Welcome to Gaia! ::

Kitsune:
Spirit Foxes
or
Psy-Vamps of a different Breed.





General

Giving a simple definition of what a kitsune is is not an easy task. While there is much speculation and adoration of these magical creatures, information about their true origins is rare and at times conflicting as well. The legend of the Kitsune race began in India. Travelers carried tales of them to China, Korea, and eventually Japan where they took deep root in popular folklore and one type; The Inari (White) kitsune became religious icons.

Spirituality

Kitsune are neither good nor evil as a race, though each individual is defined by his or her own choices and attitudes, most kitsune seem to be without spiritual influence there are some very large exceptions. Most notable are the Oinari Kitsune. These are said to have pledged themselves to the rice god Inari, and serve as go betweens, ferrying messages back and forth between humans and the god. Brother and sister pairs are often depicted as guardians at the foot of a Torii (celestial gate).

Physical

Some things that many texts seem to agree on: Kitsune are flesh and blood living creatures. They shift between fox form, and human (Usually that of a seductively beautiful youth.) They are close to immortal by human standards, with a possible lifespan of around a thousand years. They can be injured or even killed by normal means. They have their own forms of magic that vary wildly in nature from one fox to the next.

Magical Abilities

In addition to having the power to switch back and forth between fox and human form Kitsune have a huge range of other magical abilities. Which abilities a particular kitsune has seems to be part genetic and part pure chance. Some of the more common ones are, the ability to create powerful illusions, healing, possession, and the ability to use magical fire as a weapon. A kitsune grows more powerful as it ages and can live to be around a century old. When they have achieved a new level of personal growth, they gain a tail (up to 9). The higher their level the more energy they need to survive and do magic. A young one-tail kitsune need only a minimal amount, but a nine-tailed would need a staggering amount just to exist. Some sources do imply that this energy can be taken from other non-living sources by older and more experienced foxes.





Interaction with humans

Tales of them closely mirror many of the American Indian coyote *trickster* stories, revealing the majority of Kitsune to be playful, and fascinated by humans. Sometimes playing pranks on them, other times helping them, and on occasion even falling in love with them. They have volatile natures and are unlikely to forget a slight or let it go. They are just as unlikely to forget a kindness or favor, and can be fiercely loyal and protective friends.

Feeding

Kitsune need energy both for survival, and for their magic. The most common source of this energy is human beings. A kitsune would seduce a human partner and take the energy during lovemaking. Unfortunately, this is not without harm for the human. Depending on the amount of energy, taken severe burns can appear on the victim’s body, and they can even be weakened to the point of death. If the energy is given freely, the feeding causes less damage to the human and is of greater benefit to the fox. A kitsune and a human falling in love presents a difficult set of problems, for the fox and the human alike. Repeated *feedings* upon the same human, however willing they may be, will not only exponentially diminish their life force, but also cause them to become foxed (Slowly go mad) Still such pairings are common in the folklore often with tragic results. There are also many tales of fox mates giving their human companions children. Assuming Kitsune might have been real and not pure fiction there could be many humans out there with a smattering of kitsune blood in their veins.

Exposure

Thanks to their quicksilver temperaments, and distractibility it isn’t hard to expose a kitsune for what it is. It would seem that it takes a great deal of concentration to maintain a completely human form. An excited or upset kitsune loses that control and *pop* the ears or tails are suddenly visible. There are many other ways in which kitsune are revealed in the folklore. One says that they revert to full fox form immediately after seeing their own reflections.

== THE HISTORICAL DRACULA: VLAD III TEPES, 1431-1476 ==









== I. Historical Background ==

M
ost of you ("the members of this list", R.P.'92, -Ed.) are probably aware of the fact that when Bram Stoker penned his immortal classic, Dracula, he based his vampire villian on an actual historical figure. Stoker's model was Vlad III Dracula (called Tepes, pronounced tse-pesh); a fifteenth century viovode, or prince, of Wallachia of the princely House of Basarab. Wallachia is a provence of Romania bordered to the north by Transylvania and Moldavia, to the east by the Black Sea and to the south by Bulgaria. Wallachia first emerged as a political entity during the late thirteenth century from the weltering confusion left behind in the Balkans as the Eastern Roman Empire slowly crumbled. The first prince of Wallachia was Basarab the Great (1310-1352), an ancestor of Dracula. Despite the splintering of the family into two rival clans, some members of the House of Basarab continued to govern Wallachia from that time until well after the Ottomans reduced the principality to the status of a client state. Dracula was the last prince of Wallachia to retain any real measure of independence.


In order to understand the life of Vlad Dracula it is first necessary to understand something about the nature of Wallachian society and politics. The throne of Wallachia was hereditary but not by the law of primogeniture; the boyars, or great nobles, had the right to elect the voivode from among the various eligable members of the royal family. As with most elective monarchies during the Middle Ages the power of the central government tended to be dissipated among the nobility as various members of the ruling family vied for the throne. Wallachian politics also tended to be very bloody. Assasination was a common means of eliminating rivals and many of the voivodes ended their lives violently and prematurely. By the late fifteenth century the House of Basarab had split into two rival clans; the descendants of Prince Dan and those of Prince Mircea the Old (Dracula's grandfather). These two branches of the royal house were bitter rivals. Both Dracula and his father, Vlad II Dracul, murdered rivals from the Danesti upon reaching the throne.


The second ascendant fact of the fifteenth century Wallachian political life was the influence of powerful neighbors. In 1453 Constantinople and the last vestiges of the Byzantine, or Eastern Roman Empire, which had blocked the Islam's access to Europe for nearly one thousand years, succumbed to the armed might of the Ottoman Turks under Sultan Mohammed the Conqueror. Long before the fall of the Imperial City the Ottomans had penetrated deep into the Balkans. Dracula's grandfather, Mircea the Old, was forced to pay tribute to the sultan early in the fifteenth century. The Hungarian Kingdom to the north and west of Wallachia reached the zenith of its power during the fifteenth century and assumed Constantinople's ancient mantle as defender of Christendom. Throughout the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries the princes of Wallachia attempted to maintain a precarious independence by constantly shifting allegiances between these powerful neighbors.


Dracula ruled as Prince of Wallachia on three seperate occasions. He first claimed the throne with Turkish support in 1448. On this occasion he ruled for only two months (October-November) before being driven out by a Danesti claimant supported by Hungary. Dracula dwelt in exile for several years before returning to Wallachia to kill the Danesti prince, Vladislov II, and reclaim the Wallachian throne with Hungarian support. Dracula's second regnal period streched from 1456 to 1462. It was during this time that Dracula carried out his most famous military exploits against the Turks and also committed his most gruesome atrocities.


In 1462 Dracula fled to Transylvania to seek the aid of the King of Hungary when a Turkish army overwhelmed Wallachia. Instead of receiving the assistance he expected Dracula was imprisoned by the Hungarian king. He remained a prisoner of Matthius Corvinus of Hungary for several years. For most of the period of Dracula's incarceration his brother, Radu the Handsome, ruled Wallachia as a puppet of the Ottoman sultan. When Radu died (ca. 1474-1475) the sultan appointed Basarab the Old, a member of the Danesti clan, as prince.


Eventually, Dracula regained the favor and support of the Hungarian king. In 1476 he once again invaded Wallachia. His small force consisted of a few loyal Wallachians, a contingent of Moldavians sent by his cousin Prince Stephen the Great of Moldavia, and a contingent of Transylvanians under their prince, Stephen Bathory. The allies succeeded in driving Basarab out of the country and placing Dracula on the throne (November 1476). However, after Dracula was once again in control, Stephen Bathory returned to Transylvania taking most of Dracula's army with him. The Turk's soon counter-attacked with overwhelming force. Dracula was killed fighting the Turks near Bucharest in December of 1476. His head was sent to Constantinople where the Sultan had it displayed on a stake to prove that the terrible Impaler was really dead.






== II. What's in a name? ==

T
here has been considerable debate among scholars concerning the meaning of the name 'Dracula'. The name is clearly related to Dracula's father's sobriquet 'Dracul'. Drac in Romanian means devil and "ul" is the definitive article. Therefore, "Dracul" literally means "the devil." The "ulea" ending in Romanian indicates "the son of." Under this interpretation Dracula becomes Vlad III, son of the devil. The experts who support this interpretation usually claim that Vlad II earned his devlish nickname by his clever and wily political maneuvering.


The second interpretation of the name is more widely accepted. In 1431 Vlad II was invested with the Order of the Dragon by the Holy Roman Emperor Sigismund of Luxembourg. The Order of the Dragon was a knightly order dedicated to fighting the Turk. Its emblem was a dragon, wings extended, hanging on a cross. From 1431 onward Vlad II wore the emblem of the order. His coinage bore the dragon symbol. The dragon was the symbol of the devil and, consequently, the alternate meaning of 'drac' was dragon. (Note: "dragon", noun, Middle English from Old French, derivation of the Latin, "draco"; served as the emblem of the Roman Cavalry. ed.-MLW) Under this interpretation Vlad II Dracul becomes Vlad II, the Dragon and his son, Vlad III Dracula, becomes Vlad III, the Son of the Dragon.


There is some confusion in the secondary sources concerning Dracula's exact title. In most of the sources he is referred to as Vlad III. However, many sources refer to him as Vlad IV or Vlad V. I am somewhat at a loss to explain this confusion. The lists of Wallachian princes that I have seen would seem to make the correct title Vlad III. The only conclusion I have been able to reach is that there is some confusion in the sources between the various voivodes named Vlad and Vladislav. This argument gains credence when one realizes that Dracula occasionally signed his name 'Vladislaus'. I would welcome an explanation from anyone capable of resolving this problem.






