What do you think?
Rate this book
Vlad: The Last Confession
DRACULA. A name of horror, depravity and the darkest sensuality. Yet the real Dracula was just as alluring, just as terrifying, his story not of a monster but of a man and a contradiction. For the one they called 'The Devil's Son' was both tyrant and lawgiver, crusader and mass slaughterer, torturer and hero, lover and murderer. His tale is told by those who knew him best. The only woman he ever loved and whom he has to sacrifice. His closest comrade and traitor. And his priest, betraying the secrets of the confessional to reveal the mind of the man history would forever remember as Tepes - 'The Impaler'. But Vlad's actions defy such labels. His extraordinary life burns with passion, taking him from his years as hostage to the Turk, through torture, battle, triumph and betrayal, ultimately to a last crusade - there perhaps, beneath the twin banners of the Dragon and the Cross, to find redemption for his innumerable sins. Vlad: The Last Confession spins legend and facts and together into a monumental novel of blood, love and terror. This is the true story of Dracula as it has never been told before.
384 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2008
191 people are currently reading
6966 people want to read
About the author
C.C. Humphreys
29 books424 followersaka Chris Humphreys
Chris (C.C.) Humphreys was born in Toronto, lived till he was seven in Los Angeles, then grew up in the UK. All four grandparents were actors, and since his father was an actor as well, it was inevitable he would follow the bloodline.
Chris (C.C.) Humphreys has played Hamlet in Calgary, a gladiator in Tunisia, waltzed in London’s West End, conned the landlord of the Rovers Return in Coronation Street, commanded a starfleet in Andromeda, voiced Salem the cat in the original Sabrina, and is a dead immortal in Highlander. He has written eleven adult novels including The French Executioner, runner-up for the CWA Steel Dagger for Thrillers; Chasing the Wind; The Jack Absolute Trilogy; Vlad – The Last Confession; A Place Called Armageddon and Shakespeare’s Rebel – which he adapted into a play and which premiered at Bard on the Beach, Vancouver, in 2015. Plague won the Arthur Ellis Award for Best Crime Novel in Canada in 2015. He has an MFA in Creative Writing from the University of British Columbia. His epic fantasy series the Immortals’ Blood Trilogy, beginning with Smoke in the Glass' has just been published by Gollancz. He also published his other fantasy series, The Tapestry Trilogy, beginning in August 2020 with ‘The Hunt of the Unicorn’. His foray into modern crime, 'One London Day' was published in 2021. Hie new novel, the World War Two epic romance, 'Someday I'll Find You' is published by Doubleday in Canada on June 6, 2023.
Several of his novels are available as Audiobooks - read by himself! Find him here:
https://www.authorchrishumphreys.com/...
He is translated into thirteen languages. In 2015 he earned his Masters in Fine Arts (Creative Writing) from the University of British Columbia.
Check out his website: http://authorchrishumphreys.com
Chris (C.C.) Humphreys was born in Toronto, lived till he was seven in Los Angeles, then grew up in the UK. All four grandparents were actors, and since his father was an actor as well, it was inevitable he would follow the bloodline.
Chris (C.C.) Humphreys has played Hamlet in Calgary, a gladiator in Tunisia, waltzed in London’s West End, conned the landlord of the Rovers Return in Coronation Street, commanded a starfleet in Andromeda, voiced Salem the cat in the original Sabrina, and is a dead immortal in Highlander. He has written eleven adult novels including The French Executioner, runner-up for the CWA Steel Dagger for Thrillers; Chasing the Wind; The Jack Absolute Trilogy; Vlad – The Last Confession; A Place Called Armageddon and Shakespeare’s Rebel – which he adapted into a play and which premiered at Bard on the Beach, Vancouver, in 2015. Plague won the Arthur Ellis Award for Best Crime Novel in Canada in 2015. He has an MFA in Creative Writing from the University of British Columbia. His epic fantasy series the Immortals’ Blood Trilogy, beginning with Smoke in the Glass' has just been published by Gollancz. He also published his other fantasy series, The Tapestry Trilogy, beginning in August 2020 with ‘The Hunt of the Unicorn’. His foray into modern crime, 'One London Day' was published in 2021. Hie new novel, the World War Two epic romance, 'Someday I'll Find You' is published by Doubleday in Canada on June 6, 2023.
Several of his novels are available as Audiobooks - read by himself! Find him here:
https://www.authorchrishumphreys.com/...
He is translated into thirteen languages. In 2015 he earned his Masters in Fine Arts (Creative Writing) from the University of British Columbia.
Check out his website: http://authorchrishumphreys.com
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 397 reviews
February 7, 2017
An interesting premise as the story starts in 1481, 5 years after Vlad Dracula’s death (unless you believe in Vampires of course!) with a gathering of his clan, church officials & witnesses to hear testimony of his life. The gathering called by one of his clan’s surviving hierarchy is to try & restore their standing & so raise themselves above such infamy & notoriety that the victors have portrayed of Dracula’s life/evil deeds.
And so the story begins as retold by the three people (witnesses) who were closest to him in life.
His early captivity as a hostage was covered; he & his brother being held by the Turks in order to make his father compliant to the Turkish will in the region. As a teenage hostage it covers some of the abuses that he was subjected too & it’s told in a way to justify (mitigating circumstances) some of his later atrocities committed against his enemies. It’s not overtly bloody or gratuitous for the most part but you are left with a definite sense of the brutality/ harsh injustice done to him. It covers the Turks side of the story too & portrays the power the sultan had over his people in terms of life & death and was something that Vlad adopted upon his freedom as once he gained the Crown of Wallachia he ruled his court (Boyars - Lords) by fear rather than by favours as many of his predecessors had done so &ultimately paid with their lives at the hands of the fickle Boyars.
Vlad was a survivor & a man for the times who united (tried too) his people & foes against a common enemy, the Turk. His enemy was cruel & barbaric & in order to defeat them he had to match that & even surpass them in terms they too would fear. You soon learn that life as a vassal/peasant/servant was indeed cheap & the playthings of powerful Rulers, Princes & Lords.
His coming to power, uniting (controlling) his people, bringing justice to his territories, meeting out punishment to those that crossed him, his attempt to free Wallachia from the Turkish yolk, battles, are all retold by the three witnesses in further parts, some of which are brutal whilst others tell of love, sacrifice & ultimately betrayal.
All in all Its a great story, portraying the man as evolved due to his circumstances & not the finished article that we all know & revile through legend. My understanding/knowledge of Vlad Dracula has certainly improved by reading this book, as by prior reading of legends it had been tainted by tales simply of Vlad the Impaler or Count Dracula to date. He was certainly a man for the time & region.
A nice touch by the printers was that the pages were edged in blood red ink!
Recommend to all historical fiction buffs who aren’t afraid of getting their hands dirty.
A clear 5 stars for me as was wrapped throughout & really enjoyed the writers style/concept of the story
And so the story begins as retold by the three people (witnesses) who were closest to him in life.
His early captivity as a hostage was covered; he & his brother being held by the Turks in order to make his father compliant to the Turkish will in the region. As a teenage hostage it covers some of the abuses that he was subjected too & it’s told in a way to justify (mitigating circumstances) some of his later atrocities committed against his enemies. It’s not overtly bloody or gratuitous for the most part but you are left with a definite sense of the brutality/ harsh injustice done to him. It covers the Turks side of the story too & portrays the power the sultan had over his people in terms of life & death and was something that Vlad adopted upon his freedom as once he gained the Crown of Wallachia he ruled his court (Boyars - Lords) by fear rather than by favours as many of his predecessors had done so &ultimately paid with their lives at the hands of the fickle Boyars.
Vlad was a survivor & a man for the times who united (tried too) his people & foes against a common enemy, the Turk. His enemy was cruel & barbaric & in order to defeat them he had to match that & even surpass them in terms they too would fear. You soon learn that life as a vassal/peasant/servant was indeed cheap & the playthings of powerful Rulers, Princes & Lords.
His coming to power, uniting (controlling) his people, bringing justice to his territories, meeting out punishment to those that crossed him, his attempt to free Wallachia from the Turkish yolk, battles, are all retold by the three witnesses in further parts, some of which are brutal whilst others tell of love, sacrifice & ultimately betrayal.
All in all Its a great story, portraying the man as evolved due to his circumstances & not the finished article that we all know & revile through legend. My understanding/knowledge of Vlad Dracula has certainly improved by reading this book, as by prior reading of legends it had been tainted by tales simply of Vlad the Impaler or Count Dracula to date. He was certainly a man for the time & region.
A nice touch by the printers was that the pages were edged in blood red ink!
Recommend to all historical fiction buffs who aren’t afraid of getting their hands dirty.
A clear 5 stars for me as was wrapped throughout & really enjoyed the writers style/concept of the story
March 8, 2009
This the first Western novel about Vlad that does him justice as a great champion of Christendom, as well as bringer of peace and prosperity - true at a cost, but considering the times, not particularly a great cost.
It just happened that instead of the peasantry and the poor, the cost was born by the rich, merchants and noble alike as well as their families, so the truly bad press Vlad got at the times and since.
