The story of Count Dracula as many of us
know it was created by Bram Stoker, an Irishman, in 1897. But most of the
action takes place in England, from the moment the Transylvanian vampire
arrives on a shipwrecked vessel in Whitby, North Yorkshire, with plans to make
his lair in the spookily named Carfax estate, west of the river in London. But
Dracula wasn’t the first vampire in English literature, let alone the first to
stalk England. The vampire first made its way into English literature in John
Polidori’s 1819 short story “The Vampyre”. Polidori’s vampire, Lord Ruthven, is
inspired by a thinly disguised portrait of the predatory English poet, Lord
Byron, in Lady Caroline Lamb’s novel Glenarvon (1816). So the first fictional
vampire was actually a satanic English Lord.
Nick Groom concludes in The Vampire : A New History that we should try to be a bit more like vampires. Thankfully this doesn’t entail hanging shiftily around blood donor banks or having your cuspids filed to a point (that’s a thing apparently – although heaven knows where you’d find a dentist who’d oblige). Rather, Groom wants us to think about vampires as a way of re-enchanting the contemporary human condition.
On
17 June 1816, John William Polidori recorded in his diary that “The ghost
stories are begun by all but me.” Polidori was Lord Byron’s physician and had
accompanied the poet and hypochondriac to Switzerland, where Byron rented the
Villa Diodati on the banks of Lake Geneva. They had been joined there by the
poet Percy Shelley, his lover Mary Godwin (whom Percy married later that year)
and her half-sister Claire Clairmont. The weather in Switzerland—indeed across
the globe—was atrocious. The year 1816 was “The Year Without A Summer”: due to
a gigantic volcanic eruption on the Indonesian island of Tambora the previous
year, volcanic ash had been hurled into the stratosphere and remained there for
years, blotting out sunlight and drastically altering weather patterns.
Daytrips were out of the question for much of their stay, and so the previous
evening, while watching storms thundering across the lake, Byron had suggested
to the assembled company that they should each write a ghost story.
The next day, Polidori recorded
“Began my ghost story after tea.” Mary Shelley later recalled:
‘’Poor Polidori had some terrible
idea about a skull-headed lady who was so punished for peeping through a
keyhole—what to see I forget—something very shocking and wrong of course; but
when she was reduced to a worse condition than the renowned Tom of Coventry, he
did not know what to do with her, and was obliged to dispatch her to the tomb
of the Capulets, the only place for which she was fitted.’
This
story—if it ever existed—has not survived, but Polidori may well have been distracted
by what happened later that evening. At midnight, he noted, as Mary breastfed
her four-month-old baby child, the group.
‘’really began to talk ghostly.
L[ord] B[yron] repeated some verses of Coleridge’s “Christabel”, of the witch’s
breast; when silence ensued, and Shelley, suddenly shrieking and putting his
hands to his head, ran out of the room with a candle. Threw water in his face
and gave him ether. He was looking at Mrs. S[helley], and suddenly thought of a
woman he had heard of who had eyes instead of nipples, which, taking hold of
his mind, horrified him.’’
The
following day he again noted “began my ghost-story”—presumably a different
story, and perhaps influenced by the Christabel fiasco the previous night. The
new story became his unregarded novel Ernestus Berchtold; or, the Modern
Oedipus, published in 1819.
Byron had abandoned his own story
after a few pages, although nevertheless it was published (without his
permission) in 1819 as “A Fragment.” “A Fragment” returns to the Turkish
vampire figure of The Giaour, describing the mysterious Augustus Darvell, who is
in the grip of some curious and undiagnosed wasting disease. Darvell and the
unnamed narrator travel to Turkey, intending to visit the Greek ruins at
Ephesus, and their journey takes them through a desolate landscape of Greek,
Christian and Islamic ruins to a remote cemetery. Darvell disconcertingly
murmurs, “I have also been here before” and states that he will soon die. He
demands that the narrator conceal the news of his death, throw an Arabic ring
he has into certain springs on the ninth day of the month at noon, and the
following day wait at a ruined temple. A stork with a live snake writhing in
its beak contemplates Darvell as he makes these plans, and Darvell asks to be
buried where the bird is perched. The moment it flies away he dies and begins to
turn black and decompose with unnatural rapidity; the narrator buries him as
instructed, and there the text ends.
