While I'm eagerly awaiting my copy of Vampirismus und magia posthuma im Diskurs der Habsburgermonarchie to arrive, Niels received his on Monday (left).
His paper, 'Magia posthuma. a weblog approach to the history of central and Eastern European vampire cases of the 18th century', was published in the book. It mentions my previous blog. What an honour!
He's also helpfully printed the book's contents. For an idea on what the papers discuss, consult his invaluable notes on the conference.
Karin Barton's paper, 'The Habsburg flea: notes on the cultural and literary history of an insect vampire', didn't make the cut; a real shame, considering it 'presented a source from 1866 that mentions the word 'nosferatu', a term otherwise usually perceived as constructed by Emily Gerard in her Transsylvanian [sic] Superstitions from 1885!' But that's ok. I found an earlier source.
That said, if it wasn't for Niels' coverage of Barton's paper, I wouldn't've sought it out in the first place. So, kudos to 'em both.
Sigrid Janisch's paper on 'various definitions of vampires from 18th and 19th century encyclopedias' got the chop, as did Bernhard Unterholzner's discussion on 'vampire debates from 1732 and onwards.'
There's no sign of Thede Kahl's 'field work in Albania and Northern Greece, where he got about 200 tales about vampires, revenants and other entities.' However, Niels does mention his findings 'will be published later this year ', so his work may simply have appeared in another source, like a journal. Might have to chase that up.
And the others, too, for that matter.