== III. The Life of Vlad III Dracula, called the Impaler (1431-1476) ==

D
racula was born in 1431 in the Transylvanian city of Sighisoara. At that time Dracula's father, Vlad II Dracul, was living in exile in Transylvania. Vlad Dracul was in Transylvania attempting to gather support for his planned effort to seize the Wallachian throne from the Danesti Prince, Alexandru I. The house where Dracula was born is still standing. In 1431 it was located in a prosperous neighborhood (of the fortress town Sighisoara, ed.) surrounded by the homes of Saxon and Magyar merchants and the townhouses of the nobility.


Little is known about the early years of Dracula's life. It is known he had an elder brother, Mircea, and a younger brother named Radu. His early education was left in the hands of his mother, a Transylvanian noblewoman, and her family. His real education began in 1436 after his father succeeded in claiming the Wallachian throne and killing his Danesti rival. His training was typical to that common to the sons of the nobility throughout Europe. His first tutor in his apprenticeship to knighthood was an elderly boyar whom had fought under the banner of Enguerrand de Courcy at the battle of Nicolopolis against the Turks. Dracula learned all the skills of war and peace that were deemed necessary for a Christian knight.


The political situation in Wallachia remained unstable after Vlad Dracul seized the throne in 1436. The power of the Turks was growing rapidly as one by one the small states of the Balkans surrendered to the Ottoman onslaught. At the same time the power of hungary was reaching its zenith and would peak during the time of John Hunyadi, the White Knight of Hungary, and his son King Matthius Corvinus. Any prince of Wallachia had to balance his policies precariously between these two powerful neighbors. The prince of Wallachia was officially a vassal of the King of Hungary. In addition, Vlad Dracul was a member of the Order of the Dragon and sworn to fight the infidel. At the same time the power of the Ottomans seemed unstoppable. Even in the time of Vlad's father, Mircea the Old, Wallachia had been forced to pay tribute to the Sultan. Vlad was forced to renew that tribute and from 1436-1442 attempted to walk a middle coarse between his powerful neighbors.


In 1442 Vlad attempted to remain neutral when the Turks invaded Transylvania. The Turks were defeated and the vengeful Hungarians under John Hunyadi forced Dracul and his family to flee Wallachia. Hunyadi placed a Danesti, Basarab II, on the Wallachian throne. In 1443 Vlad II regained the Wallachian throne with Turkish support, on the condition that he sign a new treaty with the sultan that included not only the customary annual tribute but the promise to yearly send contingents of Wallachian boys to join the sultans Janissaries. In 1444, to further assure to the sultan of his good faith, Vlad sent his two younger sons to Adrianople as hostages. Dracula remained as a hostage in Adrianople until 1448.


In 1444 the King of Hungary, Ladislas Poshumous, broke the peace and launched the Varna campaign under the command of John Hunyadi in an effort to drive the Turks out of Europe. Hunyadi demanded that Vlad II fulfill his oath as a member of the Order of the Dragon and a vassal of Hungary and join the crusade against the Turk. The Pope absolved Dracul of his Turkish oath, but the wily politician still attempted to steer a middle coarse. Rather than join the Christian forces himself he sent his oldest son, Mircea. Perhaps he hoped the sultan would spare his younger sons if he himself did not join the crusade.


The results of the Varna Crusade are well known. The Christian army was utterly destroyed in the Battle of Varna. John Hunyadi managed to escape the battle under conditions that add little glory to the White Knight's reputation. Many, apparently including Mircea and his father, blamed Hunyadi for the debacle. From this moment forth John Hunyadi was bitterly hostile toward Vlad Dracul and his eldest son. In 1447 Vlad Dracul was assasinated along with his son Mircea. Mircea was apparently buried alive by the boyars and merchants of Tirgoviste. Hunyadi placed his own candidate, a member of the Danesti clan, on the throne of Wallachia.


On receiving the news of Vlad Dracul's death the Turks released Dracula and supported him as their own candidate for the Wallachian throne. In 1448 Dracula managed to briefly seize the Wallachian throne with Turkish support. Within two months Hunyadi forced Dracula to surrender the throne and flee to his cousin, the Prince of Moldavia, while Hunyadi once again placed Vladislav II on the Wallachian throne.


Dracula remained in exile in Moldavia for three years, until Prince Bogdan of Moldavia was assasinated in 1451. The resulting turmoil in Muldavia forced Dracula to flee to Transylvania and seek the protection of his family enemy, Hunyadi. The timing was propitious; Hunyadi's puppet on the Wallachian throne, Vladislov II, had instituted a pro-Turkish policy and Hunyadi needed a more reliable man in Wallachia. Consequently, Hunyadi accepted the allegiance of his old enemy's son and put him forward as the Hungarian candidate for the throne of Wallachia. Dracula became Hunyadi's vassal and received his father's old Transylvanian duchies of Faragas and Almas. Dracula remained in Transylvania, under Hunyadi's protection, until 1456 waiting for an opportunity to retake Wallachia from his rival.


In 1453 the Christian world was shocked by the final fall of Constantinople to the Ottomans. The East Roman Empire which had existed since the time of Constantine the Great and which for a thousand years had shielded the rest of Christendom from Islam was no more. Hunyadi immediately began planning another campaign against the Turks. In 1456 Hunyadi invaded Turkish Serbia while Dracula simultaniously invaded Wallachia. In the Battle of Belgrade Hunyadi was killed and his army defeated. Meanwhile, Dracula succeeded in killing Vladislav II and taking the Wallachian throne, but Hunyadi's defeat made his long term tenure questionable. For a time at least, Dracula was forced to attempt to placate the Turks while he solidified his own position.


Dracula's main reign stretched from 1456 to 1462. His capital was the city of Tirgoviste while his castle was raised some distance away in the mountains near the Arges River. Most of the atrocities associated with Dracula's name took place in these years. It was also during this time that he launched his own campaign against the Turks. His campaign was relatively successful at first. His skill as a warrior and his well-known cruelty made him a much feared enemy. However, he received little support from his titular overlord, Matthius Corvinus, King of Hungary (the son of John Hunyadi) and Wallachia's resources were too limited to achieve any lasting success against the conqueror of Constantinople.


The Turks finally suceeded in forcing Dracula to flee to Transylvania in 1462. Reportedly, his first wife committed suicide by leaping from the towers of Dracula's castle into the waters of the Arges River rather than surrender to the Turks. Dracula escaped across the mountains into Transylvania and appealed to Matthius Corvinus for aid. Instead, the King had Dracula arrested and imprisoned in a royal tower near Buda. Dracula remained a prisoner for twelve years.


Apparently his imprisonment was none too onerous. He was able to gradually win his way back into the graces of Hungary's monarch; so much so that he was able to meet and marry a member of the royal family (some of the sources claim Dracula's second wife was actually the sister of Matthius Corvinus). The openly pro-Turkish policy of Dracula's brother, Radu the Handsome, who was prince of Wallachia during most of Dracula's captivity probably was a factor in Dracula's rehabilitation. During his captivity Dracula also renounced the Orthodox faith and adopted Catholicism. It is interesting to note that the Russian narrative, normally very favorable to Dracula, indicates that even in captivity he could not give up his favorite past-time; he often captured birds and mice which he proceeded to torture and mutilate – some were beheaded or tarred-and-feathered and released, most were impaled on tiny spears.


The exact length of Dracula's period of captivity is open to some debate. The Russian pamphlets indicate that he was a prisoner from 1462 until 1474. However, during that period Dracula managed to marry a member of the Hungarian royal family and have two sons who were about ten years old when he reconquered Wallachia in 1476. McNally and Florescu place Dracula's actual period of confinement at about four years from 1462 to 1466. It is unlikely that a prisoner would be allowed to marry into the royal family. Diplomatic correspondence from Buda during the period in question also seems to support the claim that Dracula's actual period of confinement was relatively short.


Apparently, in years between his release in 1474 when he began preparations for the reconquest of Wallachia Dracula resided with his new wife in a house in the Hungarian capital. One anecdote from that period tells how a Hungarian captain followed a thief into Dracula's house. When Dracula discovered the intruders he killed the Hungarian officer rather than the thief. When questioned about his actions by the king Dracula answered that a gentleman does not enter the presence of a great ruler without an introduction – had the captain followed proper protocol he would not have incurred the wrath of the prince.


In 1476 Dracula was again ready to make another bid for power. Dracula and Prince Stephen Bathory of Transylvania invaded Wallachia with a mixed force of Transylvanians, a few dissatisfied Wallachian boyars and a contingent of Moldavians sent by Dracula's cousin, Prince Stephen the Great of Moldavia. Dracula's brother, Radu the Handsome, had died a coulpe of years earlier and had been replaced on the Wallachian throne by another Turkish candidate, Basarab the Old, a member of the Danesti clan. At the approach of Dracula's army Basarab and his coherents fled, some to the protection of the Turks, others to the shelter of the mountains. After placing Dracula on the throne Stephen Bathory and the bulk of Dracula's forces returned to Transylvania, leaving Dracula's tactical position very weak. Dracula had little time to gather support before a large Turkish army entered Wallachia determined to return Basarab to the throne. Dracula's cruelties over the years had alienated the boyars who felt they had a better chance of surviving under Prince Basarab. Apparently, even the peasants, tired of the depredations of the Impaler, abandoned him to his fate. Dracula was forced to march to meet the Turks with the small forces at his diposal, somewhat less than four thousand men.