“A Fragment” is a curtailed vampire
narrative. The metamorphosis of the flesh, the burial ground and the abnormal
post-mortem state link it to the earlier 18th-century history of vampires, and
doubtless Darvell would have risen from the dead. But Byron also introduces
calculatedly exotic elements, notably the spell with the ring, and the stork
and snake—a familiar enough pairing, but here suggesting a disturbing inversion
of the ancient lore that storks deliver new babies. Although “A Fragment”
hardly has a prominent place in the Byron canon, its mood was transfused into
Polidori’s next story.
Polidori
had studied medicine at Edinburgh and had written a treatise on somnambulism,
and his professional interest was clearly piqued by the serious scientific
interest afforded to vampires in the previous century. A shadow of vampirism
lies upon his aborted story about the “skull-headed lady” who ends up, like
Juliet, in the tomb of the Capulets—Juliet of course rises vampire-like from
this tomb, before discovering that Romeo, believing her to be dead, has already
killed himself. Polidori would have been familiar with the notes to Southey’s
Thalaba and to Byron’s own Giaour (if only through Byron’s recollection of
them) and Christabel presumably provoked talk of the seductive powers of the
undead. So it was that Polidori discussed Byron’s aborted vampire narrative at
the villa with the countess of Breuss, who urged him to write his own version.
The results—Polidori’s third story undertaken at the villa—were to be far from
forgettable.’
Polidori
commenced work, but then his situation changed rapidly. As the Swiss trip drew
to a close in early September, an exasperated Byron fired his cantankerous
physician; Polidori consequently used his tale to revenge himself on his former
employer. He aimed to expose the haughty lordling as a cruel seducer—Mary
Shelley’s half-sister Claire Clairmont being pregnant at the time with Byron’s
child, and hardly the first victim to fall for his diabolical charms. His
portrait of Lord Ruthven was therefore of a sexual delinquent and predator,
powerfully attracted to the virtuous and the virginal. He drew on anti-heroes
such as the rapist Robert Lovelace from Samuel Richardson’s epistolary novel
Clarissa (1747–48), the malevolent monk Schedoni of Ann Radcliffe’s novel of
terror The Italian (1797), and the repugnant libertines who inhabit the Marquis
de Sade’s repellent novel Juliette (1797–1801), such as the cannibal giant
Minski (who has furniture made of human bones) and the obsessive necrophiliac
and criminally depraved Cordelli. He also drew on Lady Caroline Lamb’s
scandalous novel Glenarvon (1816). Byron had deserted Lamb in the midst of
their passionate affair, and Lamb exacted her revenge by basing the novel’s
pitiless anti-hero on her former lover; Lord Glenarvon’s name is Clarence de
Ruthven.
Polidori’s portrait is not
conventionally erotic: Ruthven has a “dead grey eye” that seems not to perceive
character or humanity; he is cadaverous and the “deadly hue” of his face is
never lit with vivacity; and he all but ignores women as an inferior species. Yet
he has strong features and a compelling voice, and his apparent indifference to
women carries a masochistic allure. He is also wealthy and perversely generous,
sharing his wealth in the most decadent ways possible: by financing the
dissolute in their pursuit of vice and leading them into disgrace—or to the
gallows. He is a lone wolf, subverting morals. And then his dead eyes fall upon
women, his tender prey.
