Vampires
and Disease
by
Daniel J. Wood
FATE
:: December 2007
Of
all the monsters that haunted our traditional folklore, none has so fascinated
the modern mind as the vampire. Man, demon, or some combination of both, the vampire
stepped to center stage in our popular culture with the publication of Bram Stokers
Dracula in 1897, and his influence shows no sign of waning at the beginning of
the 21st century. But as the image of the fictional vampire lives on, we gradually
lose sight of the traditional vampire, the vampire of folklore and history, a
creature more ancient and more terrible than a thousand Wallachian princes. This
monster did not keep a polite distance before the kill like some aristocratic
stranger; instead, he was a friend, a neighboreven the husband who once
shared your bed. He was a corpse who returned from the grave to kill.
All
historical sources defined vampires as preternatural killers who drained victims
of their life essence in order to perpetuate their own unnatural existence. If
the vampire sucked blood to achieve this end, as many did, he normally bit his
human or animal victims on the chest or thorax rather than the throat. Some throttled
their victims, killing them quickly; others spread disease that decimated towns
or villages over the space of weeks. Though the manner or method of destruction
may have differed, the agent remained the samea deceased human body reanimated
by some devilish agency.
This
diversity and unity of the malignant undead moved Dr. J. Scoffern, Professor of
Chemistry and Forensic Medicine at the Aldersgate College of Medicine, to pen
one of the classic definitions of the vampire. In 1870 he wrote:
A
vampire, then, iswell, what shall we say? Not a ghost, certainly; except
we alter most of our existing notions of a ghost. The best definition I can give
of a vampire is a living, mischievous, and murderous dead body. A living dead
body! The words are wild, contradictory, incomprehensible; but so are vampires.
Budding
vampirologists will frequently encounter the assertion that the figure of the
vampire only recently entered English supernaturalism. This statement would be
true only if we search for the fictional image of the vampire as it emerged from
Gothic literature, but the vampire of tradition lurked within Britannias
dark corners since Anglo-Saxon times, and he attained celebrity status in the
plumes of medieval chroniclers who inscribed his name upon 12th-century parchments
as the cadaver sanguisugisor bloodsucking corpse. As a revivified
corpse, the vampire held no romantic or erotic fascination for the medieval mind;
instead, they regarded these monstrous shells with disgust, and they feared that
the miasma of their fetid breath would pollute the atmosphere and bring disease.
The vampire was, in reality, walking death........Read the rest of this
article exclusively in the December 2007 issue of FATE!