In the Shadow of Empires

by Sir Jens

Vlad Dracula, three times ruler of Wallachia, never once ruler of Transylvania, indeed he left Transylvania at around the age of 7, when his father took the throne in Wallachia and moved his family from Sighisoara to Tirgoviste (and no, he didn't have a castle in Transylvania either. Neither the one in Bran, nor any other). Vlad was given as a hostage to the Ottomans in ca. 1442 and held there until his father's murder in 1448. He then briefly ruled with Ottoman backing. Sent packing, he roamed around until he managed to get the throne back in 1456. He ruled for 6 years in what by many is still seen as a golden period, where crime and anti-social behaviour was as good as eradicated through harsh and very public punishment of those that broke the law (impaling was particularly popular. He had learned that trick from the Ottomans). He enraged Fatih Sultan Mehmet by a series of raids into Ottoman held Bulgaria in the winter of 1461, and in 1462 Mehmet came for him. Following a series of guerrilla skirmishes, Vlad finally withdrew to his bolthole castle in Poenari, which was eventually bombarded by Ottoman cannons and Vlad had to flee to Transylvania. Having had enough of him causing trouble with the sultan, the Hungarian king, Matthias, put him in house arrest for the next 14 years (partly in Budapest), only to support his last reign in Wallachia in 1476, when Mathias needed a strong arm facing the sultan. He was killed in battle in January 1477 and his head was sent to the sultan as proof that his long-time adversary had died. Despite this historic summary, most people think that Vlad Dracula was from Transylvania, that his castle stands in the Borgo Pass and that he is a vampire. The book "In the Shadow of Empires" is a narrative of the historic Vlad Dracula, the events he shaped and the events that shaped him. It follows Vlad Dracula from cradle to grave and specifically avoids discussing vampires, apart from where it is absolutely necessary to link the historic person to nineteenth century fiction writing. Written by an international traveler, who spent 9 years living in Transylvania, and couldn't understand why there was no Dracula, the book is factual but written in light and accessible language aimed at a general, rather than academic, audience.

Genres: Nonfiction, Biography

174 pages, Paperback

First published April 1, 2012

About the author

I was an Army Officer when I was young, but I have spent twenty years as a leader in various software and telecoms organisations, including some blue-chip companies. Though Danish I have spent two decades outside my native country, living and working on three different continents. I have now retired from working-life and concentrate on pursuing my life-long hobby as an amateur-historian.

Reviews

[Cheryl · Rating 5 out of 5]

I really enjoyed this book, very well written and equally as well researched. You're told the facts and where these are questionable they're given to you clearly stated as being sourced from legend. This is a book i'll return to again and again and I especially loved the end, tips for the tourist visiting Romania, brilliant touch.

[Rindis · Rating 3 out of 5]

Sir Jens' ('Sir' seems to be his first name...) In the Shadow of Empires is an amateur history book about Vlad Dracula (as opposed to a sensational book about the fictional 'Dracula'). It shows its amateur status in some uneven editing, and problems keeping tense and subject-verb agreement under control.

Once past that, it is a well-written introduction to a part of history that just isn't well enough known, and is crowded with all sorts of modern myths stemming from a century-old bestselling novel. It is a very nice step-by-step walkthrough of eastern European politics in the 15th century. He first points out that Vlad Dracula ('of the dragon') was from Wallachia, not Transylvania, proceeds into Wallachia's troubled politics from being a buffer state, his father, Vlad Dracul ('the dragon'), and then his ever-shifting fortunes from Ottoman 'guest' to Voivode (roughly 'prince') to prisoner of Hungary, to backed by Hungary, to his death in a skirmish in 1476.

Along the way, there's a number of interesting observations, the last of which being that the four principle movers of the book (Vlad Dracula, Ottoman Sultan Mehmed, King Mathias of Hungary, and Stefan of Wallachia) are all men who'd be unhesitatingly convicted by a war crimes tribunal today. But all four are heroes in the eyes of the people (well, their descendants) they ruled over.

In all, it's a very readable amateur book with some good history in it. Something I'd like to see more of.

[Roberto Sanson C · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent, Sweet and Short

An awesome short story of the real Dracula and what you can expect on a trip to Transylvania. Having done the trip myself I can tell from experience I enjoyed the book inmensively.