I read tons of Romanian novels with Vlad as a hero for sure, but due to the Saxon and Hungarian inspired bad press, with a bit of the help from the Turks who trembled hearing of the Impaler Prince, the historical record has been grossly distorted outside of his native country where even today in the 00's Vlad is justly remembered as a hero.
The novel is brilliant and a page turner end to end with a superb finish. The appendices present some further reading to get the true picture of Vlad.
And incidentally this is how you write a superb historical fiction novel - great prose, great characters and excellent research, you need all three...
It just happened that instead of the peasantry and the poor, the cost was born by the rich, merchants and noble alike as well as their families, so the truly bad press Vlad got at the times and since.
I read tons of Romanian novels with Vlad as a hero for sure, but due to the Saxon and Hungarian inspired bad press, with a bit of the help from the Turks who trembled hearing of the Impaler Prince, the historical record has been grossly distorted outside of his native country where even today in the 00's Vlad is justly remembered as a hero.
The novel is brilliant and a page turner end to end with a superb finish. The appendices present some further reading to get the true picture of Vlad.
And incidentally this is how you write a superb historical fiction novel - great prose, great characters and excellent research, you need all three...
November 15, 2011
I've read maybe, more than a thousand books in my life? I know that I have at least a few hundred in my bedroom at home because I've counted. Exactly four have left my bent over, dry heaving, sobbing - that's how phenomenal they were. And I'm not talking about anything stupid written by Nicholas Sparks or whatever fluff love story. This book is one of the best I have ever read. And don't be turned off about the whole Dracula - vampire Twilight bullshit that we all have to drown through right now. This is meticulously researched historical fiction of the actual 15th century figure that blew my mind. And honestly, you need a strong stomach to get through the book because Medieval Eastern Europe wasn't exactly known for it's mercy, but if you can get through that, and maybe especially because of that - oh my God. Amazing. Best review I've read so far put it perfectly. "It makes you think harder about what it good, what is evil, and what happens when the two collide. . . ."
January 9, 2024
Transilvania, 1501.
Tras un arduo viaje, el príncipe Horvathy llega al castillo de Poienari, en los Cárpatos, con la misión de conocer la verdad acerca del conde Vlad Tepes, antiguo voivode de Valaquia. Para lograr su objetivo deberá entrevistarse con las tres personas más cercanas al conde durante su tormentosa existencia. Tres testimonios desgarradores le revelarán la verdadera personalidad de uno de los más fabulosos personajes que han existido.
El primer relato es el de Ion Tremblac, antiguo caballero y un amigo de Vlad que lleva años prisionero. El segundo es de Ilona Ferenc, una misteriosa mujer que en su día fue amante de Vlad.
El tercero es del hermano Vasilie, un ermitaño que hizo las veces de confesor del conde Drácula durante años.
Los tres testimonios se entrelazan para generar un complejo retrato del legendario personaje Vlad Tepes, el sanguinario empalador, que ha dado origen al mito del vampiro más famoso de todos los tiempos: el conde Drácula.
Gran historia de principio a fin que retrata al hombre que fue en constante cambio debido a sus circunstancias y las leyendas que acabaron cubriendo a este hombre. Era un hombre para la época y la región. Un héroe en su tierra.
Empezó a cambiar con su temprano cautiverio como rehén. Él y su hermano están retenidos por los turcos para que su padre cumpla con la voluntad turca en la región.
Los abusos a los que fue sometido y como eso provocó las atrocidades que cometió. Enorme brutalidad en su forma de injusta justicia. Y no sólo vemos el lado de Vlad, también leeremos el punto de vista turco.
Finalmente su llegada al poder, uniendo a su pueblo en su intento de liberar a Valaquia de la garra turca, las batallas, todo esto es relatado por los tres testigos. Amigos y enemigos. Amor y odio. Traición y venganza.
La historia de Vlad Draculea. Vlad Tepes..✍️🧛
Tras un arduo viaje, el príncipe Horvathy llega al castillo de Poienari, en los Cárpatos, con la misión de conocer la verdad acerca del conde Vlad Tepes, antiguo voivode de Valaquia. Para lograr su objetivo deberá entrevistarse con las tres personas más cercanas al conde durante su tormentosa existencia. Tres testimonios desgarradores le revelarán la verdadera personalidad de uno de los más fabulosos personajes que han existido.
El primer relato es el de Ion Tremblac, antiguo caballero y un amigo de Vlad que lleva años prisionero. El segundo es de Ilona Ferenc, una misteriosa mujer que en su día fue amante de Vlad.
El tercero es del hermano Vasilie, un ermitaño que hizo las veces de confesor del conde Drácula durante años.
Los tres testimonios se entrelazan para generar un complejo retrato del legendario personaje Vlad Tepes, el sanguinario empalador, que ha dado origen al mito del vampiro más famoso de todos los tiempos: el conde Drácula.
Gran historia de principio a fin que retrata al hombre que fue en constante cambio debido a sus circunstancias y las leyendas que acabaron cubriendo a este hombre. Era un hombre para la época y la región. Un héroe en su tierra.
Empezó a cambiar con su temprano cautiverio como rehén. Él y su hermano están retenidos por los turcos para que su padre cumpla con la voluntad turca en la región.
Los abusos a los que fue sometido y como eso provocó las atrocidades que cometió. Enorme brutalidad en su forma de injusta justicia. Y no sólo vemos el lado de Vlad, también leeremos el punto de vista turco.
Finalmente su llegada al poder, uniendo a su pueblo en su intento de liberar a Valaquia de la garra turca, las batallas, todo esto es relatado por los tres testigos. Amigos y enemigos. Amor y odio. Traición y venganza.
La historia de Vlad Draculea. Vlad Tepes..✍️🧛
March 27, 2019
Once again, Chris Humphreys has written a captivating book—the tale of Vlad, Prince of Wallachia, told retrospectively as a confession to a Church functionary by his mistress, his closest frenemy, and his confessor. Vlad, who is Prince, hostage, crusader, lover, ruler, friend, steadfast enemy, and, of course, the Impaler. As Humphreys points out in his afterword, the man is still honoured by the Romanian people, for whom he is synonymous with just (if brutal) rule and honour.
I have to point out that this is an intense book. About half way through, I had to set it down and go read something less gruesome. And yes, many people are tortured and/or impaled, so if you have a weak stomach for that sort of thing, you may want to give this book a miss (although I would absolutely recommend that you try some of Humphreys’ other offerings, as he is a fabulous writer). This would definitely qualify for Grim-Dark and most of it is semi-verifiable history. Humphreys visited many of the sites where the action happened, so the environmental descriptions are evocative. As an actor, I think he brings a unique way of understanding the behaviour and motivations of the people he is writing about, giving a very visceral feel to the actions of his characters.
I must say that I am also reading a YA series set in the same place/time (Kiersten White’s The Conqueror’s Saga) and although I have really enjoyed both of them, there is no comparison. White’s series makes Vlad into a woman, Lada Dracula, and it is also well worth reading. By contrast, Humphrey’s version very much deserves an “Adult” rating, as it is much darker & grittier.
If this time period interests you, if you enjoy well-written historical fantasy, or if you have a yen to learn more about the man who served in some small way as the template for the modern vampire mythos, this is definitely the book for you.
I have to point out that this is an intense book. About half way through, I had to set it down and go read something less gruesome. And yes, many people are tortured and/or impaled, so if you have a weak stomach for that sort of thing, you may want to give this book a miss (although I would absolutely recommend that you try some of Humphreys’ other offerings, as he is a fabulous writer). This would definitely qualify for Grim-Dark and most of it is semi-verifiable history. Humphreys visited many of the sites where the action happened, so the environmental descriptions are evocative. As an actor, I think he brings a unique way of understanding the behaviour and motivations of the people he is writing about, giving a very visceral feel to the actions of his characters.
I must say that I am also reading a YA series set in the same place/time (Kiersten White’s The Conqueror’s Saga) and although I have really enjoyed both of them, there is no comparison. White’s series makes Vlad into a woman, Lada Dracula, and it is also well worth reading. By contrast, Humphrey’s version very much deserves an “Adult” rating, as it is much darker & grittier.
If this time period interests you, if you enjoy well-written historical fantasy, or if you have a yen to learn more about the man who served in some small way as the template for the modern vampire mythos, this is definitely the book for you.
March 1, 2019
C.C. Humphreys uses his novel to delve into the life of the real Dracula; the man who has come down through history as Vlad the Impaler. A real man with a story, and not a vampire from Transylvania, the myth that has become more famous than the real man. He writes compellingly that brings the character and time to life and even though you want to turn away you also want to know more. Full review you can find on my blog: https://poetryofreading.blogspot.com/...
