Does this "Deus vult" crusader templar armor with cross symbols on it and cross symbols on capes actually exist or is it a modern headcannon? Im trying to google original pieces exhibits in museums (not reconstructions but original pieces) but I cant find any.
Even medieval art will do thanks.
 |
 Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
|
>with cross symbols on it and cross symbols on capes
also shields, if they are original they will do thanks
wow really the whole deus vult armor is just modern headcannon?
Looks nothing like the deus vult armor. However can you give me source of the pic?
what is this goofy ass knight homie wearing
An impractical Frog-mouth jousing helm + nun habit + a candle with a flail(?) + a laurel + a random broom
what in the actual frick
English people dress like that routinely...
Im not joking anon I cant find an original museum piece at all is the deus vult armor just modern headcannon?
That drawing is stylised to modern tastes but the Templars did indeed wear red crosses on white on their surcoats.
Realistically it would have looked like this.
Ok sure so you say but thats not what I asked, is this an original authentic piece or just a reconstruction? If it is the former could you post source on the museum exhibit?
That is merchandise from a website called historicalreproductions.com.
But this is an exhibit at Ten Duinen Abbey which shows a similar Templar surcoat, one that looks even more like the drawing in the OP.
Thats just a reconstruction
Nonsense you can find all kinds of authentic fabrics in museums that have aged just fine.
Shit like the Turin shroud and artful tapestries that were carefully preserved from day 1. No one back then was preserving their Templar surcoat for posterity, or any surcoat for that matter since it was supposed to be a practical garment for wear on the battlefield.
Seriously, forget about authentic templar surcoats for a moment. Try to find ANY surcoat from the medieval era.
this
The best we have are depictions from the medieval times.
You don't want to paint directly on a steel breastplate because it would go to shit quickly. Enamel doesn't handle broad areas like that either, so you're looking for an 800 year old piece of fabric, like he has in your pic. This was the first result for "knight templar shield artifact" on google though.
Dude ffs this is an indiana jones movie fake shield
Surcoats are completely historical for the crusades, in fact it was the crusader states that brought the use of surcoats to western knightly traditions.
Before the crusades knights would typically just wear bare, unornamented armour. But the blazing sun of the desert made it impractical to just wear bare metal, so they'd wear a surcoat over it and decorate it with crosses or their heraldry. This caught on so knights in the west would do it too just for easy identification on the battlefield, and for swag purposes of course.
>so they'd wear a surcoat over it and decorate it with crosses
Right. Could you post an original (not some reconstruction) surcoat with a cross just like the deus vult armor?
Easy mode: It doesnt have to be like the deus vult armor, just a surcoat with a cross but it has to be original authentic piece.
Fabrics do not really age that well, in 1,000 years any item of clothing is just going to rot to nothing.
The crosses are way too big. Normally it would be a small cross in a corner. Also the sword is too long. Aside from those two details the image is alright, that's roughly how a 12th-13th century crusader could have looked like.
So can you post original authentic pieces at least for that? All I can find is museum reconstructions.
Templars were the more specialized group you're looking for which were heavily armed units made to crush mudslime lines
Yea I can find all the modern fanart I want anon. What I want is evidence that this modern fanart is not some headcannon by seeing an original authentic piece of surcoat/armor/shield/etc that looks like the modern fanart.
templar artifacts are exceedingly rare, and coveted. A lot of the artifacts would have been destroyed in multiple different countries for different reasons.
This one is also fake but I found something regarding great helms. However I dont know what the 1900s dates are supposed to mean.
just finding regular greathelms is hard enough, most of the ones found are ones that had been damaged so people probably kept wearing them until they died usually
>Prokofiev intensifies
Thats what Im looking but a shield with the deus vult cross (or any cross) not with heraldic symbols.
you're not ever going to find a shield because they were wood, even the ones with sheet metal over them would have rotted away long ago
Amazingly here's a wooden leather shield of a commander of the Teutonic Order dated 20 years after the crusades, which were mercenary knights inspired by the Templars, and fighting alongside them from Germany. They were pretty based and helped peasants travel to Jerusalem safely
you can see in the bottom left there's "templar" heraldry painted on it
The cross is not a unique symble to the Knights Templar.
I know, it wouldn't be unrealistic to see an entire shield painted with a cross
What I meant is that the cross is black on a white shield and thus the coat of arms of the Teutonic Order.
yeah it's a coat of arms, shields were decorated to identify the wielder down to the specific person. Helmets were also probably painted, they would also apply wooden or other easily lost material to the helmets as heraldry.