Ruthven dies in Greece after being
shot by robbers. He has already started rotting before his death, but has time
to swear his companion, the protagonist Mr Aubrey, to keep silent about him for
a year and a day. His body is placed on a summit to catch the first rays of the
moon, whereupon it disappears. Aubrey then discovers through forensic deduction
that Ruthven must have killed his Greek paramour Ianthe, who was found with
blood on her neck and breast, “and upon her throat were the marks of teeth
having opened the vein.” As Aubrey sinks into delirium, Ruthven rises from the
dead and seduces Aubrey’s innocent young sister, who is likewise found to have
glutted his thirst for fresh blood. As if in ironic sympathy to the plight of
both his lover and his sister, Aubrey dies from a hemorrhage. Lord Ruthven,
meanwhile, escapes; he is, as is clear from the title of the story, “The
Vampyre.”
Inspired
by Gothic poetries, then, Polidori literally romanticizes the vampire into an
enthralling outrage of sexual bloodlust. But that was not the end of it.
Polidori’s tale was delivered to the countess of Breuss and nothing was heard
of it for two-and-a-half years. Then, on 1 April 1819, it was published in the
New Monthly Magazine as “A Tale by Lord Byron.” It had been sent to the
publisher Henry Colburn with a note that certain tales had been written by
Byron, Polidori and Mary Shelley; Colburn inferred that the story in question
was by Byron and, in order to capitalize on his notorious reputation, published
it as such.
Polidori was livid: Byron had
apparently stolen his story. He immediately wrote to Colburn, insisting it is
“not Lord Byron’s, but was written entirely by me at the request of a lady.”
Polidori admitted that Byron’s “Fragment” had provided particular
incidents—”his Lordship had said that it was his intention of writing a ghost
story, depending for interest upon the circumstances of two friends leaving
England, and one dying in Greece, the other finding him alive, upon his return,
and making love to his sister”—although, of course, Byron’s “Fragment” never
reached the point of the dead man rising and seducing the sister. Polidori
accordingly requested a correction, proper attribution and compensation, and
insisted that any further publication be suppressed. He himself supplied a
statement correcting the claims made about the tale. Notwithstanding this, “The
Vampyre” continued to be attributed to Byron throughout the century—and was
celebrated across the continent as further proof of his wayward genius.
“The Vampyre” was not only
attributed to Byron, though; it was also supplemented in the New Monthly Magazine
and subsequent reprintings by prefatory material about Byron and the Villa
Diodati retreat (including the episode regarding the effect of Christabel on
Percy Shelley), together with an account of vampirism. This description of
vampires locates them in Arabia and Greece (following Southey and Byron), as
well as in Hungary, Poland, Austria and Lorraine (following Ossenfelder and
Bürger). It gives details of blood-engorged corpses taken from the earlier
medical reports, and the account of Paole given in Britain in The Craftsman
(1732). The sexual content of the tales is underlined—they rise from their
graves to “feed upon the blood of the young and beautiful”—and instructions for
slaying vampires are provided: staking, decapitation and cremation. This self-proclaimed
“monstrous rodomontade” concludes with a long quotation from The Giaour, and
references to Thalaba, “the veracious Tournefort” and Calmet—again. It has to
be said that the concise details given in this note concerning “this singularly
horrible superstition” were to prove at least as influential as Polidori’s
narrative.
Polidori, in presenting the vampire
as a depraved and amoral English aristocrat, triggered a cultural sensation.
Rather than being at the borders of Europe, the vampire was at the debauched
edges of society, a Byronic anti-hero. But although he was careful not to
over-stress the medical aspects of vampirism, Polidori’s vampire nevertheless
helped to reignite interest in the scientific phenomenon of vampirism from a
new perspective. In 1819, the Imperial Magazine published a feature on vampires
that discussed Polidori’s tale, reprinted Polidori’s letter and the account of
vampirism given by the New Monthly, and considered whether vampires were
fictitious or not. The anonymous author argues that the leading idea of the
literary vampire is that the vampire is a supernatural fiction, but a thread of
fey doubt runs through the language:
‘’The Vampyre is represented as a
mere creature of the imagination; to which have been ascribed fictitious
powers, corresponding, in their application, with those which we attribute to
sylphs, fairies, elves and genii . . . Under its imposing aspect, the mind of
the reader is insensibly transported into a region of enchantment . . .