January 24, 2023
„'Заробљен сам. Чамим у кавезу од меса. Па ипак, тврдим да сам јастреб који слободно лети.'“
Трагом крви креће се један мит, више него и један пре и после њега. Трагом смрти и страха ходају сенке једног мита, више него и један познати мит. Влад Дракула, Ђаволов син и син Дракул Влада, познатог као Змај, онај чији је кисмет (усуд, судбина) одређен и који јуриша на невернике на челу крсташке восјке без страха са змајевом канџом у руци и убија без милости, сурово, крваво, инспиративно, попут уметника у атељеу. На основу крваве легенде настала је једна прича, на основу приче настао је један роман, Стокеров Дракула, трансилванијски вампир који пије крв, са пуно реиздања, пуно превођења, пуно екранизација. Сјајан роман, сјајан филм, али нема пуно везе са крвавим вођом реда змајева, историјским Влад Дракулом. А баш ово је прича о њему, историјском Дракули, оном чије име се изговарало са страхопоштовањем, шапатом, оном због кога се није смело красти, због кога су слаби имали сигурност, због кога су непријатељске војске веровале у таму паклених кругова и ђавола који њима управља. Његова одећа била је црна, са поставом бордо, скоро црне боје, дуга коса, бркови, тен били су црни, он је имао змајеву канџу у рукама и школовао се у турском Токату да мучи и да буде мучен, његов надимак био је Колац, он је крвави Казикли- бег, он је Влад Цепеш. Као талац, залог вазалства, послат је у Турску заједно са братом Радуом. У школи је био изузетан, стекао је велико знање, изучио је језике и обичаје, у ратничкој вештини био је најбољи, волео је соколарење и припитомљавање птица, и у томе је био ненадмашан, а када је по казни доспео у Токат, школу која из својих клупа у свет шаље џелате, уметнике мучења, био је ненадмашан.
„'Постоје два начина набијања на колац', рекао је гласно, „'а о мени се прича лаж да користим само један. Одговара ми да моји непријатељи верују у ту лаж. Али, истина је да право набијање, 'trusus in anum'', наставио је гурнувши ражњић напред, 'као и свака тешка вештина, захтева време, људе, стручност. То се ради у доколици. А сада, кад су Турци на мање од дана хода одавде...' (...) 'Овај (други) начин са собом носи две невоље,' (...) 'Прва је што већина умре одмах- као што можете да се уверите. Друга је што када се кочеви зарију... (...) ,тела крећу да клизе. Ако је ко��ац гладак, леш сиђе за својом утробом на земљу за сат, а то квари представу.'“
Илона, Јон и испосник Владислав, Владу најближи људи, причају нам причу у замку Појенари о крвавом Дракули, са намером да му се опросте греси почињени за живота, како би ред змаја добио легитимитет за ново уједињење хришћана у борби против неверника, али овога пута без Цепеша на челу. Попут Ханибала звер се уздизала лагано, расла и нарасла довољно да прерасте у легенду о којој се и дуго након Владове смрти са језом говори. Звер се пела степеницама замка Појенари лагано, била саплитана и злом учена, али се на крају у свој својој снази непријатељу показала бучном риком са врха стене на којој је направила утврђење и праведничком крвљу залила све своје непријатеље.
Дамари змајеве крви теку његовим венама, његова крв је врела и жељна освете, његова мисао је бритка, попут змејеве канџе у десној руци док сече издајничке главе влашких великаша, његова вера је чврста, као поље кочева са неверницима као украсом на њима, његова правда је оштра као кљун његовог јастреба који ватрено лети ка слободи. Научен да мучи како не би био мучен за собом оставља дарове страве и крви, како би се кроз уста и очи случајно преживелих глас о Дракули, Змајевом сину, проширио на све стране света, како би непријатељи знали шта их чека у сусрету са слободе жељним влашким кнезом. Врела крв дарује и несмотрену главу, а несмотрена глава бива лако издана, из жеље за животом, из жеље да се избегне колац, из жеље за влашћу. Постао је оно што није желео, звер којим се плаше деца, чудовиште и крвопија, излагали су га пред непријатеља као симбол крви и смрти, као симбол онога шта их чека ако нападну, као обичну наказу. Усуд или кисмет му је даривао оно што није желео, занемарио доношење сигурности у срца обичног човека, искорењивање разбојништва и лоповлука, али га увео у ред бесмртних легенди које доносе гађење, страх, поштовање, па чак и љубав, али равнодушност никако.
„У Једрену је научила хиљаду и једну песму да разоноди мушкарца. Али ово је била песма из њеног детињства, из њеног родног села; доина, успаванка и жалопојка. (...) Кад је опрала сву крв, а охлађена вода у котлу попримила бледоружичасту боју, почела је да шије, да затвара посекотине којима је био прекривен, да саставља месо најбоље што је умела. Разјапљену рану на врату покрила је платненом крпом коју је зашила за рамена. Онда је узела уље замирисано жалфијом и бергамотом и истрљала цело тело док није засветлуцало под светлом уљанице. Био је помазан као кнез и сад је помазан поново, за смрт.“
Трагом крви креће се један мит, више него и један пре и после њега. Трагом смрти и страха ходају сенке једног мита, више него и један познати мит. Влад Дракула, Ђаволов син и син Дракул Влада, познатог као Змај, онај чији је кисмет (усуд, судбина) одређен и који јуриша на невернике на челу крсташке восјке без страха са змајевом канџом у руци и убија без милости, сурово, крваво, инспиративно, попут уметника у атељеу. На основу крваве легенде настала је једна прича, на основу приче настао је један роман, Стокеров Дракула, трансилванијски вампир који пије крв, са пуно реиздања, пуно превођења, пуно екранизација. Сјајан роман, сјајан филм, али нема пуно везе са крвавим вођом реда змајева, историјским Влад Дракулом. А баш ово је прича о њему, историјском Дракули, оном чије име се изговарало са страхопоштовањем, шапатом, оном због кога се није смело красти, због кога су слаби имали сигурност, због кога су непријатељске војске веровале у таму паклених кругова и ђавола који њима управља. Његова одећа била је црна, са поставом бордо, скоро црне боје, дуга коса, бркови, тен били су црни, он је имао змајеву канџу у рукама и школовао се у турском Токату да мучи и да буде мучен, његов надимак био је Колац, он је крвави Казикли- бег, он је Влад Цепеш. Као талац, залог вазалства, послат је у Турску заједно са братом Радуом. У школи је био изузетан, стекао је велико знање, изучио је језике и обичаје, у ратничкој вештини био је најбољи, волео је соколарење и припитомљавање птица, и у томе је био ненадмашан, а када је по казни доспео у Токат, школу која из својих клупа у свет шаље џелате, уметнике мучења, био је ненадмашан.
„'Постоје два начина набијања на колац', рекао је гласно, „'а о мени се прича лаж да користим само један. Одговара ми да моји непријатељи верују у ту лаж. Али, истина је да право набијање, 'trusus in anum'', наставио је гурнувши ражњић напред, 'као и свака тешка вештина, захтева време, људе, стручност. То се ради у доколици. А сада, кад су Турци на мање од дана хода одавде...' (...) 'Овај (други) начин са собом носи две невоље,' (...) 'Прва је што већина умре одмах- као што можете да се уверите. Друга је што када се кочеви зарију... (...) ,тела крећу да клизе. Ако је ко��ац гладак, леш сиђе за својом утробом на земљу за сат, а то квари представу.'“
Илона, Јон и испосник Владислав, Владу најближи људи, причају нам причу у замку Појенари о крвавом Дракули, са намером да му се опросте греси почињени за живота, како би ред змаја добио легитимитет за ново уједињење хришћана у борби против неверника, али овога пута без Цепеша на челу. Попут Ханибала звер се уздизала лагано, расла и нарасла довољно да прерасте у легенду о којој се и дуго након Владове смрти са језом говори. Звер се пела степеницама замка Појенари лагано, била саплитана и злом учена, али се на крају у свој својој снази непријатељу показала бучном риком са врха стене на којој је направила утврђење и праведничком крвљу залила све своје непријатеље.
Дамари змајеве крви теку његовим венама, његова крв је врела и жељна освете, његова мисао је бритка, попут змејеве канџе у десној руци док сече издајничке главе влашких великаша, његова вера је чврста, као поље кочева са неверницима као украсом на њима, његова правда је оштра као кљун његовог јастреба који ватрено лети ка слободи. Научен да мучи како не би био мучен за собом оставља дарове страве и крви, како би се кроз уста и очи случајно преживелих глас о Дракули, Змајевом сину, проширио на све стране света, како би непријатељи знали шта их чека у сусрету са слободе жељним влашким кнезом. Врела крв дарује и несмотрену главу, а несмотрена глава бива лако издана, из жеље за животом, из жеље да се избегне колац, из жеље за влашћу. Постао је оно што није желео, звер којим се плаше деца, чудовиште и крвопија, излагали су га пред непријатеља као симбол крви и смрти, као симбол онога шта их чека ако нападну, као обичну наказу. Усуд или кисмет му је даривао оно што није желео, занемарио доношење сигурности у срца обичног човека, искорењивање разбојништва и лоповлука, али га увео у ред бесмртних легенди које доносе гађење, страх, поштовање, па чак и љубав, али равнодушност никако.
