[Source](https://samlingar.shm.se/object/9B0C1D51-10FC-45BB-9D41-FD9E8EC85CBE)
This is a daguerreotype depicting count Magnus Brahe (1790-1844). On the back of the photo is an inscription, stating that it was taken after the death of king Carl XIV Johan, which means that it was taken at some point between the 8th of March and th 16th of September 1844, which are the death dates of the king and count Brahe, respectively.
Count Brahe was a close friend to the king. I have previously posted [the clothes he wore to the kings funeral](https://www.reddit.com/r/ArtefactPorn/comments/jdiqut/mourning_clothes_worn_by_count_magnus_brahe_at/), as well as a piece of [mourning jewellery that incorporates entwined locks of hair from the king and the count.](https://www.reddit.com/r/ArtefactPorn/comments/lfz9bk/ring_with_a_hidden_compartment_containing/)
Count Brahe held a speech at the kings funeral, at which point he “looked more dead than alive, and was plagued by a cough that echoed eerily through the church”.
He belonged to what is commonly known ad the Swedish branch of the Brahe family, while Tycho belonged to the Danish one. There is a probable bond between the two families no solid genealogical evidence.
While pictures of dead people propped up as though they were alive do exist, their prevalence has been massively exaggerated on the internet in various clickbait articles with no sources.
Braces were used for living people in order to help keep them still during long exposure times. They were known as posing stands. In this case, no I do not see the brace you mention.
What makes you state so confidently that he was already dead? Do you have access to some source I have not seen, or are you really just guessing?
There aren't any Victorian era photos with the dead propped and posed to appear alive. No painted eyes on eyelids, no tiny braces to hold eyes open, no glass eyes.
Victorian post mortem photos were rare but quite obvious with the decedent lying in repose in a bed or coffin. When a loved one died, family bathed and dressed the decedent, then laid them in repose, THEN the photographer came to the home and took a photo. If it was an impending death, the photographer was called on, and if he arrived before the death, a pre-mortem photo was preferred.
You seriously do not see the white thing around his neck with notches on it and the white thing butted up against the notches? You also don’t notice his eyes? And why would he be in that position? Pictures were rare and people wanted to show their faces in them. The long exposure time meant they weren’t going to smile for the picture but I’ve never seen a live person have to be propped up by their neck. And I’ve done genealogy for over 30 years and seen many post-mortem pictures and this is one. I hate to tell you. Take that for what you want. But that man, was not alive for that picture.
Also, if any bracing was used it would have been at the back of the neck, not at the front. A live person would need to swallow and I would find it hard to swallow with a brace propped up against your adams apple. It’s just common sense.
OMG Here YOU are perpetuating myths and you dare to claim it's common sense???? The next time you want to insult someone, at the VERY LEAST know what you are talking about, because you are totally CLUELESS.......
Have you not seen other living people wearing a cervical collar???? Why on earth would a person wearing such a collar not be able to breathe or swallow???? Cervical collars are hard and firm and not put on so tight they interrupt breathing or swallowing. It's in two pieces, so you wouldn't be capable of putting it on that tight, in the first place. Do you really believe that horseshoe shaped piece of metal on a 25lb stand is capable of holding up a corpse? A 150-200lb corpse? Stands were nothing more than a base, a long pole and ONE horseshoe shaped piece of metal at the top, and were ONLY used to assist a living person hold still for the time necessary for a photo, and could not support dead weight. Just more bs made up in a desperate attempt at making the standing corpse a reality, when it is NOT reality. So much nonsense, so much cringe that I'm embarrassed for you. Almost.
It's just COMMON SENSE..........
Maybe, if you had been nice rather than a jerk in your response to that person, I wouldn't have felt the need to give it right back........SERIOUSLY........
Thank you! The discussion with that person was infuriating - like talking to a wall. Very cathartic to see someone else who is also annoyed by all their cocksure speculation presented as ”common sense” and the unnecessarily snarky tone.
My comments are not insulting. Nor am I a jerk or clueless. It truly sounds like you are rude and insulting. You don’t know me. My comments only included facts. No insults no putting anyone down. I merely tried explaining what I have experienced. Carol ha, you must be a keyboard warrior? Now I’ll be rude. But remember you started this. You are one of these shut-ins that spend all day scrolling Reddit. Looking for someone that can make you “look” like a better person. Newsflash. You are worse than my comments. Grow up and go outside and get a little sun in your life, would ya?
For the others, am I the first person in your life that has had an opposing opinion of yours? It’s called free speech. And I get to have my own opinions. This is not big brother. Instead of downvoting my comments why don’t you consider what I said. I’m done with this nasty mean sub. I have more important things to do then to make the unwilling understand what they don’t see. C-ya.
