Sort by:
Best
Open comment sort options
Best
Top
New
Controversial
Old
Q&A
This makes my eyes hurt
Which is why red on blue/blue on red is discouraged in heraldry.
Makes sense lol, looks awful and messes with the eyes.
Yep. Medieval people needed to identify coats of arms and other heraldic devices from really far away without any assistance from a telescope or whatever. They needed to do it quickly and accurately. Having bad colour combinations that fucks with people's eyes is a no-no, unless it's being done to fuck with people's eyes.
Note that in OP's map, green on blue is a no-no as well, but because it's bright green, I suspect such a combo would've be allowed. There weren't many bright green dyes or paints during the medieval period, so that's why you won't see that bright-green on blue combo even if it would've been allowed.
Just like Internet pages in the early 2000s
Please teach me about heraldry
Colours on metals (white or yellow, called argent and or), metals on colours, some colours can go on other colours, some metals can go on other metals (Papal arms, for instance). The rules about what some people can do but not other people can get very complicated, but knowing the terminology, the verbs, and the grammar will let you go far.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heraldry
Lots of good resources that aren't on wiki as well.
The Papal heraldy "wrongdoing" was done one purpose to flex on every other coat of arms, to reflect its uniqueness and that they do not abid by mortals' rules. The symbolism behind the white and gold colors are strong in both heraldy and Christianity.
Yep I'd recommend to look for out of wiki sources too, over the year I've found many mistakes on heraldry pages so it's always better to do comparisons
Came here to say this. I thought my colour blindness was screwing with me again.
And why there are two shades of blue ahead of the first year ever considered, therefore never used?
In Poland it's 1492.
Yup. Was always taught it's either 1453 (fall of Constantinople) or 1492 ('discovery' of America by Columbus). Personally I've already been more of a 1453 person tho
Same in Germany, those two dates are usually the ones used here as well as far as I am aware.
Or 1453. Nobody says 1506.
Usually 1492 though. Domestically the death of Kazimierz IV, the last truly medieval king of the country. And globally the voyage of Columbus.
Same in Hungary. The end of Middle Ages was connected to the discovery of America. Alternate version is 1517 the beginning of Reformation. Nobody says 1526
Except it isn't. Yes, globally the discovery of America is considered the end of the Middle Ages. However that had no immediate effects on Hungarian society. As such, historians are split mainly into two groups on when the Middle Ages ended in Hungary. Either 1490, the death of Mátyás I, the last great medieval king of Hungary or 1526, the battle of Mohács and the death of Lajos II, as the civil war and ottoman wars that would be the result of that event, would absolutely shatter the medieval state of Hungary. Most historians count this as the end of the Middle Ages in Hungary and I myself find it thoroughly convincing.
Same in Italy, 1492 is always cited before 1453.
This is what I learned in French school as well....
That's what we were taught in Slovenia.
In Belarus it's 1492 as well. Or 1453, but usually 1492
I think OP has confused end of the middle ages and and time when the reneissance, meaning the esthethic, has come to the countries. In Czechia reneissance comes in 1526 with the Habsburgs. Before that ruled the jaggellonians and during their rule the esthethic is considered late gothic
In that case the start date for Poland was 1499 when part of the Wawel castle burnt down and the reconstruction was done by Renaissance artists fetched directly from Italy and Germany.
King John I Albert's tomb from 1501 is already typically Renaissance.
Same in Czech rep.
Same in Croatia, 1492
PORTUGAL NÚMERO UM CARALHO 🇵🇹🇵🇹🇵🇹🏆🏆🏆🎉🎉🍾🍾
I had to look it up but 1415, marked the conquest of Ceuta. That was the first step in the expansion that led to the Age of Discovery. Cool
Not so fast ☝️🤓 check Liechtenstein on the map (ignore the legend)
I can’t believe the Middle Ages ended in 2 AD for Liechtenstein. The birth of Christ must’ve really done a number on them.
Are you just gonna ignore Andorra
Long long time ago....;)
I can still remember
Everyone knows it ended in 1444
It ended in 2000 when Paradox Interactive published Europa Universalis 1.
And then it started again in 2004 when they released crusader kings.
November 10, 1444.
Why would England be 1489? Surely it would be 1485 with the Battle of Bosworth? Or 1487 as the "real" end of the Wars of the Roses with the Battle of Stoke Field
Yes that’s a mistake on my part which I noted here somewhere but it is meant to represent that battle and the rise of Henry VII
Albania: any day now
I'm Dutch and don't recognise the date. It's typically Colombus discovering the Americas or the Fall of Constantinopel.
It is meant to signify the end of the "Bourgondische tijd", because the Habsburgs started ruling over us. Not that that changed much for the better for us Dutchies, but I guess the map found it significant. :p
Even then it's wrong. The real event that ended the Valois-Burgundian era was the death of Charles the Bold at the Battle of Nancy in 1477.
And EVEN THEN the Beeldenstorm (1566) is way more significant to Dutch history.
I think you're downplaying Maria's part in this. Charles only claimed regency in 1482, which triggered civil unrest, and from this point on we officially became the Habsburgian Netherlands.