„У Једрену је научила хиљаду и једну песму да разоноди мушкарца. Али ово је била песма из њеног детињства, из њеног родног села; доина, успаванка и жалопојка. (...) Кад је опрала сву крв, а охлађена вода у котлу попримила бледоружичасту боју, почела је да шије, да затвара посекотине којима је био прекривен, да саставља месо најбоље што је умела. Разјапљену рану на врату покрила је платненом крпом коју је зашила за рамена. Онда је узела уље замирисано жалфијом и бергамотом и истрљала цело тело док није засветлуцало под светлом уљанице. Био је помазан као кнез и сад је помазан поново, за смрт.“
July 12, 2015
Nope.
(1) It's boring as hell. The characters have 1/10th the rounded personality of Rottingham's cardboard standup in Robin Hood: Men in Tights.
(2) It's violent. I'm not opposed to bloodspray in my reading material, but there's a difference between whackadoodle bodice ripper'ing & detailed descriptions of torture, flaying, & impaling. YES, I know it's about Vlad the Impaler, but c'mon. Psychological horror rule #1: less is more. Judging by the afterward, the author's goal was to humanize a terrible person without whitewashing his violent history -- but this is the noble version? There's no way to accept Nutball Vlad as anything vaguely resembling an anti-hero, let alone a protagonist.
(3) It's pretentious. The style is dry, vague, & utterly disengaged from the reader's sympathies, yet somehow comes off convoluted & excessive. (This from someone who enjoys Wilkie Collins & Anne Rice -- I don't break out the "overwriting" label lightly, y'all.)
Overall reaction:
(1) It's boring as hell. The characters have 1/10th the rounded personality of Rottingham's cardboard standup in Robin Hood: Men in Tights.
(2) It's violent. I'm not opposed to bloodspray in my reading material, but there's a difference between whackadoodle bodice ripper'ing & detailed descriptions of torture, flaying, & impaling. YES, I know it's about Vlad the Impaler, but c'mon. Psychological horror rule #1: less is more. Judging by the afterward, the author's goal was to humanize a terrible person without whitewashing his violent history -- but this is the noble version? There's no way to accept Nutball Vlad as anything vaguely resembling an anti-hero, let alone a protagonist.
(3) It's pretentious. The style is dry, vague, & utterly disengaged from the reader's sympathies, yet somehow comes off convoluted & excessive. (This from someone who enjoys Wilkie Collins & Anne Rice -- I don't break out the "overwriting" label lightly, y'all.)
Overall reaction:
October 4, 2016
I enjoyed this book, but I think that was mostly because of the subject matter more than anything else. Humphreys is a fun writer and he writes about morbid things, which I LOVE. (Yes,I know I’m ghoulish.) So I will definitely be checking out The French Executioner. I have to say though, this book definitely is not the same quality as some of the other historical fiction that I’ve read by other writers. The characters aren’t complex, (except for Vlad) and some of the incidents don’t quite make sense.
Humphreys prose is rich and he’s got a knack for description, describing scenes with skillful beauty. A lot of Turkish and Romanian words are thrown in for color, which was kind of a pain in the ass, since I had to keep looking them up in the glossary in the back. It’s not all through the book though.
I know Humphreys wanted to truly grasp Vlad’s personality and that’s got to be hard (Humphreys even said it was difficult in the author’s note) because let’s face it, Vlad is a brutal asshat. There’s no getting around it. Yes Vlad put up a good fight against the Turks considering he was so outnumbered, but it’s hard to make him hero when he’s just so ruthless. I do admire Humphreys for trying though without sanitizing or vilifying him.
There’s no doubt, Vlad has had more bad press than any other ruler. Some of the stories about him are monstrous. Like for instance the story of him inviting all the poor people of Wallachia to a feast, and then locking them in the banquet hall, setting it on fire. Humphreys didn’t include that tale. I’m sure he considered it propaganda. Matthias Corvinus (the king of Bohemia) had good reason to promote Vlad’s cruelty, since he betrayed him, and as Humphreys points out, Vlad’s enemies wrote his story, so of course they aren’t going to paint him in a good light. Yet even with all the propaganda removed, Vlad is still cruel. Obviously he hated the Turks with a big passion.
I think the main problem I had with this book was the awkward time line. It starts off with three people, brought together to tell their own story of Vlad, their past revealed through third person. Humphreys likes to use this device to jump and skip over years, having the characters info dump and narrate over what happened instead of showing it. It really irritated me in beginning when Vlad was trying to make an escape to Hungry, when all off a sudden the story just stops and jumps back to the present. Then the characters talked for a few paragraphs on what happens for the next eight years and that’s it. They moved on. Obviously Humphreys didn’t want talk about Vlad’s relationship with his cousin Stephen, and I felt this did the book a great disservice. One of the reasons Vlad didn’t succeed was because he was surrounded by treachery. It’s amazing how these Christian countries just stabbed each other in the back. No wonder the Turks took over. But the relationship Vlad had with these people is never fully explored. Maybe it was just too many characters, but I think a fuller, richer biographical fiction would have pursued it.
And the main characters the book does focus on are not very complex. Ion (Vlad’s best friend) is kind of an oaf. Mehmet is a childish villain. Ilona is a dream girl, stunningly beautiful, trained in the arts of love, but still a virgin and totally loyal to Vlad, even though he’s never around…FOR YEARS. I was like…you’ve got to be kidding me. She waited that long? LOL
Vlad’s relationship with Pasha Hamza is fascinating (considering what happens) but some of the other characters were faceless. My favorite is Laughing Gregor, who would be totally unmemorable to me, except I thought it was funny how he’s always laughing, even when he died.
So yes, this is pretty lightweight, even with the pretty prose. It’s got some great intense moments though, and it was fun for that reason. While I don’t think it’s a great book, I enjoyed reading it. So I’ll stick with my three stars.
If you’re worried about the grim subject matter, it’s not really that gory, but some bad things happen.
Humphreys prose is rich and he’s got a knack for description, describing scenes with skillful beauty. A lot of Turkish and Romanian words are thrown in for color, which was kind of a pain in the ass, since I had to keep looking them up in the glossary in the back. It’s not all through the book though.
I know Humphreys wanted to truly grasp Vlad’s personality and that’s got to be hard (Humphreys even said it was difficult in the author’s note) because let’s face it, Vlad is a brutal asshat. There’s no getting around it. Yes Vlad put up a good fight against the Turks considering he was so outnumbered, but it’s hard to make him hero when he’s just so ruthless. I do admire Humphreys for trying though without sanitizing or vilifying him.
There’s no doubt, Vlad has had more bad press than any other ruler. Some of the stories about him are monstrous. Like for instance the story of him inviting all the poor people of Wallachia to a feast, and then locking them in the banquet hall, setting it on fire. Humphreys didn’t include that tale. I’m sure he considered it propaganda. Matthias Corvinus (the king of Bohemia) had good reason to promote Vlad’s cruelty, since he betrayed him, and as Humphreys points out, Vlad’s enemies wrote his story, so of course they aren’t going to paint him in a good light. Yet even with all the propaganda removed, Vlad is still cruel. Obviously he hated the Turks with a big passion.
I think the main problem I had with this book was the awkward time line. It starts off with three people, brought together to tell their own story of Vlad, their past revealed through third person. Humphreys likes to use this device to jump and skip over years, having the characters info dump and narrate over what happened instead of showing it. It really irritated me in beginning when Vlad was trying to make an escape to Hungry, when all off a sudden the story just stops and jumps back to the present. Then the characters talked for a few paragraphs on what happens for the next eight years and that’s it. They moved on. Obviously Humphreys didn’t want talk about Vlad’s relationship with his cousin Stephen, and I felt this did the book a great disservice. One of the reasons Vlad didn’t succeed was because he was surrounded by treachery. It’s amazing how these Christian countries just stabbed each other in the back. No wonder the Turks took over. But the relationship Vlad had with these people is never fully explored. Maybe it was just too many characters, but I think a fuller, richer biographical fiction would have pursued it.
And the main characters the book does focus on are not very complex. Ion (Vlad’s best friend) is kind of an oaf. Mehmet is a childish villain. Ilona is a dream girl, stunningly beautiful, trained in the arts of love, but still a virgin and totally loyal to Vlad, even though he’s never around…FOR YEARS. I was like…you’ve got to be kidding me. She waited that long? LOL
Vlad’s relationship with Pasha Hamza is fascinating (considering what happens) but some of the other characters were faceless. My favorite is Laughing Gregor, who would be totally unmemorable to me, except I thought it was funny how he’s always laughing, even when he died.
So yes, this is pretty lightweight, even with the pretty prose. It’s got some great intense moments though, and it was fun for that reason. While I don’t think it’s a great book, I enjoyed reading it. So I’ll stick with my three stars.
If you’re worried about the grim subject matter, it’s not really that gory, but some bad things happen.
June 19, 2011
Thanks to Bram Stoker when most people hear the name Dracula they think of a vampire from Transylvania. The myth, I think has become more famous than the real man. C.C. Humphreys uses his novel to delve into the life of the real Dracula; the man who has come down through history as Vlad the Impaler. A real man with a story that is not easy to read.
