for starters, the unquestioned facts of the biography of Vlad Dracula.

A Very Brief Biography.

- He was born in 1431, in the city of Sighisoara, in the family of the future Lord of Wallachia, Vlad II from the Besarab clan. He received a good education for that time.
- At the age of 12, together with his brother, he was given as a hostage to the Ottoman Empire. His brother Radu converted to Islam, but Vlad only became embittered, and then hated the Turks all his life.
- After the death of his father, Vlad III was elevated by the Turks to the throne of the ruler of Wallachia but was quickly removed from it with the participation of the Hungarian ruler Janusz Huniyadi. Vlad is forced to flee to Moldova and then to Hungary, where he becomes an adviser to his former enemy Janusz.
- In 1456, he sought the throne for the second time - this time on his own, and for 6 years he ruled Wallachia, pursuing an aggressive anti-Ottoman policy.
- In 1462, on false charges of conspiring with the Turks, Vlad III was arrested and placed under arrest.
- In 1474, Vlad was rehabilitated and in 1476, after the death of his brother Radu III, he returned to the throne of Wallachia.
- His third reign lasted not much more than two months, after which he was killed by an assassin sent by him, and his head was sent to Turkey as proof of his death.
-Almost everything else from the biography of Vlad Dracula is disputed, has several versions or is not known at all..

I won’t try to create a complete historical portrait of Vlad - this would be like a dissertation)). I will try, instead, to simply clarify the issues that caused us the most bewilderment and confused our guides.

Let's start with the simplest thing - the name.

What was Dracula's name?

Everyone knows who Count Dracula is, many remember Vlad the Impaler, some guess that this is, after all, more of a nickname than a real name. But what was his real name and what did it mean? In fact, the confusion begins even before Dracula's birth.

His father, Vlad II, received the nickname Dracul in his homeland for his services in the fight against the Turks, who was accepted into the knightly Order of the Dragon. If you ask a Romanian today to translate this word for you, he will 100% answer “devil, devil.” But Vlad II willingly accepted this nickname, made it his family surname, decorated the walls of churches with it.. This is due to the fact that at that time the Latin roots of the word Dracul were still alive in the Romanian Language. That is, the nickname Dracul was perceived as a derivative of the Latin draco and Vlad II was still a Dragon and not a Devil.

From him Vlad III inherited the nickname Dracula or Dracula (Romanian Drăculea), i.e. diminutive of Dragon, "Son of the Dragon." Subsequently, perhaps due to the reputation of Vlad Dracula, or perhaps simply because the dragon now sounds “balaur” in Romanian, there was a misconception that this nickname originally meant “Devilish”.

The matter does not end there. There is another nickname: Vlad the Impaler - Impaler. This is explained by the “favorite” type of execution that Dracula practiced. He willingly impaled captured Turks and his opponents in his own kingdom. This name, which many seem more “deserved,” paradoxically, in fact, first appeared almost a hundred years after Vlad’s death.

Well, it seems like we’ve sorted out the name! So what about Vlad Dracula's reputation? Was he really such a cruel monster as is commonly believed?

The legendary cruelty of Dracula.

Most of the stories vividly depicting the atrocities of Vlad III are based on several documents written by a certain German author just after the arrest of Dracula by the Hungarian king Matthias Corvinus. At the same time, several pamphlets and engravings on the same topic were published, which became “bestsellers” and were distributed throughout Western Europe. Most likely, this is an example of a “political order” and “black PR” of that time. King Matthias was very interested in tarnishing Vlad's name in order to justify his decision to capture him. After all, the (false) accusations against Dracula were not very convincing: he was accused of colluding with the Ottoman Empire, although he was widely known as a fierce opponent of the Turks. Apparently, this is how Dracula, a literary character, was born for the first time. Over time, stories about his cruelty only became more and more colorful, overgrown with details and intertwined with folklore. In addition, a certain political and geographical distribution of stories about Vlad the Impaler is interesting - in the countries of Western Europe, the dominant motif is Vlad the monster, a maniac enjoying the suffering of his victims, while in Eastern Europe, Romania itself and Russia, the main motif is Vlad the harsh ruler, cruel but fair .

But it cannot be said that all evidence of the cruelty of Vlad III is fiction. The executions of thousands of people are evidenced by documents from the entire period of his reign, including his own letters.
It is known that even in his youth, Vlad Dracula had an explosive, stubborn and rebellious character, which made his stay in Turkish captivity especially difficult. Subsequently, his hatred of the Turks exceeded all reasonable limits. In war, he knew no mercy, he was not embarrassed by any means in achieving his goal. And within the country, in the eternal confrontation with the boyars, who were constantly trying to challenge and limit his power, he showed himself to be a ruler of more than tough character. Perhaps this is why, during his reign, Vlad III was popular among the people and unpopular among the boyars.

Everything related to Dracula's castle is no less confusing.

"Dracula's Castles"

Here you won’t even immediately understand where to start.. Everywhere and everywhere “Dracula’s Castle” (or, even better, “Count Dracula’s Castle”) is called Bran Castle in Transylvania. This is as wrong as anything can be :)

The historical Vlad Dracula did not build this castle, did not live in it, did not storm it... In general, in fact, he had nothing to do with it. According to one version, he spent some time in this castle as a prisoner before being sent to Hungary, but this version is pretty far-fetched, since there is a record that he was arrested in the Oratia fortress nearby, and about his detention in Bran Not a word is written anywhere.

As for the character of Bram Stoker, the literary Count Dracula, he did not live here either. More precisely, there is not a single evidence that Bran was the prototype of the habitat of the Transylvanian Vampire and that Stoker even knew about this castle.

Where did this legend come from? Unclear. Romanian guides suggest that the tourists themselves decided to christen this castle this way. To be honest, it’s not entirely clear why. The castle does not at all resemble an ominous stronghold of a vampire - it is bright and joyful.

So where to look for Dracula's family estate? Let's go in order.
Vlad, as I already wrote, was born in the city of Sighisoara. His father's mansion there is quite impressive, but it doesn't look like a castle.

During his reign, Vlad lived in the city of Targovishte, which was at that time the capital of Wallachia. It is known that he built the Kindia Tower there, but this, of course, is not a castle.

Perhaps the best candidate for the role of Dracula's castle is Poenari Castle. Built long before the birth of Vlad, it was the ancestral castle of the Bessarabians, but was abandoned and destroyed. During his reign, Vlad Dracula ordered the restoration and expansion of the castle, due to its excellent strategic position.
In addition to its historical connection with Vlad, Poenari Castle boasts a local legend, making it even more attractive to Dracula fans.