I agree though that the Beeldenstorm is much more fitting.
I mean this map is kinda weird in the first place. The end of the Middle Ages is kind of a broad topic and this map simplifies it incredibly.
What's supposed to be 1481 (Albania)? The fall of Shkodra? Ottoman occupation?
Yes precisely, Ottoman occupation
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albania_in_the_Middle_Ages
In Italy is 1492, because is the death of Lorenzo De Medici, the discovery of America, and the expulsion of the Moors from Spain.
It can also be 1453 but nobody say it.
Yeah, 1453 isn’t used much at all.
In Turkey, we learn both, but accept 1453.
Well, It is obvious why 😀
I think this is one of the unintended consequences of globalism. People stop thinking of dates like this in localized terms but rather a strict date is set by a single or group of entities and then is taught in places where it may not even be terribly applicable.
Edit: the more correct word is globalization.
I mean, it totally makes sense for the end of the Middle Ages to be a more globalized event, though. That's why it's 1492 or 1453 in a lot of European countries - the discovery of the Americas, the end of the Reconquista and the fall of Constantinople are all highly symbolic events that set the course of (western?) European history.
It's like how 476 is often picked for the end of the antiquity. Of course it's a bit arbitrary and artificial, but you can the symbolism behind it.
It doesn't make sense at all actually because history is not uniform. Fro example in Romania the middle ages started in 270 and ended in 1599-1601.
Yes. Here is another example. You wrote more or less what I said, but I gave up on explaining it further because for a productive discussion you need two sides to want it:
https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/1camli8/when_the_middle_ages_is_considered_to_have_ended/l0t3pnn/
https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/1camli8/when_the_middle_ages_is_considered_to_have_ended/l0ta4d0/
That would be all from me.
456 is only for Western Europe. While in the East the period is Late Antiquity which continues until the Arab invasions.
For the majority of Europe no change was made.
The transition to the Middle Ages should be the emergence of the large state. 631 in eastern Western Europe (Samo's State), the ninth century for Northwestern Europe (Denmark, Norway), the late ninth century in the eastern half of Europe (Rus, Volga Bulgaria), 966 in western Central Europe (Poland) etc.
Sweden 1050... 500 years difference really confuses my students. :-)
Picking a single date at which something “happened“ which in actuality was a more gradual process is always a bit arbitrary. It is not like at that point in time the thinking and live of everybody suddenly radically changed.
conquest of Constantinople
I feel like "globalism" (WTF that means) leads to the opposite - there's more appreciation that other countries have their own histories and don't conform to a colonial power's assumption that the mediaeval period started in 1066 and ended in 1485 and we'll consider that the same for everyone.
Are you quoting globalism because you think it doesn't fit into this conversation, or because you don't think it exists?
People in 1493:
"So how's life this year?"
"Well...it feels...different. I don't know why, it just arbitrarly does"
"Yeah, is not like a new continent has been discovered"
It's almost like a whole continent got discovered by the Europeans changing the fate of both forever
Well, I don't think most Europeans felt anything at this moment. This is what the commenter was aiming at.
1526, Battle of Mohacs
Finally someone who understands what this is about
I would like to understand where you pulled this data from.
Some examples:
England: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Bosworth_Field
Denmark: https://en.natmus.dk/historical-knowledge/denmark/middle-ages-1000-1536/
Spain: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spain_in_the_Middle_Ages
Portugal: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portugal_in_the_Middle_Ages
Serbia: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbia_in_the_Middle_Ages
Ireland: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Ireland_(1169–1536)
Sweden: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Sweden_(800–1521)
Hungary: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Hungary_(1301–1526)
Good research, but I bet quite few of those examples are contested or are not talked about in the context of being the end of the middle ages. For Serbia at least, there is no real formal date where the middle age ends. Yeah, we divide domestic history in the period pre Ottoman rule and post Ottoman rule which is 1459, but there is no notion of being the end of the middle ages. I would argue that in school we were thought that the end of the middle ages was the discovery of America in 1492. Especially weird in the context of domestic history labelling it as the end of the middle ages as the modern period is characterized by the renaissance period, which we completely missed due to Ottoman occupation, so it gets even more complicated
If noone understands, work on map communication.
Hot take: Germany: ~1440 (invention of the movable type printing press)
Or 1517, begin of Reformation. Yes, 1492 still is an option.
Lets say around 1500??
I agree with 1517, personally. A lot of changes started to rapidly happen after 1517 in terms of culture, technology, politics, and economics. No such rapid changes occurred immediately after 1453 or 1492.
Source? In Hungary we learn like 5 different dates as the end of the middle ages, 1526 is not one of them but it’s definitely an end of an era.
Our history teacher said maybe it’s 1453, fall of Constantinople, maybe 1492 discovery of America, maybe 1517, start of the Reformation. We view the 1400’s as the time of the renaissance, a transitory century between the middle ages and the early modern period.
In France it's traditionally 1492: Colombo's discovery of the Americas and the end of the Reconquista. 1453 is an important date of course but not as well known as 1492.
Although 1453 had more of a direct effect on France specifically than 1492 did
Perhaps it depends on the region and our age. Because I learned 1453 in school.