Topic: Do the Belmonts know Dracula is Mathias?

[Nagumo]

And if so, how did they find out?

I was just wondering about this because there's a possibility this might be brought up in the upcoming animated series (if they care enough to acknowledge LoI). I would assume that the Belmonts knew because that makes the most sense from a narrative standpoint. After all, the entire point of LoI's story was to create a personal connenction between the Belmonts and Dracula. This also creates a personal motivation for Trevor. He goes to fight Dracula because of Leon's vow. (and also because he wants to restore his family's reputation, most likely). But then there's the question of how Trevor knew beforehand he was dealing with Mathias.

Does anyone have an idea how that could play out? I suppose you could write it in such a way that Trevor only has his suspicions beforehand because he knows Dracula is a vampire. And then Dracula would most likely reveal his old identiy during his confrontation with Trevor. Most likely he would be prompted to do so because he recognizes the Vampire Killer or something like that. Any other possible scenarios?         

[AlexCalvo]

I like to think that Matthias and the Belmonts kept some level of tabs on each other.   Matthias knew how impressive a warrior Leon was and I doubt he took his boasts at the end of LoI lightly. And on the flip side the Belmont's whole mission is kind of built around destroying Matthias some day, so I imagine tracking him, knowing what he's up to was pretty high on the to do list. I'd bet in the time between Leon and Trevor other Belmonts tried and failed to find and or battle him.

[Super Waffle]

Do the Belmonts even know the Vampire Killer is the transubstantiated form of some dude's dead waifu?

[theplottwist]

I think they don't. Not only that, but I think they shouldn't as it cheapens their duty.

I think they don't because of the time span between Leon and Trevor. Also, at the end of Lament, Leon seems to put aside his personal vendetta with Mathias to look at the bigger picture: Walter turned his wife, Mathias is now a vampire and will turn many more. It became more about the suffering people will be subjected to than about his personal vengeance. Leon's altruism appears to be in stark contrast with Mathias' selfishness.

This is the key point: Personal. Leon's promise was about the clan hunting the night, not "Mathias". Of course he condemned Mathias to die by the whip one day, but this became an afterthought on this promise's conclusion.

Think Batman. He made a vow to catch criminals until the day he dies. He wanted to catch Joe Chill, his parents' killer, but he had no idea who he was. He simply knew he would catch him one day as an afterthought of the "I will catch ALL criminals because I'm Batman".

So I think they don't because I think it would be outside Leon's character to actually pass on Mathias' name and past forward. He wouldn't honor his greatest betrayer with a memory of him to consume his children or make his children wield the whip out of pity due to knowing Leon's dead wife is inside it. Besides, it's supposed the Leon DID live a happily ever-after ending with a new wife with whom he made mini Belmonts, and who should seriously get more recognition lol. I think he would train his kin to hunt demons and monsters as their bread-winning with the intention of them becoming so good at it Mathias would perish at their hands eventually, but not actually weave long expositions about who Mathias was or make him their focus.

Ignoring aside a bit the fact that most Dracula vs Belmont conflicts happened way before Lament was developed and therefore they couldn't write about a centuries-old vendetta, I think the Belmonts not recognizing Dracula as "Mathias" could be a hint they don't know his past with Leon. Leon shutting up would be what truly killed Mathias -- or, as they say, you die for real when nobody remembers you anymore. Them remembering Mathias would, on my opinion, cheap their duty because they would be quite literally fighting another guy's personal vengeance instead of fighting to do what they were trained to do and constantly evoke the reason to be: Save humanity. Fighting for this makes them their own person taught to do what is right.

But again, that's what I think. Not actually any proof or something for that.

Does anyone have an idea how that could play out? I suppose you could write it in such a way that Trevor only has his suspicions beforehand because he knows Dracula is a vampire. And then Dracula would most likely reveal his old identiy during his confrontation with Trevor. Most likely he would be prompted to do so because he recognizes the Vampire Killer or something like that. Any other possible scenarios?

Dracula: You know nothing, boy. The only reason you're here is because of me. Not because of what I did now, not because of some people crying for help, but because what I did to your fool of an ancestor. You call me selfish? Isn't condemning your children to live life fighting your battle an act of selfishness?

Trevor: I know exactly what you did. But this is irrelevant. The world doesn't revolve around you.

Dracula: So, you decided to trample on Leon's promise of killing me, then?

Trevor: No. I have come here to fulfill his promise. Not of killing you, but killing the night making people miserable. You just happen to be the last one standing between me and my mission.