[Kathy · Rating 3 out of 5]

An easy to read telling of an interesting time in history. It was nice getting to read about the actual Vlad Dracula rather than the legend he has become.

[Dion Smith · Rating 4 out of 5]

3.5 out of 5 stars.

I have been a fan of Vlad Dracula since Leonard Nimoy told me about him on Great Mysteries of the World (called ‘In Search of...’ on America TV).

This book is about the basic history of the region at that time, covering battles and skirmishes between various groups and changes of leadership, which was very interesting, but I would have liked more about Vlad himself, but I’m not sure how much information is out there and how much is fact and how much is speculation.

[Rick Hunter · Rating 5 out of 5]

I was curious to learn more about Vlad and this book didn’t disappoint. I certainly enjoyed it and it is easy to read. The book does exactly what the title indicates. It provides the reader a basic explanation of the geo-political world of the time and how it affected Vlad. There are plenty of blank pages when it comes down to Vlad’s life, and the author attempts to fill in those blanks. The author does an excellent job at pointing out what is factual and what is legend. In some cases he even wonders into intelligent speculations in a brief and respectful manner.

I personally enjoyed how Mr. Jens ends the book, it made me feel like it all had been a very pleasant and friendly conversation. I feel that a couple more maps of the region would have made it easier for unfamiliar readers like myself to absorb the context. I personally would have loved to see a couple of ilustrations of Vlad Dracula or castles in the book.

[Jennifer · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was a good introduction to the historical figure of Vlad Dracula, or Vlad Tepes (The Impaler). The author gives a fairly detailed account of his life and times, as well as a crash course on the geo-politics at that time in Wallachia (now part of Romania). He differentiates between fact and fiction, and in the case where accounts and details are provided by legend only, he lets the reader decide what to believe.

[Michele Eccleston · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very Balanced

I found this book to be a very balanced history of a leader that is in modern days thought of as a monster. The writer did an excellent job of framing Vlad's actions in the context of the era when Vlad ruled.

[Tanya Procknow · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a history book that was interesting to read. Now normally I wouldn't say Ottoman, Byzantium, and Wallachian history was a fun read but these chapters were easy with everything explained nicely. It is also fascinating how much legend has taken over what we think we know about Vlad Dracula.

[Kristian Strauss · Rating 4 out of 5]

a noticeable book that gives clarity to the legend of Vlad Dracula who otherwise would be remembered only for his inspiring Bram Stokers novel. the history of the region and geopolitics is an easy read for anyone who has watched a game of thrones and reads the relations between the varying factions between those who sought power within the Balkan regions. From his being a hostage with his brother under the ottoman sultan Mehmed to his final days fighting both Hungarian and Turkish empires.

[Vinter Skugga · Rating 2 out of 5]

Definitely not an academic book, this is aimed at a more casual audience. As such, the language can be rather simplistic, at times, and there are more than a dozen spelling errors to be found, throughout. At any rate, for those interested in the historical Vlad Dracula, as well as the historical events surrounding him, it's worth a read.

[STish · Rating 4 out of 5]

A basic retelling of the history of Vlad Dracula and how the events shaped him forever.

[Steve Cran · Rating 3 out of 5]

The facts around Dracula, or Vlad the Impaler are scarce indeed with not much too go on for the researching scholar. Contrary to popular opinion Dracula was not a vampire, he was considered by some to be a brave warrior who fought for his people and his land. Others considered him a demon or a devil and that depended on whether you were friend or foe. Sir Jens who is a history buff rather then a scholar renders to the reader a good skeleton of Vladimir Dracula's life. There are no sources mentioned in the book, nor is there a bibliography which is a must for any book of research.