Dracula was killed in battle against the Turks near the small town of Bucharest in December of 1476. Some reports indicated that he was assasinated by disloyal Wallachian boyars just as he was about to sweep the Turks from the field. Other accounts have Dracula falling in defeat, surrounded by the bodies of his loyal Moldavian bodyguard (the troops loaned by Prince Stephen of Moldavia remained with Dracula after Stephen Bathory returned to Transylvania). Still other reports claim that Dracula, at the moment of victory, was accidentally struck down by one of his own men. Dracula's body was decapitated by the Turks and his head sent to Constantnople where the sultan had it displayed on a stake as proof that the Impaler was dead. He was reportedly buried at Snagov, an island monastery located near Bucharest.






== IV. Atrocities ==

M
ore than anything else the historical Dracula is known for his inhuman cruelty. Impalement was Dracula's preferred method of torture and execution. Impalement was and is one of the most gruesome ways of dying imaginable. Dracula usually had a horse attached to each of the victim's legs an a sharpened stake was gradually forced into the body. The end of the stake was usually oiled and care was taken that the stake not be too sharp; else the victim might die too rapidly from shock. Normally the stake was inserted into the body through the buttocks and was often forced through the body until it emerged from the mouth. However, there were many instances where victims were impaled through other bodily orifices or through the abdomen or chest. Infants were sometimes impaled on the stake forced through their mother's chests. The records indicate that victims were sometimes impaled so that they hung upside down on the stake.


Death by impalement was slow and painful. Victims sometimes endured for hours or days. Dracula often had the stakes arranged in various geometric patterns. The most common pattern was a ring of concentric circles in the outskirts of a city that was his target. The height of the spear indicated the rank of the victim. The decaying corpses were often left up for months. It was once reported that an invading Turkish army turned back in fright when it encountered thousands of rotting corpses impaled on the banks of the Danube. In 1461 Mohammed II, the conqueror of Constantinople, a man not noted for his squeamishness, returned to Constantinople after being sickened by the sight of twenty thousand impaled corpses outside of Dracula's capital of Tirgoviste. The warrior sultan turned command of the campaign against Dracula over to subordinates and returned to Constantinople.


Thousands were often impaled at a single time. Ten thousand were impaled in the Transylvanian city of Sibiu (where Dracula had once lived) in 1460. In 1459, on St. Bartholomew's Day, Dracula had thirty thousand of the merchants and boyars of the Transylvanian city of Brasov impaled. One of the most famous woodcuts of the period shows Dracula feasting amongst a forest of stakes and their grisly burdens outside Brasov while a nearby executioner cuts apart other victims.


Impalement was Dracula's favorite but by no means hjis only method of torture. The list of tortues employed by this cruel prince reads like an inventory of Hell's tools: nails in heads, cutting off of limbs, blinding, strangulation, burning, cutting off of noses and ears, mutilation of sexual organs (especially in the case of women), scalping, skinning, exposure to the elements or to wild animals and boiling alive.


No one was immune to Dracula's attentions. His victims included women and children, peasants and great lords, ambassadors from foreign powers and merchants. However, the vast majority of his victims came from the merchants and boyars of Transylvania and his own Wallachia. Many have attempted to justify Dracula's actions on the basis of nascent nationalism and political necessity. Many of the merchants in Transylvania and Wallachia were Saxons who were seen as parasites, preying upon Romanian natives of Wallachia, while the boyars had proven their disloyalty time and time again. Dracula's own father and older brother were murdered by unfaithful boyars. However, many of Dracula's victims were Wallachians and few deny that he derived a perverted pleasure from his actions.


Dracula began his reign of terror almost as soon as he came to power. His first significant act of cruelty may have been motivated by a desire of revenge as well as a need to solidify his power. Early in his main reign he gave a feast for his boyars and their families to celebrate Easter. Dracula was well aware that many of these same nobles were part of the conspiracy that led to his father's assasination and the burying alive of his elder brother, Mircea. Many had also played a role in the overthrow of numerous Wallachian princes. During the feast Dracula asked his noble guests how many princes had ruled during their life times. All of the nobles present had out lived several princes. One answered that at least thirty princes had held the throne during his life. None had seen less than seven reigns. Dracula immediately had all the assembled nobles arrested. The older boyars and their families were impaled on the spot. The younger and healthier nobles and their families were marched north from Tirgoviste to the ruins of a castle in the mountains above the Arges River. Dracula was determined to rebuild this ancient fortress as his own stronghold and refuge. The enslaved boyars and their families were forced to labor for months rebuilding the old castle with materials from another nearby ruin. According to the reports they labored until the clothes fell off their bodies and then were forced to continue working naked. Very few of the old gentry survived the ordeal of building Castle Dracula.


Throughout his reign Dracula systematically eradicated the old boyar class of Wallachia. The old boyars had repeatedly undermined the power of the prince during previous reigns and had been responsible for the violent overthrow of several princes. Apparently Dracula was determined that his own power be on a modern and thoroughly secure footing. In the place of the executed boyars Dracula promoted new men from among the free peasantry and middle class; men who would be loyal only to their prince. Many of Dracula's acts of cruelty can be interpreted as efforts to strengthen and modernize the central government at the expense of the feudal powers of nobility and great towns.


Dracula was also constantly on guard against the adherents of the Danesti clan. Some of his raids into Transylvania may have been efforts to capture would-be princes of the Danesti. Several members of the Danesti clan died at Dracula's hands. Vladislav II was murdered soon after Dracula came to power in 1456. Another Danesti prince was captured during one of Dracula's forays into Transylvania. Thousands of citizens of the town that had sheltered his rival were impaled by Dracula. The captured Danesti prince was forced to read his own funeral oration while kneeling before an open grave before his execution.


Dracula's atrocities against the people of Wallachia were usually attempts to enforce his own moral code upon his county. He appears to have been particularly concerned with female chastity. Maidens who lost their virginity, adulterous wives and unchaste widows were all targets of Dracula's cruelty. Such women often had their sexual organs cut out or their breasts cut off. They were also often impaled through the v****a on red-hot stakes that were forced through the body until they emerged from the mouth. One report tells of the execution of an unfaithful wife. Dracula had the woman's breasts cut off, then she was skinned and impaled in a square in Tirgoviste with her skin lying on a nearby table. Dracula also insisted that his people be honest and hard working. Merchants who cheated their customers were likely to find themselves mounted on a stake beside common thieves.






== V. Anecdotal Evidence ==

M
uch of the information we have about Vlad III comes from pamphlets published in Germany and Russia after his death. The German pamphlets appeared shortly after Dracula's death and, at least initially, may have been politically inspired. At that time Matthias Corvinus of Hungary was seeking to bolster his own reputation in the Holy Roman Empire and may have intended the early pamphlets as justification of his less than vigorous support of his vassal. The pamphlets were also a form of mass entertainment in a society where the printing press was just coming into widespread use. Much like the subject matter of the supermarket tabloids of today, the cruel life of the Wallachian tyrant was easily sensationalized. The pamphlets were reprinted numerous times over the thirty or so years following Dracula's death – strong proof of their popularity.


The German pamphlets painted Dracula as an inhuman monster who terrorized the land and butchered innocents with sadistic glee. The Russian pamphlets took a somewhat different view. The princes of Moscow were at the time just beginning to build the basis of what would become the autocracy of the czars. They were also having considerable trouble with disloyal, often troublesome boyars. In Russia, Dracula was presented as a cruel but just prince whose actions were directed toward the greater good of his people. Despite the differences in interpretation the pamphlets, regardless of their land of origin, agree remarkably well as to specifics. The level of agreement between that various pamphlets has led most historians to conclude that at least the broad outlines of the events covered actually occurred.


Romanian verbal tradition provides another important source for the life of Vlad Dracula. Legends and tales concerning the Impaler have remained a part of folklore among the Romanian peasantry. These tales have been passed down from generation to generation for five hundred years. Through constant retelling they have become somewhat garbled and confused and they are gradually being forgotten by the younger generations. However, they still provide valuable information about Dracula and his relationship with his people. Many of the tales contained in the pamphlets are also found in the verbal tradition, though with a somewhat different emphasis. Among the Romanian peasantry Dracula is remembered as a just prince who defended his people from foreigners, whether those foreigners be Turkish invaders or German merchants. He is also remembered as somewhat of a champion of the common man against the oppression of the boyars. Dracula's fierce insistence on honesty is a central part of the verbal tradition. Many of the anecdotes contained in the pamphlets and in the verbal tradition demonstrate the prince's efforts to eliminate crime and dishonesty from his domain. However, despite the more positive interpretation, the Romanian verbal tradition also remembers Dracula as an exceptionally cruel and often capricious ruler.


There are several events that are common to all the pamphlets, regardless of their nation of origin. Many of these events are also found in the Romanian verbal tradition. Specific details may vary among the different versions of these anecdotes, but the general coarse of events usually agrees to a remarkable extent. For example, in some versions the foreign ambassadors received by Dracula at Tirgoviste are Florentine, in others they are Turkish. The nature of their offense against the Prince also varies from version to version. However, all versions agree that Dracula, in response to some real or imagined insult, had their hats nailed to their heads. Some of the sources view Dracula's actions as justified, others view his acts as crimes of wanton and senseless cruelty. There are about nine anecdotes that are almost universal in the Dracula literature:


(1) The Golden Cup


Dracula was known throughout his land for his fierce insistence on honesty and order. Thieves seldom dared practice their trade within Dracula's domain – they knew that the stake awaited any who were caught. Dracula was so confident in the effectiveness of his law that he placed a golden cup on display in the central square of Tirgoviste. The cup was never stolen and rermained entirely unmolested throughout Dracula's reign.


