Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Nightmare Doom

I know who the first Vampire is!

Recommended Posts

Enjay said:
WW took all the "cool" things about vampires and distilled them into a very well marketed package that instantly appealed to gothy/indie type people.

They basically took the dark hero stereotype spawned by comic book super heroes in the 80s and 90s; i.e., the "gay" side of the vampire stereotype, giving a twist to every characteristic in Bram Stoker's character to make it a "still human" but superior being with an adolescent nature, so everyone could be a vampire or a werewolf, and it was Halloween every day.

Share this post


Link to post

I used to play VtM to torment those cheesy goth kids. I met a lot of guys like enjay described, but I was pretty fuckin twisted back then. I was very sadistic and masochistic as well (not the whole bondage/s&m fetish crap). I never was a lost tormented soul, in conflict with my inner darkness. I really scared the crap out of some of those guys. I stopped playing because I was tired of all the gay posturing and pre-fight monolouges. I got kicked out of a couple of games because I really hurt people.

as far as the first vampire goes, many sources I've read (and I have studied this extensively, as I am writing a vampire novel) show that the first mentions of blood drinking demons in human form come from babalonian, akadian, and ancient jewish legend. the creature is now commonly reffered to as lilith, but has gone by other similar names. supposedly the alleged first wife of adam had children with the demon asmodeus and they also took on the vampire-like trait.

another interesting vamp origin, IMO, is from the movie dracula 2000. the vampire is actually judas iscariot, cursed by his betrayal of jesus and suicide to wander the earth as a vampire. I like the parallel between eternal life in light with jesus and eternal life in darkness with judas.

Share this post


Link to post

VileSlay said:
the creature is now commonly reffered to as lilith, but has gone by other similar names.

Lilith's related to the Cain myth as it's also about the shepherd vs. agricultural culture clash, when warlike nomadic herders invaded established communities which seemingly had a more matriarchical organization and may have practiced some forms of ritual human sacrifice (e.g., Medea killing her brother.)

Share this post


Link to post
Sir_Alien said:

All valid and important questions.

Especially the last two. :)

myk said:

so everyone could be a vampire or a werewolf, and it was Halloween every day.

Hence its appeal and success.

VileSlay said:

I stopped playing because I was tired of all the gay posturing and pre-fight monolouges.

You never played any of my games then. Pre fight monologues rarely happened. Although we tried to run a game where fighting was the last resort, if the last resort was all you had left there was rarely any time for monologuing. You just jumped straight in there and shot, sliced or otherwise tore apart the other guy (no ridiculous scissor, paper, stones either). When people went for it, it was rare for there not to be a "death" in just a few short seconds. Getting the drop on someone (and we had some amazing well executed assassinations) was key. Anyone and everyone was a potential and capable killer so you don't give the other guy any clues if you can help it and hope you have an equally cunning plan for dealing with the fallout from your actions.

However, the style and type of games people run is very much a taste thing. What we ran was not to everyone's taste and games other people ran were not to ours. And, of course, some people play any and all games.

VileSlay said:

I got kicked out of a couple of games because I really hurt people.

Quite rightly so. It's supposed to be fun.

Share this post


Link to post
myk said:

Lilith's related to the Cain myth


lilith's link to adam actually came in medieval times as part of the churches anti-women campaign. thats why I said the alleged first wife of adam. what is believed to be the earliest mentioning of liith is in sumerian writings, such as the gilgamesh epic. there really is no concrete link between adam and lilith or cain and lilith except for the fact that the stories existed at the same time in the same region of the world. as religions of the region evolved and began to intermarry the stories became mingled.

the cain link to vampirism is only a conjecture, just like god turning him in to a black man. scholars were trying to figure out how god marked or cursed cain and that was one they came up with. nothing in the original legends point to him being a vampire. lilith, on the other hand, and her kin are known blood drinking night demons.

enjay said:

However, the style and type of games people run is very much a taste thing.


a bunch of the guys and girls that played in the games were drama students so they made everything overly, well, dramatic. as for my ridiculous actions that led to me getting kicked out of games, I really was seriously disturbed back then. it's no excuse for some of the things I did (not only in those games) but those things are past and I have made peace with many that I harmed.

Share this post


Link to post

VileSlay said:
lilith's link to adam actually came in medieval times as part of the churches anti-women campaign.

