posted
"Creeping acceptance of the idea that cain was the primeval vampire."
What circles do you run in that such things are topics of discussion, let alone susceptible to "creeping acceptance" as historical (or even mythological) fact?
posted
I was under the impression that Lilith, Adam's first wife before Eve, was the first vampire...why I have that impression, and whose work I lifted it from, I'm at a loss.
Posts: 8809 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes the cain myth was strongly propogated via Vampire: The Masquerade.
Most vampire origins are still at "Dracula".
Anne Rice uses an eqyptian queen as the origin.
The actual history of the Vampire legends is so clouded with misinformation, its hard to identify where the concept of the vampire even came from.
Prior to the 19th century literature, there is absolutely nothing that would be recognizable as a "vampire" as we know them today. Though monsters that drink blood are not uncommon.
posted
Lilith was a demoness/vampire who fed on the blood of infants in Jewish folklore. The Semitic roots of that tradition extend into antiquity.
Posts: 8322 | Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, I was aware of the Lilith/vampire strand of legends but was disconcerted by what I thought was a new or emerging myth concerning the origins of vampires.
I don't think that it is restricted to Masquerade® anymore. It seems to be pervading the whole goth-net now. I have even heard reference to the Book of Nod as though it were a real document.
I was just wondering if the idea is widespread and whether others had noticed its transformation from trashy RPG into other older mythologies. I also wondered whether I had got it wrong and the idea predates the games.
[This message has been edited by hoptoad (edited February 01, 2007).]
posted
I thought Dracula was based on Vlad the Impaler, though I guess the concept of a vampire may have been before that. Certainly the general concept of killing for gain goes back to Cain in what I would consider "the culture."
I found the straight dope link on Lilith persuasive, but I guess it is just a thing on the internet. Maybe I'll check my old encyclopedia.
posted
Well, the Lilith connection is a natural for the western idea of vampires, because it's a "forgotten" element of biblical "tradition". That means it fits well with all the Christian symbolism associated with the vampire of popular mythology. It also has the advantage of positing a human-like (and likely beautiful) vampire, which is less common in mythology than your generic blood-sucking monsters.
Lilith is also supposed to be immortal, having never eaten of the fruit of knowledge of good and evil, and thus having no moral sense either. She left the Garden of Eden of her own will because she didn't want to be subordinate to Adam, consorted with demons, and that is the origin of her children. By medieval times, Jewish tradition posited that she could be warded off by the use of symbols that held religious significance. And in addition to her thirst for the blood of infants, her children were prone to engage in seductions. It even makes more sense of the classic "turning" method, since the blood of Lilith's children is a mixture of immortal human blood and demonic blood. Thus drinking it could plausibly (by mythological standards) have some efficacy in granting immortality and demonic powers.
So it really is quite natural for her to be adopted into the vampire myth, even though the two seem to have independent origins. Lilith preceeds "vampires" in recorded mythology, and her story has more drama, being closer to the origin and all. Most ancient myths about vampires don't assign them any origin at all. Lilith has a really good origin myth, so it is natural that hers should displace other inventions. Almost all other explanations of vampiric origins are backformations that are quite recent.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
