Post by Vampirologist on Apr 14, 2006 2:45:38 GMT -5
"Vampire Nation" by Arlene Russo, pages 79, 85, 86
Arlene Russo's factually inaccurate and purposely misleading claims have to be seen to be believed. This is not a question of her expressing an opinion. What she claims on pages 79, 85 and 86 of her book are a complete misrepresentation of what is recorded in the annals by those actually involved who provide supporting evidence. Where is her evidence?
For example, on page 79 of "Vampire Nation" Arlene Russo writes:
“In 1990 he [Seán Manchester] and two assistants visited the grave. Apparently one of the helpers became so frightened as they entered the woods around the grave, that he fled into the night …”
This simply did not happen. It is a total fabrication. Was Arlene Russo present at the time sixteen years ago? No, she was not. Did she read this from an account given by someone who was present at the Kirklees vigil in April 1990. No, she did not.
Nowhere has it been suggested by Seán Manchester or anyone else present at the Kirklees vigil that anyone “fled into the night.” His account about the vigil of 22 April 1990 in The Vampire Hunter's Handbook is absolutely clear about this.
Neither was it “an unofficial mini exorcism at the gravesite,” as claimed by Arlene Russo. It was a vigil, albeit one where three words of prayer were uttered at one point during the culmination of events. She cannot make statements about an event sixteen years ago which alters what is recorded as actually happening. Who told her that one of those present fled into the night in terror as the group entered the woods? Certainly nobody belonging to that group. So why did she invent this episode? I suspect because it conveys an impression she wants to present which is different to the recorded facts and introduces doubt about those participating.
On page 85 of "Vampire Nation" Arlene Russo alleges: “…Seán Manchester, who claimed to be an expert in vampire matters, stated that the entity was an undead European nobleman who had arrived in Highgate in the 18th century.”
This attribution belongs to the editor of the Hampstead & Highgate Express, 27 February 1970, which Seán Manchester was at pains to correct in his own published works, not least his concise vampirological guide The Vampire Hunter's Handbook (1997) where the original account is given, which Arlene Russo has certainly read along with The Highgate Vampire (1985 & 1991).
The same page in "Vampire Nation" states: “Manchester claimed that a local girl, named Elizabeth, had fallen under the vampire’s sway and that only he could save her.”
However, Seán Manchester did not claim that “only [he] could save her.” So where did this come from? It came from Arlene Russo who had in mind a distorted image of Seán Manchester which she wanted to portray and convey in "Vampire Nation."
The same page states: “Manchester’s claims set off a hysterical reaction: graves were smashed and bodies exhumed. … the normally quiet suburb had become gripped by the drama as the satanic rituals increased.”
Now Arlene Russo is trying to lay at the feet of Seán Manchester blame for desecration and vandalism at Highgate Cemetery. Is it not ironic that her source of misinformation about these matters was convicted of desecration and vandalism at Highgate Cemetery in the 1970s? She promotes the illegal (due to libel and copyright infringement) pamphlets of this person in "Vampire Nation" while omitting any mention of The Highgate Vampire or The Vampire Hunter's Handbook by Seán Manchester. I wonder why?
Seán Manchester's theory was not made public until 27 February 1970, prior to which there had been innumerable newspaper reports of the phenomenon and sundry goings-on. Indeed, the vandalism, desecration and black magic incidents significantly lessened following two television programmes (13 March and 15 October 1970) on which Seán Manchester discussed the cemetery occurrences. It should be recognised that desecration and vandalism had been taking place throughout the 1960s. Seán Manchester putting a spotlight on the situation made it impossible for vandals and diabolists to continue their clandestine activities at Highgate Cemetery. Thus such nefarious activities dwindled from the spring of 1970 largely due to his intervention.
The same page in "Vampire Nation" states: “Events came to a head on 14 March 1970 … Manchester claimed to have located the vampire in a vault, and also claimed to have impaled the ‘king vampire’ in its lair.”