(2) The Foreign Merchant


A merchant from a foreign land once visited Dracula's capital of Tirgoviste. Aware of the reputation of Dracula's land for honesty, he left a treasure-laden cart unguarded in the street over night. Returning to his wagaon in the morning, the merchant was shocked to find 160 golden ducats missing. When the merchant complained of his loss to the prince, Dracula assured him that his money would be returned and invited him to remain in the palace that night. Dracula then issued a proclamation to the city – find the thief and return the money or the city will be destroyed. During the night he ordered that 160 ducats plus one extra be taken from his own treasury and placed in the merchant's cart. On returning to his cart in the morning and counting his money the merchant discovered the extra ducat. The merchant returned to Dracula and reported that his money had indeed been returned plus an extra ducat. Meanwhile the thief had been captured and turned over to the prince's guards along with the stolen money. Dracula ordered the thief impaled and informed the merchant that if he had not reported the extra ducat he would have been impaled alongside the thief.


(3) The Two Monks


There are several versions of this anecdote. In some the two monks were from a Catholic monastery in Wallachia or wandering Catholic monks from a foreign land. In either case, the Catholic monks would be viewed as representatives of a foreign power by Dracula. In other versions of the story the monks were from a Romanian Orthodox establishment (the native church of Wallachia). Dracula's motivation also varies considerably amomng the different versions of the story.


All versions of the story agree that two monks visited Dracula in his palace at Tirgoviste. Curious to see the reaction of the churchman, Dracula showed them rows of impaled corpes in the courtyard. When asked their opinions of his actions by the prince, one of the monks responded, "You are appointed by God to punish evil-doers." The other monk had the moral courage to condemn the cruel prince. In the version of the story most common in the German pamphlets, Dracula rewarded the sycophantic monk and impaled the honest monk. In the version found in Russian pamphlets and in Romanian verbal tradition Dracula rewarded the honest monk for his integrity and courage and impaled the sycophant for his dishonesty.


(4) The Polish Nobleman


Benedict de Boithor, a Polish nobleman in the service of the King of Hungary, visited Dracula at Tirgoviste in September of 1458. At dinner one evening Dracula ordered a golden spear brought and set up directly in front of the royal envoy. Dracula then asked the envoy why he thought this spear had been set up. Benedict replied that he imagined that some boyar had offended the prince and that Dracula intended to honor him. Dracula then responded that he had, in fact, had the spear set up in the honor of his noble, Polish guest. The Pole then responded that had he done anything to deserve death that Dracula should do as he thought best. He further asserted that in that case Dracula would not be responsible for his own death, rather he would be responsible for his own death for incurring the displeasure of the prince. Drcaula was greatly pleased by this answer and showered the man with gifts while declaring that had he answered in any other manner he would have been immediately impaled.


(5) The Foreign Ambassadors


There are at least two versions of this story in the literature. As with the story of the two monks, one version is common in the German pamphlets and views Dracula's actions unfavorably while the other version is common in eastern Europe and sees Dracula's actions in a much more favorable light. In both versions ambassadors of a foreign power visit Dracula's court at Tirgoviste. When granted an audience with the prince the envoys refused to remove their hats as was the custom when in the presence of the prince in Wallachia. Angered at this sign of disrespect Dracula had the ambassadors' hats nailed to their heads so that they might never remove them.


In the German version of the story the envoys are Florentine and refused to remove their hats to demonstrate their superiority. When Dracula asked the ambassadors why they wouldn't remove their hats they responded thet such was not their custom and that they wouldn't remove their hats, even for the Holy Roman Emporer. Dracula immediately had their hats nailed to their heads so that they might never come off and had the ambassadors ejected from his court. In Germany and in the West, where the concept of diplomatic immunity was at least given lip service, this was held to be an act of barbarity against the representatives of a freindly power.


In the version of the story common in the east, the envoys are Turkish. When ushered into the presence of the prince, the Turks refused to remove their Phrygian caps. When questioned they answered that it was not the custom of their fathers to remove their hats. Dracula then ordered their hats nailed to their heads with three nails so that they might never have to break such an excellent tradition. The envoys were sent back to the sultan. In the east this was held to be a courageous act of defiance in the face of the Ottoman sultan. It should also be noted that the nailing of hats to heads of those who displeased a monarch was not an unknown act in eastern Europe. Apparently this method was occasionally used by the princes of Moscow when faced by unpleasant envoys.


(6) Dracula's Mistress


Dracula once had a mistress who lived in a house in the back streets of Tirgoviste. This woman apparently loved the prince to distraction and was always anxious to please him. Dracula was often moody and depressed and the woman made every effort to lighten her lover's burdens. Once, when Dracula was particularly depressed, the woman dared tell him a lie in an effort to cheer him up; she told him that she was with child. Dracula warned the woman not to joke about such matters but she insisted on the truth of her claim despite her knowledge of the prince's feelings about dishonesty. Dracula had the woman examined by the bath matrons to determine the veracity of her claim. When informed that the woman was lying Dracula drew his knife and cut her open from the groin to her breasts while proclaiming his desire for the world to see where he had been. Dracula then left the woman to die in agony.


(7) The Lazy Woman


Dracula once noticed a man working in the fields while wearing a too short caftan. The prince stopped and asked the man whether or not he had a wife. When the man answered in the affirmative Dracula had the woman brought before him and asked her how she spent her days. The poor, frightened woman stated that she spent her days washing, baking and sewing. The prince pointed out her husband's short caftan as evidence of her laziness and dishonesty and ordered her impaled despite her husband's protestations that he was well satisfied with his wife. Dracula then ordered another woman to marry the peasant but admonished her to work hard or she would suffer her predecessor's fate.


( cool The Nobleman with the Keen Sense of Smell


On St. Bartholomew's Day in 1459 Dracula caused thirty thousand of the merchants and nobles of the Transylvanian city of Brasov to be impaled. In order that he might better enjoy the results of his orders, the prince commanded that his table be set up and that his boyars join him for a feast amongst the forest of impaled corpses. While dining, Dracula noticed that one of his boyars was holding his nose in an effort to alleviate the terrible smell of clotting blood and emptied bowels. Dracula then ordered the sensitive nobleman impaled on a stake higher than all the rest so that he might be above the stench.


In another version of this story the sensitive nobleman is an envoy of the Transylvanian cities of Brasov and Sibiu sent to appeal to the cruel Wallachian to spare those cities. While hearing the nobleman's appeal Dracula walked amongst the stakes and their grisly burdens. Some of the victims still lived. Nearly overcome by the smell of drying blood and human wastes the nobleman asked the prince why he walked amidst the awful stench. Dracula then asked the envoy if he found the stench oppressive. The envoy, seeing an opportunity to ingratiate himself with Dracula, responded that his only concern was for the health and welfare of the prince. Dracula, angered at the nobleman's dishonesty ordered him impaled on the spot on a very high stake so that he might be above the offending odors.


(9) The Burning of the Sick and Poor


Dracula was very concerned that all his subjects work and contribute to the common welfare. He once noticed that the poor, vagrants, beggars and cripples had become very numerous in his land. Consequently, he issued an invitation to all the poor and sick in Wallachia to come to Tirgoviste for a great feast, claiming that no one should go hungry in his land. As the poor and crippled arrived in the city they were ushered into a great hall where a fabulous feast was prepared fore them. The prince's guests ate and drank late into the night, when Dracula himself made an appearance. "What else do you desire? Do you want to be without cares, lacking nothing in this world?", asked the prince. When they responded positively Dracula ordered the hall boarded up and set on fire. None escaped the flames. Dracula explained his action to the boyars by claiming that he did this, "in order that they represent no further burden to other men so that no one will be poor in my realm."






== VI. Dracula and the Vampire Myth ==

I
t is unclear why Bram Stoker chose this fifteenth century Romanian prince as the model for his fictional vampire. Stoker was friends with a Hungarian professor from Buda-Pest and many have suggested that Dracula's name might have been mentioned by this friend. Regardless of how the name came to Stoker's attention the cruel history of the Impaler would have readily loaned itself to Stoker's purposes. The events of Dracula's life were played out in a region of the world that was still basically medieval even in Stoker's time. The Balkans had only recently shaken off the Turkish yoke when Stoker started working on his novel and the superstitions of the Dark Ages were still prevelent. Transylvania had long been a part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, but it too had endured a long period of Turkish domination and its culture was still largely medieval.


The legend of the vampire was and still is deeply rooted in that region. There have always been vampire-like creatures in the mythologies of many cultures. However, the vampire, as he became known in Europe and hence America, largely originated in the Slavic and Greek lands of eastern Europe. A veritable epidemic of vampirism swept through eastern Europe beginning in the late seventeenth century and continuing through the eighteenth century. The number of reported cases rose dramatically in Hungary and the Balkans. From the Balkans the plague spread westward into Germany, Italy, France, England and Spain. Travellers returning from the Balkans brought with them tales of the undead, igniting an interest in the vampire that has continued to this day. Philosophers in the West began to study the phenomenon. It was during this period that Dom Augustin Calmet wrote his famous treatise on vampirism in Hungary. It was also during this period that authors and playwrights first began to explore the vampire myth. Stoker's novel was merely the culminating work of a long series of works that were inspired by the reports coming from the Balkans and Hungary.


Given the history of the vampire myth in Europe it is perhaps natural that Stoker should place his great vampire in the heart of the region that gave birth to the myth. Once Stoker had determined on a locality Vlad Dracula would stand out as one of the most notorious rulers of the selected region. He was obscure enough that few would recognize the name and those who did would know him for his acts of brutal cruelty; Dracula was a natural candidate for vampirism. Why Stoker chose to relocate his vampire from Wallachia to the north in Transylvania remains a mystery.