The period in history when Vlad was fighting for his throne in the small kingdom of Wallachia (which is now part of Romania) is not exactly noted for it's gentility. The Roman Catholic church was warring with the Greek Orthodox church and the Ottoman Empire was trying to take over them both. Sins could be eliminated by killing the "infidel." So they all went about killing as many infidels as they could.
The book is set up in an interesting way; the three people who knew Vlad best are brought together in a sort of tribunal to tell his tale. To show how his life played out to see if his excesses could be somehow forgiven. To see if his reputation could be repaired. His best friend and right hand man throughout life, his love and his confessor.
The tale starts with Vlad's stay as a hostage in the "care" of Murad where he is taught the way of the Koran and the Turk. It moves through his life and loves and shows the whys of his actions. The author does an excellent job of dealing with the horror of a man who reputedly impaled up to 100,000 people and yet making him still seem somewhat human. Mad, yes but human all the same.
As I said at the beginning it was a hard book to read but one I found I could not put down. The story is very compelling and while I suspected the one part of the ending it still was very satisfying. Mr. Humphreys writes in a compelling way that brings the character and time to life and even though you want to turn away you also want to know more. This was an excellent book about a very disturbing man.
The period in history when Vlad was fighting for his throne in the small kingdom of Wallachia (which is now part of Romania) is not exactly noted for it's gentility. The Roman Catholic church was warring with the Greek Orthodox church and the Ottoman Empire was trying to take over them both. Sins could be eliminated by killing the "infidel." So they all went about killing as many infidels as they could.
The book is set up in an interesting way; the three people who knew Vlad best are brought together in a sort of tribunal to tell his tale. To show how his life played out to see if his excesses could be somehow forgiven. To see if his reputation could be repaired. His best friend and right hand man throughout life, his love and his confessor.
The tale starts with Vlad's stay as a hostage in the "care" of Murad where he is taught the way of the Koran and the Turk. It moves through his life and loves and shows the whys of his actions. The author does an excellent job of dealing with the horror of a man who reputedly impaled up to 100,000 people and yet making him still seem somewhat human. Mad, yes but human all the same.
As I said at the beginning it was a hard book to read but one I found I could not put down. The story is very compelling and while I suspected the one part of the ending it still was very satisfying. Mr. Humphreys writes in a compelling way that brings the character and time to life and even though you want to turn away you also want to know more. This was an excellent book about a very disturbing man.
March 7, 2017
Man or monster? The author wants the reader to decide for herself!
This book is nonjudgmental. Humphreys presents the findings of his extensive research into this historical figure and draws no conclusions. Was he a crazed immortal that drinks blood to survive? No!
We first meet Vlad and his younger brother as youths held as hostage by a Turkish Sultan. The reason for their incarceration is to ensure their fathers cooperation with Turkey. Vlad has a naturally rebellious nature and is very conscious of his status as an Orthodox Catholic Prince of the Dragon line imprisoned by infidels. He feels the need to avenge, what in his eyes are, the many wrongs inflicted on his own family, and indeed on the whole of Christianity, by the Infidel enemy. This becomes the main motivating force in his life. At the hands of his Turkish teachers he learns the mantra "I torture, so that I will not be tortured". Although his name is synonymous with impalement, he did not invent that imaginative means of torture but, in later life he used it to great effect to keep order in his Kingdome. Nothing deters law breaker like fear of having a blunt stake forced through your anus!
This book was very well written and dealt with the brutalities of the age without focusing in the gory details. Unpleasantries were not skimmed over but neither very they gloried in in a gratuitous way - some modern thriller writers could learn a thing or two from C.C.Humphries!
The mythologies surrounding Dracula were dealt with in a roundabout way. Apparently night-walkers who fed on the blood of sleeping infants were a big fear in 15th century Europe. Those stories coupled with a strong family resemblance to his son, may have been enough for his enemies to use to further blacken an already feared figure.
I found this story compelling and thought provoking. After reading it I think that Vlad was a psychopath fuelled by revenge and incapable of love. He was obsessive about the things he wanted. My own verdict is that I can understand all of his actions bar one, and that one is unforgivable in my eyes - but, I am not going to spoil the story by telling you what that was! But was he much different from other rulers of his time? Would he have been a different man if not for his early exposure to brutality? Does he deserve the fear that his name inspires? These are questions that remain in my thoughts for a long time I think - exactly the effect that a great book should have on the reader. One thing the book does very well is to separate the man from the myth.
This book is nonjudgmental. Humphreys presents the findings of his extensive research into this historical figure and draws no conclusions. Was he a crazed immortal that drinks blood to survive? No!
We first meet Vlad and his younger brother as youths held as hostage by a Turkish Sultan. The reason for their incarceration is to ensure their fathers cooperation with Turkey. Vlad has a naturally rebellious nature and is very conscious of his status as an Orthodox Catholic Prince of the Dragon line imprisoned by infidels. He feels the need to avenge, what in his eyes are, the many wrongs inflicted on his own family, and indeed on the whole of Christianity, by the Infidel enemy. This becomes the main motivating force in his life. At the hands of his Turkish teachers he learns the mantra "I torture, so that I will not be tortured". Although his name is synonymous with impalement, he did not invent that imaginative means of torture but, in later life he used it to great effect to keep order in his Kingdome. Nothing deters law breaker like fear of having a blunt stake forced through your anus!
This book was very well written and dealt with the brutalities of the age without focusing in the gory details. Unpleasantries were not skimmed over but neither very they gloried in in a gratuitous way - some modern thriller writers could learn a thing or two from C.C.Humphries!
The mythologies surrounding Dracula were dealt with in a roundabout way. Apparently night-walkers who fed on the blood of sleeping infants were a big fear in 15th century Europe. Those stories coupled with a strong family resemblance to his son, may have been enough for his enemies to use to further blacken an already feared figure.
I found this story compelling and thought provoking. After reading it I think that Vlad was a psychopath fuelled by revenge and incapable of love. He was obsessive about the things he wanted. My own verdict is that I can understand all of his actions bar one, and that one is unforgivable in my eyes - but, I am not going to spoil the story by telling you what that was! But was he much different from other rulers of his time? Would he have been a different man if not for his early exposure to brutality? Does he deserve the fear that his name inspires? These are questions that remain in my thoughts for a long time I think - exactly the effect that a great book should have on the reader. One thing the book does very well is to separate the man from the myth.
October 15, 2008
A dark, evocative look at the historical fifteenth century prince who became known as Vlad the Impaler. A ruler who terrorized his enemies, a courageous warrior and dauntless justiciar, Vlad was also a man beset by inner demons and Humphreys brings him to life through the eyes of his closest companions, each of whom had reason to love and fear him. This is not a vampire novel.
Read
August 2, 2019Before Bram Stoker's Dracula - the vampire- there was another man called Dracula or Vlad III Dracula.
A Voivode (prince) from Wallachia, part of today's Romania.
And this book tells his story.
He was not a vampire but a crusader against the Turks, a Christian prince that wanted to cleanse Europe from the Turks.
This book is historical fiction but it didn't feel like historical fiction. It wasn't heavy. It wasn't infested with dates, names, and events, it was a straightforward story, and this doesn't mean it wasn't good.
I bought this book in 2010, and I tried to read it but for reasons unknown I dnf-ed, and now ten years later I decided to read it till the end.
What does Dracula mean?
It means son (-a) of the Dragon (Dracul).
His father was Vlad II Dracul.
His sobriquet (nickname) was acquired since his order's emblem was a Dragon, an order set to defend Christendom from the Ottoman Empire.
But his son was also a vicious bloodthirsty ruler and his means of justice were too cruel. His most well known method of execution was impalement and this book thrives from graphic descriptions of impalement, which was performed by inserting a stake from your anus...(view spoiler if you dare reading the method)
So Vlad III Dracula also got another nickname, Țepeș (Impaler).
His bloodthirstiness made him an infamous person and his legacy inspired Bram Stoker to write Dracula, a bloodthirsty Vampire.
But Stoker doesn't refer to him as Vlad, but just as Prince Dracula, fighting the Turks.
"He must, indeed, have been that Voivode [prince] Dracula who won his name against the Turk, over the great river [Danube] on the very frontier of Turkey-land [i.e. Ottoman Empire]"
Dracula p.289
So I'm really glad I finished this book finally, after being untouched and gathering dust on my shelves for 10 years. I was also glad I read this book just before reading Stoker's Dracula for the 3rd time.
P.S. Francis Ford Coppola's film Bram Stoker's Dracula combines the real story of Vlad the Impaler and Stoker's Dracula.
A Voivode (prince) from Wallachia, part of today's Romania.
And this book tells his story.
He was not a vampire but a crusader against the Turks, a Christian prince that wanted to cleanse Europe from the Turks.
This book is historical fiction but it didn't feel like historical fiction. It wasn't heavy. It wasn't infested with dates, names, and events, it was a straightforward story, and this doesn't mean it wasn't good.
I bought this book in 2010, and I tried to read it but for reasons unknown I dnf-ed, and now ten years later I decided to read it till the end.
What does Dracula mean?
It means son (-a) of the Dragon (Dracul).
