• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Touching Bronze Statues For Luck

bloody hell! no! that's ginormous!!!!!!!!!

:D isn't it lovely?
 
naitaka said:
Not just statues of religious figures or others that might be thought to confer a blessing...

Usually, a specific part of the statue has to be touched.

A few years ago I went on a stag do in Budapest. We were enjoying an adult beverage outside a cafe at the top of the hill when I saw a group of giggling female tourists having a statue pointed out to them by a tour guide:

We were bit confused as to why this particular piece of statuary was, ahem!, "arousing" so much interest, and wandered over to examine it more closely:

Subsequent research established that the less well-endowed in leg- and trouser department part of the statue represents Andras Hadik, a noted hussar.

A legend has arisen that caressing the horse's taters brings luck. Before anyone asks, no I didn't.

maximus otter
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I got told off for touching the Roman marble carving of a horse when it was in Leeds Art Gallery. I didn't care what the security guard said because by the time he told me off, too late - I'd got to touch it, so tough luck. They've since moved it to the Museum (maybe it was only on loan to the Art Gallery) and that is full of rioting, annoying kids screaming an running amok. I doubt they'd care if someone sat on it, and mashed pizza into its face, now.
 
Glad I am not the only one who has been told off Ghost. When my daughter and I went to the Adelaide art gallery there was a marquetry sewing box on display, not roped off or anything.
I was pointing out the pattern to my daughter as I was sure it was the same as a box I have at home .
A young security guard came out of somewhere at the speed of light and told me off and suggested I sit on a bench about 5 metres away to look at it.
I've found museums are much more relaxed and encourage some things be touched and valuables they either rope off or put behind glass.
 
Glad I am not the only one who has been told off Ghost. When my daughter and I went to the Adelaide art gallery there was a marquetry sewing box on display, not roped off or anything.
I was pointing out the pattern to my daughter as I was sure it was the same as a box I have at home .
A young security guard came out of somewhere at the speed of light and told me off and suggested I sit on a bench about 5 metres away to look at it.
I've found museums are much more relaxed and encourage some things be touched and valuables they either rope off or put behind glass.

I do a fair bit of research behind the scenes in museums (textiles, usually) and libraries an archives (usually 18thC original documents) and I never lose my absolute sense of wonder that I get to touch and play with 'actual stuff', all the time. And have now handled and documented a number of items I had previously known from photos in books. Even sometimes, get asked to give an informal opinion on what a thing was or how it was made. But I never lose that "Wow, they're letting me touch this!" feeling. And that's often really special things - I had Charlotte Bronte's actual letters in my hand, last year, for example. And countless delicate textiles in the reserve collections of various museums. Things that you have nightmares might fall apart as you handle them! So I didn't get the preciousness about a piece of marble.

Maybe it is an Art Gallery thing? The museums used to let us lend boxes of things for the kids to handle, when I was a teacher, no problem. They seem more geared to education than Art Galleries, maybe? I have a friend works in museums who accidentally damaged some artefact when handling it and he was mortified, but got a "Shit happens" response from his more experienced colleagues...

Totally with you on the marquetry. Those things were meant to be touched. I met a living history person, doing a weekend in costume at a local 18thC house, recently and she had brought with her a late 18thC sewing box she had picked up in a charity shop! She had slowly, over several years, filled it with contemporary stuff you'd find in a late 18thC lady's sewing box and part of her spiel was, she showed you the contents. Some repro, some original. One of the best pieces of living history I've ever seen!
 
I do a fair bit of research behind the scenes in museums (textiles, usually) and libraries an archives (usually 18thC original documents) and I never lose my absolute sense of wonder that I get to touch and play with 'actual stuff', all the time. And have now handled and documented a number of items I had previously known from photos in books. Even sometimes, get asked to give an informal opinion on what a thing was or how it was made. But I never lose that "Wow, they're letting me touch this!" feeling. And that's often really special things - I had Charlotte Bronte's actual letters in my hand, last year, for example. And countless delicate textiles in the reserve collections of various museums. Things that you have nightmares might fall apart as you handle them! So I didn't get the preciousness about a piece of marble.

Maybe it is an Art Gallery thing? The museums used to let us lend boxes of things for the kids to handle, when I was a teacher, no problem. They seem more geared to education than Art Galleries, maybe? I have a friend works in museums who accidentally damaged some artefact when handling it and he was mortified, but got a "Shit happens" response from his more experienced colleagues...

Totally with you on the marquetry. Those things were meant to be touched. I met a living history person, doing a weekend in costume at a local 18thC house, recently and she had brought with her a late 18thC sewing box she had picked up in a charity shop! She had slowly, over several years, filled it with contemporary stuff you'd find in a late 18thC lady's sewing box and part of her spiel was, she showed you the contents. Some repro, some original. One of the best pieces of living history I've ever seen!

*nods* Also, I believe there's a new approach to wearing gloves when handling artefacts, or books at least. In a mediaeval library in Oxford* a year or so ago I was able to handle some really old books without gloves. One was Robert Hooke's Micrographia from the 17th century. Never thought I'd see that, and certainly didn't expect to turn the pages with my bare hands.


* The librarian is a friend of my son and she opened it especially for us!
 
My mother-in-law strokes the snout of Il Porcellino in Florence to ensure that she returns to that beautiful city:

Mother-in-law_pixellated_cropped_Florence.jpg

Mother-in-law_pixellated_cropped_Florence.jpg


maximus otter
 
Last edited:
*nods* Also, I believe there's a new approach to wearing gloves when handling artefacts, or books at least. In a mediaeval library in Oxford* a year or so ago I was able to handle some really old books without gloves. One was Robert Hooke's Micrographia from the 17th century. Never thought I'd see that, and certainly didn't expect to turn the pages with my bare hands.