*cue epic whippage with the night literally fading afterwards*

[AlexCalvo]

I don´t want to get into a pages long essay war... but I couldn't disagree more.  I find the idea of the Belmonts not knowing who Dracula was akin to Harry Potter defeating Voldemort without knowing he was the one who killed his parents.  Yes LoI came later, but it adds so many layers to the story in entwining the origins of both in a way that makes them create each other.  It adds a layer of drama, and scope to the confrontation with Trevor.

I think the idea of a clan finally fulfilling it's most sacred duty (though not it's ONLY sacred duty, and not fully fulfilling it due to resurrections) adds a weight to the confrontation that absolutely annihilates the alternative "I'm good for goodness sake!  I just want to help everyone, and you're evil!"  And I get that "the Belmont clan will hunt the night."  But I think you are really dismissing "this whip and my kinsman will destroy you someday" far too out of hand.  Believe it or not, familial duty is a powerful thing, especially when it's a duty that has gone on for many generations.

Another level to this is how arbitrary the continual battle against him would become under this circumstance.  Giving the Belmonts' a much more personal stake in fighting Dracula, I.E. the progenitor of their clan literally created him, improves the story immensely.  Elevating it above the generic "super warrior vs. evil lord."  A trope that gets progressively sillier as the resurrections stack up.  This IMO was the greatest strength in LoI, the weight it added to every game in the series, and the storyline as a whole.  Making the Belmonts after Leon not know who Dracula is really cheapens that, to me it really doesn't add anything, just makes the Belmonts into more of your standard generic goodie two shoes heroes.  Make them good guys, who want to save the world from evil, but throwing in a personal stake makes it even better.

There's also a whole other aspect about Dracula clearly not wanting people to know of his past, given that he literally creates a new identity.  The Belmonts knowing who he is makes the confrontation more intimate.  And that is always better.

I would much prefer a Trevor confrontation along these lines...

Dracula: So finally you've come.  What can a mere man hope to accomplish against me?

Trevor: What indeed Dracula... or should I say Matthias.

*Dracula's expression grows cold*: Where did you learn that name?!  That man is gone!  Centuries dead!"

Trevor:  I know who you really are Matthias Cronqvist, and I've come to fulfill the promise of my ancestors.  I, Trevor Belmont have come to destroy you!"

Dracula *enraged*:  Enough talk!  Have at you! (or some other Dracula-ism)

[theplottwist]

Thing is: Trevor already has his personal reason.

Trevor still is his own person with his own goals. He has been banished from the living with other people because he's seen as some freak of nature with vampire powers (yes, the Belmonts have been specifically banished because their powers are confused with vampires'). Earning the right to walk amongst the people again and renewing his actual perceived humanity is reason WAY beyond enough. Dracula is to blame for their banishment -- he's a vampire, he has displayed powers that compound the fear people have of the Belmonts.

He doesn't need another personal reason from a personal vendetta of someone who lived 400-odd years ago. The Belmonts have already spent this time hunting other vampires and beasts of darkness. For me, it's much more believable to think that they have outgrown the vendetta after not finding Mathias for so long, and just accepted that they hold power to banish evil, and that this power should be used responsibly. That NOT using this power to protect humanity incur on not only irresponsibility, but in a case of "I helped nobody, now that I need help nobody is here to help me". On a Batman analogy: Joe Chill (Mathias) is the symbol of evil that spurred Batman (Belmonts) on their hunting of evil. He's not in to catch Joe Chill in specific, but what he represents -- Joe Chill will be caught eventually because he's a criminal, but that's a footnote on the bigger "hunt all evil" page Joe Chill started.

To the Belmonts starting at Trevor, Dracula is a total stranger. Yeah yeah "ancestor vendetta" but the ancestor in question is long gone and 400 years is a LONG-ASS time with no contact with the actual offender (Dracula) to give it too much importance.

Another very, very important detail is: How would they even recognize Dracula as Mathias? Just being a powerful vampire isn't enough, dude. By Dracula they have already seen vampires abound. They don't know what Mathias looked like, they don't know what name he chose for himself, and even if they had a painting of Mathias survive all the way from Leon up until Trevor (damn unlikely), Dracula's face by Trevor's time is far from being recognizable (as we've seen it depicted, at least).

