Vampires: The Long-Lived Truth!

The legend of "Vampires" started with a Romanian Prince name Vlad Tepes IV. He was called many things, but 3 of which stand out.

1racul. The meaningevil's son or Son of the Devil.

2racular. The Meaningragon's son or Son of the Dragon.

3:Vlad the Impaler. Origin: He impaled an entire Turkish Army on wooden skewers.

to most of you, this may not be new. But, to you that it is, it's a good to-be-essay. Dracul and Dracular are the main courses for this legend, because they fit out to be called Dracula. And so, Vlad Tepes the 4th has hence been dubbed Count Dracula. There was also an Empress who Bathed in and drank blood, reasons for the devil knows. But, I must admit, there are vampires. I am one. Yet, I'm Mormon. ROTFLOL. If you have any comments, I'll be happy to Q & A.

[edit on 12/30/2008 by Dragonfriend]

[edit on 12/30/2008 by Dragonfriend]

[edit on 12/30/2008 by Dragonfriend]

I remember the story of Chiron, the wounded healer who was accidently hit with an arrow and it could not be healed.

He having been an immortal was giving the gift of death by a powerful mythological deity.

Biblically I have always been infatuated by the races who by punishment would hunger, but could not eat, would thirst but could not drink.

Not sure what the "True" history is on Vlad, but to this day he is a national hero in his native land. Vlad basically took out the trash -- ie what appears to be the invasion of perhaps the Khasar/AshkanNazi/zionist Psuedo Jews that brought mass corruption to his homelands. He cleaned them out and reclaimed the country for the people. Likely, history later portrays him in just the opposite frame of reference. He wasn't called Vlad the Impaler for nothing but the people exterminated where the degenerate invaders.

Vlad is not the source of the legend at all. The legend streatches back a much, much longer time; from people in the Medieval Ages that reguraly drank blood, to the times of old Egypt, and even further back, to Lilith in the old writings, that at night drank the blood from little children.

In short, the origin of Vampires has nothing to do with Vlad at all, more then the way Stoker interpreted it.

I believe the vampire story starts with lilith en.wikipedia.org... (Sumerian 4000bc). The woman you are referring to as the empress bathing in blood is in fact a countess by the name of elisabeth bathory en.wikipedia.org...

There was a great Vlad documentary on the History Channel a few months ago. He was basically abused greatly as a child by an army invader, and his family were all killed in nasty ways. What he did later in life was revenge and the results of his abuse. Also since his army was greatly outnumbered he used the fear of his vicious treatment of the enemy as psy ops. Whether he did it out of enjoyment is something to ponder on, but much of it points to rational reasons instead.




[edit on 30-12-2008 by Xtrozero]

One can roll this story back a bit further than Vlad. In the times before modern mortuary services, people were not embalmed. Some could not even be proven dead when they were buried.
Bells were hanged above the graves and strings run down and tied to a finger so that if a person awoke, the bell would ring in the panic. They could then be dug up before dying of hysteria or suffocation.
Bodies not drained and then embalmed induce riggor and will move, twitch or out right jump. When they would dig up bodies this long into death, they opened the caskets only to see the bodies sit up or the arms reach out. As well, the body becomes bloated in death and the movement let out a howling sound as the built up gases expelled, which gave the impression of the dead person screaming out.

This began the mythos of the undead since they did not have the medical knowledge at the time to know what was happening. All they saw was a rotting corpse sitting up, reaching out and screaming out in pain. They literally stumbled upon the means of "killing" the undead by staking the heart, which seemed to suppress the undead back into death. Thereby, the first means of destroying the undead was to stake them through the heart. Further demonizing this myth was lead by the fact that this could not be the work of God, so this must be a form of demonic possession. This brought the priests into the realm of purifying the corpse.
However, not all of the "undead" died from just a stake. Cutting off the head was added as a measure of insuring that the dead remained dead.

So, this is the origin of the myth that to kill a vampire, you force a wooden stake into the heart and cut the head from the body to insure they stay dead.

I would like to correct that Vlad III is Vlad Dracul/Tepes. Vlad IV is Vlad the Monk. He is not related to the Devil/Impaler legacy beyond being the youngest brother and eventual ruling successor.

Vlad Tepes later does become the familiar blood lusting demonic face of the origin of the vampires. Count Dracula, a blood drinking night stalker that is the immortal embodiment of one man's sins against God and humanity.