The vampire myth is still wide-spread in eastern Europe. Similarly the name of Dracula is still remembered in the Romanian oral tradition, but that is the end of any connection between Dracula and the vampire myth in folklore. Outside of Stoker's novel the name of Dracula was never linked with the myth of the vampire. Despite his inhuman cruelty, in Romania Dracula is remembered as a national hero who resisted the Turkish conquerors and asserted Romanian national sovereignty against the powerful Hungarian kingdom.

1560: Elizabeth Bathory is born into one of the oldest and wealthiest families in Transylvania. Her family had many powerful relatives -- a cardinal, princes, and a cousin who was prime minister of Hungary are among these relatives. The most famous relative was Istvan (ISHT-vahn) Bathory (1533-86). Istvan was prince of Transylvania and king of poland from 1575-86. It has been said that At around the age of 4 or 5, Elizabeth had violent seizures. These may have been caused by epilepsy or another neurological disorder and may have something to do with her "psychotic" behavior later in life.

1575: Age 15, Elizabeth married Count Ferenc (pronounced FAIR-entz) Nadasdy (NAW-dawzhd with silent y). The Count was 26 years of age. The count took Elizabeth's surname so that she could keep her name. They lived together in Castle Cséjthe (which in hungarian is pronounced CHAY-tuh). In Slovak this Castle is named Cachtice (pronounced CHAKH-teet-suh). [To this day there is rivalry between the Hungarians and the Slovak's and you will get a blank expression if you refer to the "wrong" name.] The count spent a great deal of time away from home fighting in wars and for this he was nicknamed "The Black Hero of Hungary". While her husband was away Elizabeth's manservant Thorko introduced her to the occult. For a brief time Elizabeth eloped with a "dark stranger". Upon her return to Castle Cachtice the count did forgive her for her leaving. Back at the castle, Elizabeth couldn't tolerate her domineering mother-in-law. With the help of her old nurse Ilona Joo, she began to torture the servant girls. Her other accomplices included the major-domo János Ujvary (pronounced YAH-nosh OOEE-vahr-yuh), Thorko, a forest witch named Darvula and a witch Dorottya Szentes. The first ten years of their marriage, Elizabeth bore no children because she and Ferenc shared so little time together as he pursued his "career." Then around 1585, Elizabeth bore a girl whom she named Anna, and over the following nine years gave birth to two more girls, Ursula and Katherina, and in 1598 bore her first and only son, Paul. Judging from letters she wrote to relatives, she was a good wife and protective mother, which was not surprising since nobles usually treated immediate family very differently from the lower servants and peasant classes.

1600: At age 51, Count Ferenc died in battle and thus began Elizabeth's period of atrocities. First, she sent her hated mother-in-law away from the Castle. By this time it is thought that she had dabbled into some forms of sorcery, attending rituals that included the sacrificing of horses and other animals. Elizabeth, now 40 years old, grew increasingly vain and she feared the thought of aging as she may lose her beauty. One day a servant girl accidentially pulled her hair while combing it. Elizabeth slapped the girl's hand so hard she drew blood. The girls blood fell into ELizabeth's hand and she immediately thought that her skin took on the freshness of her young maid. She believed that she had found the secret of eternal youth. Elizabeth had her major-domo and Thorko strip the maid and then cut her and drain her blood into a huge vat. Elizabeth bathed in it to beautify her entire body.

1600 - 1610: Elizabeth's henchmen continued to provided Elizabeth with new girls for the blood-draining ritual and her blood baths. Elizabeth went out of her way to see to it that the dead girls were given proper Christian burials by the local Protestant pastor, at least initially. As the body count rose, the pastor refused to perform his duties in this respect, because there were too many girls coming to him from Elizabeth who had died of "unknown and mysterious causes." She then threatened him in order to keep him from spreading the news of her "hobby" and continued to have the bodies buried secretly. Near the end, many bodies were disposed of in haphazard and dangerously conspicuous locations (like nearby fields, wheat silos, the stream running behind the castle, the kitchen vegetable garden, etc.). But one of her intended victims escaped and told the authorities about what was happening at Castle Cachtice. King Mátyás (MAHT-yash) of Hungary ordered Elizabeth's own cousin, Count György (pronounced DYERD-yuh) Thurzo, governor of the province to raid the castle. On December 30, 1610 they raided the castle and they were horrified by the terrible sights. One dead girl in the main room, drained of blood and another alive whose body had been pierced with holes. In the dungeon they discoverd several living girls, some of whose bodies had been pierced several times. Below the castle, they exhumed the bodies of some 50 girls.

1611: A trial was held at Bitcse. Elizabeth, who refused to plead either guilty or innocent, and never appeared in the trial.. At this trial Johannes Ujvary, major-domo, testified that about 37 unmarried girls has been killed, six of whom he had personally recruited to work at the castle. The trial revealed that most of the girls were tortured for weeks or even months. They were cut with scissors, pricked with pins, even prodded with burning irons onto short spikes in a cage hung from the ceiling to provide Bathory with a "blood shower". Sometimes the two witches tortured these girls, or the Countess did it herself. Elizabeth's old nurse testified that about 40 girls had been tortured and killed. In fact, Elizabeth killed 612 women -- and in her diary, she documented their deaths. A complete transcript of the trial was made at the time and it survices today in Hungary. Of the people involved in these killings, all but Countess Bathory and the two witches were beheaded and cremated. Due to her nobility, Elizabeth was not allowed by law to be executed. The tow accomplices had their fingers torn out and were burned alive. The court never convicted Countess Elizabeth of any crime, however she was put under house arrest. She was sentenced to life imprisonment in her torture chamber and stonemasons were brought to wall up the windows and doors of the with the Countess inside. They left a small hole through which food could be passed. King Mátyás II demanded the death penalty for Elizabeth but because of her cousin, the prime minister, he agreed to an indefinitely delayed sentence, which really meant solitary confinement for life.

1614: On July 31 Elizabeth (age 54) dictated her last will and testament to two cathedral priests from the Esztergom bishopric. She wished that what remained of her family holdings be divided up equally among her children, her son Paul and his descendants were the basic inheritors though. Late in August of the year 1614 one of the countess's jailers wanted to get a good look at her, since she was still reputedly one of the most beautiful women in Hungary. Peeking through the small aperture in her walled-up cell, he saw her lying face down on the floor. Countess Elizabeth Bathory was dead. Her body was intended to be buried in the church in the town of Cachtice, but the grumbling of local inhabitants found abhorrent the idea of having the "infamous Lady" placed in their town, on hallowed ground no less! Considering this, and the fact that she was "one of the last of the descendants of the Ecsed line of the Bathory family", her body was placed to the northeastern Hungarian town of Ecsed, the original Bathory family seat.

More Information:

All records of Elizabeth were sealed for more than a century, and her name was forbidden to be spoken in Hungarian society.
Unlike most females of the time, Elizabeth was well educated and her intelligence surpassed even some of the men of her time. Elizabeth was exceptional, becoming "fluent in Hungarian, Latin, and German... when most Hungarian nobles could not even spell or write...Even the ruling prince of Transylvania at the time was barely literate"(20). Some modern scholars and contemporaries of hers postulated that she may have been insane, thus accounting for her seemingly inconceivable atrocities, but even a brief glance into her past reveals a person fully in control of her faculties.
Dracula, created by the Irish author Bram Stoker, was based, albeit loosely, on the Romanian Prince, Vlad Dracula, the Impaler. Raymond T. McNally, who has written four books on the figure of Dracula in history, literature, and vampirism, in his fifth book, "Dracula was a Woman," presents insights into the fact that Stoker's Count Dracula was also strongly influenced by the legends of Elizabeth Bathory of Hungary. Why, for example, make a Romanian Prince into a Hungarian Count? Why, if there are no accounts of Vlad Dracula drinking human blood, does blood drinking consume the Dracula of Stoker's novel, who, contrary to established vampire myth, seems to appear younger after doing so? The answers, of course, lie in examining the story of Countess Elizabeth Bathory.
It was largely Slovak servants whom Erzsebet killed, so the name "Csejthe" is only spoken in derision, and she is still called "The Hungarian Whore" in the area.

When did vampires begin? As with many legends, the exact date of origin is unknown; but evidence of the vampire tale can be found with the ancient Chaldeans in Mesopotamia, near the Tigris and the Euphrates rivers, and with Assyrian writings on clay or stone tablets. The land of the Chaldeans is also called the "Ur of the Chaldeans," which was the original home of Abraham from the Bible.

"Lilith" was a possible vampire from the ancient Hebrew Bible and its interpretations. Although she is described in the book of Isaiah, her roots are more likely in Babylonian demonology. Lilith was a monster who roamed at night taking on the appearance of an owl. She would hunt, seeking to kill newborn children and pregnant women. Lilith was the wife of Adam before there was Adam and Eve, according to tradition; but she was demonized because she refused to obey Adam. (Or to see it from a more liberated viewpoint, she demanded equal rights with Adam). Naturally, she was considered evil for such "radical" desires and became a vampire who eventually attacked the children of Adam and Eve -- namely, all human descendants.

References to vampires can be found in many lands, and some scholars believe this indicates that the vampire story developed independently in these various lands and was not passed from one to the other. Such an independently occurring folktale is curious indeed.

References to vampires can be found among the ancient civilizations of the Mediterranean such as Egypt, Greece and Rome. The ancient Greeks believed in the strigoe or lamiae, who were monsters who ate children and drank their blood. Lamia, as the mythology goes, was the lover of Zeus; but Zeus' wife, Hera, fought against her. Lamia was driven insane, and she killed her own offspring. At night, it was said, she hunted other human children to kill as well.