Yet Seán Manchester did not claim to have “impaled” anything within the confines of Highgate Cemetery, and never employed the term “king vampire” as he explains in The Vampire Hunter's Handbook (page 72), a work that makes clear this attribution originated with the sensationalising of what he did say by journalists. Arlene Russo would know this because she has read Seán Manchester's concise vampirological guide where the matter is clarified in detail.
Incidentally, the date of the “mass vampire hunt” was 13 March 1970 — not “14 March 1970,” as erroneously stated in "Vampire Nation."
The same page states: “… new reports of incidents around the cemetery started up.”
This was not the case. The new incidents arose at a completely different cemetery some miles distance from Highgate Cemetery.
On page 86 it is claimed by Arlene Russo: “They [sic] hunters eventually claimed to have killed this beast too …”
Nobody, least of all Seán Manchester, claimed to have “killed” anything, whether beast or vampire. What was being dealt with cannot be “killed” as it is demonic and can only be expelled.
The same page finds Arlene Russo repeating the falsehood: “Manchester … is still adamant that he personally killed two vampires.”
Seán Manchester is not in the business of “killing” anything. He is a trained and seasoned exorcist with four decades of experience in operative vampirological/demonological research.
This critique has nothing to do with differences of opinion expressed in Arlene Russo's book. It concerns Arlene Russo's premeditated and intentional misrepresentation of the facts as already recorded by others with supporting evidence. She offers no evidence whatsoever to support any of her damaging allegations. How can she? They originate with an ex-offender who was sentenced to five years' imprisonment for crimes committed at Highgate Cemetery. Someone, moreover, who has been waging a vicious and unrelenting vendetta against Seán Manchester and the Vampire Research Society for three and a half decades.
What serious vampirologists will find really irritating is the claim made by Arlene Russo that she is "the UK's foremost vampire expert."
Link to The Highgate Vampire by Seán Manchester which Arlene Russo failed to identify even though she used it as a resource to distort and produce fabricated claims about events that occurred before she was born:
www.gothicpress.freeserve.co.uk/Highgate%20Vampire%20Book.htm
Arlene Russo's factually inaccurate and purposely misleading claims have to be seen to be believed. This is not a question of her expressing an opinion. What she claims on pages 79, 85 and 86 of her book are a complete misrepresentation of what is recorded in the annals by those actually involved who provide supporting evidence. Where is her evidence?
For example, on page 79 of "Vampire Nation" Arlene Russo writes:
“In 1990 he [Seán Manchester] and two assistants visited the grave. Apparently one of the helpers became so frightened as they entered the woods around the grave, that he fled into the night …”
This simply did not happen. It is a total fabrication. Was Arlene Russo present at the time sixteen years ago? No, she was not. Did she read this from an account given by someone who was present at the Kirklees vigil in April 1990. No, she did not.
Nowhere has it been suggested by Seán Manchester or anyone else present at the Kirklees vigil that anyone “fled into the night.” His account about the vigil of 22 April 1990 in The Vampire Hunter's Handbook is absolutely clear about this.
Neither was it “an unofficial mini exorcism at the gravesite,” as claimed by Arlene Russo. It was a vigil, albeit one where three words of prayer were uttered at one point during the culmination of events. She cannot make statements about an event sixteen years ago which alters what is recorded as actually happening. Who told her that one of those present fled into the night in terror as the group entered the woods? Certainly nobody belonging to that group. So why did she invent this episode? I suspect because it conveys an impression she wants to present which is different to the recorded facts and introduces doubt about those participating.
On page 85 of "Vampire Nation" Arlene Russo alleges: “…Seán Manchester, who claimed to be an expert in vampire matters, stated that the entity was an undead European nobleman who had arrived in Highgate in the 18th century.”
This attribution belongs to the editor of the Hampstead & Highgate Express, 27 February 1970, which Seán Manchester was at pains to correct in his own published works, not least his concise vampirological guide The Vampire Hunter's Handbook (1997) where the original account is given, which Arlene Russo has certainly read along with The Highgate Vampire (1985 & 1991).