His father was Vlad II Dracul.
His sobriquet (nickname) was acquired since his order's emblem was a Dragon, an order set to defend Christendom from the Ottoman Empire.
But his son was also a vicious bloodthirsty ruler and his means of justice were too cruel. His most well known method of execution was impalement and this book thrives from graphic descriptions of impalement, which was performed by inserting a stake from your anus...(view spoiler if you dare reading the method)
So Vlad III Dracula also got another nickname, Țepeș (Impaler).
His bloodthirstiness made him an infamous person and his legacy inspired Bram Stoker to write Dracula, a bloodthirsty Vampire.
But Stoker doesn't refer to him as Vlad, but just as Prince Dracula, fighting the Turks.
"He must, indeed, have been that Voivode [prince] Dracula who won his name against the Turk, over the great river [Danube] on the very frontier of Turkey-land [i.e. Ottoman Empire]"
Dracula p.289
So I'm really glad I finished this book finally, after being untouched and gathering dust on my shelves for 10 years. I was also glad I read this book just before reading Stoker's Dracula for the 3rd time.
P.S. Francis Ford Coppola's film Bram Stoker's Dracula combines the real story of Vlad the Impaler and Stoker's Dracula.
April 23, 2009
This was the first time that i've read something fictional about Vlad, although fiction could be used for many historical 'facts' written about him!
I enjoyed this book despite the fact that it took me several attempts to get into it, I'm someone who hunts down books about Vlad and so was surprised that it took me so long to get into the story but again I put that down to the fact that it was a departure from reading history books, I read The Historian last year and while that touched on Vlad slightly it kept him as a myth and almost in the background behind the Dracula character.
By the time I was half way through I was hooked and found the events leading up to his demise fascinating and thoroughly enjoyable, I wasn't looking for historical accuracies or reading it as a Tepes snob, I just allowed myself to be pulled into a story about a man who thirsted to avenge his father/brother's deaths, to fight for what he believed in and who turned out to be surprisingly humane.
Very well written, researched and refreshingly free of blood sucking monsters!
I enjoyed this book despite the fact that it took me several attempts to get into it, I'm someone who hunts down books about Vlad and so was surprised that it took me so long to get into the story but again I put that down to the fact that it was a departure from reading history books, I read The Historian last year and while that touched on Vlad slightly it kept him as a myth and almost in the background behind the Dracula character.
By the time I was half way through I was hooked and found the events leading up to his demise fascinating and thoroughly enjoyable, I wasn't looking for historical accuracies or reading it as a Tepes snob, I just allowed myself to be pulled into a story about a man who thirsted to avenge his father/brother's deaths, to fight for what he believed in and who turned out to be surprisingly humane.
Very well written, researched and refreshingly free of blood sucking monsters!
July 30, 2014
I think I got taken in my an author's review on this one. I read one chapter, which had 3 completely different scenes and have no idea what the heck was going on in any of them. I have seen a good author use a little of that to create the effect of intrigue and ignitie curiousity, but between the overwrought prose and absolutely confusing storyline, this was just a muddled mess. I'm not wasting any more of my time.
November 26, 2021
El rehén de Mehmet, el príncipe Dracul, el voivoda de Valaquia, el señor de los Draculesti, el hombre que inspiró al mismísimo Bram Stoker para dar vida al Conde Drácula, el vampiro más famoso del mundo, por su sed de sangre... En resumidas cuentas el hombre detrás del mito, la leyenda... Los que queráis una historia de vampiros, este no es vuestro libro, pero lo que queráis conocer algo más sobre la vida de Vlad "El Empalador", leedlo; es un libro con una gran documentación histórica, muy muy fiel a la vida de Vlad como por ejemplo la época que pasó como rehén de los turcos, su pasada por Tokat para aprender a torturar al grito de: "Torturalos para que no te torturen ellos", el empalamiento de los boyardos el día de pascua, la forma de morir su padre y su hermano Mircea, la copa de oro en la fuente del pueblo, las cartas falsas que mandaron sus enemigos en nombre de Vlad, las mentiras que inventaron los turcos para echar su nombre, aún más, por tierra... Y muchos hechos más que el autor explica al final de novela, para separar la realidad de la historia que él ha compuesto para contarlos.
La prosa es exquisita, está contado de tal manera que aún sabiendo lo que va a pasar (si se conoce previamente la historia) te mantiene en vilo... Es un libro lleno de sentimientos, me ha hecho llorar, he sentido el amor que sintió Vlad, su sed de venganza, te acerca al hombre, al hombre con sus luces y sus sombras, pero al hombre que hubo detrás del mito. Es mi personaje histórico favorito y tenía ciertos miedos a la hora de leer éste libro, pero me ha encantado, sobre todo un par de giros que tiene al final (cuando llegué a uno de ellos, hasta aplaudí de la emoción).
Libro recomendable al cien por cien.
La prosa es exquisita, está contado de tal manera que aún sabiendo lo que va a pasar (si se conoce previamente la historia) te mantiene en vilo... Es un libro lleno de sentimientos, me ha hecho llorar, he sentido el amor que sintió Vlad, su sed de venganza, te acerca al hombre, al hombre con sus luces y sus sombras, pero al hombre que hubo detrás del mito. Es mi personaje histórico favorito y tenía ciertos miedos a la hora de leer éste libro, pero me ha encantado, sobre todo un par de giros que tiene al final (cuando llegué a uno de ellos, hasta aplaudí de la emoción).
Libro recomendable al cien por cien.
January 13, 2015
-Enfoque hacia el hombre con una tarea que cumplirá a cualquier coste.-
Género. Novela histórica (pero a su manera).
Lo que nos cuenta. Janos Horvathy, conde de Pecs, y por orden del rey de Hungría, dirige un interrogatorio ante escribas y eclesiásticos con la intención de tratar de restaurar el valor de la fraternatis draconem ante los ojos de las naciones cristianas. Y es que el comportamiento hasta su muerte de Vlad Drácula, voivoda de Valaquia y enemigo jurado del Imperio Otomano y cualesquiera otros herejes, dejó a la Orden del Dragón en muy mal lugar. Los tres testigos que hablarán de la vida de Vlad lo conocieron bien, aunque en circunstancias muy diferentes y por razones muy distintas.
¿Quiere saber más de este libro, sin spoilers? Visite:
http://librosdeolethros.blogspot.com/...
Género. Novela histórica (pero a su manera).
Lo que nos cuenta. Janos Horvathy, conde de Pecs, y por orden del rey de Hungría, dirige un interrogatorio ante escribas y eclesiásticos con la intención de tratar de restaurar el valor de la fraternatis draconem ante los ojos de las naciones cristianas. Y es que el comportamiento hasta su muerte de Vlad Drácula, voivoda de Valaquia y enemigo jurado del Imperio Otomano y cualesquiera otros herejes, dejó a la Orden del Dragón en muy mal lugar. Los tres testigos que hablarán de la vida de Vlad lo conocieron bien, aunque en circunstancias muy diferentes y por razones muy distintas.
¿Quiere saber más de este libro, sin spoilers? Visite:
http://librosdeolethros.blogspot.com/...
May 5, 2024
"Zarobljen sam, u ovom kavezu od mesa. Pa ipak, tvrdim da sam soko koji leti slobodno."
Odličan istorijski roman koji može da se posmatra i kao prednastavak Stokerovog "Drakule" jer nam daje širu sliku iz Vladovog života pre nego što je "prodao dušu đavolu". U ovom delu je predstavljen iz dva ugla: kao pravdoljubiv borac koji je spreman na sve zarad ljubavi, časti i osvete, ali je prikazana i njegova mračna strana kroz detaljne opise mučenja koja je hladnokrvno sprovodio zbog čega je i dobio nadimak Nabijač. Na kraju ćete moći sami da donesete svoj sud o njemu jer ćete sve ono što je već poznato, ali i ono što nikad nije ispričano o njemu dobiti na tacni. Ovaj roman i predstavlja Vladovo suđenje, kao i pokušaj da se skine ljaga sa njegovog imena. Kroz priču ćete slušati svedočenja ljudi koji su mu bili bliski, a sve zarad toga da se Redu Zmaja, čiji je Vlad bio pripadnik, vrati čast kako bi krenuli u Krstaški rat. Ima dosta preskakanja kroz vreme pa je potrebna koncentracija kako bi se lepo ispratila priča, ali daleko toga da je nerazumljivo. Neki istorijski romani umeju da budu suvoparni jer se pisci razbacuju znanjem da često ne obrate pažnju na pripovedanje. Kod Hamfriza to nije slučaj.