According to legend, the army of the Turks, led by Vlad’s brother, Radu Bey, who had converted to Islam, was preparing to besiege Poenari Castle, where Vlad Dracula’s love, Justin, was at that time, while he himself was away. Among Radu's entourage was Vlad's former servant, who remained loyal to his old master. He writes a note warning about the approach of the Turkish army, and sends it with an arrow through the window of the princely chambers of the castle. Justina, having read the note and realizing that the castle is surrounded and, in the absence of Vlad and his army, will inevitably be taken, throws herself from the walls of the castle into the river flowing under the slope of the cliff on which the castle stands, preferring death to Turkish captivity. Since then, the river flowing under the walls of Poenari Castle has been called Râul Doamnei, which translates as Princess River.
We see an adaptation of this legend in an episode of the famous film by Francis Ford Coppola “Dracula”.

The last Romanian castle associated with the name of Dracula, Corvin Castle in Hunedoara, brings us to the next topic:

Hungarian captivity of Dracula.

At first glance, everything is clear and understandable here. It is “historically recorded” that in 1462 Vlad III was arrested and placed in the dungeon of Corvinus Castle, and in 1474 he was rehabilitated and in 1476 he assumed the rights of ruler of Wallachia for the third time. Without any doubt in their words, the guides of the Corvin Castle say, pointing to the eerie casemate in the basement of the castle: “The famous Vlad Dracula spent 12 years in captivity here.”

When I began to study this issue, I was immediately confused by another “historically recorded” fact: around 1465, Vlad married the cousin of the Hungarian king.. It’s unlikely that it’s right in this cell?

Continuing my search on the Internet, I was able to piece together something like this:
In 1462, Vlad was indeed arrested near the Oratia fortress on false charges of conspiring with the Turks. For Matthias Corvinus, this was a “necessary” political step: shortly before this, he received money from the Papal See for a crusade against the Turks, but squandered the funds for other purposes. A “scapegoat” was urgently needed, and Vlad, losing in the war to the Ottoman Empire, and planning to ask for help from the Hungarian king, became the best candidate..

But from Oratia it was transported not to Corvinus, but to Visegrad, in Hungary. As a high-ranking prisoner, he was kept in Visegrad Castle under "house arrest" rather than in prison. For the winter he moved to the capital of Hungary, returning back in the summer. Vlad quickly won the favor of Matthias Corwin. It was not so difficult: Vlad’s pro-Ottoman brother, Radu III, reigned in Wallachia, the Turks continued to press on the Hungarian and Moldavian borders, in addition, Vlad still had political supporters. Dracula soon got married, further strengthening his position, had two children and, as a result, finally moved to Budapest. In general, apparently, this was the calmest and most stable period of his life. And Corwin Castle, it seems, has no place at all in the real story of Dracula...

Portrait of Dracula.

The only portrait made during his lifetime dates back to the time of Vlad’s captivity (the original has not survived), which later became the model for all other existing images of him. The most popular oil portrait was made many years after Vlad's death and does not accurately resemble the original. For unknown reasons, the artist gave Vlad here the hereditary features of the Habsburgs.

But, speaking of the portrait of Dracula, I rather want to paint a portrait of his personality, rather than his appearance.

So, what portrait of Dracula's personality emerges as a result? He is in no way similar to that gloomy man-beast who spent two-thirds of his life in a cage and went berserk during his short reign and was nicknamed the “Son of the Devil”, whom medieval “historians” painted for posterity.

“Son of the Dragon” is a sharp, energetic man, a talented commander, a flexible, charismatic politician; while heading a not at all large state, he resisted the onslaught of the huge Ottoman Empire all his life. Forced to take advantage of any help offered, even by the murderers of his own family, he restores his principality, devastated by the war. Of course, not a saint, he does not miss the opportunity to take cruel revenge on the Turks, who crippled his youth and took his brother away from him, and on his enemies among the nobility of his own country, as a result of whose conspiracy his father was killed and his elder brother was buried alive. He himself is betrayed again and again by his own allies and neighbors, but he does not give up, until the last, striving for his goal, until the killer’s hand manages to reach him from behind.
Such a person really deserves to become a literary character! But fate decreed otherwise...

Dracula the vampire.

The legend of "Nosferatu", Dracula the Vampire, of course, was created by Bram Stoker, writing his novel, which became so popular. The names of the legendary count and the ancient Wallachian prince coincide, of course, not by chance. Bram Stoker's diaries mention a book by William Wilkinson, a British diplomat in Eastern Europe, in which he could find a mention of Vlad Dracula. Stoker could also learn about Romanian legends in which the walking dead are present from his friend, Hungarian professor Armin Vambery. This guess is confirmed by the fact that in the novel, Dr. Abraham Van Helsing says that the source of his information about Count Dracula is Professor Arminius. The novel also has some parallels with the real biography of Vlad: his participation in the war with the Turks is emphasized and even a brother is mentioned who betrayed him and went over to the side of the enemy.
In his book, Stoker combined the name Dracula with the motif of vampirism, drawn from the Gothic novels of the time and perhaps from Eastern European fairy tales, in which vampires, werewolves, ghosts, specters and similar evil spirits abound.
So Dracula became the hero of a bestseller for the second time :)

Francis Ford Coppola (or rather his screenwriter) certainly did excellent preparatory work before filming began on Bram Stoker's Dracula. In addition to the excellent adaptation of the novel, we see added elements that tie the action even more tightly to the historical landscape. Firstly, in the film we see a presentation of the already mentioned legend about the death of Vlad’s wife, whose name is even consonant - Mina, and secondly, the “Order of the Dragon, founded by Count Dracula” is mentioned.

Order of the Dragon.

Such an order actually existed, but its founder was neither Dracula nor even his father, Vlad II, but the king of the Holy Roman Empire, Sigismund. The order had as its goal to fight the enemies of Christianity, in particular the Ottoman Empire. Vlad's father was accepted into the Knights of the Order of the Dragon for his services in the war against the Turks, thus receiving his nickname Dracul, founding the Drăculeşti dynasty and bequeathing to his son the name Dracula, which means "Son of the Dragon".
The symbol of the order was a dragon curled into a ring against the background of a cross. They say that this coat of arms is depicted by order of Vlad II on the walls of several churches in Romania, although we were not able to see any during our visit.

According to some reports, Vlad Dracula, at the age of five, was also accepted into this order, although this is doubtful. The fact is that in 1436, just when Vlad Dracula turned 5 years old, his father was officially deleted from the list of members of the Order of the Dragon because, having broken under the pressure of the Ottoman Empire, he recognized the power of the Sultan over himself and was forced into as a guide, take part in the invasion of Transylvania.. However, after the death of Sigismund in 1437, the order quickly lost its influence.

Descendants of Dracula.