* The librarian is a friend of my son and she opened it especially for us!

Yes, the gloves (and those weighted bookmark thingies) are always filthy. My hands would be cleaner and less greasy. I've noticed a few places not using them any more, that used to. I think if they'd be one use only they'd be fine, but of course, museums and libraries can't afford that!
 
Yes, the gloves (and those weighted bookmark thingies) are always filthy. My hands would be cleaner and less greasy. I've noticed a few places not using them any more, that used to. I think if they'd be one use only they'd be fine, but of course, museums and libraries can't afford that!

The idea, according to my son, is that people's hands are less sensitive with the gloves on so they're more likely to tear a delicate page while turning it.
I've noticed fewer people wearing gloves when handling precious-looking things in documentaries, makes me want to shout at the TV!
 
The idea, according to my son, is that people's hands are less sensitive with the gloves on so they're more likely to tear a delicate page while turning it.
That's a good point. I've also seen people turning large pages with a long, flat implement not unlike a palette knife.
 
That's a good point. I've also seen people turning large pages with a long, flat implement not unlike a palette knife.

Those items are typically referred to as 'page turners'. However, as this article claims:

https://www.collectorsweekly.com/articles/the-mystery-of-the-phantom-page-turner/

... the implements used for careful page turning were probably not dedicated page-turning implements, but rather the paper-knives that were once common accessories for the serious bibliophile.
 
Thanks for posting that!

It is not uncommon to find old books with uncut pages; I have certainly made the mistake of using too sharp a blade!

Sometimes it is just the bound-in catalogues which are uncut but, in some cases, you find that a reader has given up a novel halfway or decided that that Collected Poetical Works were more delightful for their binding and tooling than the spasmodic vapourings sealed inside! :reader:
 
Thanks for posting that!

It is not uncommon to find old books with uncut pages; I have certainly made the mistake of using too sharp a blade!

Sometimes it is just the bound-in catalogues which are uncut but, in some cases, you find that a reader has given up a novel halfway or decided that that Collected Poetical Works were more delightful for their binding and tooling than the spasmodic vapourings sealed inside! :reader:

Just re-reading 'Jonathan Strange and Mr Norrell' and got to the bit where Mr Norrell is getting wound up by Jonathan touching his books, which he had re-bound in matching leather with identical gold tooled titles on the spines... I bet bookbinding was quite lucrative in Georgian times...
 
It appears visitors are in the habit of rubbing the tips of his statue's shoes as well, but there's no mention of any superstition / association with the shoes.
Maybe the visitors' shoes will thereafter need less shining? I was intrigued to learn of the cat-couple statue in Krasnodar - I have cat-loving relatives who live there, but this is the first I heard of it.

And surely the well-rubbed portions of the allegedly anatomically-true-to-life statue of Peter the Great in the Peter and Paul Fortress in St Petersburg deserve mention here.

HowAboutALittleHead.jpg
 
... I see the family had it moved to the ROM (Royal Ontario Museum) so I imagine that no one can touch it now. ...

Yes they can ... and do ... See the last paragraph:

Museum-goers in Toronto and hockey fans in Winnipeg continue to rub Timothy's toe for luck. While ROM generally discourages visitors from physically touching its artifacts, an exception is made for the statue, as the accompanying plaque invites museum-goers to partake in the tradition.
 
This is Australia's legendary monument 'The Dog on the Tuckerbox' that sits just outside of the New South Wales town of Gundagai.

tuckerbox.jpeg


Not only have I touched it, but I can also confess to having vomited all over it. I was 5 or 6 at the time. Nonetheless, not everyone can lay claim to having vomited on a national icon, so I re-tell this story with great pride.
 
Just to note a filmic reference to the practice. It occurs in the last of the Merchant Ivory films, The White Countess, where a Chinese man touches the head* of a Buddha, before entering a building. It seems to be presented as a piece of typically Chinese superstition - the film is set in 1930s Shanghai - but this thread shows the worldwide distribution of the habit! :cooll:

*Perhaps belly - see below. It was Merchant-Ivory and very slow, so I had the occasional doze.
 
Last edited:
Just re-reading 'Jonathan Strange and Mr Norrell' and got to the bit where Mr Norrell is getting wound up by Jonathan touching his books, which he had re-bound in matching leather with identical gold tooled titles on the spines... I bet bookbinding was quite lucrative in Georgian times...

“Wednesday 18 January 1664/65

Up and by and by to my bookseller’s, and there did give thorough direction for the new binding of a great many of my old books, to make my whole study of the same binding...”
“Friday 3 February 1664/65

So back again on foot to the ‘Change, in my way taking my books from binding from my bookseller’s. My bill for the rebinding of some old books to make them suit with my study, cost me, besides other new books in the same bill, 3l.; but it will be very handsome.”
https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/1665/02/03/

maximus otter
 
This is Australia's legendary monument 'The Dog on the Tuckerbox' that sits just outside of the New South Wales town of Gundagai.

View attachment 20250

Not only have I touched it, but I can also confess to having vomited all over it. I was 5 or 6 at the time. Nonetheless, not everyone can lay claim to having vomited on a national icon, so I re-tell this story with great pride.

*bows*
 
What part of him gets rubbed? I was about to search for Bum the Dog but thought I had better not. There is also Hume's toe.
FA4E84BD-DA8C-46BB-B71B-049047BDA884.jpeg
Never noticed before but the artist appears to be crap at doing the legs of dogs. BTW “Bum the dog statue Edinburgh” appears to be a safe bet search wise.
And rubbing Hume’s toe is supposed to be lucky. Yeah coz that’s what his work was all about, irrational luck superstitions!
 
Back
Top