Stil pisanja je lep i vešto vodi čitaoca kroz priču tako da uživa u svakoj rečenici. I ono što mi se najviše dopalo ostavio sam za sam kraj: iako ste svesni da ne čitate fikciju, u nekim delovima ćete sigurno pomisliti da je ovo baš taj trenutak kad će Vlad da se transformiše u vampira, međutim od toga neće biti ništa. Knjiga nekoliko puta dolazi do same granice sa fikcijom, zatim ponovo klizi nazad u realnost. Upravo to uzaludno iščekivanje je jedno od najvećih čari ove knjige.🙂
Odličan istorijski roman koji može da se posmatra i kao prednastavak Stokerovog "Drakule" jer nam daje širu sliku iz Vladovog života pre nego što je "prodao dušu đavolu". U ovom delu je predstavljen iz dva ugla: kao pravdoljubiv borac koji je spreman na sve zarad ljubavi, časti i osvete, ali je prikazana i njegova mračna strana kroz detaljne opise mučenja koja je hladnokrvno sprovodio zbog čega je i dobio nadimak Nabijač. Na kraju ćete moći sami da donesete svoj sud o njemu jer ćete sve ono što je već poznato, ali i ono što nikad nije ispričano o njemu dobiti na tacni. Ovaj roman i predstavlja Vladovo suđenje, kao i pokušaj da se skine ljaga sa njegovog imena. Kroz priču ćete slušati svedočenja ljudi koji su mu bili bliski, a sve zarad toga da se Redu Zmaja, čiji je Vlad bio pripadnik, vrati čast kako bi krenuli u Krstaški rat. Ima dosta preskakanja kroz vreme pa je potrebna koncentracija kako bi se lepo ispratila priča, ali daleko toga da je nerazumljivo. Neki istorijski romani umeju da budu suvoparni jer se pisci razbacuju znanjem da često ne obrate pažnju na pripovedanje. Kod Hamfriza to nije slučaj.
Stil pisanja je lep i vešto vodi čitaoca kroz priču tako da uživa u svakoj rečenici. I ono što mi se najviše dopalo ostavio sam za sam kraj: iako ste svesni da ne čitate fikciju, u nekim delovima ćete sigurno pomisliti da je ovo baš taj trenutak kad će Vlad da se transformiše u vampira, međutim od toga neće biti ništa. Knjiga nekoliko puta dolazi do same granice sa fikcijom, zatim ponovo klizi nazad u realnost. Upravo to uzaludno iščekivanje je jedno od najvećih čari ove knjige.🙂
May 5, 2011
When I was pitched this book, it almost sounded to good to be, well . . . good.
How many times have you bought a book (or asked for a review copy) and wanted it to be as good as the blurb, yet past let-downs jaded your hope?
I’ve never been so happy to be disappointed.
Historical Fiction can be a challenging genre to read if the author hasn’t take care to do their research. It also takes skill to weave that knowledge into a story seamlessly, never allowing it to detract from the overall storytelling, but to enhance it. When done well, it entertains and informs, tells a story of history with enough credibility behind the fiction to support and feed it.
Humphreys does this with his main character as well. Vlad, known by other names including ‘Dracula’, is a man many think they know much about, but in reality, the truth is overshadowed by unflattering propaganda. He fictionalizes Vlad’s life using as much truth as he could gather. He uses it in a way to be as fair as possible to the man while clarifying the forces which drove him to such brutal extremes in order to do what he felt was best for his country, his people, his faith.
This brutality was not innate. At least this is what the reader comes away with after reading Vlad’s story. It was learned, then reflected back at those who had used it against him as well as his enemies. This is the hardest part of the read and very disturbing.
Although Humphreys does not go into a great amount of detail, still, the heinous acts perpetrated upon Vlad, and the ones he inflicted on others is shocking. As much as I was prepared for it, it still had a powerful impact. It gives a complexity to the man that forces a re-evaluation of all that you have learned previously.
The most interesting aspect of this novel is the narration. It is told using the third person however, it is actually three people – those who knew Vlad best who are telling it. The writer mixes each voice to become one: Vlad, making his voice strong throughout.
The story is told in a linear fashion, allowing the reader to grow in understanding as Vlad descends in depravity. Not that it is to be excused, but at least there is a basis for it – a method to this dark Prince’s madness. The reader is left to decide if Dracula deserves his infamy, is misunderstood, or in a way a bit of both.
I have to warn you, this is a challenging read, not so much for some of its content, but the feelings that remain afterward. It makes you think harder about what it good, what is evil, and what happens when the two collide and combine within the soul.
I love this book. One of the best historical fiction novels I’ve read. It gets my highest rating and a strong recommendation.
How many times have you bought a book (or asked for a review copy) and wanted it to be as good as the blurb, yet past let-downs jaded your hope?
I’ve never been so happy to be disappointed.
Historical Fiction can be a challenging genre to read if the author hasn’t take care to do their research. It also takes skill to weave that knowledge into a story seamlessly, never allowing it to detract from the overall storytelling, but to enhance it. When done well, it entertains and informs, tells a story of history with enough credibility behind the fiction to support and feed it.
Humphreys does this with his main character as well. Vlad, known by other names including ‘Dracula’, is a man many think they know much about, but in reality, the truth is overshadowed by unflattering propaganda. He fictionalizes Vlad’s life using as much truth as he could gather. He uses it in a way to be as fair as possible to the man while clarifying the forces which drove him to such brutal extremes in order to do what he felt was best for his country, his people, his faith.
This brutality was not innate. At least this is what the reader comes away with after reading Vlad’s story. It was learned, then reflected back at those who had used it against him as well as his enemies. This is the hardest part of the read and very disturbing.
Although Humphreys does not go into a great amount of detail, still, the heinous acts perpetrated upon Vlad, and the ones he inflicted on others is shocking. As much as I was prepared for it, it still had a powerful impact. It gives a complexity to the man that forces a re-evaluation of all that you have learned previously.
The most interesting aspect of this novel is the narration. It is told using the third person however, it is actually three people – those who knew Vlad best who are telling it. The writer mixes each voice to become one: Vlad, making his voice strong throughout.
The story is told in a linear fashion, allowing the reader to grow in understanding as Vlad descends in depravity. Not that it is to be excused, but at least there is a basis for it – a method to this dark Prince’s madness. The reader is left to decide if Dracula deserves his infamy, is misunderstood, or in a way a bit of both.
I have to warn you, this is a challenging read, not so much for some of its content, but the feelings that remain afterward. It makes you think harder about what it good, what is evil, and what happens when the two collide and combine within the soul.
I love this book. One of the best historical fiction novels I’ve read. It gets my highest rating and a strong recommendation.
February 26, 2012
Amazing, amazing, amazing!!! I loved this book from start to finish. Not just for the story it told but also for the way it told it. Humphreys hs managed to describe the chrecter and his actions without giving any bias towards him. It is left to the reader to form their own view.
I couldn't help but like Dracula, willing him on and to victory. Although his measures were extreme he was fighting for what he believed in.
I don't think I have read a more researched and thought out book
Every Charecters actions were believeable and or explainable.
I'm not good at writing reviews so will cut this short.
Please read this book. If you are interested in Dracula then this book will blow you away. It is not about the bloodsucking monster of the night that everyone knows but of a man. A man who will do anything (and I mean anything) for the freedom of his country and countrymen. You will understand after reading this how the story of Count Dracula came about.
I couldn't help but like Dracula, willing him on and to victory. Although his measures were extreme he was fighting for what he believed in.
I don't think I have read a more researched and thought out book
Every Charecters actions were believeable and or explainable.
I'm not good at writing reviews so will cut this short.
Please read this book. If you are interested in Dracula then this book will blow you away. It is not about the bloodsucking monster of the night that everyone knows but of a man. A man who will do anything (and I mean anything) for the freedom of his country and countrymen. You will understand after reading this how the story of Count Dracula came about.
August 11, 2011
You know a writer is skilled when they can take someone who is quite ruthless and insane and make you like them, and in many ways understand/sympathies with them.
Thomas Harris did it with Hannibal Rising, and C.C Humphreys has done it with Vlad the Impaler.
I must admit, that I did have to put this book down a few times because of the brutality of it, but once you learned about what Vlad lived and went through in his life you understand in a strange way. He wasn't the first person to impale people, and the people who taught him how to do it are the same people he used it as a scare tactic with.
Humphreys has created a fully formed human out of Vlad the Impaler. I loved this book, it is one of my most favorite pieces of historical fiction written in recent years. I can't wait to read Humphrey's newest, A Place Called Armageddon, and see what lyrical masterpiece he has created next.
Thomas Harris did it with Hannibal Rising, and C.C Humphreys has done it with Vlad the Impaler.
I must admit, that I did have to put this book down a few times because of the brutality of it, but once you learned about what Vlad lived and went through in his life you understand in a strange way. He wasn't the first person to impale people, and the people who taught him how to do it are the same people he used it as a scare tactic with.
Humphreys has created a fully formed human out of Vlad the Impaler. I loved this book, it is one of my most favorite pieces of historical fiction written in recent years. I can't wait to read Humphrey's newest, A Place Called Armageddon, and see what lyrical masterpiece he has created next.
May 27, 2017
I've really tried with this book but with so many others waiting to be enjoyed I've given up on it. I really just could not get into it. It is brutal and extremely gory but it even that was not what finally stumped me. I suppose I just did not like it. It's sitting in my box for the Charity Shop tonight. Perhaps someone will give it a home.
July 28, 2021
4.5 rounded up
This is historical fiction at its finest. Really enjoyed this one and will read more by the author.