Awakened from this poetic delirium, when we reach the conclusion of the tale,
reason once more regains its dominion over fancy; but, unfortunately, instead
of following that steady light, which is necessary to all just discrimination,
we suddenly fall into an opposite snare, and hastily conclude that the Vampyre
has no kind of existence, except in the dreams of poets, and the fables of
romance.’’
The writer is aware that literature
inoculates readers against vampires, but recognizes that despite this they
maintain some sort of presence, a state of unbeing that carries a trace of
reality. They are more than mere fictions.
On the Very Scary Rise of the First Literary Vampire. By Nick Groom.
LitHub , October 25, 2018
In other words, Groom wants to construct a
rigorous genealogy of the vampire and, to this end, picks the early 18th
century as his place to start. Before this there had been myriad tall tales
about bloodsucking creatures popping up all over “the Levant”. In Serbia you
could spot the undead by their ruddy complexions as a result of all that
snacking on friends and family, while in Slavonic folklore a male vampire would
make a point of returning for a conjugal visit, to be followed, nine months
later, by the arrival of a baby without a skeleton. On Mykonos there was a
creature called the Vrykolakas, who rose from the dead and ran around
aggressively until stopped by some brave islander reaching into the decaying
corpse and tearing out its heart.
What turned this motley crew of stinking,
sexed-up roustabouts into vampires, Groom contends, is their run-in with
Enlightenment thought. From the early 18th century the doctors, scientists and
theologians of western Europe started not only to collect and codify these
bloodthirsty folktales but also to try to come up with rational explanations.
Perhaps the peasants had simply been drinking too much hoppy beer and imagined
the whole thing. Or maybe they were so flummoxed by the shifting borders of the
decaying Habsburg empire that this was their way of expressing panic about
outsiders. The Protestants of northern Europe, meanwhile, thought it all
nonsense peddled by the Orthodox Church.
The upshot of this cultural encounter was
that vampires – both the possibility and the impossibility of them – became
what Groom calls “the stuff of thought”, implicated in every aspect of medical,
technological and even theological life. Inoculation against smallpox now
became a source of terror: someone knew someone who knew a boy from Peckham who
had received the usual prophylactic dose of cowpox and started chewing the cud.
Grafting teeth from the dead to the living – a rudimentary form of dental implant
dating from the days of Henry VIII – was now a perilous activity, in the course
of which you were likely to end up with venereal disease from your donor. Even
the Roman Catholic and Protestant churches found the vampire provided food for
thought thanks to the way it echoed the rite of holy communion, during which
the congregation lined up to drink Christ’s blood.
The Vampire: A New History by Nick
Groom review – an undead family tree. By Kathryn Hughes. The Guardian , October
27 2018.
Two hundred years before vampires found
their way into novels – most famously Dracula – they were featured in medical
journals as a blood-sucking phenomena that rose from the dead to drain the
blood of the living. Dr Nick Groom, Professor of English at the University of
Exeter who has been dubbed the ‘Prof of Goth’, has found evidence that Bram Stoker
and other early Gothic authors would have been aware of medical descriptions of
vampire activity in Eastern Europe dating back to the 17th century.
In research to be published by Cambridge
University Press as part of a new project on Bram Stoker’s Dracula, Prof. Groom
records how by the 18th century physicians were investigating reports of undead
monsters who gorged themselves on blood. These incidents led to bodies being
dug up, decapitated, staked through the heart, and cremated. He says that passages
in Dracula – the late-19th-century Gothic horror novel about a Transylvanian
vampire who comes to Britain in search of fresh blood - mirror medical
descriptions of how ‘real-life’ vampires are recorded to have behaved.
