Victorian sword stick esoterica

[urbanspaceman]

I know this is not about sword-sticks, but duels and Byron have been mentioned so I thought I would tack this in. Being a smallsword duel I included this story in my book. I found it intriguing, especially the bit about Byron's sentence and the Statute of Edward VI. If anyone knows what that is, I would be obliged if they would explain it for me.

A very interesting small-sword duel took place on January 26, I765, between Lord Byron and his neighbour and distant cousin Mr. Chaworth. These gentlemen were dining with others at the Star and Garter Tavern in Pall Mall about seven in the evening when the conversation turned upon the subject of game on their estates (precise story varies). This resulted in a drunken altercation, after which Lord Byron left the room, and meeting Mr. Chaworth in the passage stated that he wished to speak with him.
He then called a waiter and asked if there were any room disengaged. The waiter showed them to an unoccupied room and left them with a candle, which was all the light in the apartment except a dull fire. As Mr. Chaworth turned round after shutting the door, he perceived Lord Byron with his sword half drawn, who instantly exclaimed "Draw." Mr. Chaworth immediately complied, and at the first thrust his sword passed through Lord Byron's waistcoat, and he thought he had wounded him, when Lord Byron, shortening his sword, gave him a fatal wound. A struggle then took place between the parties, for they were found grasped in each other's arms by the landlord and waiter, who, hearing the noise, hurriedly entered the room.
A surgeon was immediately sent for, who pronounced the Chaworth wound mortal, the sword having entered on the left side of the stomach, and, passing obliquely upwards, had made its exit five or six inches higher on the left side of the back.
It appears that when Mr. Chaworth's sword passed through the waistcoat of his antagonist, he expressed his apprehension that he had seriously wounded him. Now under such an apprehension it is probable that he was thrown off his guard and Lord Byron quickly shortened his sword and ran him through.
Writhing under the agonies of his wound, Mr. Chaworth several times declared that, although he well knew that he was in immediate danger of death, he had rather be in his present situation than live under the misfortune of having killed another person. He also observed that when, after closing the door, he turned round, he perceived that Lord Byron's sword was half-drawn and knowing his man, he drew his own as quickly as he could, and had the first pass at him.
After three months incarceration the House of Lords found William, Lord Byron, "not guilty of the felony of murder, but of manslaughter," and his lordship, being a Peer and claiming the Benefit of Clergy and the statute of Edward VI., was discharged after paying his fees.
The two swords involved were preserved: at Annesley, and Newstead.
nb. About 300 aristocrats a year died of duels in France in the 1600s.

[A. G. Maisey]

Jim, it saddens me to see that you have altered the name of Henry Charles William Malevolti/Angelo from your initial use of "Harry" to "Henry". Harry was baptised with his Italian father's family name, "Malevolti", but his father later adopted the name "Angelo" as his family name, and young Harry followed suit.

In fact, taking into account the time & place where Harry Angelo lived, your use of "Harry" was quite correct and it reflects correct historical use of the English Language. Harry Angelo was born in the mid-18th century.

Now fast forward to our beloved & well known Prince Henry Charles Albert David of Wales. When Prince Harry was born to Charles & Diana, he was baptised as I have noted, however Charles & Diana adopted the very ancient English royal practice of using the name "Harry" rather than the baptismal name of "Henry".

The use of "Harry", rather than "Henry" reflects the pronunciation of "Henry" in Middle English, it has been English Royal practice to use "Harry" for princes & monarchs for a very long time. Other English nobles followed the royal lead.

Harry Angelo attended Eton, & later, as a master of fence, his clients were mostly English upper & ruling class, any "Henry" that Harry Angelo came in contact with would have been addressed as "Harry". The use of "Harry" in the written form simply reflected the pronunciation of "Henry", & followed the royal lead in this respect.

In Shakespeare's England the use of "Harry" rather than "Henry" in the written form was usual. In fact, at that time, "Harry" was very often abbreviated to "Hal".

The Oxford English dictionary advises that "Harry" is the familiar form of "Henry". English coinage issued under Henry VIII was referred to as a Harry groat, or a Harry sovereign or a Harry (some other coin).

If you had been face to face with Harry Angelo & you addressed him as Henry, I rather feel that he might not have recognised that you were indeed addressing him.

I think I will continue to think of this fencing master as Harry, Henry seems a little bit unrealistic.

[Jim McDougall]

Interesting case, and it would take quite a bit of complicated research trying to wade through the complexities of English law in those times.
As near as I can guess, Lord Byrons status was key in the matter, and it seems as if his light sentence was the result of tenuous legal machinations.

I dont believe there was a specific 'statute' under Edward VI, whose short reign ended with his death at 15 in 1553, and the Lady Jane Grey issue.
The 'benefit of clergy' element had to do possibly with Lord Byrons peerage and matters of what is known as 'legal fiction' which I would best describe as 'abstract' legal protocol.

