|
|
Post by Westny on Apr 20, 2005 14:50:05 GMT -5
Could the Highgate Vampire have remained undetected if it had maintained a lower profile? Conversely, are there possibly many vampires currently in existence that operate under the radar screen of detection by more scrupulously avoiding the eyes of man?
The Highgate Vampire's manifestation of itself to passersby with subsequent vampirization of two of these witnesses allowed Rev. Manchester to connect the dots, so to speak. If it had not manifested in this fashion, it could have quietly vampirized its victims, gradually draining them over a period of time without drawing undue attention to its activities. Many people are afflicted by unexplained anemia. Others suffering with various illnesses could be hastened towards their ultimate demise without detection. In fact, the Highgate Vampire might still be quietly draining victims--with no one the wiser.
Seemingly, the rather spectacular killings sometimes associated with vampires are not a logical necessity. It appears that a vampire can survive by the gradual vampirization of its victims and/or the occasional complete draining of a stray animal.
So, did the Highgate Vampire ultimately betray itself to destruction? Do other vampires ply their trade without detection in a secularized world where the symptoms of their presence are not recognized in the gradual weakening and death of their victims? Or, is it inevitable that a vampire will make its presence know more directly? Does a monstrous form of demonic pride dictate this result?
Food for thought.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vampirologist on Apr 21, 2005 2:12:37 GMT -5
The vampire had been sighted in Highgate's Swains Lane area since the early 19th century, but, especially as time passed, few actually attributed the manifestation to what it really was or identified it correctly, and by the mid-twentieth century, of course, the whole idea of vampires had been relegated to the dustheap of exploded superstition.
What betrayed the vampire presence more than anything else was the satanic cult active in the western graveyard thirty-five to forty-five years ago. This created a focus of attention, especially as many of the clandestine ceremonies were of a necromantic nature.
Vampires can slip under the radar of detection by becoming dormant for long periods of time. Moreover, who nowadays is going to detect a vampire other than a vampirologist ~ and they are not too thick on the ground in the 21st century.
|
|
|
|
Post by Westny on Apr 21, 2005 9:23:09 GMT -5
Very good points. The logical conclusion is that it is impossible to say one way or the other whether large numbers of vampires are currently active around the world. Given the lack of interest, the paucity of clear and unambiguous evidence, and the lack of those trained to detect their activities, vampires could easily operate below the radar screen.
As to the Highgate Vampire, it seems that a more cautious vampire, once alerted to the fact that its presence was known or suspected, would have maintained a very low profile (i.e., moved its coffin to an extremely isolated locale and entered dormancy for an extended period). This is where I wonder about demonic pride. I also wonder whether there is some unsuspected factor. Perhaps the vampire, like a bear about to enter hibernation, needs to be completely saturated with the life force of multiple victims before it can enter a period of dormancy.
However, returning to the real topic, how could the unobtrusive vampire be detected based on objective and public evidence? Those suffereing vampiric attack are more likely to be diagnosed for physical and psychiatric ailments. As you point out, the likelihood of diagnosis by someone skilled in the field is practically nil. Thus, the only way of detecting this problem would be to look for a locale with an elevated and unexplained mortality rate (i.e., a mortality rate not otherwise explainable based on crime, ethnic make-up, poverty, or environmental factors). This would be particulary true if it lies close to a cemetary.
|
|
|
|
Post by Westny on Apr 21, 2005 10:52:49 GMT -5
I think you may have accidentally pasted some extraneous material into your last response.
In any case, my speculation with regard to the Highgate Vampire really relates to the fact that the vampire did not enter a period of dormancy as well as moving its coffin until the uproar it had raised passed over. Leaving out God's providence and the guidance of the Holy Spirit (i.e., looking at facts from a purely human perspective), the Highgate Vampire might have "lived to bite another day" if it had maintained a lower profile and/or entered a period of dormancy. On this point two things come to mind: maybe it was not ready for some reason to enter a period of dormancy and (on the other hand) maybe it was too demonically proud to admit to the presence of an effective threat to its existence.
