3

This question contains spoilers:

In Dracula Untold, the Sultan creates an entire room filled to the brim with silver to protect himself from Dracula, so clearly he had some way to find out about Vlad's vulnerability.
Why doesn't he have even one cross to protect himself? For that matter, why didn't he equip his entire army with crosses just in case? (just by random chance you'd think at least a few of them would happen to be carrying crosses) Is a cross only effective when wielded by a "holy" person (such as a monk)?

  • 7
    I haven't seen the movie but the character of the Sultan is based upon Mehmed the Conqueror who was a follower of Islam. The cross represents Jesus' resurrection to Christians. It holds no special meaning in Islam. Several vampire movies follow the trope that only belief in the Christian God and the holiness of the cross give it power. – Legion600 Oct 12 '14 at 6:57
8

The Turks were Muslim and would not have used crosses to protect themselves. Their holy symbols are the Cresent Moon and Star:

enter image description here

or the depiction of the name of Allah:

enter image description here

It is unclear if the presentation of a cross by someone who did not believe in the religious symbol would be offered any protection from it.

Vampiric legends vary widely on the efficacy of crosses wielded by believers vs non-believers.

  • Some legends would have the most pious able to hold two sticks together in the sign of the cross and that would be enough to protect them. Strong faith could make even the smallest holy symbol presented boldly enough to repel a weaker vampire.

  • Other more modern myths do away with presentation of holy symbols as just another myth to confuse vampire hunters. In these myths crosses have little or no effect on vampires at all. Anne Rice's vampires were unaffected by crosses.

  • As I am reminded, some tales make the presentation of a holy symbol dependent upon the belief of the VAMPIRE as they were in life. Thus a Christian who became a vampire might be repelled by the symbol of their church as a denial of what they have become in undeath.

| improve this answer | |
  • 5
    Dracula untold was meant to be a prequel to the Bram Stoker novel--the director is quoted here saying that although in the movie he hasn't yet become the Dracula of Bram Stoker's novel, there are "the beginning seeds to be able to get there. It sets itself in the 1460s and made a bridge to what would eventually be Bram Stoker’s Dracula 400 years later." So he should have the same vulnerabilities, though the novel doesn't say what would happen if a non-Christian used a cross. – Hypnosifl Oct 12 '14 at 14:02
  • 1
    I'd add to your bullet points that some vampire stories make it depend on the belief of the vampire (as a mortal). In that case, the Sultan and his troops might have been able to use crosses to protect themselves, if they'd thought of it and didn't consider it blasphemy – Paul Jun 14 '17 at 19:34
-1

They were Muslim not Christians, that's why the monks wanted to kill Vlad to release him from evil.

| improve this answer | |
  • The first part of your answer has already been mentioned, and I'm having trouble understanding the second part of your sentence - could you elaborate on it? – Gallifreyan Jun 14 '17 at 15:06
  • 1
    A muslim can still carry a cross, can they not? – Edlothiad Jun 14 '17 at 15:14
  • @Edlothiad Some would say not, which is a part of the motivation, I assume. – Gallifreyan Jun 14 '17 at 15:33

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.