And in this “simple” question, not everything is as simple as it could be :) According to various sources, Vlad had two or three wives, who bore him three or four sons and, possibly, a daughter. Apparently, one of his wives was not married to him and one of his sons was illegitimate, which causes confusion in the sources.
In any case, the Dracula line did not end with Vlad III. The Draculesti continued to live and rule in Wallachia until 1600, the year of Wallachia's reunification with Transylvania and Moldavia.
And now, among his distant descendants, one can name even such famous people as Queen Elizabeth II of Great Britain.

Although the descendants of Dracula are alive, there are no direct descendants of this family. Among the Transylvanian peaks, an old man who calls himself the last descendant of the famous governor Vlad does not live in a lonely castle, and if he does, we could not find him, but maybe one of the future guests of Romania will be lucky? :)

All illustrations in this post were found on the Internet and belong to their authors.

In 2003, the magazine Skiing(No. 6, pp. 44-45, 2003) published my article about ski Romania under the unusual title “Our skiers are not afraid of Dracula.” It seemed to me that before publishing with such a title, some clarifications and additions are needed, especially since serious controversy has recently flared up around Dracula’s castle.

In black and white photographs of Dracula's castle, I see more mysticism, and they better convey the atmosphere of mystery that surrounds this castle. This is how Bram Stoker described it more than 100 years ago.

“The castle stood on the edge of a mighty cliff. From three directions it was impregnable. A huge valley stretched to the west, and beyond it the jagged mountain range could be seen in the distance. Sheer cliffs, overgrown with mountain ash and thorny bushes that clung to every notch, crack and crevice in the stone. Wide windows were placed so that neither an arrow, nor a stone, nor a cannonball could reach them, that is, so that the rooms were as light and comfortable as possible for a place that had to be directly defended.”

Nothing has changed during this time. The ominous Bran Castle appeared before us exactly as Stoker described it.

Bran Castle, better known as Count Dracula's Castle, was built in 1377 by the Knights of the Teutonic Order to defend against attacks by the Ottoman Empire, and later became the main defensive fortress through which the Austro-Hungarian Empire defended Transylvania.

Bran Castle gained fame after Bram Stoker wrote his famous novel Dracula, where the main character is Count Dracula, also known as the “Vampire of Transylvania”. In reality, Stoker's character never existed either in history or in Romanian folklore.

Dracula was largely based on a dark figure in Romanian history: Count Vlad the Impaler.

In the mid-15th century, he ruled Wallachia, the region that is today Romania. Although he was never accused of vampirism, he was known for his notoriety. Vlad Tepes lived from 1431 to 1476. Almost everything connected with the activities of this person is shrouded in mystery. The place and time of his birth have not been established at all. Wallachia was not the most peaceful corner of medieval Europe. Vlad the Impaler was an Orthodox autocratic prince of Wallachia. Having become the ruler, he established his own rules in his state. First of all, Tepes dealt with the boyars who were unfaithful to him, whom he punished with a terrible execution - impalement. Tepes was the first to use this type of execution in Europe, borrowing it from the Turks, for which he received his nickname “The Impaler.” Vlad Tepes received the name “Dracul” from his father, but the ending “a” was added to the name, and therefore in history he is known either as Vlad Tepes or Vlad Dracula.

Let us also note that Lord Tepes spent only one night in the legendary castle. The rest was done by workers in the local tourism industry.

Bran Castle was nicknamed "Dracula's Castle" three decades ago by Western tourists who came to Romania in search of Dracula. Having visited a castle in Transylvania, they were struck by its resemblance to the castle that Stoker described in his novel, so they nicknamed it “Dracula’s Castle.” Unfortunately (or fortunately, this is debatable), over time, the connection between Stoker's novel and the castle became firmly ingrained in people's minds.

The territory of the castle resembles a circle in shape, behind the wide walls there is an abyss. The air temperature inside the castle itself does not exceed 15 degrees all year round. And in order to move from floor to floor, you need to climb the mountain at an angle of 60 degrees.

In each room there is a bear skin on the floor; it supposedly covers the entrances to the underground passages. One of the rooms was set aside by Vlad the Impaler for torture. There are even special excursion routes to this part of the castle.

In the 20s of the 20th century, the castle was presented to Queen Maria of Romania, and then it was inherited by Princess Ileana von Hohenzollern, mother of Archduke Dominique von Habsburg. In 1950, the castle was expropriated by the communist government and became a national treasure. Only in May last year it was returned to von Habsburg, who now lives in the United States.

The Romanian tourist mecca, the castle of Count Vlad the Impaler, is now up for sale. Its current owner, designer Dominik von Habsburg, is asking $77 million for it.

One of the contenders for the purchase of the castle is Russian oligarch Roman Abramovich. He is ready to invest money not only in the restoration and maintenance of the castle, but also in the construction of a tourist area, which, according to the plan, should turn this castle into an amusement park, reports La Stampa newspaper (translation published by Inopressa).

A lawyer for the Habsburg family recently reported that the current owner of the castle intends to complete the deal within a week and receive 60 million euros ($78 million), while the Bucharest government has offered 25 million euros for the castle. However, it can already be assumed that Abramovich’s proposal will force the Romanian government to abandon the deal.

Count Dracula is one of the most popular media characters. However, few know that the ruler of Wallachia, Vlad the Impaler, who bore this nickname, did not at all resemble the image that has been replicated by mass culture for more than a hundred years.

Wallachian Grozny

“The look of his eyes is lightning, the sound of his speech is heavenly thunder, the outburst of his anger is death and torture; but through all this, like lightning through the clouds, the greatness of a fallen, humiliated, distorted, but strong and noble in nature spirit shines through.”

This is what Belinsky wrote about the Russian Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich, but such a description would be quite suitable for another formidable ruler - the Wallachian ruler Vlad III the Impaler, who lived a century earlier. There is much more in common between these two rulers than might seem at first glance. Both belonged to the Orthodox faith and spoke Church Slavonic. Both lost their parents early and, despite their high rank, were subjected to oppression in childhood and adolescence. Both were among the most educated people of their era. And, finally, both demonstrate an example of how a vivid folklore and literary image almost completely replaces a real person, ultimately having very little in common with historical reality.

The Birth of Fiction

At the end of the 15th century, a unique monument of secular literature was created in the Old Russian language - the small “Tale of the Mutyansky [Romanian] governor Dracula.” The entire text, in fact, is a chain of short stories demonstrating one or another example of the cruelty of the ruler, prohibitive even by the standards of the late Middle Ages, which were not distinguished by humanism.