I think the outcome of Lord Byrons sentence is more aligned with the 'judicial duel', trial by combat, in England known as 'wager of battle', in which the winner in effect is shown as 'right'. Somehow these convolutions elementally absolved him of criminal wrongdoing.

Thats about the best I can come up with, and actually it is salient despite not involving a sword cane, but the outcome is essentially the same. Not sure when this combat took place, but the wager of battle law/statute ended in 1819.

[Jim McDougall]

Alan, thank you so much for this elucidation regarding the familiar use of the name Harry for the formal name Henry in these times (mid 18thc) which is fascinating.
While I'd love to take credit accordingly, my error was entirely inadvertent, as I knew full well all the fencing references I have consulted over decades,(Egerton, 1885; Aylward, 1945) even to my own days training always referred to Henry Angelo.

These kinds of familiar and linguistic usages are truly fascinating to me, and often can be key in philological studies. Entries like yours are what I always hope for, and to learn. Thank you again,

All the best
Jim

[A. G. Maisey]

Jim, what a lot of us --- me included --- tend to forget is that it is only in very recent times that English spelling has more or less been formalised. My own family name --- going back through the years --- has a lot of variations, the variation I use is from Cornwall, but originally the name was French, with a rather different spelling.

The English royal connection with Harry/Henry is well documented, but I was recently helping a friend carry out some research on his ancestors, & what I found was that as recently as only 100 years ago in Australia members of the same family had around 10 different ways in which to spell their own name, they were all rural dwellers, and by the look of it, most of them could not spell nor write nor read.

I learnt about the Harry thing when I was in high school & we were required to memorise extended passages of Shakespeare. I doubt that The Bard is even studied in school these days.

[Jim McDougall]

Thanks Alan! It truly is interesting about spellings and even words, which have sometimes changed entirely in meanings (now recorded in 'archaic' dictionaries). As you note, the spellings of names are incredibly varied over the years, and of course relied on the literary skills of those recording them.

As an American aside toward the familiar names from formal, here a common version of Henry is Hank (probably from Dutch dimin. henk), but here in Texas we think of the late Hank Williams for example, and in country music, Henry Williams just wouldnt have had the same twang

You're right about schools these days, too many students probably never heard of Shakespeare. Very sad.

[urbanspaceman]

A friend of nearly 70 years, a professor of English grammar, tells me again and again, when my ignorance of the subject disrupts my literary endeavors, that it all boils down to effective communication, and that many of the rules we learned in school are products of personal pronouncements that remain open to debate.
When you read what is written, do you understand what the writer intended?
Actually, correct punctuation is far more important in accurate conveyance of intention. The lack of a comma can completely change the meaning of the sentence - as countless school-time exercises have shown.
Jim, everybody understood perfectly well to whom you referred, it didn't need to be corrected; and, in fact, the correction was potentially inaccurate, as Alan so eruditely pointed out. Well done Alan, I was hoping someone would set the record straight.
ps
The USA and the UK are countries separated by a common language.

[A. G. Maisey]

I was once told that if I wrote something that an educated 8 year old could not understand that I'd better go back & try again.

Been trying again ever since.

Occasionally successfully.

[Jim McDougall]

LOL! Good notes Keith.....The UK and the US separated by a common language! I recall going to London years ago, thinking this is a piece of cake, its the same language ......well, half the time I needed an interpreter!
Well noted though...it is indeed about communicating, but this exercise has taught me a great deal, and that is most important to me...learning.

Back to the sword canes:
I wanted to locate cases in written works where these were noted, and perhaps content supporting how and when likely actually used, hoping for historical context.

In the archaeological strata of my 'note mountains', I found an entry from 1997, an apparent auction offering described as the sword cane of Dr. Syntax.
Completely bewildered, I looked it up:
This was one of the first 'comic' adventures written by William Combe (1742-1843) in "The Three Tours of Doctor Syntax".
I have yet to find exactly which installment held reference to a sword cane, and even more puzzling, the offering of such a weapon from a fictional character. I wish I had more of the detail!

Thus far, still looking for more literary references, but it has become interesting to see how the sword cane, apparently not a focused detail of particular notice in these early works, has become a notably used prop in modern venues.

In the Antonio Banderas version of "The Mask of Zorro" his character, Alejandro Murrietta, uses a sword cane as a trope heightening his disguise as a gentleman dandy.
In the 1968 version of "Doctor Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" starring Jack Palance, as he transforms into the evil Mr. Hyde, the sword cane again presents as a prop emphasizing his threatening character.

In "Batman", the evil character 'the Penguin' carrys a sword cane.

But in the 60's in the TV series, "The Avengers" the hero, John Steed, carries a sword cane formidably as the gentleman, FIGHTING evil and injustice.

In studying the history of such a mysteriously dynamic weapon such as the sword cane/stick, it is difficult to avoid recognizing the kinds of representations occurring in fictional sources. It is the seeds of actuality in these that give perspective to better understanding the true character of the weapon as perceived, despite the hyperbole and lore.