From: iroderic@alfred.carleton.ca (Ian Roderick)
Subject: Re: Vampyres and more
Organization: Carleton University
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 13:53:53 GMT

In <6920@stan.xx.swin.oz.au> ov@saturn.cs.swin.oz.au (Owen Veenstra) writes:

>In article <iroderic.714873721@cunews>, iroderic@alfred.carleton.ca (Ian Roderick) writes:
>|> In <5193@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> laurelp+@pitt.edu (Laurel A Povazan) writes:
>|> 
>|> >In article <6902@stan.xx.swin.oz.au> ov@saturn.cs.swin.oz.au (Owen Veenstra) writes:
>|> >>

>|> Naw, its porphyria.  Anemia is a good guess Laurel but porphyria is

>|> a great deal of pain for the victim.  David Dolphin proposed that if,
>|> in the middle ages, victims resorted to drinking large quantities of
>|> blood to relieve their pain then this could have spawned the vampire
>|> myth.  Thing is though that variations on the vampire myth can be
>|> found in numerous cultures around the world while porphyria is most
>|> 'common' in southern Europe.  It is more likely, that blood is
>|> universal resource for mythic symbolism and one good way of describing
>|> evil is something which drinks blood (with my anthropology background
>|> I could give a more elaborate explanation but it would still boil done
>|> to the same thing).  Paul Barber has a good but quick discussion of
>|> Dolphin's claim (_Vampires,_Burial,_and_Death_)
>|> 
>|> Ian 

>   I don't think that drinking blood was enough to cause the myth, but I
> believe that it was a good start.  

Sorry, what I meant was precisely that.  This is how Dolphin makes the
leap from porphyria to the vampire myth.  What I meant was that blood
tends to be about as close to a universal sign as you can get.  Most
cultures invest blood with qualities of life, energy, etc. so that it
exists between the sacred and the prophane.  It is because of this
investment, IMHO, that the vampire myth occurs in so many interesting
variations around the globe.  This is all on the mythic level and has
very little to do with any actual blood drinking.

>   As I understand it, a corpse (though dead) still undergoes many chemical
> reactions internally.  One of many such reactions is an enzyme reaction,
> that results in the growth of hair and finger-nails.  Thus, when coffins
> were opened the corpse had displayed signs of further life -- the
> fingernails and hair growth sited as one example.

Yes.  This is precisely the sort of argument which Barber makes
throughout his book.  You may find it quite interesting.

>   Another reason for the vampyre myth arizes from corpse decompisition.  
> Various internal decompisition within the body (lungs I assume) can result
> in gases forcing blood out of the mouth, thus providing blood-stains on
> the head (primarily the mouth region).  This, too, would be assumed to be
> more such proof.

Again, you are supported by Barber.

>   (Unfortunately, I cannot refer the reader to any such information; I
> remember this from a radio science show that spent one episode on myths
> such as vampires and werewolves.)

>    If I am wrong, would those (medically inclined?) persons respond, either
>  over news or email, pointing out my mistakes and possible references.

Barber's book, which I cite above in my earlier posting is published
by Yale University Press, 1988.  The ISBN is 0-300-04859-9.

Ian


>    One last question : how is the word vampyre derived, and how was vampire
>  derived from that ??


>   Many thanks to those who responded to questions.

>                                         Owen 
Newsgroups: alt.horror