Since I started researching Bram Stoker's Dracula, two distinct fields of interests have developed. There never was a plan for this, but in retrospect, we can clearly see two clusters of topics. The bridge between them is the preface to the Swedish and Icelandic Dracula adaptations of 1899 and 1900, wording the author's claim of factuality.
Stoker tried to reach the maximum of impact with a supernatural horror story seemingly backed up by authentic details. Upon closer examination, however, the most essential data elude a fact check. Research essays in this cluster deal with the lifetime identity of the Count, the exact location of his (fictitious) castle and other locations mentioned in the novel, the time frame of the narrative, and the paradox Stoker was caught in as an author. This cluster includes an analysis of the Count Dracula/Vlad Dracula debate that has dominated the discussion and press coverage around Stoker's novel over the last decades, and a critique of the work of Professors McNally and Florescu.
While early English-langage book editions of Dracula have been amply studied by collectors and scholars creating bibliographies, early newspaper serializations and translations of Stoker's story have only recently become the subject of systematic research. Some early translations turned out be radical modifications of the 1897 text. My essays in this cluster deal with the Hungarian, the Swedish, the Icelandic and the American serializations and how they may have been interrelated. Moreover, they address the question whether Stoker was personally involved in the creation of early Dracula adaptations, or if they are examples of literary piracy,