Let's say, once Dracula, having lost a battle with the Hungarian king, was captured and thrown into prison for 12 years (a real historical fact). However, the Tale says, even in captivity, the governor “did not abandon the evil custom, but caught mice and birds, and executed them in this way: he impaled some, cut off the heads of others, and released others after plucking their feathers.”

The problem with The Tale of Dracula is that this most interesting work was written about 10 years after the death of Vlad III, who died in 1476.

However, whether Kuritsyn was in neighboring Transylvania and Wallachia, where Tepes lived and reigned, is not known for sure. Moreover, in the “Tale” the date and place of the commission of the described atrocities are almost never mentioned; in form and content it is more of a journalistic article than a historical chronicle. At the same time, to write his “Tale,” Kuritsyn partially used an anonymous pamphlet about the alleged cruelties of Dracula, written by order of the Hungarian king in 1463.

Why did the Hungarians need to discredit their neighbor? We'll talk about this further.

Three names

So, Vlad III was born under the dynastic surname Basarab (from which, by the way, the name of Bessarabia, one of the regions of medieval Romania, comes). It is not known exactly when exactly, but it is believed to be around 1430.

The nickname "Dracul", or "Dracula", which he bore during his lifetime, can be translated respectively as "Dragon" or "Son of the Dragon".

Vlad's father (and, perhaps, Vlad himself) was a member of the knightly Order of St. George, whose adherents wore on their clothes images of the serpent defeated by their patron saint.

According to one version, among the founders of this order was the Serbian hero Milos Obilic, who fell in the battle with the Turks on Kosovo. The task of the order - the only Orthodox spiritual-knightly order of the Middle Ages - was to defend the Orthodox faith. Thus, it can be assumed that one of the motives for denigrating Dracula was his activity in this field - as we will see later, very significant.

Finally, the third name - Tepes, meaning “Impaler” - began to be widely used by Europeans only 30 years after the death of the governor (and, as we see, during his life, ordinary people, it turns out, did not even know that their ruler was a torturer and tyrant ).

Having come to power in 1456, Vlad dealt with the Wallachian boyars responsible for the conspiracy that led to the death of his father and older brother. The number of people impaled was about 10 (in words: ten) people. Actually, these are the only historically confirmed victims of Tepes from among his own subjects.

Legends, however, say otherwise. Allegedly, the ruler and his courtiers often dined under impaled corpses (let me remind you that the authenticity of this story remains solely on the conscience of the author of the already mentioned “The Tale of Dracula”). One day Tepes’s servant could not bear the stench emanating from the rotting bodies, and then the despot ordered him to be impaled on the highest stake, saying: “The stench will not reach you there.”

But seriously, upon ascending the throne, Vlad III began to centralize the state, created a militia of free peasants to fight the Ottomans and Hungarians, and stopped paying tribute to the Turkish Sultan. In 1462, he forced the army of Mehmed II himself, who had invaded Wallachia, to retreat. According to legend, having gone only a few miles into the territory of the principality, the army of the recent conqueror of Constantinople turned back in fear: all these few miles along the road there were stakes with impaled Turks.

The Age of Popular Culture

The Wallachian ruler found a rebirth in 1897, with the publication of Bram Stoker’s Gothic novel “Dracula,” which later became a cult work of mass culture.

Allegedly, Count Dracula, cursed by one of his countless victims, rose from the grave after death, reborn as a vampire.

The real Tepes, of course, was not any count; Stoker added the sonorous title for the sake of gothic beauty. His hero is cruel and bloodthirsty, however, as befits an infernal aristocrat, he is not devoid of noble romantic traits.

But no matter how the image of Dracula is transformed, we should pay tribute to modern Romanians, who turned his bloody deeds not into a national tragedy, but into a highly profitable tourism business. Today, in every second castle in Transylvania, you will be told chilling stories from the life of Tepes, who drank the blood of innocent victims almost right in this tower. And no one is embarrassed that this castle was built one hundred or two hundred years after the death of the great ruler.

Over the course of several centuries, the figure of the most famous vampire in the world has become overgrown with a layer of various myths, true and not so true, and our task today is to understand the mysterious appearance of the ominous prince. He is associated with a national hero who fought for justice, a cruel and bloody ruler who knew no mercy, and the well-known image from books and films depicts in the imagination a legendary bloodsucker consumed by passions. For many who followed the popular film adaptations, the blood ran cold from the atmosphere conveying horror, and the vampire theme, shrouded in a flair of mystery and romance, became one of the main ones in cinema and literature.

The birth of a tyrant and murderer

So, the story of Vlad Dracula began at the end of 1431 in Transylvania, when a son was born to the heroic commander Basarab the Great, who famously fought against the Turks. It must be said that this was far from the most beautiful baby, and it is with his repulsive appearance that some historians associate a pathological manifestation of cruelty. The boy, possessing incredible physical strength, with a protruding lower lip and cold, bulging eyes, had unique properties: it was believed that he saw right through people.

The young man, whose biography was full of such terrible stories, after which he even lost his mind, was considered an unbalanced person with many strange ideas. From childhood, his father taught little Vlad to wield weapons, and his fame as a cavalryman literally thundered throughout the country. He swam perfectly, because in those days there were no bridges, and therefore he constantly had to swim across the water.

Order of the Dragon

Vlad II Dracul, who belonged to the elite Draco with strict military-monastic orders, wore a medallion on his chest, like all his other members, as a sign of his membership in society. But he decided not to stop there. At his instigation, images of a mythical fire-breathing animal appeared on the walls of all churches and on coins circulating in the country. The prince received the nickname Dracul, who converts infidels to Christianity, in the order. It translated from Romanian meant “dragon”.

Compromise solutions

The ruler of Wallachia - a small state located between the Ottoman Empire and Transylvania - was always ready for attacks from the Turks, but tried to compromise with the Sultan. So, in order to maintain the state status of his country, Vlad’s father paid a huge tribute in timber and silver. At that time, all princes had duties - to send their sons as hostages to the Turks, and if uprisings broke out against the dominance of the conquerors, then inevitable death awaited the children. It is known that Vlad II Dracul sent two sons to the Sultan, where for more than 4 years they were held in voluntary captivity, which meant the guarantee of a fragile peace, so necessary for a small state.

They say that the fact of being away from his family for a long time and the terrible executions that the future tyrant witnessed left a special emotional imprint on him, which was reflected in his already shattered psyche. Living at the Sultan's court, the boy saw a manifestation of cruelty towards everyone who was obstinate and opposed to power.

It was in captivity that Vlad III Tepes learned about the murder of his father and older brother, after which he received freedom and the throne, but after several months he fled to Moldova, fearing for his life.