Like, I would be much more convinced if they had actually witnessed Dracula doing Draculy things all through these 400 years, having their mind refreshed on who the guy at a constant pace. But 400 years with no word of the man? For all they cared he could have died already by their own or some other hunter's hands. He changed identities, remember? It's the point of a disguise. Nobody will recognize you given enough time.

Not everything needs to be "ancestor vendetta" levels of personal. Every Belmont has their own personal stake with Dracula. Be it "Dracula kidnapped my girlfriend" or "Dracula mind-controlled my son".

The Belmonts knowing who he is makes the confrontation more intimate.  And that is always better.

Eh. Not sold on that. You can't be believably intimate with a guy from 400 years ago. You may even know there is a vendetta, but in truth you don't KNOW this guy. You haven't quite built your perception of him because all you know are tales from ages past. It's like meeting Hitler and thinking you have an intimate confrontation with him because you read too many WWII books. You don't KNOW the guy -- you just understand the basic concept that he is really evil.

It may be better when revealing Dracula's identity has any importance. What importance does telling the people who Dracula is has at all? What importance does knowing he was some guy on the crusades 400 years ago has? None. It's not like the Church could do anything against him (they are already trying their hardest, and failing miserably were not for the Belmonts). Knowing who Dracula is would go on more or less like this:

Belmont: I HAVE COME TO SLAY THEE, O MATHIAS, BETRAYER OF BARON LEON BELMONT!

Dracula: Oh cool, 'tis been ages since I have last heard this name.

Belmont: I KNOW THY NAME, O INFERNAL DEMON OF LEGEND!

Dracula: Nice. What will you do with it? Try to scavenge some occult knowledge from my long dead heritage which I have obviously destroyed on this centuries-long timespan because I'm a genius tactician and don't plan on having my alchemy used against me? Tell Aunt May?

Belmont: I WILL REVEAL THAT YE HAVE LIVED FOR LONGER THAN THE COMMON MAN!

Dracula: What, wasn't that cat already out of the bag when the whole vampire stuff became obvious?

I'm joking here, of course. But I'm trying to express that I see no advantage of knowing who Dracula is beyond "I know who Dracula is". I don't think an ancient vampire warlock would even bat an eye to someone knowing his name. Like, remember Bison? Same concept here: Betraying Leon, for Dracula, living long as he has and seeing the shit he saw through all this time, was a Tuesday.

Also, another important thing: This "I know who you are, DRACULA!" stuff cheapened Mirror of Fate immensely for me. Dracula has been already waging war on humanity for long, but all Trevor thinks is "U MUH FATHER". This "ancestor vendetta" trope is an easy way to write antagonism between two characters without actually having to develop a reason for the character itself to have a personal vendetta to hate the other party. It CAN be done very right -- I'm not saying it can't -- but the stars must be aligned. One such star is seeing the guy your father hates doing shit, then the son still sees the same guy, then his son, then his son... Keeps the vendetta flame alive.

[aensland]

Technically Mathias isn't Dracula because he was "reborn" as a vampire thanks to the crimson stone, like, he totally changed his body, soul, name and even species legally.

It would be rude af for a Belmont to call him by his slave name

[The Puritan]

It'd be irresponsible for the Belmonts not to know about their whip, their sworn nemesis, and the story behind their very raison d'etre. But I can see Leon not telling his son so as not to taint his (and consequently the entire lineage's) thoughts of Sara with resentment. 

So yeah, I don't think the Belmonts know... but I can see Julius finding out before or during the Demon Castle War. Maybe the knowledge was instrumental in bringing down Dracula one last time and finally fulfilling Leon's vendetta.

[Shiroi Koumori]

I think Leon must have wrote something and the book might be read by some Belmonts but not all. I agree with Puritan that definitely Julius would know.

[zangetsu468]

Do the Belmonts know who Mathias is? The answer is that there's no definitive answer, however, nothing in the canon specifically alludes to this. I personally don't believe the Belmonts knew, given that Mathias fled to faraway lands and it was generations before they ever crossed paths again, it makes me believe less in them knowing one another. (In fact Mathias lives relatively under the radar in a "peaceful" state until the events of CV3 according to Iga's timeline and an interview he did).

I always thought it was that Leon could've tracked Mathias to some extent and then lost his trail.

As for the other question about the Belmonts knowing about Sara's soul, specifically that it was Sara's? Probably not. However, there must've been some knowledge about the VK's memory, since Stella and Loretta knew about it in POR. Julius mentions the "Whip's power fading" after Soma defeats the Creature of Chaos which implies the VK's rage has been quelled due to the absence of a Dark Lord candidate.