One tale known by both the Greeks and Romans, for example, concerns the wedding of a young man named Menippus. At the wedding a guest, who was a noted philosopher called Apollonius of Tyana, carefully observed the bride, who was said to be beautiful. Apollonius finally accused the wife of being a vampire, and according to the story (as it was later told by a scholar named Philostratus in the first century A.D.) the wife confessed to vampirism. Allegedly she was planning to marry Menippus merely to have him handy as a source of fresh blood to drink.

Vampire tales occurred in ancient China, where the monsters were called kiang shi. In ancient India and Nepal, as well, vampires may have existed -- at least in legend. Ancient paintings on the walls of caves depict blood drinking creatures; the Nepalese "Lord of Death" is depicted holding a blood-filled goblet in the form of a human skull standing in a pool of blood. Some of these wall paintings are as old as 3000 B.C., it is believed. Rakshasas are described in the ancient Indian holy writings called the Vedas. These writings (circa 1500 B.C.) depict the Rakshasas (or destroyers) as vampires. There is also a monster in ancient India's lore which hangs from a tree upside-down, not unlike a bat, and is devoid of its own blood. This creature, called Baital, is in legend a vampire.

Other ancient Asians, such as the Malayans, believed in a type of vampire called the "Penanggalen." This creature consisted of a human head with entrails that left its body and searched for the blood of others, especially of infants. The creature lived by drinking the victims' blood.

It is also said that the vampire may have lived in Mexico prior to the arrival of Spanish Conquistadors, according to the renown vampire author Montague Summers whose 1928 book The Vampire -- His Kith and Kin is a classic. He further wrote that Arabia knew of the vampire as well. Vampire-like beings appeared in the "Tales of the Arabian Nights" called algul; this was a ghoul which consumed human flesh.

Africa, with its spirit-based religions, may be seen as having legends of vampire-like beings as well. One tribe, the Caffre, held the belief that the dead could return and survive on the blood of the living.

In ancient Peru there were also vampire legends; the canchus were believed to be devil worshipers who sucked the blood of the young.

Thus from ancient times and from a bounty of exotic lands came forth the vampires. It is from these ancient fears about death and the magical, life-sustaining powers of blood that the vampires as we know them today have evolved.

Throughout history the legend of the vampire has been used to "explain" other natural phenomena that primitive people who lacked scientific knowledge could not otherwise explain. Possibly the most astonishing belief which people associated vampires with was the Black Death during the Middle Ages in Europe.

The Black Death, as we now know, was actually Bubonic plague spread by fleas and rats. The plague (which came from the East, not unlike the vampire) may have killed as much as a third of the population of Europe in the 1300s. Some people of the day, however, associated the multitude of deaths with vampires. Somehow they believed that the deaths were the workings of these monsters; perhaps the vampires spread plague, they may have thought. In some cases people believed a deceased relative returned as a vampire and killed a victim (who actually died of the plague). Alternately, it was believed a dead enemy could return and kill someone turning the victim into a vampire as well. Many graves were dug up and the bodies of suspected vampires mutilated to "kill" the vampire.

Idiotic methods were used to "locate" the graves of vampires. For example, a virgin was placed naked on a horse, and the horse was paraded through a graveyard. If the horse (which was apparently more intelligent than the people) decided not to walk over a certain burial site, this was assumed to be the grave of a vampire. The body was immediately exhumed and mutilated to "kill" the vampire and, yes, thereby stop the plague which was devastating the region.

Some of the most foolish vampire beliefs involved the methods used for killing vampires or stopping the spread of vampirism. It is important to remember, however, that while these beliefs seem absurd today, in an age when ignorance ruled unchecked, desperate people became susceptible to the power of superstitions.

Corpses were sometimes buried face-down. If the corpse became a vampire it would actually dig deeper into the ground in an attempt to escape the grave, if it was facing the wrong direction -- or so it was thought. Wooden stakes were sometimes planted in the ground above the grave, so if the body rose it would stab itself on the stake -- hopefully through the heart.

Corpses were sometimes wrapped in a carpet or cloth to make it more difficult for them to rise from the dead. Alternately, the legs or arms were tied up with rope.

Large rocks were often placed over the grave to prevent the corpse's return. (Could this possibly be the origin of the modern tombstone?) And it is significant to note that some people consider the vampire to be a type of ghost which lives after death, transcending the grave. What better way to keep the ghost in the grave than seal it in stone?

The natural process of bodily decomposition after death sometimes convinced people that corpses were actually transforming into vampires: the hair and nails continued to grow, indicating continued life; the corpse bloated from naturally occurring gasses in the body, meaning it fed on the living; blood sometimes appeared near the mouth as a natural result of bodily decay, indicating the drinking of blood; the generally grotesque appearance of the corpse complete with pale skin, indicating a vampiric need for blood.

Ignorant people followed superstitions to thwart assault from vampires, too. Two of the most commonly known substances used to scare away vampires were the herbs "wolfsbane" and, of course, garlic. It is theorized that people during the Middle Ages believed that the horrible smell of the dead was related to the cause of death, especially during the Black Death, and that the deaths were somehow related to vampires. It is not unlikely that herbs would be used to counteract the smell of death, considering the potent aroma of garlic. Also, throughout the ages garlic had been used as a medicinal herb even by the ancient Romans. Ironically enough, modern science also believes garlic can help people become healthier, in some cases.

People developed curious beliefs relating to vampires. Some believed if a black cat or dog jumped over a corpse, the deceased could turn into a vampire. In Bukovinian lore a stake of ash wood should be driven through the chest of those who died by suicide; suicide being a presumed cause for vampirism. In several cultures, including old England, people who committed suicide were buried at a crossroads (a sign of the cross made by roads) to prevent the corpse from becoming a vampire.

Various people had their various methods for destroying vampires as well. In some Slavic nations a spike made of ash wood, if driven through the chest, was believed to kill a vampire -- this is everyone's favorite method, a stake through the heart. In different lands, however, the wood used sometimes needed to be from a certain tree. For example, oak wood did the job in Silesia, while hawthorn wood was required in Serbia.

Additionally, the heads of corpses suspected of being vampires were sometimes chopped off. Sometimes corpses were thrown into pools of water or burned.

These beliefs were based on the general ignorance of the population, but the greater tragedy of the vampire legend was that the actual ascendance of the belief of the vampire myth may have been helped through the deeds (and misdeeds) of organized religion.

The Church in Europe during the Middle Ages came to recognize the existence of vampires and changed it from a pagan folk myth into a creature of the Devil. The vampire, though clearly a thing of evil and a pagan myth, had its believability reinforced by preexisting Christian doctrines such as life after death, the resurrection of the body, and "transubstantiation." This was a concept based on the Last Supper and the dogma of Pope Innocent the III in 1215 A.D., that the "bread and wine" and its equivalent during Christian Communion literally transubstantiated into the actual body and blood of Christ. People who adhered to this belief, and who consumed the blood of Christ, would have little difficulty in believing the corrupted corollary to this -- the drinking of blood by evil demons, namely, vampires.

The Church during the Middle Ages gave credence to the belief in vampires, concluded that it alone had the power to stop vampirism, and then reinforced this position two centuries later in 1489 with its landmark book, Malleus Maleficarum. This work was actually designed to deal with the persecution of witches, but it could be applied to evil vampires as well. Unfortunately many innocent people fell victim to this document, and were tortured and executed for no good reason whatsoever. This book, known as The Hammer Against Witches in English, was used to help identify and persecute people who were supposedly in league with the Devil.

Two centuries after this, evidence that the Church still clung to a belief in vampires was found in the writing of the noted theologian Leo Allatius. As a Church scholar he studied the vrykolakas, the Greeks' concept of the vampire. In his 1645 work called On the Current Opinions of Certain Greeks, he concluded that vampires were often the result of excommunication. Proof of their vampirism is that the body does not decay, indicating that it cannot leave this earthly plane. A swollen body was also evidence of possible vampirism. As some bodies might not decay rapidly due to the type of chemicals in the soil or the cold air temperature, and since bodily swelling was the result of naturally produced gasses in a corpse, many a dead man was wrongly presumed to be a vampire. Oddly enough, incorruptibility --the failure of the dead body to decay -- was also a sign of holiness, even evidence of saintliness. The difference was that a vampire did not totally decay but did become grotesque in form with discoloration and bloating, while a holy body remained almost perfectly intact as if still alive. Also, vampires smelled bad during the lack of decay, whereas sanctified bodies did not. (Remember, you needed garlic to overcome the smell of the vampire's corrupting but non-decomposed, undead body.)

Furthermore, it was a common belief of early Greek Christians that a priest or bishop upon excommunicating an evil-doer could also prevent the sinner's body from decomposing, hence the soul would not be free to go to heaven and was left to dwell on earth until it received a pardon for its sins. In the western Church this belief was apparently also held. There was the case of the Archbishop of Bremen in the 10th century, St. Libentius. He was said to have excommunicated some pirates; the body of one of them was allegedly discovered many years later still undecomposed. It apparently required a pardon of its sins by a bishop before its body would dissolve to ashes -- so it was believed. The clergy thus had the power to make or break possible vampires through excommunication and absolution.

Leo Allatius may have been one of the first scholars to declare officially that vampires were under the power of the Devil and that they prowled at night.