This is historical fiction at its finest. Really enjoyed this one and will read more by the author.
Read
September 29, 2017Dracula was born in 1431 to the Voivode (warlord) Dracul of Transylvania the second son. He was a member of the order of the dragon and was known by many titles including ‘Vlad Tepes’ or ‘Kaziklu Bey’ both meaning ‘The Impaler’. Wallachia was a beautiful country but in the wrong place between the Crescent (Turkey) and the Cross (Hungary). Dracula fought and won his country to bring peace and prosperity for thirteen years by the iron fist. At one point a golden goblet was left on a well for travellers and locals to use. Nobody stole the cup. It would be nice to think this was because stealing was a sin but more likely it was because the perpetrator would have been ‘impaled’ in front of the whole community. Vlad’s lifelong friend was Ion who was with him in Edina, in Tokat and throughout the many wars. There was Ilona the girl Dracula gave a choice to, who ran away from the Turks and back to Wallachia, the commoner who had the heart of Dracula in spite of his many affairs. There was Hamza who taught him the ways of the Turkish world, the Qur’an, the art of falconry. Such a mixture of people and places not to forget his loyal steed Kalafat , who was his partner. The person who really was a pawn in the game was Elisabeta, the daughter of a boyar, taken by Dracula as his wife because she was of his station, a marriage which was never consummated who fell or leapt or was pushed over the battlements of Poenari Castle – poor girl with nobody to care. In 1476 Dracula was said to have had his head chopped off and sent to Mehmet the Sultan.
The author really writes for the reader. There are the maps of where Wallachia is located, now Romania and still a hot-spot in the twenty-first century. Turkey is still in conflict. There is a vocabulary, a dramatic persona (very useful when there are so many characters), there are details of what the author has found to be true and there is the story of friendship, honour and death which has an ending not foretold. Amazing read
What did like or dislike about this book? The horror of the torture and the methods used, but this is before the age of enlightenment, the time when man’s inhumanity to man was at its height – the time of the Crusades, the time when women’s genitalia were locked and only unlocked when her lord returned from the crusades (see The Cloister and the Hearth) if he returned. This novel really explores the honing of the art of killing and torturing. It describes the process so graphically that it is good advice ‘not to read it before you go to sleep’ (review by the Daily Express). Get over that and there is a beauty about the book especially when describing the cold, the snow, the hawks, the detail of the Greek-style dressing of Mehmet and his ‘console’ Thomas Catavolinus, the tent encampments or the or the unbelievable heat in Targoviste on the day of Vlad’s wedding. So much was going on all the time and they still had time to make their bows and arrows with metal tips, train their horses, have children, eat, drink, sleep and somehow survive the Middle Ages. – What is not to admire, a really unexpected emotion. A novel to be remembered. The book never really ends – it is the story of endurance, possibility, adventure, mystery and composer. A couple of quotes to remember: ‘soldiers follow greybeards reluctantly’, ‘his trade against the day of disaster’.
The author really writes for the reader. There are the maps of where Wallachia is located, now Romania and still a hot-spot in the twenty-first century. Turkey is still in conflict. There is a vocabulary, a dramatic persona (very useful when there are so many characters), there are details of what the author has found to be true and there is the story of friendship, honour and death which has an ending not foretold. Amazing read
What did like or dislike about this book? The horror of the torture and the methods used, but this is before the age of enlightenment, the time when man’s inhumanity to man was at its height – the time of the Crusades, the time when women’s genitalia were locked and only unlocked when her lord returned from the crusades (see The Cloister and the Hearth) if he returned. This novel really explores the honing of the art of killing and torturing. It describes the process so graphically that it is good advice ‘not to read it before you go to sleep’ (review by the Daily Express). Get over that and there is a beauty about the book especially when describing the cold, the snow, the hawks, the detail of the Greek-style dressing of Mehmet and his ‘console’ Thomas Catavolinus, the tent encampments or the or the unbelievable heat in Targoviste on the day of Vlad’s wedding. So much was going on all the time and they still had time to make their bows and arrows with metal tips, train their horses, have children, eat, drink, sleep and somehow survive the Middle Ages. – What is not to admire, a really unexpected emotion. A novel to be remembered. The book never really ends – it is the story of endurance, possibility, adventure, mystery and composer. A couple of quotes to remember: ‘soldiers follow greybeards reluctantly’, ‘his trade against the day of disaster’.
January 21, 2016
How many times can it be said! This book is NOT about vampires! Whew, and I am so glad. As a work of fiction, it was a very good book. As a work of history, it led to some interesting insights. As historical fiction, it was very easy to read, enjoyable (??), and interesting. I question the enjoyable part only because some of the scenes do become quite graphic. But understand it is not gratuitous violence. It is as the times were. During the Middle Ages, life was very different. Which is exactly the point of this book. Vlad was a man of his times, although we frequently hear this as an excuse for illegal behaviors, understand, what he was doing was not illegal at all. While now known throughout history as the "impaler", the interesting piece of the puzzle is that it was a technique he learned from the Turks, who interestingly enough, had learned it from the Saxons! While gruesome and horrifying to modern day culture, this is not solely what the book is about. It is an historical glimpse into the life of a Prince of the Middle Ages. His conflict within himself is about Faith, Love, and Friendship.
I do wish the book had delved a little more into the politics and power struggles of the time, the interactions and reliance upon the boyars for power, even though everything they possessed had been granted to them by the Princes of Wallachia, the influence of the Turks, the influence of the "foreign" Church in Rome (Vlad and Wallachia were Eastern Orthodox). It is interesting to me how the "Leader" of this country was even then beholden to their subjects. Not unlike the influence we witness every day with modern politicians and political parties!!
This is a good read to step off into a broader study of the Middle Ages in Eastern Europe. I rate the book with 5 stars because of this. It does not answer all the questions, might not even ask any questions, but does generate a desire to know more about this (Middle) Age and time.
I do wish the book had delved a little more into the politics and power struggles of the time, the interactions and reliance upon the boyars for power, even though everything they possessed had been granted to them by the Princes of Wallachia, the influence of the Turks, the influence of the "foreign" Church in Rome (Vlad and Wallachia were Eastern Orthodox). It is interesting to me how the "Leader" of this country was even then beholden to their subjects. Not unlike the influence we witness every day with modern politicians and political parties!!
This is a good read to step off into a broader study of the Middle Ages in Eastern Europe. I rate the book with 5 stars because of this. It does not answer all the questions, might not even ask any questions, but does generate a desire to know more about this (Middle) Age and time.
October 12, 2011
Well, I was so excited to read this book after reading the reviews. However, after reading the first third I grew tired of it. The use of a seemingly older version of English made the story chug along, instead of flow. I found myself getting bored every few sentences with the 'over-the-top' prose, longing for some straight-forward writing to carry me onward to the actual story. Others of a more patient disposition might wonder what the hell I'm moaning about.
I even found reading Dracula easy in comparison, and a much more pleasurable read. Stroker at least wrote in a time when flowery, comma-laden, extremes of writing were normal. They are no longer, thankfully. Though this author would have you believe otherwise.
Those of you who enjoy heavily applied, convoluted prose will love it. Perhaps the complete story could make the struggle of reading it worthwhile? However, with so many other books to get stuck into, I decided to move on to another book.
Recommendation? Well, I recommend that you read a sample first, then decide. Most reviewers seemed to enjoy it, so don't let me put you off. I want books to grab me, pull me along, immerse me between the pages and make me forget that I'm reading. This was never going to do that -for me. But it might for you.
I even found reading Dracula easy in comparison, and a much more pleasurable read. Stroker at least wrote in a time when flowery, comma-laden, extremes of writing were normal. They are no longer, thankfully. Though this author would have you believe otherwise.
Those of you who enjoy heavily applied, convoluted prose will love it. Perhaps the complete story could make the struggle of reading it worthwhile? However, with so many other books to get stuck into, I decided to move on to another book.
Recommendation? Well, I recommend that you read a sample first, then decide. Most reviewers seemed to enjoy it, so don't let me put you off. I want books to grab me, pull me along, immerse me between the pages and make me forget that I'm reading. This was never going to do that -for me. But it might for you.
August 26, 2023
Truth can be stranger than fiction. The real life inspiration for the complete fantasy that became known as "Dracula" also had many skeletons in his closet.
At times mesmerizing, at times boring, this account has something for everyone -- even a glossary and a bibliography, just in case we ever doubted the author was serious.
At times mesmerizing, at times boring, this account has something for everyone -- even a glossary and a bibliography, just in case we ever doubted the author was serious.
July 29, 2016
Excellent historical novel about Vlad III Dracula! It doesn't deserve 5 stars... It deserves 10 stars!
January 18, 2017
UKUPNA OCENA (overall rating) - 3
Radnja (story) - 3
Likovi (characters) - 3.5
Pripovedanje (writing style) - 3
Okruženje (setting) - 3.5
Radnja (story) - 3
Likovi (characters) - 3.5
Pripovedanje (writing style) - 3
Okruženje (setting) - 3.5
Displaying 1 - 30 of 397 reviews