It seems that heraldry on the shield grew out of shield strengthening for combat, but eventually the cross reinforced shield was adopted because of Christianity
This heraldry was actually born from the reinforced strips of iron they used across this man's specific shield, William de Valence which was a French Knight from the 13th century (crusades time)
Yes but why did you label the heraldry of the Teutonic Order als "templar" heraldry?
because OP would identify with the cross being templar
dates of the studies that the photos are from
There is evidence. We have artwork. Most importantly, we have effigies. These were extremely accurate and become even more intricate into the 14th and 15th centuries showing the complexities.
If you want to see how much evidence effigies give us, read up on Tobias Capwell, the leading historian on Engliah armor in the world. Albeit he focuses on 1400-1500 mostly
The details of effigies are so exact that even unique designs on gauntlets are displayed
The bucket helmet is pretty much a 13th century invention
They were only used in the shitty later crusades the deus vult gays would rather ignore
the red cross on white background does appear on 13th century art
https://manuscriptminiatures.com/search?year_start=&year_end=&art=&tag=115%2C10534%2C1043%2C139&gallery=&source=&place=&artist=#results
Templars apparently.
missing the most important one (As usual, and for a reason) the Portuguese Order of Christ.
Literally just Templars but rebranded after you know what.
yes, "just" 😉
>16th century ships
Yes, Naval Crusade. The final one.
is that late Reconquista?
No, Empire of the Indic, and attempt to kill the beast in it´s nest, Final crusade to reach Medina and Mecca, unfortunately not successful.
Dom Afonso I, first King of Portugal
Depends on the specific order and country
The English and Templars wore stuff like that but you had Franks wearing blue, Germans, The Teutons, Venetians, etc. all wearing different colours and symbols
You also had the different sects and all the Saints would be represented with different crosses and signs so the men who's patron was St George would wear the red cross while those under St Edmund would wear a different shapes and people's individual heraldry so Sir Leon of the Leon family would wear his family symbol and Sir Gaston would wear his
So basically the Deus Vault armour is a gross underrepresentation of the armours and heraldry that was used then in regards to the Crusader forces
St. George didn't become associated with the cross until after the english wore the red cross on Crusade. These colors and patterns were purely to distinguish where each crusader force came from. The French had the cross on blue.
Actually, it was the French who wore the red cross on white background during the crusades, while the English wore a white cross on red background.
The English later switched to the former as it had gained more prestige than their own cross.
Actually the English swapped to using a red cross on white not because they used it on their medieval arms but because they used it on their ships.
Before it was the flag of England it was the flag of Genoa, who allowed English ships to fly it so that they'd be under Genoa's protection back when England was basically irrelevant while Genoa was a major maritime power.
Yes thanks for clarifying, I did not do so very well. I believe the reason to go with Genoa colors was to avoid being attacked by pirates.
Of interest is that the Knights Hospitaller still exist today and this is what their devotional robes look like.
early crusade shields looked like this, kite shields
woops
it wasn't until near the last two or three crusades that shields were flattened at the top
and the sterotypical "heater" shield probably wasn't seen at all. So that's the main problem with depictions is that the shield is wrong.
this is the most well preserved 14th century heater shield, also pictured here. You can also see the heraldry on his gambeson
The heater shield was the most widely used shield as leg armor improved, not sure why you think they were never used. The reason they don't survive is because they were made of wood and leather and various bio degradable material.
yeah, widely used in the 14th century, not during the crusades
>Does this "Deus vult" crusader templar armor with cross symbols on it and cross symbols on capes actually exist or is it a modern headcannon?
I dont get if you are talking about the armor or the decoration on the arming garment/shield, ive never heard of such a thing as "deus vult armor" i all the books ive read so i dont know. I know that there are lots of ebic cruzader drawings out there, and most of them are just modern crap with little base on reality, but this one is not as bad, so, If you are talking about a style of arming oneself like similar to that on the pic, them yeah, its very much real. People were arming thenselves in a simillar fashion from at least the early 13th century down to the early 14th, and it was basicaly the standard way of doing it if you could afford it, based on artworks from the period (which is like 99% of what we have anyways). If you are talking about that decoration design being used with that style of armor, then its very possible that it could have been done by someone, it is not an implausible decoration choice for the time and culture, and for most of time it was up too personal tastes with lots of diferent designs being possible. If i am not mistaken, military orders liked to fashion themselves using crosses. It would be just a question of finding a source for it, and i recommend you go looki at manuscriptminiatures to see if you can find something.
> Im trying to google original pieces exhibits in museums (not reconstructions but original pieces) but I cant find any.
Ha! good luck with that.
>Even medieval art will do thanks.