Dracula’s female vampire, for example, makes the same “churning” sound with her
tongue as is described in academic medical treatises about the behaviour of the
undead. Stoker, in turn, incorporated cutting-edge 19th-century medical
research such as blood transfusion technology into his own novel. Sightings of
vampires had been reported in journals and gazettes in Poland and Russia as
early as the 1690s. The creatures were supposed to have sucked the blood of
humans and animals, and, engorged, blood would flow from their eyeballs, pores,
and other orifices. Once dug up, their coffins were said to have been swimming
in gore. As a protection, local people advised making bread from this very
blood against “contracting vampirism.”
Physicians in the 1730s recorded the
physical symptoms of vampire attacks, from shivering and nausea to spasms,
nightmares, and death. The vampirism epidemic led to 17 articles in 1732 in
professional journals, followed by 22 learned treaties over the next three
years published in European centres of learning. By that time the London press
had reported that in Hungary there were “dead bodies sucking….the blood of the
living, for the latter visibly dry up, while the former are fill’d with Blood.”
Professor Groom, author of The Gothic: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 2012), is comprehensively mapping the vampire’s
pre-history as part of a research project examining the emergence of Gothic
literature from early medicine, theology, politics, and criminal law.
According to his research, Stoker and
other literary figures who first wrote about vampires drew from medical
reports. Indeed, the first vampire novel in English, The Vampyre, was written
by the physician Dr John Polidori and was published in 1819. He believes
Stoker, who published Dracula in 1897, would have been aware of much earlier
accounts of vampirism as both a “genuine disease” and also a “mass delusion of
peripheral and backward communities” in Eastern Europe. These reports include
accounts of a rampant plague in Serbia where the dead were rising from their
graves to prey on the living, who in turn became vampires. Medics writing from
1679 also wrote Latin treatises about “grave eating” where the undead were dug
up to find they had been eating their own shrouds and even feasting on their
own limbs and bowels.
By 1751 the vampire had “become mordantly
fashionable”, according to Professor Groom, with the Earl of Sandwich naming a
bay gelding racehorse “Vampire”. The image of the blood-sucker was also quickly
adopted by political commentators: tax revenue was represented as a way to
gratify the “fat gutted vampire” that was the government. Vampires were also a
major topic of debate among philosophers and theologians, and even influenced
legal thinking. By the second half of
the 18th century the vampire was appearing in English and German literature,
subsequently inspiring poets such as Samuel Taylor Coleridge and John Keats.
Meanwhile, Mary Shelley alludes to the monster in her anatomical novel
Frankenstein as “my own vampire, my own spirit let loose from the grave and
forced to destroy all that was dear to me.” Since then it has become an abiding
image of the vengeful dead. Professor Groom said: “For many years vampirism was
a serious subject of research: on the one hand it was a terrifying medical
disorder, on the other a mass delusion fostered by wretched social conditions.
As its popularity rapidly spread across Europe, the image of the vampire
changed the way that people thought about political power, theology and
philosophy, and legal testimony – as well as supernatural literature.”
It is nearly 200 years since this
Romantic/Byronic archetype for a vampire emerged – but what do we know about
English belief in vampires outside of fiction? New research at the University
of Hertfordshire has uncovered and reappraised a number of vampire myths – and
they are not all confined to the realms of fiction.
The Croglin Vampire reputedly first
appeared in Cumberland to a Miss Fisher in the 1750s. Its story is retold by Dr
Augustus Hare, a clergyman, in his Memorials of a Quiet Life in 1871. According
to this legend, the vampire scratches at the window before disappearing into an
ancient vault. The vault is later discovered to be full of coffins that have
been broken open and their contents, horribly mangled and distorted, are
scattered over the floor. One coffin only remains intact, but the lid has been
loosened. There, shrivelled and mummified – but quite intact – lies the Croglin
Vampire.