And, moving from Highgate to the more general question raised by its failure to maintain a low profile, I'm wondering how such a low profile (as opposed to a dormant) vampire could be detected by resort to externally available evidence.
|
|
|
|
Post by DrEdwardx on Apr 21, 2005 12:53:00 GMT -5
hello everybody.
Just popped in to say that in an earlier posting on the subject of the identity of the highgate vampire, i did propose the theory that the best place for a vampire to hide,would be in plain sight of all.
The logic being that remaining unobtrusive no doubt aids his nocturnal activities and draws least suspicion to his state of existence.
As i have previously stated,i think that a creature ,something akin to the phantom raspberry blower of old london town,trapsing around in a top hat and cloak would no doubt have a large stake hammered into it's chest cavity sooner or later.
A butcher on the other hand, would raise no suspicion,neither would a barber.
I fear we have all inherited the hammer horror/hollywood image of vampires into our psyche.
I agree with westy.
not to do so would be plainly ludicrous.
Sweet dreams
Dr Edward X
|
|
|
|
Post by Vampirologist on Apr 25, 2005 1:36:24 GMT -5
The vampire, of course, did relocate some distance away from Highgate Cemetery, and it was at this new location that an exorcism finally took place with a successful outcome.
"A pyre was built in the centre of the large garden ... We looked, but saw none of its awful contents before everything was consumed. At last it was hidden from our view ... its dark pestilence swallowed in the bright flames which leaped skyward while all beneath crackled and hissed. Several hours later all that remained was a great scorch-mark on the ground ¡ We stood staring at the charred spot, not daring to believe it was finally over. I took a handful of grey dust from the blackened earth and scattered it to the four winds."
[The Highgate Vampire, Gothic Press, 1991, pages 144-145.]
|
|
|
|
Post by DrEdwardx on Apr 25, 2005 6:49:41 GMT -5
Hello yet again.
Please could you tell me what was done with the skeletal remains after such a low temprature cremation of the remains .
Even after hours in a normal creamatorium there are skeletal and indeed full dental remains left after processing -even the heart takes an extremely long time to reduce to a disposable form.
A study of cremations of the ganges , by Dr J.H.Potter
reveals that after 2 hours cremations on a pyre 85% of remains remain nearly intact before they are dumped into the ganges , to be mainly eaten by 2 species of turtle/terrapin.
Please tell me where these remains are so i can run a D.N.A test on the remains and produce a report.
Sweet Dreams
Dr Edward X
|
|
|
|
Post by Vampirologist on Apr 25, 2005 9:36:44 GMT -5
The bones etc were ground down and the remaining "grey dust ... scattered to the four winds."
(The Highgate Vampire, page 145)
|
|
|
|
Post by DrEdwardx on Apr 25, 2005 12:27:37 GMT -5
Hello again .
Could you please tell me what equipment was used to grind down the remains, as i have seen industrial creamatorial grinders have problems with things like teeth etc.
sweet dreams
Dr Edward X
|
|
|
|
Post by Vampirologist on Apr 25, 2005 23:35:31 GMT -5
Due to the immense interest shown in these remains by those of diabolical intent, suffice to say that everything reduced to dust was successfully scattered.
You are ignoring the true age of the corpse itself which was centuries rather than scores of years. This returned to its natural state when exorcism took place. Reducing what remained to dust presented no major difficulty.
But, then, someone with a "degree in metaphysics" would already presumably know this?
|
|
|
|
Post by DrEdwardx on Apr 26, 2005 3:23:38 GMT -5
Hello again my learned freinds.
The age of a corpse does not necessarily mean that it will "crumble to dust".
Just look at the cases of the corpse of william the conqueror and indeed edward the first , not forgetting to name the naturallly or otherwise preserved remains of many catholic and indeed buddhist "saints".
I am afraid that i have to disagree with your belief in the preservation of corpses, having myself had the pleasure of viewing a remarkably preserved corpse in the crypt of st paul's church in deptford high st SE8, which i still believe remains interred in the said vault.
The remarkable preservation of this corpse neither marks the deceased as a vampire or a saint .