Proof of the Church's power over vampires (and hence the power of the crucifix or holy cross to scare off vampires -- although more modern vampires appear to be less susceptible to this) dates all the way back, at least, to Medieval England. A writer named William of Newburgh discussed the case of a man who died in the 12th century A.D. Supposedly he rose from the dead to torment his wife. After causing much consternation with the local villagers and clergy, the bishop of the region pardoned the corpse in writing for all his past sins. The grave was opened and the actual written pardon was placed over the body of the "vampire." The people were surprised -- or maybe not -- to see the body was still in good condition without signs of decay, sure proof of vampirism. But fortunately for everyone, once the pardon was placed in the grave, the vampire visited no more. Note that this method of dispelling the vampire with an official Church document was remarkably more civil and legalistic than the ordinary way peasants would dispense with a vampire found in the grave -- by burning the corpse, ripping out its heart, chopping off its head, or giving it the old wooden stake through the heart.

In the early 1700s the Sorbonne university in Paris formally opposed the all too common practice in popular culture of mutilating corpses to prevent the dead from becoming vampires. The Sorbonne (which the renowned writer Voltaire had once been shocked to discover actually debated the legitimacy of the mythological vampire) finally took the apparently radical position at that time that the mutilation of corpses suspected of vampirism was a practice based on irrational superstitions.

The belief in vampires, however, did not go without intelligent criticism. Dom Augustine Calmet, a French Benedictine monk, actually wrote a book in 1746 which dared to question the existence of vampires, called A Treatise on Apparitions, Spirits and Vampires a.k.a. The Phantom World. Calmet challenged the rampant vampire superstitions of the day and required proof before acceptance of a belief. He especially doubted that vampires could perform superhuman tasks, such as rising from the dead. He also analyzed and critiqued the supposed vampire epidemics throughout Europe, questioning their basis in reality.

Eventually the centuries of ignorance and superstition gave way to the Age of Reason and Enlightenment and the rise of the scientific method. Eventually medical science was able to prove that plagues, such as the Black Death, were not spread by evil, metaphysical vampires but had a very physical, although microscopic, biological basis.

Gilles de Rais (also spelled Retz) (autumn of 1404 – October 26, 1440) was a French noble, soldier, and one time brother-in-arms of Joan of Arc. He was later accused and ultimately convicted of infanticide - torturing, raping and murdering dozens, if not hundreds, of children. Along with Erzsébet Báthory, another sadistic aristocrat acting more than a century later, he is considered by some historians to be a precursor of the modern serial killer.

Gilles de Rais was born in 1404 in the château of Machécoul, near the border of Brittany. His father was Guy de Montmorency-Laval, from the house of Laval who had inherited, via adoption, the fortunes of Jeanne de Rais and Marie de Craon.

His father died when he was nine, and his mother immediately married again and abandoned her two children to die two years later c.1415. Gilles and his brother René must have felt alone in the world.

Their father's will made provision for them to be brought up by a cousin and educated by two priests; instead they were sent to live with their grandfather, Jean de Craon, who had a violent temper, but was too wrapped up in his own affairs to pay attention to his grandsons. His own son had been killed at the battle of Agincourt in 1415, so that Gilles became heir to the entire vast fortune. He was an intelligent child who read Latin fluently and loved music. Gilles came from a family of medieval knights, so he was trained in the art if war and chivalry..

He already had a taste for the "forbidden" and secretly devoured Suetonius, with his details of the sexual excesses of the Roman emperors.

Five years later, he went to the court of the Dauphin, the uncrowned heir to the throne, and made a considerable impression with his good looks and fine breeding.

Jean de Craon sought to marry Gilles off to the heiress Jeanne de Paynol; this was unsuccessful. Jean de Craon then attempted to join de Rais with Beatrice de Rohan, niece of the Duke of Brittany, again with no success. Eventually he was able to substantially increase Rais's fortune by marrying him off to Catherine de Thouars of Brittany, heiress of La Vendee and Poitou, but only after first kidnapping her.

Later stories connecting Rais with the legendary wife-murderer Bluebeard may have stemmed from the fact that two of several previous marriage schemes were thwarted by the death of the intended bride. By his marriage to the extremely wealthy heiress, Gilles de Rais became one of the richest noble in Europe, From 1427 to 1435, Rais served as a commander in the Royal Army,


Rais took the side of the Montfort Dukes of Brittany against a rival house led by Olivier de Blois, Count of Penthievre, who took John VI, Duke of Brittany prisoner. He was able to secure the Duke's release, and was rewarded for this deed by generous land grants which the Breton parliament converted to monetary gifts.

In 1429 he was at Chinon when a seventeen-year-old peasant girl named Jeanne, from the village of Domremy, demanded to see the Dauphin, and told him that she had been sent to defeat the English, who were now laying siege to Orléans. The Dauphin thought she was mad, but decided it was worth a try. He ordered Gilles to accompany "the Maid" (la pucelle) to Orléans, perhaps because he had noticed that Gilles was fascinated by the girl's boyish figure and peasant vitality.

Gilles fought by her side when she raised the siege of Orléans, and again at Patay, when she once more defeated the English. At twenty-four, Gilles was a national hero. Although a few authors have tended to exaggerate the position he held during the latter campaigns, surviving bursary records show that he only commanded a personal contingent of some 25 men-at-arms and eleven archers, and was one of many dozens of such commanders.

However, when the Dauphin decided it was time for the crowning, Gilles was awarded the honour to collect the holy oil with which the king was to be anointed. After the coronation, Gilles was appointed Marshall of France and allowed to include the fleur de lys in his coat of arms. But after her military triumphs, jealous ministers soon undermined Joan of Arc’s career, and the king was too weak and self-indulgent to withstand the pressure. In the following year she was captured by the English, and burned at Rouen in 1431 with the Church and most of the French noblemen consent; she was only nineteen. (Jeanne who has been made a saint since is one of the great figure of France history and a paradox, she saved thousands of people and pushed the English back to their filthy Channel but she was treated with the most cruelty by the very one who profited from her; she was guided by God’s voice but was called a witch and burned…).

Gilles still had one more martial exploit to come--the deliverance of Lagny from the English. After the coronation of Charles VII, he retired to his estates, at Machecoul, Malemort, La Suze, Champtoce and Tiffauges, promoting theatrical performances and exhausting the large fortune he had inherited.

He spent his time and money in collecting a fine library, including a copy of Saint Augustine’s City of God; but above all he devoted himself to making the religious services held in the chapels of his castles as sumptuous and magnificent as possible.

After the years of glory, Gilles seemed to have found life unbearably dull. During the course of the following year, according to his later confession, he committed his first sex murder, that of a boy. His grandfather willed his sword and cuirass to the younger brother René but died in the following year. Gilles was suddenly able to do what he liked.

One day, a young boy dubbed Poitou was brought to the château and raped, after which Gilles prepared to cut his throat. At this point, Gilles de Sille pointed out that Poitou was such a handsome boy that he would make an admirable page. So Poitou was allowed to live, and become one of Gilles' most trusted mignons.

Gilles' attacks of sadism seem to have descended on him like an epileptic fit, and turned him into a kind of maniac. A boy would be lured to the castle on some pretext, and once inside Gilles' chamber, was hung from the ceiling on a rope or chain. But before he had lost consciousness, he was taken down and reassured that Gilles meant him no harm. Then he would be stripped and raped, after which Gilles, or one of his cronies would cut this throat or decapitate him (they had a special sword called a braquemard for removing the head).

But Gilles was still not sated; he would continue to sexually abuse the dead body, playing with the head in grotesque manner, sometimes cutting open the stomach, then squatting in the entrails and masturbating. When he reached a climax he would collapse in a faint, and be carried off to his bed, where he would remain unconscious for hours.

His accomplices would meanwhile dismember and burn the body. On some occasions, he later confessed, two children were procured, and each obliged to watch the other being raped and tortured.

Gilles was not merely sexually deranged; he was also a reckless spendthrift. He surrounded himself with a retinue of two hundred knights, for whom he provided. He loved to give banquets and fêtes; in 1435, when the city of Orléans celebrated its deliverance by Joan of Arc, Gilles presented a long mystery play about the siege, with enormous sets and a cast of hundreds, playing, of course, the leading role himself. He also provided food and wine for the spectators. Like a Roman emperor he must have felt that he was virtually a god.

In a mere three years he had spent what would now be the equivalent of millions of dollars. Back at Machécoul, he had to sell some of his most valuable estates. His brother was so alarmed that he persuaded the king to issue an interdict forbidding any further sales of land. For a man of Gilles' unbridled temperament, this was an intolerable position. He went into a gloomy and self-pitying retirement.

Years before, when he first went to court, he had borrowed a book on alchemy from an Angevin knight who had been imprisoned for heresy. Alchemy was prohibited by law, and for a man with Gilles' romantic craving for "the forbidden," this must have been an additional incentive to learn more about it. Now, ten years later, with his coffers empty, he realised that black magic might be the answer to his problems.

Gilles then asked a priest named Eustache Blanchet to find him a magician. Several were tried, but the results were poor until one of them, a man named Fontanelle, succeeded in conjuring up twenty crows whereas the others were not even able to conjure up a few birds. But Fontanelle also claimed he had conjured up a demon called Barron; Gilles was then advised that his only way of learning to make gold was to agree to sell his soul to the Devil. Despite his taste for killing children, Gilles remained a devout Catholic; so deciding to invoke the Devil must have seemed a far more frightening step than murder.

But finally, he and his cousin Gilles de Sille locked themselves in the basement of his castle at Tiffauges, together with Fontanelle, and prepared to converse with demons. The magician warned them solemnly not to make the sign of the cross, or their lives would be in great danger. Sille stayed by the window, prepared to jump out; Gilles ventured fearfully into the magic circle and watched the beginning of the conjuration. The legend says that the three men were brutally ejected from the donjon before the roof collapsed. Fontanelle disappeared, either killed or escaped.

