This argument is unnecessary Stoker clearly used Dracula s name and also the fact that he was a vovoide prince from Transylvania who fought during the Middle Ages with mixed success against the Turks Stoker s Dracula also mentions being betrayed by his brother who sided with the Turks The real Dracula was also betrayed by his brother Radu the Handsome who indeed maintained allegiance to the Turkish emperor Mehmed You may claim the last point to be coincidence but the previous ones are enough to say that Stoker based his character on the real Dracula as far as using basic facts about him as a starting point But Stoker likely knew little else about the real Dracula and his character is FICTIONAL so any similarities are clearly going to be limited either way a reader