I still need hard scientific proof.
sorry.
Dr Edward X
|
|
|
|
Post by Vampirologist on Apr 26, 2005 9:35:16 GMT -5
The remarkable, almost sometimes miraculous, preservation of a corpse over a long period may possibly mark it out for sainthood or demonic interference, but in either case the intervention is supernatural.
That touched by the supernatural, whether good or evil, often defies the examination and treatment we would afford the same matter when natural and untouched.
|
|
|
|
Post by Westny on Apr 26, 2005 9:53:33 GMT -5
While the great age of a corpse does not necessarily mean that it will crumble to dust, it does not necessarily mean that it won't. In fact, the failure of a non-preserved body to decay is the exception, not the rule. Normally, bodies do decay and a centuries old non-preserved corpse would be extremely decayed.
Could bones and teeth remain? Possibly. However, possibly not as well. A lot would depend on where they were maintained. In the humid climate of Florida where I once lived, I have witnessed cow carcasses virtually disappear in a few years when exposed to the ravages of the elements. In arrid climates, quite a different result could obtain.
However, all of these discussions ignore the fact that vampires are not "normal" corpses, and the disintegration of a vampire would not be a "normal" circumstance of decay. If there are factors present that result in the abnormal preservation of the vampiric corpse, there may also be factors present that result in its abnormally rapid dissolution. In other words, the power that abnormally suspends the operations of entropy may, when countered, greatly accelerate its operations.
|
|
|
|
Post by BaronVordenburg on Apr 26, 2005 15:26:33 GMT -5
'For the Dead travel fast'
'Lenore', Gottfried August Burger, 1773
It is certainly the case that with the Wampir, Varcolac or Broucalaque, all the normative conditions which govern the physical tabernacle of the flesh are suspended and terribly so for it dwells in a devillish hiatus between the spheres of the dead and the living. I must agree with the judicious and sage comments made by Vampirologist on these recondite matters in respect of the Highgate case.
As to the prevalence of the Wampir, Oupir or Volkolak in these times, let us just say that the illusions of modernity, atheism and materialism, the dominant paradigms of this crepuscular historical eopch, have done little more than blind contemporary man to the holy miracles of sanctity and the infernal mysteries of iniquity alike. Materialism dims the inward eye of man and of course this is the greatest advantage of the Powers of Darkness and the fiendish minions thereof. The Vampire remains today as through the long ages of man, a horrible and appalling pestilence, albeit one sedulously hushed-up or unsuspected in the 'enlightened' 21st century.
|
|
|
|
Post by Westny on May 5, 2005 16:44:11 GMT -5
Dear Baron:
Your remarks bring me back to the original subject of this thread: the unobtrusive vampire.
It seems quite obvious to me that a large urban area (e.g., London), not an isolated hamlet would be the "safest" location for such a creature. The available records indicate that the vampire is quickly recognized, traced to his grave, staked and burned in areas where there are few people and everyone knows each other. In a large urban setting, however, with millions of people (and where even close neighbors do not necessarily know each other), a vampire can operate with relative impunity.
This is particularly true because, as you point out and as previously discussed on this thread, his operations are extremely unlikely to be recognized. They will be given a naturalistic explanation, even an absurd one. As with scripture and miracles, the modern mind will accept almost any explanation, no matter how implausible, in order to avoid having to deal with the supernatural. Even those with some idea of the supernatural will balk at the idea of a supernatural entity that does not fit into their particular paradigm. And, few of the muddle-headed new age set accept the existence of real evil any more than they accept real divinity (with all the demands this places on their existence).
In any case, it seems to me that the large cities of the present day are a far more attractive venue for the operations of such creatures--creatures such as the ghoul that allegedly haunted Highgate--than any other place in our time or in history. Only consider the number of potential victims located within a short distance of such a creature's abode. It boggles the mind.
However, there should be a way of recognizing the operations of such a creature by statistically examining the records in a particular urban locale. There should be something that can be used for this purpose . . . but what? I am open to any suggestions.
Cordially,
Westny
|
|