Cruelty coming from childhood

Historical chronicles know of an incident when a rebellion was raised in one principality, and in retaliation for this, the ruler’s offspring, who were held hostage, were blinded. For stealing food, the Turks had their bellies ripped open, and for the slightest offense they were impaled. Young Vlad, who was repeatedly forced to renounce Christianity under threat of death, watched such terrible sights for 4 years. It is possible that daily rivers of blood influenced the young man’s unstable psyche. It is believed that life in captivity was the very impetus that contributed to the emergence of bestial cruelty towards all disobedient people.

Vlad's nicknames

Born into the dynasty from which Bessarabia (ancient Romania) was later named, Vlad the Impaler is referred to in documents as Basarab.

But where did he get the nickname Dracula - opinions differ. There are two known versions explaining where the sovereign’s son got this name. The first says that the young heir had the same name as his father, but he began to add the letter “a” at the end to the inherited nickname.

The second version says that the word “Dracul” is translated not only as “dragon”, but also as “devil”. And this is what Vlad, known for his incredible cruelty, was called by his enemies and intimidated local residents. Over time, the letter “a” was added to the nickname Dracul for ease of pronunciation at the end of the word. A few decades after his death, the ruthless killer Vlad III received another nickname - Tepes, which was translated from Romanian as “impaler” (Vlad Tepes).

Reign of the merciless Tepes

The year 1456 marks the beginning of not only the short reign of Dracula in Wallachia, but also very difficult times for the country as a whole. Vlad, who was particularly ruthless, was cruel to his enemies and punished his subjects for any disobedience. All the guilty died a terrible death - they were impaled, which differed in length and size: low murder weapons were chosen for commoners, and executed boyars were visible from afar.

As ancient legends say, the prince of Wallachia had a special love for the groans of those in agony and even held feasts in places where the unfortunate suffered incredible torment. And the ruler’s appetite only intensified from the smell of decaying bodies and the cries of the dying.

He was never a vampire and did not drink the blood of his victims, but it is known for certain that he was an obvious sadist who enjoyed watching the suffering of those who did not obey his rules. Often executions were of a political nature; the slightest disrespect was followed by retaliatory measures leading to death. For example, the infidels who did not remove their turbans and arrived at the prince’s court were killed in a very unusual way - by driving nails into their heads.

The Lord, who did a lot to unify the country

Although, as some historians say, the deaths of only 10 boyars are documented, as a result of whose conspiracy Dracula’s father and his older brother were killed. But legends call a huge number of his victims - about 100 thousand.

If the legendary ruler is considered from the point of view of a statesman, whose good intentions to liberate his native country from the Turkish invaders were fully supported, then we can confidently say that he acted based on the principles of honor and national duty. Refusing to pay the traditional tribute, Vlad III Basarab creates from among the peasants who forces the Turkish warriors to retreat, who have arrived to deal with the disobedient ruler and his country. And all the prisoners were executed during the city holiday.

Fierce religious fanatic

Being an extremely religious person, Tepes fanatically helped the monasteries, donating land to them. Having found reliable support in the person of the clergy, the bloody ruler acted very far-sightedly: the people were silent and obeyed, because virtually all his actions were sanctified by the church. It is difficult to even imagine how many prayers for lost souls were offered to the Lord every day, but the grief did not result in a fierce struggle against the bloody tyrant.

And what is surprising is that his enormous piety was combined with incredible ferocity. Wanting to build a fortress for himself, the cruel executioner gathered all the pilgrims who came to celebrate the great holiday of Easter, and forced them to work for several years until their clothes decayed.

The policy of cleansing the country of antisocial elements

In a short time it eradicates crime, and historical chronicles tell that gold coins left on the street continued to remain in the very place where they were thrown. Not a single beggar or tramp, of whom there were very many in those troubled times, dared even to touch wealth.

Consistent in all his endeavors, the ruler of Wallachia begins to implement his plan to cleanse the country of all thieves. This policy, as a result of which everyone who dared to steal faced a quick trial and painful death, bore fruit. After thousands of deaths at the stake or the chopping block, there were no people willing to take what belonged to others, and the unprecedented honesty of the population in the middle of the 15th century became a phenomenon that had no analogues in the entire history of the world.

Order in the country through brutal methods

Mass executions, which have already become commonplace, are the surest way to gain fame and remain in the memory of posterity. It is known that Vlad III Tepes did not like gypsies, famous horse thieves and slackers, and to this day it is in the camps that he is called a mass murderer who exterminated a huge number of nomadic people.

It should be noted that everyone who incurred the wrath of the ruler died a terrible death, regardless of their position in society or nationality. When Tepes learned that some merchants, despite the strictest ban, had established trade relations with the Turks, as a warning to everyone else, he impaled them on a huge market square. After this, there were no people willing to improve their financial situation at the expense of the enemies of the Christian faith.

War with Transylvania

But not only the Turkish Sultan was dissatisfied with the ambitious ruler; the power of Dracula, who did not tolerate defeat, began to be threatened by the merchants of Transylvania. The rich did not want to see such an unbridled and unpredictable prince on the throne. They wanted to place their favorite on the throne - the Hungarian king, who would not provoke the Turks, exposing all neighboring lands to danger. Nobody needed the long battle between Wallachia and the Sultan’s troops, and Transylvania did not want to engage in an unnecessary duel, which would have been inevitable in the event of hostilities.

Vlad Dracula, having learned about the plans of a neighboring country, and even conducting trade with the Turks, which was prohibited on its territory, became extremely angry and struck an unexpected blow. The army of the bloody ruler burned the Transylvanian lands, and local residents with social weight were impaled.

Tepes' 12-year imprisonment

This story ended pitifully for the tyrant himself. Outraged by the cruelty, the surviving merchants turned to a last resort - a proclamation for the overthrow of Tepes by means of the printed word. Anonymous authors wrote a pamphlet describing the ruler’s mercilessness, and added a little of their own about the plans of the bloody conqueror.

Count Vlad Dracula, not expecting a new attack, is caught by surprise by Turkish troops in the very castle that the unfortunate pilgrims built for him. By chance, he flees from the fortress, leaving his young wife and all his subjects to certain death. Outraged by the atrocities of the ruler, the European elite was just waiting for this moment, and the fugitive was taken into custody by the Hungarian king, who laid claim to his throne.

Death of the Bloody Prince

Tepes spends 12 long years in prison and even becomes a Catholic for his political reasons. Mistaking the tyrant's forced obedience for submission, the king frees him and even tries to help him ascend to his former throne. 20 years after the start of his reign, Vlad returns to Wallachia, where angry residents are already waiting for him. accompanying the prince was defeated, and the king, not intending to fight with his neighbors, decides to hand over the tyrant to the state that suffered from his atrocities. Having learned about this decision, Dracula runs again, hoping for a lucky break.