There are a few not well known facts about Dracula's life or should  I say family that are not mentioned in other works, at least which I have seen. Vlad's grandfather was a Viovode of Wallachia. Like his grandson he too would fight against the Turks and would in the end turn out paying tribute and sending Wallachian boys over to be Janniseries. THe grandfathers name was Mercia. Vladimir the second or Vlad Dracul ,me weaning Vlad the Devil, was Mercea's first son. A boy of a more diplomatic bent he was sent to be raised in HUngary far from the court intrigues of Tirgovaste , the cpaital of Wallachia. He learned the art of diplomacy an throughout the gift of tongue was able to resolve many disputes diplomatically and rendered such services to Hungary. Vald the second while belonging to the Orthodox Church, converted to Catholicsim and joined "THe Order of the Dragon" which was dedicated to preserving Christianity and fighting the Ottoman Empire. For practical purposes Vlad converted to Catholicism but returned tro the Orthodox Church upon assuming power with the Viavode of Wallachia. He paid tribute to the Ottoman's  and one would say that he was the epitome of real politik. As a matter of policy and a show of loyalty to Murad the Second Vald Dracul left his son, Vladimir the Third and Radu.

Vlad was born in the Hungarian town of Sighiousorsa in the year 1431. As hostages to the Ottomans they were raised as Ottoman. learning war and customs they were allowed to keep their  religion. Life by and large was comfortable at the court although there are stories of cruelty . One was was that the boys could be used sexually. Vlad stayed their until 1448 and in hsi 17th year the Ottomans helped him reclaim his throne with a small force of Ottoman soldiers. His reign did not last long . Driven out by rival boyars , someone from the Danesti throne was put into power. For a good number of years he dwelt with his uncle Bogdan and son Stephan rulers of Moldovia. They did not hold to thir throne that long either . Seeking refuge in Hungary, Stephan would find refuge while Dracula's fate was more precarious,  Janas Hunyadi was a powerful personage in Hungary and he had been the one for responsible fo the death of Dracula's father and older brother  Mecrcea. 

Yet it would be Janos Hunyadi that would be instrumental in helping Dracula reclaim his throne. First he allowed Dracula thje right or privilege to be the protector governor of Transylvania. Janos Hunyadi would later die of plague after holding the Sultan Moorad off from over taking Belgrade. This opened the way for Dracula to reclaim his throne.

The reign of 1456 was his second and most noted reign. Must be noted that neither the Otoman's nor Hungary wanted Wallachia as that would be a border with the two empires. Better for both if they could install a puppet ruler who served their interests. Some of Vlad's achievement was the cowing of the Saxon Merchant towns who could sway the balance of things and hold undue influence in the Wallachian court. He also supposedly wiped out the Boyar  as they were a destabilizing element and made thing rather turbulent. He also killed off all the beggars and indigent. Now how far he went is up for debate. His actions are compared to the death camps in Europe where undesriable were eliminated. He mentions Gypsies, handicapped and metally ill but he fails to mention that Jews were the main victims. What is with Sir Gens? What other important details did he leave out?

THe second reign is when Dracula challenged the Sultan by refusing to pay tribute , torturing Ottoman emissaries and fighting the Turks as they came across the Danube. Ultimately Dracula lost and had to flee to Hungary while Radu too the throne. But there was a lot of back and forth. While in Hungary Dracula would be a political prisoner and get married. Eventually he did reclaim his thrown but only briefly. Having died in battle his hdedad was displayed in Ottoman Turkey.

Vlad is  both a hero and villain depending on your perspective.Catholic monks and Saxons vilified him. The Romanians look to him as a savior. Bram Stoker's novel  did not help clarify things. I know that some of Sir Jens material is somewhat slanted and biased and I question hopw much research he has done. A BETTER BOOK TO GET WOULD BE "DRACULA :PRINCE OIF MANY FACES" by Radu Florescu.

[Eileen · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book examines the historic Vlad Dracula, not the fictional one created in the nineteenth century. In fact, the author mentions vampires as little as possible so as to be clear about this.

The language is very accessible, and the book is a good (factual) introduction or summary of Vlad Dracula, who was considered something of a local hero for the common people in what is now present-day Romania. He was known in particular for his method of execution, which was impaling people. Also helpful and interesting is the way Jens lays out the conflicts between the Hungarian and Ottoman empires during Vlad's day. The frustrating thing about this book is that there are no footnotes or even a listing of sources that the author used.

This is a good book for the general reader.

[فيصل اللنقاوي · Rating 3 out of 5]

The author is politically Biased to vlad he want to make a beautiful picture of him At the expense of the truth that he is bloodthirsty beast
All in all the book is a good introduction to whom who wants to read about this ERA