Yeah, I've heard about that; I even recall feminists using that myth to illustrate stuff. My "relation", though, was more anthropological, referring to that epoch in history where the the nomad warriors invaded agricultural communities, aside from specific mythic characters and stories from where one may spot such movements. Supposedly the priestesses (or goddesses, if not both) of the older agricultural cultures were derided by the conquerors and diminished to the status of witches or demons. Similar myths pointing to such relations, conquests and demonizations can be found in different cultures, sometimes only marginally related, if so.

Share this post


Link to post

I am fully aware of those anthropological facts that you mentioned. as a matter of fact I'm using those in the novel I'm working on. I was just speaking of mythic writings, which is the major basis for vampire fiction. thats where I thought this was going.

Share this post


Link to post
myk said:

Yeah, I've heard about that; I even recall feminists using that myth to illustrate stuff. My "relation", though, was more anthropological, referring to that epoch in history where the the nomad warriors invaded agricultural communities, aside from specific mythic characters and stories from where one may spot such movements. Supposedly the priestesses (or goddesses, if not both) of the older agricultural cultures were derided by the conquerors and diminished to the status of witches or demons. Similar myths pointing to such relations, conquests and demonizations can be found in different cultures, sometimes only marginally related, if so.


Which means history is written by the victors. and history has named the Native Americans 'savages'.

Share this post


Link to post

VileSlay said:
I was just speaking of mythic writings, which is the major basis for vampire fiction.

More like popular folklore (from Eastern Europe) plus "popular science" (information about blood-sucking bats.)

Share this post


Link to post

You're aware that Native American myths and magic have as much credibility as any other culture's religion and mythology?
Strange, last time I checked, but all the history I've read made a point of portraying both the Indians and the settlers as cruel to each other. The Native Americans were savages, wether by reason or not, they were. Though not all tribes can be held accountable, a good amount of them invaded and slaughtered settler towns that they were supposedly peaceful with. They murdered trade caravans and travellers from town to town. They didn't like us on their land, and they made it known. They initiated a lot of the battles that were fought. They broke as many, if not more, treaties as we did. Because we won in the end, we're made to look like the heartless savages that stole their land. Which we did. We cheated, broke treaties, and launched sneak attacks for territorial reasons. It's f-ed up, but that's conquest and civilization. Get over it.

edit: As far as I know, the common idea of what a vampire is originated from Hebrew texts, Cain being their diety (I know it's not the proper word to use, because in their eyes there is only one god, but I don't know what other word I would use), though he may not be portrayed as one himself in the Bible. As for the Cain part, it was years ago when I looked into all this though, and I'm sure most of my sources weren't all that valid. But it only makes sense that the demonic vampire came from Hebrew scripture, as Hebrews were (AFAIK) among the first to place blatant "evil" in such personal forms.
This could be due to other religions that they had to face DID indeed involve blood sacrifices and the such, but none are proven to reach the exagerrated extent they're spoken of by Hebrew and Hebrew based faiths.

Share this post


Link to post

Morris said:
Get over it.

Who the fuck are you talking to? Someone quotes some web-based myth-story to "illustrate" the supposed origin of vampires, and you take on a rant against american-indian cultural/racial claims? What an idiot.

Oh, and Cain isn't "the first vampire"; whether some Hebrew or Christian chronicler may have used that character thus to illustrate popular vampire myths, is another matter. Most cultures have "vampiric" demons and boogeymen in their legends and myths, but they are all different, some very ancient (Greek, Indian, African, Mesopotamian, etc.), each with their own names and characteristics, and only relatively recent serial novels and pulp fiction, based on romaticised post-medieval supperstition, gave the type enough character for us to be discussing the matter like this. It's pretty embarrassing when people start looking for the verosimilitude of literary character types in myth, history or reality when it's clear such come to be for the sake of entertainment's requirements, taking the others as free sources of embellishment. It sounds like the theories of illiterate supperstitious rabble.

Without Dracula's popularity, we'd be discussing an assortment of semi-related or unrelated myths and legends, at best, and few would care what old women in Bulgaria told their gandchildren at night by the fireside.

Share this post


Link to post

Actually, that was in reply to

Nightmare Doom said:

...and history has named the Native Americans savages.

which wouldn't be the first time he's brought up Native Americans and the evil European settlers in a thread. In this thread at least, it was pointless for him to bring up, especially before finding his story, which he did. I don't feel I was anti-racial in any way, seeing as I grew up next to an Indian reservation and have no qualms with them at all, and for that reason, the time of Western colonization happens to be one of my favorite areas of American history. I like correcting things I've come to learn as misguided or plain out wrong, especially when it's something I've studied extensively from the different sides. Perhaps "get over it" might have been over the edge in this context, and with no need to continue that thought in this thread. My fault and sorry if I offended you or anyone else.