The same page in "Vampire Nation" states: “Manchester claimed that a local girl, named Elizabeth, had fallen under the vampire’s sway and that only he could save her.”
However, Seán Manchester did not claim that “only [he] could save her.” So where did this come from? It came from Arlene Russo who had in mind a distorted image of Seán Manchester which she wanted to portray and convey in "Vampire Nation."
The same page states: “Manchester’s claims set off a hysterical reaction: graves were smashed and bodies exhumed. … the normally quiet suburb had become gripped by the drama as the satanic rituals increased.”
Now Arlene Russo is trying to lay at the feet of Seán Manchester blame for desecration and vandalism at Highgate Cemetery. Is it not ironic that her source of misinformation about these matters was convicted of desecration and vandalism at Highgate Cemetery in the 1970s? She promotes the illegal (due to libel and copyright infringement) pamphlets of this person in "Vampire Nation" while omitting any mention of The Highgate Vampire or The Vampire Hunter's Handbook by Seán Manchester. I wonder why?
Seán Manchester's theory was not made public until 27 February 1970, prior to which there had been innumerable newspaper reports of the phenomenon and sundry goings-on. Indeed, the vandalism, desecration and black magic incidents significantly lessened following two television programmes (13 March and 15 October 1970) on which Seán Manchester discussed the cemetery occurrences. It should be recognised that desecration and vandalism had been taking place throughout the 1960s. Seán Manchester putting a spotlight on the situation made it impossible for vandals and diabolists to continue their clandestine activities at Highgate Cemetery. Thus such nefarious activities dwindled from the spring of 1970 largely due to his intervention.
The same page in "Vampire Nation" states: “Events came to a head on 14 March 1970 … Manchester claimed to have located the vampire in a vault, and also claimed to have impaled the ‘king vampire’ in its lair.”
Yet Seán Manchester did not claim to have “impaled” anything within the confines of Highgate Cemetery, and never employed the term “king vampire” as he explains in The Vampire Hunter's Handbook (page 72), a work that makes clear this attribution originated with the sensationalising of what he did say by journalists. Arlene Russo would know this because she has read Seán Manchester's concise vampirological guide where the matter is clarified in detail.
Incidentally, the date of the “mass vampire hunt” was 13 March 1970 — not “14 March 1970,” as erroneously stated in "Vampire Nation."
The same page states: “… new reports of incidents around the cemetery started up.”
This was not the case. The new incidents arose at a completely different cemetery some miles distance from Highgate Cemetery.
On page 86 it is claimed by Arlene Russo: “They [sic] hunters eventually claimed to have killed this beast too …”
Nobody, least of all Seán Manchester, claimed to have “killed” anything, whether beast or vampire. What was being dealt with cannot be “killed” as it is demonic and can only be expelled.
The same page finds Arlene Russo repeating the falsehood: “Manchester … is still adamant that he personally killed two vampires.”
Seán Manchester is not in the business of “killing” anything. He is a trained and seasoned exorcist with four decades of experience in operative vampirological/demonological research.
This critique has nothing to do with differences of opinion expressed in Arlene Russo's book. It concerns Arlene Russo's premeditated and intentional misrepresentation of the facts as already recorded by others with supporting evidence. She offers no evidence whatsoever to support any of her damaging allegations. How can she? They originate with an ex-offender who was sentenced to five years' imprisonment for crimes committed at Highgate Cemetery. Someone, moreover, who has been waging a vicious and unrelenting vendetta against Seán Manchester and the Vampire Research Society for three and a half decades.
What serious vampirologists will find really irritating is the claim made by Arlene Russo that she is "the UK's foremost vampire expert."
Link to The Highgate Vampire by Seán Manchester which Arlene Russo failed to identify even though she used it as a resource to distort and produce fabricated claims about events that occurred before she was born:
www.gothicpress.freeserve.co.uk/Highgate%20Vampire%20Book.htm