Of course, thanks to Hollywood and the tourist attraction at Castle Dracula, a lot of the history of the truth behind the myth has been distorted and lost.

Originally posted by Xtrozero
There was a great Vlad documentary on the History Channel a few months ago. He was basically abused greatly as a child by an army invader, and his family were all killed in nasty ways. What he did later in life was revenge and the results of his abuse. Also since his army was greatly outnumbered he used the fear of his vicious treatment of the enemy as psy ops. Whether he did it out of enjoyment is something to ponder on, but much of it points to rational reasons instead.




[edit on 30-12-2008 by Xtrozero]

Partly true. To dissuade attackers, he lined the only passage to his fortress with the impaled bodies of his enemies so that the advancing troops would see the lengths he was willing to go to protect his rule and his land. This is what gave him the moniker Vlad the Impaler. It was a most effective form of mental warfare against those who would invade. It was also mental warfare against his own people. They lived under the rule of a man so evil and disturbed.

It should also be noted that Vlad did not do this because his family was brutalized or destroyed. After the death of Vlad the Dragon, his family fought over the title. The family was split into 2 factions. Vlad III had 2 brothers: Radu, who aligned with and lead against Vlad III, the very Turks that were impaled and Vlad IV (Vlad the Monk), who would not fight. Radu and Vlad III were leaders of war, but Vlad IV did not fight, rather waited until the end of Vlad III's life to claim the throne for himself.

if you are a vampire why would tell the world wide web also there is a slayer who has an acount which is named jackinthebox

lastly i dont believe that you are a vampire

Many times Vlads victims would still be alive when he put them on the skewer. He also killed 10,000 of his own men(probably spies or whatever). Just FYI, didn't see that in there.

Are you a twilight fan? Not another ''oh im a vampire'' ....Sorry guys its just plain silly

reply to post by Dragonfriend


Your wrong in fact the beginning of vampires is dated bck to judas escariot the man who betrayed the beloved jesus of christian belief. dracula 2000 the movie describes some of the truth about this fact.

reply to post by Dragonfriend


Actually the Dracul name was from drac/draco (Latin) meaning "dragon," not the modern Romanian version of "devil." This has caused many misinterpretations characterizing Vlad as "devilish," when in fact he adopted the name from his father Vlad II who was inducted into the Order Of The Dragon, hence Vlad Dracul, or basically "Vlad of the dragon."

reply to post by vlykan21


You ever thought that maybe the first vampire was not Judas, but Jesus Christ himself? A figure, risen from the death, from the tomb. They crucified him, and stabbed him in the side, but they never staked his heart. I never thought about it before, but something about your post made me think of that.

Originally posted by Grifter42
reply to post by vlykan21

 

You ever thought that maybe the first vampire was not Judas, but Jesus Christ himself? A figure, risen from the death, from the tomb. They crucified him, and stabbed him in the side, but they never staked his heart. I never thought about it before, but something about your post made me think of that.

them stabbing him in the side, WAS them stabbing him in the heart. they went to speed the death of the 3 men on crosses, two were still alive had their legs broken to speed it up. Jesus seemingly already dead, they ensured he was by piercing his side with the spear, bible scholars say the aim was to pierce the heart.

Disagree. He was stabbed in the side, not the heart. And what's with the sacrament? The drinking of wine that has been consecrated into blood? That is a sure fire way to become a vampire, to drink a vampire's blood. You've got secretive men in the vatican.

I would not be surprised if a large portion of the Vatican were vampiric in nature. So many catacombs and such. You see, the cross, and symbols of faith very seldom work, and the faith of Mankind has become so very threadbare.

reply to post by Grifter42


I like the idea! If vampires are real, that would explain Jesus's "miracles" because vampires are said to have varying levels of mind-control based on age mostly... as well as being able to heal all kinds of things by drinking blood. Vampires are said to be immune to most diseases, etc. And the Vatican has been hiding many many things about religion since the start of Christian faith. Including many of the old gospels, such as one written about Mary Magdelene if I remember correctly, and one about Judas.

At worst, you just had what seems like an original idea, and at best, you may have just stumbled onto the largest cover-up of all time! I think you should work on finding some evidence and maybe make a new thread to get other's input on this.