When Bram Stoker’s personal notes on the writing of DRACULA came to light, Vlad III’s name was conspicuously absent. His FIRST name, that is. Probably that’s why he is never referred to as “Vlad” in the novel. Stoker simply didn’t know that name at the time of the writing. The only book that can be PROVEN Stoker consulted, per his notes, was AN ACCOUNT OF THE PRINCIPALITIES OF WALLACHIA AND MOLDAVIA, by William Wilkinson. This work makes mention of Vlad and offers a cursory history, but never mentions his Christian name, his habit of impaling enemies or any of his other supposed atrocities, focusing instead on his military exploits. That’s why, in the novel DRACULA, when the Count is referring to himself, he lists his martial accomplishments. Had Stoker known about the whole impalement thing AT THE TIME OF THE WRITING of his novel, he surely would have made use of it to paint his villain as even more of an imposing monster.
It is possible, although substantiating evidence is lacking, that Stoker knew more, or LEARNED more, about Vlad, but the academic must have solid proof. This is as it should be. For the armchair enthusiast, however, speculation is rife—and fun. Personally I theorize that Stoker DID know a good deal more about Vlad than his notes convey. I will elaborate on my reasoning for this in this post’s continuation.