Legends of Blood: The Vampire in History and Myth

by Wayne Bartlett, Flavia Idriceanu

Of all the fictional monsters that have pierced society's collective consciousness, none has been so persistent or seductive as the vampire. Tales of the undead preying upon the blood of the living have survived in one form or another for thousands of years and across cultures. Legends of Blood traces this fascinating history from the myths of Ancient Greece and Egypt through the Gothic literature of 19th century Europe and up to present day, emphasizing how the tales of this alluring creature tap into humanity's most basic and primal fears. Wayne Bartlett and Flavia Idriceanu's highly readable yet impeccably researched book is a must-have for vampire enthusiasts and scholars alike.

Drawing upon such sources as obscure and ancient myths, Romantic literature, and the novels of Anne Rice, Legends of Blood sheds new light on the pervasiveness of the vampire myth. Bartlett and Idriceanu illustrate the relationships that subsist between vampires and witchcraft, religion and sexuality, and show how the myth has adapted to the various intellectual trends of European history. Other topics include real-life vampirism such as the macabre tale of Elizabeth Bathory who murdered some 650 girls and bathed in their blood to restore her legendary beauty.

Genres: Nonfiction, Vampires, History, Horror, Adult

232 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 2006

About the author

Wayne Bartlett lives in Quirpon, Newfoundland, Canada. He works as a welding instructor for displaced fishermen. Since 1988 he has independently written and recorded five albums of original songs. One of the most popular, "She's Gone, Boys, She's Gone" is about the close of the Newfoundland fishery, and was made into an hour-long program for Canadian national television. He remains fascinated by the oral history of the area, and has researched and recorded these stories into three books, complete with old photographs and leger accounts.

Reviews

[James F · Rating 2 out of 5]

Even for Halloween, this one is not really worth reading, unless you're a real fan of Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Although one of the co-authors is described as a "Romanian philologist", the "history and myth" is taken entirely from secondary sources, primarily Montague Summers, and The Encyclopedia of Witchcraft and Demonology. The book is not so much concerned with the history of the vampire myth in itself as in identifying the sources for certain themes and traits of modern vampire fiction and film, with long discussions of Bram Stoker's Dracula, LeFanu's Carmilla, Tieck's "Wake Not the Dead", Rice's Interview with a Vampire, and especially the aforementioned Buffy, as well as several film versions. (The book was written before the Twilight series.) Even taking this into account, the analysis of the fascination with vampires is rather superficial, mainly cliches about fear of the other and fear of death, with no attention paid to historical specifics (they never ask, why are vampires popular at some times rather than others?) Some of the ideas in the book were interesting, but not developed in any depth.

[Breanna Phelan · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book showed me most of the vampire stuff that I already knew but there was a few new things that I did learn while reading. I like how the authors gave meanings to words that was tricky to read. The book also has some historistic people in the vampire history that some believers think are still vampires. I have read more informational books about the vampire myth and history that is written.

I learned that some people believe they are vampires because they have mental or physical illnesses. To be honest, the books and movies or Twilight are wrong on some many levels that do not follow the traditional vampire lore. For example, Vampires aren’t sparkly in the day light. They mostly use umbrellas and objects like sunscreen or don’t go out in the daylight. I think I know more about vampires than anything else.

I would recommend this book to people who like to learn about vampires. The myth and history behind the legend of the vampire is a great fascinating thing to read and learn about. This book had made me look back on a few other books that I have read over the years with vampires in them. The book also talks about the vampire community that is around the world. I like how they explain everything about the myth to the horrifying first vampire that was discovered.

[Spinster Witch · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5, and here's why:

I enjoyed learning about all the lore, and how different myths are intertwined. However, there were several erroneous references to Buffy (incorrect episodes/seasons, incorrect plot points, etc.) that I found really irritating. As if someone who saw the show once told the authors about it and they ran with that info. They said things that fit their narrative which made me suspicious of the other examples they pulled from sources I'm less familiar with. There were often times that I felt it was a bit of a stretch to connect one thing or another to the vampire myth.

So all in all, it was interesting, but I've read better reviews of the vampire mythology.

[Kristi Einberg · Rating 3 out of 5]

Quite okay book. I love vampires (every since i first time saw Spike ;) ). But this book wasn't really captivating. It was interesting to read how much vampires/vampirism have common with different mythologies. Many similarities with Harry Potter and LOTR. Never thought about it like that. All that happened long long time ago is easily explained but understandabe that at that time people really were sure about vampires, werewolves, demons etc.

[Eric · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is an interesting and fun general overview of the connection between ancient vampire myths and legends and folklore and the fiction that borrowed from it in the 1800s. The authors sprinkle in some more modern treatments, such as Coppola's Dracula rendition and the most awesome TV show ever Buffy the Vampire Slayer, but the emphasis is on the historical. Great read for Halloween Month.

[Tony Huynh · Rating 4 out of 5]

It was educational reading about vampires and what other people believed in. It was a good book to read.

[Brita · Rating 1 out of 5]

Unfortunately, I did not learn much new from this book.