However, fortune turned away from him completely, and the tyrant accepted death in battle, but the circumstances of his death are not known. The boyars, in a fit of anger, chopped the body of the hated ruler into pieces, and sent his head to the Turkish Sultan. The monks who remember the good, who supported the bloody tyrant in everything, quietly bury his remains.

When, several centuries later, archaeologists became interested in the figure of Dracula, they decided to open his grave. To everyone's horror, it turned out to be empty, with traces of garbage. But nearby they find a strange burial of bones with a missing skull, which is considered to be the last resting place of Tepes. To prevent the pilgrimage of modern tourists, the authorities moved the bones to one of the islands guarded by monks.

The birth of a legend about a vampire looking for new victims

After the death of the Wallachian sovereign, a legend was born about a vampire who found no shelter either in heaven or in hell. Local residents believe that the spirit of the prince has taken on a new, no less terrible guise and now prowls at night in search of human blood.

In 1897, Bram Stoker’s mystical novel was published, describing Dracula rising from the dead, after which the bloodthirsty ruler began to be associated with a vampire. The writer used real letters from Vlad, preserved in the chronicles, but a large amount of the material was still made up. Dracula appears no less merciless than his prototype, but aristocratic manners and a certain nobility make the Gothic character a real hero, whose popularity is only growing.

The book is considered a symbiosis of science fiction and a horror novel, in which ancient mystical forces and modern realities are closely intertwined. As the researchers say, the conductor's memorable appearance served as inspiration for creating the image of the main character, and many details were borrowed from Mephistopheles. Stoker clearly indicates that Count Dracula receives his magical powers from the devil himself. Vlad Tepes, who has turned into a monster, does not die and does not rise from the grave, as was described in early novels about vampires. The author makes his character a unique hero, crawling along vertical walls and turning into a bat, always symbolizing evil spirits. Later, this little animal will be called a vampire, although it does not drink any blood.

Credibility effect

The writer, who has carefully studied Romanian folklore and historical evidence, creates unique material in which there is no author's narration. The book is only a documentary chronicle, consisting of diaries, transcripts of the main characters, which only enhances the depth of the narrative. Creating the effect of genuine reality, Bram Stoker's Dracula soon becomes the unofficial bible of vampires, which details the rules of a world alien to us. And the carefully drawn images of the characters appear alive and emotional. The book is considered to be innovative art, executed in an original format.

Film adaptations

Soon the book will be filmed, and the first actor to play Dracula will be a friend of the writer. His Vlad the Impaler is a vampire with noble manners and good looks, although Stoker described him as an unpleasant old man. Since then, the romantic image of a handsome young man has been exploited, against whom the heroes unite in a single impulse to save the world from universal evil.

In 1992, director Coppola filmed the book, inviting famous actors to play the main roles, and Dracula himself played superbly. Before filming began, the director forced everyone to read Stoker’s book for 2 days for maximum immersion in the characters. Coppola used various techniques to make the film, like the book, as realistic as possible. He even filmed footage of Dracula's appearance on a black and white camera, which looked very authentic and frightening. Critics felt that the vampire played by Oldman was as close as possible to Vlad the Impaler, even his makeup resembled a real prototype.

Dracula's castle is for sale

A year ago, the public was shocked by the news that a popular tourist attraction in Romania was being put up for sale. Bran, in which Tepes supposedly spent the night during his military campaigns, is being sold by its new owner for fabulous money. The local authorities once wanted to buy Dracula's Castle, but now the world-famous place, bringing fabulous profits, is awaiting a new owner.

According to researchers, Dracula never stopped in this place, considered a cult place for all fans of vampire works, although local residents will vie with each other to tell chilling legends about the life of the legendary ruler in this fortress.

The castle, described in great detail by Stoker, only became the setting for a horror novel that has nothing to do with ancient Romanian history. The current owner of the castle refers to his advanced age, which does not allow him to conduct business. He believes that all costs will be repaid in full, because the castle is visited by about 500 thousand tourists.

A real bonanza

Modern Romania makes full use of the image of Dracula, attracting numerous tourist flows. Here they will tell about the ancient castles in which Vlad III the Impaler committed bloody atrocities, even despite the fact that they were built much later than his death. The highly profitable business, based on the unrelenting interest in the mysterious figure of the ruler of Wallachia, provides an influx of members of sects for which Dracula is the spiritual leader. Thousands of his fans make pilgrimages to the places where he was born to breathe the same air.

Few people know the true story of Tepes, taking on faith the image of the vampire created by Stoker and numerous directors. But the history of the bloody ruler, who did not disdain anything to achieve his goal, begins to be forgotten over time. And with the name Dracula, only a bloodthirsty ghoul comes to mind, which is very sad, because the fantastic image has nothing in common with the real tragic personality and the terrible crimes that Tepes committed.

March 18th, 2017

“Once upon a time there lived a bloodthirsty prince Dracula. He impaled people, roasted them over coals, boiled their heads in a cauldron, skinned them alive, cut them into pieces and drank their blood…” said Abraham Van Helsing, leafing through a book about the lifetime crimes of a formidable vampire. Many remember this episode from F. Coppola’s film, based on Bram Stoker’s novel “Dracula,” and, perhaps, it was from this film that they learned that Dracula was not a fictional character.

The famous vampire has a prototype - Prince of Wallachia Vlad Dracula Tepes (Tepes - from the Romanian tepea - stake, literally - Piercer, Impaler), who ruled this Romanian principality in the middle of the 15th century. And indeed, this man is still called the “great monster” to this day, eclipsing Herod and Nero with his atrocities.

You probably already know all the details of this historical fiction figure inside and out? Let's just summarize what is known.

Let's leave it to Stoker's conscience that he "turned" a real historical figure into a mythical monster, and let's try to figure out how justified the accusations of cruelty are and whether Dracula committed all those atrocities, in comparison with which the vampire's addiction to the blood of young girls seems like innocent fun. The actions of the prince, widely replicated in literary works of the 15th century, are truly blood-chilling. A terrible impression is made by the stories about how Dracula loved to feast, watching the torment of his impaled victims, how he burned vagabonds whom he himself invited to the feast, how he ordered nails to be driven into the heads of foreign ambassadors who had not taken off their hats, and so on, so on... In In the imagination of the reader, who first learned about the atrocities of this medieval ruler, the image of a fierce, ruthless man with a caustic look of unkind eyes, reflecting the black essence of the villain, appears. This image is quite consistent with German book engravings, which depicted the features of a tyrant, but the engravings appeared after Vlad’s death.