[DraculaCronqvist]

I think they do not know, and I'd like to think they don't know. It would be very much in-character for Leon to keep something like this to himself, not wanting to shame his old friend, but rather just upholding the duty of warding off the ultimate evil. Even after everything Mathias did, Leon did not seem to truly hate him and I think he would not mingle personal feelings into his family's duty like such. As for canon status, nothing ever hints at the Belmondos knowing of Dracula's true self.

[AlexCalvo]

I think they do not know, and I'd like to think they don't know. It would be very much in-character for Leon to keep something like this to himself, not wanting to shame his old friend, but rather just upholding the duty of warding off the ultimate evil. Even after everything Mathias did, Leon did not seem to truly hate him and I think he would not mingle personal feelings into his family's duty like such. As for canon status, nothing ever hints at the Belmondos knowing of Dracula's true self.

"You are a cursed being, and I will never forgive you.  This whip, and my kinsman will destroy you some day."  I know the hunt the night part is the dramatic climax, but can we stop ignoring the first part.  Leon hates Matthias, like you can only hate someone you cared about deeply, who betrayed you profoundly.

[zangetsu468]

"You are a cursed being, and I will never forgive you.  This whip, and my kinsman will destroy you some day."  I know the hunt the night part is the dramatic climax, but can we stop ignoring the first part.  Leon hates Matthias, like you can only hate someone you cared about deeply, who betrayed you profoundly.

Is this being taken in context though, I wonder. Of course Mathias is responsible for Sara's demise. However, Mathias rejected God, he made the offer to Leon to do the same and he chose God. Then he talks about someday destroying Mathias.

What I'm saying is that in context, Leon's reason for saying he'll never forgive Mathias is alluding to the fact that predominantly, he's turned his back on God. I say this for two reasons:
1- Sara made it very clear she didn't want anyone to suffer the same fate as her, hence her sacrifice. Leon is very much aware of Sara's wishes.
2- Leon would not base several legacies' worth of Belmonts "hunting the night" purely and solely to avenge his wife, because that was his own bone-to-pick with Mathias. He swore to hunt the night meaning destroying beings such as Walter and Mathias are; "cursed".

If for arguments sake Sara's death (and not simply the VK having a memory) was that important to the timeline, if the Belmonts knowing Dracula was Mathias post-LOI, then they would have alluded to this in later games or added some detail about it in the 400 year time lapse of Iga's timeline where it stated Mathias was living a peaceful/ undetected life. After all COD made reference to the Battle of 1999, and the two games weren't set in the same era.

I'm sure Leon would be as furious as the next man given what happened to his spouse, however, his last speech seems of a more holistic nature than simply for a "revenge" kill. If anything I can see him destroying many cursed beings because of Sara's wishes, he was probably hoping he'd cross paths with Mathias again one day.

See the difference between Mathias and Leon is that Leon is man of faith and a man of God. Even after what happened to Sara, Leon's faith never waivered and his resolve became stronger. So I can't for one believe that he was hell bent purely on his revenge as the only reason for wanting to hunt the night and destroy Mathias. Mathias on the other hand lost his faith and did what was necessary to reject and curse God for what he believed would be eternity.

[Nagumo]

"This whip, and my kinsman will destroy you some day."

I should mention that in the Japanese version this line is written like this: "Me and my kinsman will hunt you down with this whip." This seems to imply Leon intented to pass down his vendetta to his descendants if he himself didn't succeed in fulfulling it.

Another very, very important detail is: How would they even recognize Dracula as Mathias? Just being a powerful vampire isn't enough, dude. By Dracula they have already seen vampires abound. They don't know what Mathias looked like, they don't know what name he chose for himself, and even if they had a painting of Mathias survive all the way from Leon up until Trevor (damn unlikely), Dracula's face by Trevor's time is far from being recognizable (as we've seen it depicted, at least).

What about the Crimson Stone? If Dracula still wore it during Trevor's time, it would a good way to identify him. Of course, it's not a 100% reliable deduction, but it would be a good enough reason for a Belmont to suspect he is dealing with his ancestor's sworn enemy.   

 

[AlexCalvo]

Here's an awesome kind of fusion of ideas.  What if Trevor doesn't know he's Matthias until he confronts him,  maybe the whip helps him see, maybe it's the crimson stone, but whatever... what a wonderful moment that would be.  When Trevor realizes that the battle as basically destiny,  and that he is inadvertently fulfilling the family quest.