[Yasmin · Rating 2 out of 5]

Not a bad book about the intriguing legend behind vampires. For those of us that didn't get caught up in the unfathomable mania of Harry Potter books and Buffy the Vampire slayer television series there was at times over kill in the mention of both characters. I can't agree however that the elements of the Unknown, foreign and The Stranger is our biggest fears. I would say it is the familiar that would create the most terror especially when it is beyond individual control, after all stastically you are far likely to be murdered or maimed by a friend or a relative than a complete stranger. Why would a stranger want to hurt you unless the person really is unbalanced in the head, but then it takes a certain amount of willpower and mind control to pick up a gun or knife or whatever to use in a destructive way. There is also the seldom used term "kindess of strangers" likewise a stranger is a friend you haven't met. To add to that with all the mixing of DNA and heritage what is so-called "foreign" may indeed be more familiar to the mind than is given credit for. The English language is full of many pitfalls in the clarity of speaking/communicating. To say that in Francis Ford Cappola's Dracula seduced Lucy in the cemetry is a serious example in one of these pitfalls. As I recall from the movie the more clarified word of description would be that Lucy was raped. Since she was not in complete control of her mental powers, she was essentially doped by Dracula with hypnotic powers, she would therefore not be a willing partner in any sexual activity. What woman in her sharp mind and senses wants to have sex with some kind of beast like creature? Unfortunately there has been much discussion and dissection in modern times to the sexual nature and environs of the author. At the time as I have read elsewhere critics called it ponderous and other similar flattery and it was advised that the female sex should not read it, incidentally no one else but women always got a special reserve at books they should not read. Sir Henry Irving had nothing better to say about the book either when it was going to be made into a stage production. Interestingly the sexuality aspects of the book were not heavily dissected then or refrenced to unlike The Picture of Dorian Gray, which gets well deserved mentions in Legends of Blood, which in actual vivid description was far less than Dracula. But I suppose that is why it has had more rivals in book form, stage production, film etc. etc. because for what little is mentioned is more explicit. Wanton blindness in the Victorian Age or has the mind since then more bent towards sexual overtones we can pick it up quicker than our stuffy forebears? Although when you read certain accounts of the Victorian population they had sex on the brains more than we do! Well that does depend on the author of course and how they have moulded the English language for clarity in explaining themselves. The final question is would Dracula be as powerful without his hypnotic powers or like any woman in her right mind would slam the door in his face at her bedroom and lock said door? Keeping in mind that there is a difference actually in Dracula and other vampires. Other vampires in non English speaking worlds, as a first language, would feed off their kin and have tendancies to nibble on their shrouds. It is also preferable that you stake the heart once as more than once brings the vampire back to life and the neck had to have a clean stroke to the throat and remove the head or it would reattach itself! Mind you what symbols you would use to defeat vampires in countries that didn't have Christianity seems to be a moot point.

[Alice · Rating 5 out of 5]

I got this book as a birthday present from my then boyfriend (now husband) quite a few years ago and used it when I was doing my A levels on Stoker's Dracula. I've been interested in vampires for a long time, well before I got myself into literary academia and this was my first foray into reading academically.

The first time I read it it blew my brain. I was 17 years old and had basically no idea what I was getting myself in for. Reading it again as an MA student and I still think it's a solid academic book, however the ideas are perhaps a little simple.

Simple can be good though. While there is little depth there is certainly great width with mentions of Babylonian vampires as well as Rice's creations. Bartlett and Idriceanu look at a small selection of literary fictions, mostly from the late 18th and 19th centuries as well as folklore from around Europe. This gives a good over view of the key texts you'd want to read (or have probably already read) when looking at the 'vampire' or the gothic tradition. They also look at a few key themes most notably sexuality and religion, again both solid themes but perhaps a little obvious.

Overall I still think it's worth 5 stars because it's such a good introduction to vampire fiction and analysis. It was my first academic read and I think it'd make a great first for other budding literature students or Gothic fans. The writing style is intelligent but not elitist, just chatty enough to be readable and enjoyable without feeling like you're in the dustiest lecture ever given. The insights are clear and well presented, nothing ground breaking but it's need-to-know stuff!

Read if you love vampire fiction!!!

[Grumpylibrarian · Rating 1 out of 5]

The subject matter is theoretically extremely interesting and the opportunity to provide a thoughtful and faceted analysis of vampirism in history and myth is there. However, this book was dull, dull, dull, dull.

The examples of Dracula, Interview with the Vampire, Harry Potter, Buffy the Vampire Slayer/Angel & LOTR are basically beaten into the ground with only periphery reference to other, much more historical, vampire characters in legend. If you're going to write a book about pop-culture and vampirism then title it so, but don't attempt to blanket vampire history in a <200p book (my copy had 187p) that mostly discusses materials from the 1990s-present.

[Christine · Rating 3 out of 5]

The other reviews are correct; some of the prose is dull. The book does give background on the vampire epidemics, which was proably the most intersting chapter in the book. The book does contain some analysis of Buffy and some of Anne Rice, though more the movie than the book.

[Tea · Rating 4 out of 5]

The book has been written before the "Great Vampire Revival" (the last modern vampires discussed are from the "Buffy" movie and "Interview with the Vampire"). However, I liked the research and the thorough discussion of history and origins of the vampire legends.

[Dorotea · Rating 2 out of 5]

This history of vampires was more focused on the notion of vampires in literature, popular culture and cinematic representations. There is less historical accounts and explanations.

The style is somewhat dry and it wasn't as easy to read as I would have hoped.

[Jamie · Rating 3 out of 5]

It was okay, nothing spectacular.

[Peter · Rating 3 out of 5]

Could do with being about half the length.

[Kaseka · Rating 2 out of 5]

Contained a lot of useful information, but some chapters were more interesting to read than others.

[Crusader · Rating 2 out of 5]

A bit of a dry read that doesn't really provide much depth on the origin of the vampire myth and focuses too much on referencing popular culture movies and TV series.

[Brooke · Rating 2 out of 5]

Read for my Ancient history assignment.
It was...weird.
An extremely bias book (see, I do learn things)

[AskNezka · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very informative chapters give a good foundation covering a lot of folklore, history, religion and literature featuring the vampire.

[Tia Rose · Rating 4 out of 5]

For someone who is interested in vampire lore, this book is invaluable.

[Mike · Rating 2 out of 5]

Not a great read.
It was interesting information presented in the most boring of ways.