But those who happen to see the lifetime portrait of Dracula, practically unknown in Russia, will be disappointed - the man depicted on the canvas clearly does not look like a bloodthirsty sadist and maniac. A small experiment showed: people who did not know who exactly was depicted on the canvas often called the “unknown” beautiful, unfortunate... Let’s try for a moment to forget about the reputation of the “great monster” and look at the portrait of Dracula with an unbiased eye. First of all, Vlad’s large, suffering eyes attract attention. What’s also striking is the unnatural thinness of his emaciated, yellowish face. Looking at the portrait, one can assume that this man has suffered severe trials and hardships, that he is more of a martyr than an executioner...

Clickable 1800 px

Vlad led Wallachia at the age of twenty-five, in 1456, during very difficult times for the principality, when the Ottoman Empire was expanding its possessions in the Balkans, capturing one country after another. Serbia and Bulgaria had already fallen under Turkish oppression, Constantinople had fallen, and a direct threat loomed over the Romanian principalities.

The prince of little Wallachia successfully resisted the aggressor and even attacked the Turks himself, making a campaign into the territory of occupied Bulgaria in 1458. One of the goals of the campaign was to free and resettle the Bulgarian peasants who professed Orthodoxy on the lands of Wallachia. Europe enthusiastically welcomed Dracula's victory. Nevertheless, a major war with Turkey was inevitable. Wallachia prevented the expansion of the Ottoman Empire, and Sultan Mehmed II decided to overthrow the unwanted prince by military means.

Dracula's younger brother Radu the Handsome, who converted to Islam and became the Sultan's favorite, claimed the throne of Wallachia. Realizing that he could not alone withstand the largest Turkish army since the conquest of Constantinople, Dracula turned to his allies for help. Among them were Pope Pius II, who promised to give money for the crusade, and the young Hungarian king Matthias Corvinus, who called Vlad “a beloved and faithful friend,” and the leaders of other Christian countries. All of them verbally supported the Wallachian prince, however, when trouble struck in the summer of 1462, Dracula was left alone with a formidable enemy.

The situation was desperate, and Vlad did everything possible to survive this unequal battle. He drafted into the army the entire male population of the principality starting from the age of twelve, used scorched earth tactics, leaving the enemy burned villages where it was impossible to replenish food supplies, and waged a guerrilla war. Another weapon of the prince was the panic that he instilled in the invaders. Defending his land, Dracula mercilessly exterminated his enemies, in particular, impaled prisoners, using execution against the Turks, which was very “popular” in the Ottoman Empire itself.

The Turkish-Wallachian War of the summer of 1462 went down in history with the famous night attack, during which it was possible to destroy up to fifteen thousand Ottomans. The Sultan was already standing near the capital of the principality of Targovishte when Dracula, along with seven thousand of his warriors, penetrated into the enemy camp, intending to kill the Turkish leader and thereby stop the aggression. Vlad failed to fully implement his daring plan, but an unexpected night attack caused panic in the enemy camp and, as a result, very heavy losses. After the bloody night, Mehmed II left Wallachia, leaving part of the troops to Radu the Handsome, who himself had to wrest power from the hands of his elder brother. Dracula's brilliant victory over the Sultan's troops turned out to be useless: Vlad defeated the enemy, but could not resist his “friends.” The betrayal of the Moldavian prince Stefan, Dracula's cousin and friend, who unexpectedly went over to Radu's side, turned out to be a turning point in the war. Dracula could not fight on two fronts and retreated to Transylvania, where the troops of another “friend”, the Hungarian king Matthias Corvinus, were waiting for him to come to his aid.

And then something strange happened. In the midst of negotiations, Corwin ordered the arrest of his “faithful and beloved friend,” accusing him of secret correspondence with Turkey. In letters allegedly intercepted by the Hungarians, Dracula begged Mehmed II for forgiveness and offered his assistance in capturing Hungary and the Hungarian king himself. Most modern historians consider the letters to be crudely fabricated forgeries: they are written in a manner unusual for Dracula, the proposals put forward in them are absurd, but most importantly - the originals of the letters, these most important pieces of evidence that decided the fate of the prince, were “lost”, and only their copies in Latin have survived , given in the “Notes” of Pius II. Naturally, they did not bear Dracula's signature. Nevertheless, Vlad was arrested at the end of November 1462, put in chains and sent to the Hungarian capital Buda, where he was imprisoned without trial for about twelve years.

What made Matthias agree with the absurd accusations and brutally deal with his ally, who at one time helped him ascend the Hungarian throne? The reason turned out to be banal. According to the author of the Hungarian Chronicle, Antonio Bonfini, Matthias Corvinus received forty thousand guilders from Pope Pius II to carry out the crusade, but did not use this money for its intended purpose. In other words, the king, who was constantly in need of money, simply pocketed a significant amount and shifted the blame for the disrupted campaign onto his vassal, who allegedly played a double game and intrigued with the Turks.

However, accusations of treason against a man known in Europe for his irreconcilable struggle with the Ottoman Empire, the one who almost killed and actually put to flight the conqueror of Constantinople Mehmed II, sounded quite absurd. Wanting to understand what really happened, Pius II instructed his envoy in Buda, Nicholas Modrussa, to understand what was happening on the spot.

King of Hungary Matthias Corvinus. The youngest son of Janos Hunyadi liked to be depicted in the manner of a Roman emperor, with a laurel wreath on his head. He was considered the patron of science and art. During the reign of Matthias, the expenses of his court increased sharply, and the king sought ways to replenish the treasury - from increasing taxes to using money transferred by the Vatican for the crusades. The prince was accused of the cruelty he allegedly showed towards the Saxon population of Transylvania, which was part of the Hungarian kingdom. Matthias Corvinus personally spoke about the atrocities of his vassal, and then presented an anonymous document in which he reported in detail, with German punctuality, the bloody adventures of the “great monster.”

The denunciation spoke of tens of thousands of tortured civilians and for the first time mentioned anecdotes about beggars being burned alive, monks impaled, how Dracula ordered the caps of foreign ambassadors to be nailed to the heads, and other similar stories. An unknown author compared the Wallachian prince with the tyrants of antiquity, claiming that during his reign Wallachia resembled “a forest of impaled people,” accused Vlad of unprecedented cruelty, but at the same time did not care at all about the verisimilitude of his story. There are a lot of contradictions in the text of the denunciation, for example, the names of settlements given in the document, where 20-30 thousand (!) people were allegedly killed, still cannot be identified by historians.