However, Gilles needed money so badly that there seemed no other way than continuing with his magical experiments. In 1439, he sent the priest Blanchet to Italy to search for a more skilled magician; Blanchet returned with a "clerk in minor orders" called François Prelati, a young man of great charm--and also, apparently, a homosexual. It is hard to know whether he was simply a confidence trickster or whether he had some genuine knowledge of the magic arts; but Gilles found him immensely attractive and trusted him completely.

Prelati told him that they would have to offer a child's blood and parts of its body as a sacrifice to the Devil; Gilles agreed but still refused to take the final step, of selling his soul to the Devil. Prelati told him that in that case, he would have to continue the conjurations alone. During one of these sessions, Gilles and his cousin heard loud thumps from inside the room; they looked in and found Prelati "so hurt that he could hardly stand up." He explained that he had been beaten by the demon Barron, and had to take to his bed for several days, during which time Gilles nursed him tenderly.

On another occasion, he rushed out to tell Gilles that he had finally conjured up a heap of gold. Gilles rushed back to see it, but Prelati was there first; as he opened the door, he staggered back and shouted that a huge green serpent guarded it. Gilles fled. When he returned, the gold had vanished, leaving only piles of dust...

During his years of murder, Gilles often came close to discovery. In 1437, his family heard that he intended to sell the castle of Champtoce, in spite of the royal interdict; they hastened to seize it. Gilles was terrified; he had left the mutilated bodies of dozens of children there. He was also afraid that the castle of Machécoul would be next--the remains of many children had been thrown into a locked tower. He and his companions removed about forty dismembered bodies from Machécoul. When he regained control of Champtoce in 1438 he hastened to remove another forty or so corpses, which had apparently remained unnoticed. Meanwhile, the Duke of Brittany had imposed a huge fine on Gilles, aware that Gilles would be unable to pay. He also began an investigation into the disappearance of hundreds of children.

In July 1440, Gilles made a fatal mistake. He had sold a castle called Mer Morte to Geoffroy de Ferron, treasurer to the Duke of Brittany, Gilles' suzerain. For some reason, Gilles decided that he was entitled to repossess the castle, which had not yet been occupied by its new owner. The keys, it seemed, were in the hands of Geoffroy's brother, a priest called Jean de Ferron. Instead of waiting until Jean de Ferron was in his home, he led his men into the church of St Etienne de Mer Morte soon after mass, and had the priest dragged outside, where he was beaten. By entering a church and permitting violence, Gilles had committed sacrilege, a capital offence.

Gilles' companions later revealed that, even on this expedition to recover his castle, he had been overcome by his craving for rape and murder. After leaving the church, he had halted for the night in the town of Vannes and taken lodging in a house near the bishop's palace. One of the ex-choristers of his private chapel, André Bouchet, had brought him a ten-year-old boy. Since his present lodging was not private enough for rape and murder, the boy was taken to another house near the market, and there sodomised and decapitated; the body was thrown into the latrines of the house, where the smell was less likely to cause its discovery.

Bishop Malestroit seized this opportunity to bring Gilles to court, on charges that he had secretly been preparing since July 29. The bishop was joined by the Inquisition, which pressed for a charge of heresy and a civil trial was called for in the ducal court.

On September 13, 1440, the Bishop summoned Gilles before the court. Preliminary hearings took place on September 28, October 8, 11 and 13, and the formal trial opened on October 15. The Duke of Brittany, John V, sanctioned a concurrent trial, which started on September 17. Gilles was at first arrogant and defiant but after six sessions, on Friday, October 21, 1440, he was tortured until he promised to confess "voluntarily and freely".

The extensive witness testimony convinced the judges that there were adequate grounds for establishing the guilt of the accused. To procure additional evidences of his alleged crimes, his servants and four alleged accomplices were also tortured. In all, 110 witnesses (including informers) were heard. After Rais admitted to the charges on 21 October, the court canceled a plan to torture him further into confessing. The transcript, which included testimony from the parents of many of the missing children as well as graphic descriptions of the murders provided by Rais's accomplices, was said to be so lurid that the judges ordered the worst portions to be stricken from the record. In sum, Gilles was accused of being a "heretic, apostate, conjurer of demons... accused of the crime and vices against nature, sodomy, sacrilege and violation of the immunities of Holy Church."

On the 25 October, the ecclesiastical court handed down a sentence of excommunication against Rais, followed on the same day by the secular court's own condemnation of the accused. Forty-seven charges were levelled against Gilles, including conjuration of demons, abuse of clerical privilege, and sexual perversions against children. The invocation of spirits charge was embellished with accusations of human sacrifices. After tearfully expressing remorse for his crimes, Rais obtained rescindment of the Church's punishment and was allowed confession, but the secular penalty remained in place.

Charged and condemned with him were his mignon Henri Griard and his page Etienne Corillaut, called Poitou.

On October 26 1440, Gilles de Rais was brought to the main place in Nantes, to be strangled and burnt with his two associates, Griart and Poitou.

But before he died, he sang the De Profundis in a voice louder than all the rest while standing under the gibbet. He urged his henchmen to "thank God with him for a manifest sign of His love," and to continue praying for a little while longer.

He prayed on his knees, and the hundreds of spectators prayed with him. In his agonies of guilt, he said to the families of the murdered:

“You who are present--you, above all, whose children I have slain--I am your brother in Christ. By Our Lord's Passion, I implore you, pray for me. Forgive me with all your hearts the evil I have done you, as you yourselves hope for God's mercy and pardon”.

When de Rais was theatrically executed, the children's parents, his judges, and hundreds of spectators, gave way to floods of tears. His fellow criminals followed soon after.

His corpse was placed on a pyre, but his relatives were allowed to remove his body before the flames reached it, and he was interred in the nearby Carmelite church. His two companions were less lucky; they were burned alive.

The precise number of Rais's infanticides is not known, as most of the bodies were burned or buried. The number of murders is generally placed between 80 and 200; a few have conjectured numbers upwards of 600. The victims ranged in age from six to eighteen and included both sexes; although Rais preferred boys, he would make do with young girls if circumstances required.

It is important to note here that Gilles was not allowed any testimony in his defence, nor was he given any legal advice or council. The proceedings of the trial were highly irregular, even for trials of heresy. Not one of his 500 servants was summoned to give defensive evidence and his own attendants were tortured and, having testified against Gilles, freed. This treatment is consistent with how the ecclesiastical courts handled witches and heretic trials during this time. Some historians have alleged that Rais was framed for murder and heresy by elements within the Church as part of a diocesan plot to seize his lands.

Baobhan Sith

Baobhan Sith, also known as Baobhan Sidhe, Bavanshee, Baavan Shee or The White Woman of the Scottish Highlands, is a fairy Vampire who appears to men taking a the form of a beautiful woman in order to seduce them and drink their blood.

Scottish version of female Vampires and Succubi (as they lure men through sexual attraction), Baobhan Sith are very dangerous and evil and they act preying on human being, mostly hunters but unwary travellers passing by the Highlands as well.
According to legend, Baobhan Sith are mostly attracted to hunters (as their clothes might smell of blood) and to young men out after dark.




Etymology


The words baobhan sith (pronounced baa'-van shee) stand for fairy woman in Scottish Gaelic.




Behaviour


Baobhan Sith are even more withdrawn from society than are their common counterparts. They don’t care about power, they just want to feed and prey upon their victims, youth staying out until after dark. The fairies approach their victims by inviting them to dance with them, until they are exhausted because while dancing the sidhe, feed upon them, sucking their blood until death.




Element


They usually settle in forests or mountains, always in natural environment. Anyway Baobhan Sith will have a secured coffin somewhere underground so they can return to rest there during the day.

Shape


A lesser popular version tells they have hooves instead of feet, though they keep it hidden under their clothes. They may be of Human or Half-Eleven stock, but they always appear as beautiful women and enchanters, sometimes attacking in small groups with others of their kin. Baobhan Sith are supposed to be able to shift, but not into bats: their animal of choice is the wolf. |Shapeshifting will lessen their power as they won’t be able to use their glamour in animal form.




Powers


They can speak any language their victim knows due to a form of telepathy, but they will sound as if they have a strange accent.
Baobhan Sith don’t use fangs as most vampires do to draw blood, but their long and sharp finger nails. They look very ordinary until the vampire attacks, then turn into talons to win their victim.
The so-called dancing vampires are capable of glamour and they use it to charm their victims through spells so they drain blood without the victim noticing. No male victim of theirs will turn into Baobhan Sith, as they are only women, but if they attack and kill a woman she will return as one of their kin. Most of them where previously enchanters or witches who keep on using their skills in death.



Weaknesses

Baobhan Sith are fairy creatures so they might be harmed and killed by iron. But their awesome beauty is hard to resist even for those who understand how dangerous they are. Also, if horse-riding hunters are surrounded by baobhan sith they can usually ward them off by staying on the horse, if they manage to resist the creatures’ beauty.

Main Belief

The most common tale tells of four young friends who after hunting decide to spend their night in an abandoned cottage. As darkness falls they set a fire in the hearth and they start singing and dancing. As one of them express his wish to have female companions with them, four women knock at their door and start dancing with the youth. As the baobhan sith start to attack their preys, the young man who was singing runs to the door, taking shelter between their horses. The creature that was running after him waits for him to get out of the safe circle formed by the animals but the man stays within until dawn breaks and the woman disappears shortly before. The man returns to the cottage to find his friends dead and blood-drained. He only saved his life because fairy creatures are traditionally afraid of iron for it can harm and kill them, and horses had iron shoes.