This isn't the first time you've "yelled" at me. I'm new here, and used to forums where challenging and heated debate are provoked. I realize this isn't the place for that, but old habits die hard. I'll work harder on leaving my old habits behind.

I'm sure most of us understand that there is no real "first vampire", and that the stereotype is built upon the various "boogiemen" of world cultures. Saying that we're embarassing for evaluating literary characters, of any background, is ridiculous to me, but to each his own. The more frequent stereotype falls under a more Hebrew/Christian style of evil, and an article I read a while ago brought up the whole Cain thing and more lineage linked to Hebrew texts. That's simply all I was suggesting. I'm sure it's not something anyone here obsesses about, and appears to be held mostly on a side-thought level.

Share this post


Link to post

Morris said:
In this thread at least, it was pointless for him to bring up, especially before finding his story, which he did.

In sake of civil posting it's best to leave what is pointless to be dealt with by mods, and to concentrate on what one deems interesting and constructively to the subject (even if it's a side subject.) It was an illustration of how "history is written by the victor."

Perhaps "get over it" might have been over the edge in this context, and with no need to continue that thought in this thread. My fault and sorry if I offended you or anyone else.

Hey, I thought you were talking about a culture/people that was practically obliterated or ousted from their lands as a result of a colonization process. Keep in mind the term "savage" is pejorative, and that while it may be argued that in the end we're all little savages in this world, it's pretty much an insult in context, mostly meaning "uncouth ingonrant brutes unworthy of civilized respect."

This isn't the first time you've "yelled" at me.

I'd rather yell a bit sometimes like the coach in the field, keeping talk going even with the people I "yell at" in sake of converstion and posting of which I participate in, as opposed to mostly applying sanctions or editing contents.

Saying that we're embarassing for evaluating literary characters, of any background, is ridiculous to me, but to each his own.

Investigating or judging such characters might be quite interesting (I'm into literary criticism and analysis myself), but I was referring to the need to tie them essentially to some myth or fact, as if we were looking at some reality and not a fictional type. That tends to derail into which myth has the "real" vampire or whether X historical or pseudo-historical character was a vampire or was thought to be one first. Cain, for example, was foremost a murderer, and if he was ever mentioned as a vampire, that was an extrapolation from the line where it says he "yearned for blood", which is bloodlust, the murderer's need to spill blood, not a dietary type (blood consumption.)

Share this post


Link to post
myk said:

In sake of civil posting it's best to leave what is pointless to be dealt with by mods, and to concentrate on what one deems interesting and constructively to the subject... it's pretty much an insult in context, mostly meaning "uncouth ingonrant brutes unworthy of civilized respect."

All fair enough. Admittedly, I did disregard the intent of the hostility behind the word "savage" in my perspective.


I'd rather yell a bit sometimes like the coach in the field, keeping talk going even with the people I "yell at" in sake of converstion and posting of which I participate in, as opposed to mostly applying sanctions or editing contents.


It doesn't seem as though you did, but just in case you think I was attacking you, I put "yell at" in quotes simply because it is figurative speech. I prefer a "coach" over censorship. Not only does it further conversation as you said, but it pushes the poster to truly question and re-evaluate not only what they had said, but the angle and perspective from which they were saying it. That is something I'm personally fond of, especially when I'm the one having to do it.
I really don't mean for some of my posts to come off as hostile, bitter, or over-critical (none of which I am in real life), but I can see why they do. I can only conclude that it's a matter of posting without putting much thought into who might read it or the real person behind a screenname, something I'll make a point to keep in mind from now on.


Investigating or judging such characters might be quite interesting (I'm into literary criticism and analysis myself), but I was referring to the need to tie them essentially to some myth or fact, as if we were looking at some reality and not a fictional type. That tends to derail into which myth has the "real" vampire or whether X historical or pseudo-historical character was a vampire or was thought to be one first...

For me, at least, that is one of the fun parts of history, theology, and storytelling. I like comparing traits and personas to other things in fact, myth, and intended fiction. On the contrary, I'm aware it all adds up to being mostly senseless rabble, but it's a rabble that I delight in.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×