With the understanding that folklore is constantly in flux, we can attempt to answer this question, but first, we must settle what, exactly, we mean by "vampire." For most this will conjure an image of a blood-sucking, usually conscious, walking dead with pointed teeth. This entity - who is well known to much of the world thanks to film - is extremely clever and can often appear as a normal living person, with some restrictions (no sunlight, stay away from mirrors, etc.).

That entity, if not the product of literature, has certainly been finely honed by various forms of media. Others can no doubt address the history of the vampire in literature and film.

The literary vampire drew inspiration and some energy from its folkloric counterparts. The idea that some dead remain unsettled, leave their graves, and attack (and sometimes yearn to eat) the living is widespread in Europe. There is a tendency for the dead to be more inclined in this direction the farther east one goes, but one can encounter walking corpses practically everywhere in Europe - or, to clarify, a folk tradition about walking corpses!!!

In general (one can always find exceptions!), the walking dead of folklore are relatively mindless. They are dangerous, but they are not the shrewd, clever operators of literature and film. Various cultures have ways to put the dead to rest, and these can (especially in the east) involve digging up the corpse and mutilating it in some way - often cutting off its head and placing it at the feet of the corpse. Different cultures have different procedures for this, however.

We can see what seems to be archaeological evidence of a concern about the walking dead when he find corpses with stones or bricks jammed into the mouth of the dead or when we see bodies turned face down or, again, with their heads cut off. Some or all of that may represent some sort of disrespect for the person who died, and it is important not to project too much meaning onto archaeology, but some of these finds certainly have the "feel" of a concern about corpses wishing to walk.

There is a western European legend that involves a conflict between those buried on land and those lost at sea, that can shed some insight into the question of attitudes toward the dead. An excerpt from my Introduction to Folklore which I used for several decades when teaching folklore at university:

In this story, a young man walking along the coast at night insults the ghosts of the sea who begin to chase him. The frightened fellow flees through a churchyard and, hurrying past the graves, he cries out, “Up, up, every Christian soul, and save me!” He hears a tremendous noise behind him as he runs to his home. The following morning, the townspeople find jellyfish, sea tangle, and boards from coffins strewn about the churchyard. They conclude that the ghosts of the churchyard must have fought with the sea dead to protect the young man.

Reidar Christiansen classifies this story as Migratory Legend 4065, “Ghosts from the Land Fight Ghosts from the Sea.” The story serves as an example of peasants applying the Christian dichotomy between good and evil: the dead who are buried in consecrated church ground are helpful and good, while those who were lost at sea without burial rites are outside Christianity and are, therefore, evil. An early variant of the legend illustrates that this was not the original point of view.

The thirteenth-century Icelandic Eyrbyggia Saga includes an episode that is strongly reminiscent of Legend 4065. A series of illnesses left several people dead and buried, but their animated corpses began to haunt a certain farm. Shortly after this, a ship from the same farm was lost at sea and five sailors were never found. The household had a funeral feast for the lost men. No sooner were the people seated then the dead sailors entered the room, leaving seaweed and puddles of seawater wherever they went. The corpses warmed themselves by the fire. They returned each night, even after the funeral feasts had ended, but now even more dead people arrived, these covered with dirt, which they shook off and threw at the dead from the sea. The two groups, those buried on land and those lost at sea, met each night and quarreled until the owner of the household charged them with trespassing, at which the corpses left for good.

This early variant of Legend 4065 lacks a Christian point of view. Both groups of dead are equally troublesome, and neither has assumed a good or evil role although they are clearly antagonistic to one another, anticipating the later legend. Since recent variants of the legend exhibit the Christian dichotomy of the spiritual world, it seems likely that peasants modified Legend 4065 sometime after conversion. Although the legend is an example of the successful integration of the concept of good and evil, it is the exception and not the rule.

Here we can see troublesome corpses who border on consciousness (they at least respond to the threat of a lawsuit!). That said, Europeans tends to ascribe conscious revenants (whether taking corporeal or ethereal form) to roles that tend to be more benevolent - or at least are not quite so hungry.

With this, we have a way to break down traditions about the dead - conscious and (reasonably) well-disposed toward the living versus mindless and exceedingly dangerous corpses. The literary vampire crosses wires, here, by being malevolent and conscious, and that is generally a step away from folklore.

This combination of motifs reminds me of stories a Northern European elves, fairies, hidden folk, etc. (they go by many names). These entities can be extremely dangerous, but they often appear in legends - at least initially - in ways that are indiscernible from other people. It is only as the story unfolds that the people involved realize the danger they face since they have been deceived to the supernatural being. This is how literature and film often handle the vampire, even though, as indicated, this is not normally a feature of folk belief with regard to the dead.

Your question mentions "appearing in folklore." I have broadly outlined the folkloric underpinning. That said, your question about "the early 1700s" suggests that you are seeking literary antecedents - and as indicated, I leave that to others. As for the folklore involved here, we are clearly dealing with a concern that reaches far back in time.