What served as the documentary basis for this denunciation? We know that Dracula actually made several raids into Transylvania, destroying the conspirators hiding there, among whom were contenders for the Wallachian throne. But, despite these local military operations, the prince did not interrupt commercial relations with the Transylvanian Saxon cities of Sibiu and Brasov, as confirmed by Dracula's business correspondence from that period. It is very important to note that, apart from the denunciation that appeared in 1462, there is not a single earlier evidence of the massacres of civilians in Transylvania in the 50s of the 15th century. It is impossible to imagine how the extermination of tens of thousands of people, which regularly occurred over several years, could have gone unnoticed in Europe and would not have been reflected in the chronicles and diplomatic correspondence of those years.

Consequently, Dracula’s raids on the enclaves that belonged to Wallachia, but located on the territory of Transylvania, at the time of their implementation were considered in European countries as an internal affair of Wallachia and did not cause any public outcry. Based on these facts, it can be argued that the anonymous document that first reported the atrocities of the “great monster” was not true and turned out to be another fake, fabricated on the orders of King Matthias following the “letter to the Sultan” in order to justify the illegal arrest of Vlad Dracula. For Pope Pius II - and he was a close friend of the German Emperor Frederick III and therefore sympathized with the Saxon population of Transylvania - such explanations were enough. He did not interfere with the fate of the high-ranking captive, leaving the decision of the Hungarian king in force. But Matthias Corwin himself, feeling the instability of the charges he brought forward, continued to discredit Dracula, who was languishing in prison, resorting, in modern terms, to the services of the “mass media.” A poem by Michael Behaim, created on the basis of a denunciation, engravings depicting a cruel tyrant, “sent out throughout the world for everyone to see,” and, finally, many editions of early printed brochures (of which thirteen have reached us) under the general title “About one great monster” - all this was supposed to form a negative attitude towards Dracula, turning him from a hero into a villain. Apparently, Matthias Corvinus had no intention of freeing his prisoner, dooming him to a slow death in prison. But fate gave Dracula the opportunity to survive another takeoff.

During the reign of Radu the Beautiful, Wallachia completely submitted to Turkey, which could not but worry the new Pope Sixtus IV. It was probably the intervention of the pontiff that changed Dracula's fate. The Prince of Wallachia showed in practice that he could withstand the Turkish threat, and therefore it was Vlad who had to lead the Christian army into battle in a new crusade. The conditions for the prince's release from prison were his transition from the Orthodox faith to the Catholic faith and his marriage to Matthias Corvina's cousin. Paradoxically, the “great monster” could gain freedom only by becoming related to the Hungarian king, who until recently represented Dracula as a bloodthirsty monster...

Two years after the liberation, in the summer of 1476, Vlad, as one of the commanders of the Hungarian army, went on a campaign; his goal was to liberate Turkish-occupied Wallachia. The troops passed through the territory of Transylvania, and documents have been preserved indicating that the townspeople of Saxon Brasov joyfully welcomed the return of the “great monster”, who, according to the denunciation, committed unheard-of atrocities here just a few years ago. Having entered Wallachia with battles, Dracula ousted the Turkish troops and on November 26, 1476, again ascended the throne of the principality. His reign turned out to be very short - the prince was surrounded by obvious and hidden enemies, and therefore a fatal outcome was inevitable.

Vlad's death at the end of December of the same year is shrouded in mystery. There are several versions of what happened, but they all boil down to the fact that the prince fell victim to treason, having trusted the traitors who were around him. It is known that the head of Dracula was donated to the Turkish Sultan, and he ordered it to be exhibited in one of the squares of Constantinople. And Romanian folklore sources report that the headless body of the prince was found by the monks of the Snagov monastery located near Bucharest and buried in the chapel built by Dracula himself near the altar.

Thus ended the short but bright life of Vlad Dracula. Why, despite the facts indicating that the Wallachian prince was “framed” and slandered, does rumor continue to attribute to him atrocities that he never committed? Opponents of Dracula argue: firstly, numerous works by different authors report on the cruelty of Vlad, and, therefore, such a point of view cannot but be objective, and secondly, there are no chronicles in which he appears as a ruler doing pious deeds. It is not difficult to refute such arguments. An analysis of the works that speak of the atrocities of Dracula proves that they all either go back to the handwritten denunciation of 1462, “justifying” the arrest of the Wallachian prince, or were written by people who were at the Hungarian court during the reign of Matthias Corvinus. From here the Russian ambassador to Hungary, clerk Fyodor Kuritsyn, also drew information for his story about Dracula, written around 1484.

Having penetrated into Wallachia, widely circulated stories about the deeds of the “great monster” were transformed into pseudo-folklore narratives that in fact have nothing in common with the folk legends recorded by folklorists in the areas of Romania directly related to the life of Dracula. As for the Turkish chronicles, the original episodes that do not coincide with the German works deserve closer attention. In them, Turkish chroniclers, sparing no color, describe the cruelty and bravery of “Kazıkly”, who terrified his enemies (which means “Impaler”), and even partially acknowledge the fact that he put the Sultan himself to flight. We understand perfectly well that descriptions of the course of hostilities by the warring parties cannot be impartial, but we do not dispute the fact that Vlad Dracula really dealt very cruelly with the invaders who came to his land. Having analyzed the sources of the 15th century, we can confidently say that Dracula did not commit the monstrous crimes attributed to him.

He acted in accordance with the cruel laws of war, but the destruction of the aggressor on the battlefield under no circumstances can be equated with the genocide of civilians, of which Dracula was accused by the orderer of the anonymous denunciation. The stories about the atrocities in Transylvania, for which Dracula received the reputation of the “great monster,” turned out to be slander that pursued specific selfish goals. History has developed in such a way that descendants judge Dracula by how Vlad’s actions were described by his enemies, who sought to discredit the prince - where can we talk about objectivity in such a situation?!

As for the lack of chronicles praising Dracula, this is explained by the too short period of his reign. He simply did not have time, and perhaps did not consider it necessary, to acquire court chroniclers, whose duties included praising the ruler. It’s a different matter for King Matthias, famous for his enlightenment and humanism, “with whose death justice died,” or the Moldavian prince Stefan, who ruled for almost half a century, betrayed Dracula and impaled two thousand Romanians, but at the same time was nicknamed the Great and Saint...

In a muddy stream of lies, it is difficult to discern the truth, but, fortunately, documentary evidence has reached us of how Vlad Dracula ruled the country. The documents signed by him have been preserved, in which he gave lands to peasants, granted privileges to monasteries, and an agreement with Turkey, which scrupulously and consistently defended the rights of citizens of Wallachia. We know that Dracula insisted on the observance of church burial rites for executed criminals, and this very important fact completely refutes the claim that he impaled the inhabitants of the Romanian principalities who professed Christianity. It is known that he built churches and monasteries, founded Bucharest, and fought with desperate courage against the Turkish invaders, defending his people and his land. There is also a legend about how Dracula met with God, trying to find out where his father’s grave was so that he could build a temple on this place...