Interview With Historian about the 'Dracula House'
Dr. Fedeles, of the Medieval and Early Modern Department at Pécs University’s Historical Studies Institute, said in an interview with Digital Journal that there was no definite proof that Duke Vlad III ”Tepes” (The Impaler) of Wallachia owned the recently discovered cellar.
Writing in an e-mail, Fedeles said what was certain was that a historically significant, late Medieval house had come to light, but its ownership could not be stated with certainty, as there were no ownership registers in the 15th Century.
Referring to a document from September 1489, which referred to a large house as ”Drakulyaház”, or ”Dracula House”, Fedeles said Duke Vlad’s widow, Justina de Szilágyi, owned the house for a while and that the document showed it was a corner house. The historian said:
Based on these data, we can merely say, that ”Dracula” did have something to do with the house, likely he co-owned it with his wife, although even that isn’t certain. The house stood in the centre of the town (and that) it was a significant object.
Fedeles, referring to various sensationalized media reports, added:
What is out of the question is that: (King) Mátyás (of Hungary) exiled Dracula to Pécs. That Voivode (Duke) Dracula lived in Pécs, although he might have visited, and might well have obtained property in the town, after all, he spent 10 years in Hungary.
comments powered by Disqus
- Could another English king be buried under a parking lot?
- Huckabee says archaeology supports the Bible
- George W. Bush's CIA Briefer: Bush and Cheney Falsely Presented WMD Intelligence to Public
- Unfinished film about the Holocaust made in 1945 to finally be seen by audiences
- Two-Thirds of European Men Descend From Three People
- Daniel Pipes calls the rulers of Iran "madmen" on official Iranian TV
- A Professor Tries to Beat Back a News Spoof That Won’t Go Away
- NYT History Book Reviews: Who Got Noticed this Week?
- Sean Wilentz is being called “Hillary’s Historian"
- Hundreds of British historians challenge assumptions of “Historians for Britain” campaign