Elsewhere
in Cumbria, the natives of Renwick, were once known as “bats” due to the
monstrous creature that is said to have flown out of the foundations of a
rebuilt church there in 1733. The existence of vampire bats, which sucked blood
wouldn’t be confirmed until 1832, when Charles Darwin sketched one feeding off
a horse on his voyage to South America in The Beagle. The creature in Renwick
has been referred to as a “cockatrice” – a mythical creature with a serpent’s
head and tail and the feet and wings of a cockerel – by Cumbrian County
History. But it’s the myth of the vampire bat that has prevailed in the surrounding
villages and is recorded in conversations in local archives and journals
What
picture emerges then in this history of the English vampire? The Croglin
Vampire has never been verified – but it has an afterlife in the 20th century,
appearing as The British Vampire in 1977 in an anthology of horror by Daniel
Farson, who turns out to be Stoker’s great-grandnephew.
But there is one case that has no
connection to fiction, the little-known Buckinghamshire Vampire, recorded by
William of Newburgh in the 12th century. Historical records show that St Hugh,
the Bishop of Lincoln, was called upon to deal with the terrifying revenant and
learned to his astonishment, after contacting other theologians, that similar
attacks had happened elsewhere in England.
St Hugh was told that no peace would
be had until the corpse was dug up and burned, but it was decided that an
absolution – a declaration of forgiveness, by the church, absolving one from
sin – would be a more seemly way to disable the vampire. When the tomb was
opened the body was found to have not decomposed. The absolution was laid
inside on the corpse’s chest by the Archdeacon and the vampire was never again
seen wandering from his grave.
The Buckinghamshire revenant did not
have a “vampire” burial – but such practices are evidence of a longstanding
belief in vampires in Britain. Astonishingly, the medieval remains of the what
are thought to be the first English vampires have been found in the Yorkshire
village of Wharram Percy. The bones of over 100 “vampire” corpses have now been
uncovered buried deep in village pits. The bones were excavated more than half
a century ago and date back to before the 14th century. They were at first
thought to be the result of cannibalism during a famine or a massacre in the
village but on further inspection in 2017 the burned and broken skeletons were
linked instead to deliberate mutilations perpetrated to prevent the dead
returning to harm the living – beliefs common in folklore at the time.
The inhabitants of Wharram Percy
showed widespread belief in the undead returning as revenants or reanimated
corpses and so fought back against the risk of vampire attacks by deliberately
mutilating their own dead, burning bones and dismembering corpses, including
those of women, children and teenagers, in an attempt to stave off what they
believed could be a plague of vampires. This once flourishing village was
completely deserted in the aftermath.
Just recently at an ancient Roman
site in Italy the severed skull of a ten-year-old child was discovered with a
large rock inserted in the mouth to prevent biting and bloodsucking. Then skull
belongs to a suspected 15th-century revenant which they are calling locally the
“Vampire of Lugano”.
There has been a wealth of other
stories from the UK and other parts of Western Europe – but, despite this,
thanks to the Dracula legend, most people still assume such practises and
beliefs belong to remote parts of Eastern Europe. But our research is
continuing to examine “vampire burials” in the UK and is making connections to
local myths and their legacy in English literature, many years before the
Byronic fiend Count Dracula arrived in Yorkshire carrying his own supply of
Transylvanian soil.
Older than Dracula: in search of the
English vampire. By Sam George. The Conversation , October 25 , 2018.
Vampires is not at all like in the movies or books. Sure, I understand. You are young you have the whole world open to you. You can be anything that you choose if you apply yourself and try hard to work toward that goal. But being a Vampire is not what it seems like. It’s a life full of good, and amazing things. We are as human as you are.. It’s not what you are that counts, But how you choose to be. Do you want a life full of interesting things? Do you want to have power and influence over others? To be charming and desirable? To have wealth, health, and longevity? kindly contact the vampire kingdom whatsApp at +1 602 962 0326 or on their email vampiretemple10@gmail.com
ReplyDelete