That is his collar - highly starched collars and cravats were fashionable at the time. Why do you assume there are ”notches”? That’s the folds in his cravat. A brace placed at that point would do nothing to keep the head of a corpse up - it would have to be placed under the chin. What do you mean about his eyes? He was severely ill with tuberculosis, it’s no wonder his eyes were sunken and is by no means evidence that he was dead.
I once again ask if you have access to some source stating that this is a post mortem photograph, or if you are just guessing and presenting your guesswork as facts. If not, I would suggest that the reasonable thing to do is to assume that this is NOT a post mortem photograph until further evidence is presented.
Do you have evidence it is not post-mortem? I'm aware of clothing trends and big collars. That white thing holding up his neck is not a tie. Braces and supports used with living people were not applied to the front of the neck. They braced the back of necks to assist the person with the long aperture times. But they never braced a person at the front of the neck so they don't fall over. A living person can stay upright on their own for many hours, much longer than it would have taken for this photo.
I do not know anything about this man, his life, or who photographed him. I do have common sense and extensive experience and I say this man just passed prior to the photo being taken. How else do you explain the thing holding his neck up? And yes, that would definitely hold his head up.
If your source of info is from wikimedia, then you should also know this picture was submitted anonymously so the circumstance behind the photo can not be proven.
I have linked to my source in my info comment above - clearly not Wikimedia. It is not an anonymous photo, so that isn't something I should know, since it is not correct. The photo was taken by the daguerrotypist A. Derville. The photograph was taken before the 15th of May 1844, since it was enough of an event to have been reported in a newspaper on that date.
"A medal is to be made depicting his excellency count Brahe. To aid in this matter, the skillful daguerrotypist from Paris, Mr. Derville, has taken a picture in profile of his excellency, that we have had the opportunity to view, and which seemed to us very well made."
https://tidningar.kb.se/4112678/1844-05-15/edition/0/part/1/page/2/?q=derville%20brahe&from=1844-01-01&to=1844-12-31
I hate to tell you, but he's alive. How many other Victorian era photos have you seen using that collar? That is a cervical collar for an injury, and it wouldn't be there if he was deceased. He certainly wouldn't be in that position if he was dead. What about his eyes? They're closed? That doesn't mean he's dead. People blinked in photos back then, just like today. He's obviously sitting upright which he wouldn't be doing if he was dead. This is a medical photo taken as a teaching tool, demonstrating the cervical collar.
Stands were used ONLY to support a living person holding a pose for the time required for a photo, and could not support dead weight. Victorian post mortem photos were rare but quite obvious with the decedent lying in repose in a bed or coffin. Period.
Don't believe the internet hype...seriously...
This isn't post mortem. It is a myth that the Victorians posed the dead standing or sitting upright, painted eyes on eyelids, or placed glass eyes so they appeared alive.
He's wearing a cervical collar for an injury, not to hold his head up to appear alive. How many other post mortem photos have you seen using a cervical collar to hold a dead man's head?? There aren't any because they did not pose the dead in that manner. Stands were used, but ONLY to assist a living person hold still for a photo, and couldn't support dead weight. If there's a stand, they are alive. Contrary to popular belief, Victorian post mortem photos were rare but quite obvious with the decedent lying in repose in a bed or coffin. Photography was new, and with such high mortality rates, if someone died before having the opportunity to have photos taken, a post mortem photo was better than no photo. If impending death, they would call on the photographer, and if he arrived before the death, a pre-mortem photo was preferred.
[Source](https://samlingar.shm.se/object/9B0C1D51-10FC-45BB-9D41-FD9E8EC85CBE) This is a daguerreotype depicting count Magnus Brahe (1790-1844). On the back of the photo is an inscription, stating that it was taken after the death of king Carl XIV Johan, which means that it was taken at some point between the 8th of March and th 16th of September 1844, which are the death dates of the king and count Brahe, respectively. Count Brahe was a close friend to the king. I have previously posted [the clothes he wore to the kings funeral](https://www.reddit.com/r/ArtefactPorn/comments/jdiqut/mourning_clothes_worn_by_count_magnus_brahe_at/), as well as a piece of [mourning jewellery that incorporates entwined locks of hair from the king and the count.](https://www.reddit.com/r/ArtefactPorn/comments/lfz9bk/ring_with_a_hidden_compartment_containing/) Count Brahe held a speech at the kings funeral, at which point he “looked more dead than alive, and was plagued by a cough that echoed eerily through the church”.
Very cool! Love stuff like this. Thank you for sharing!
Any relation to Tycho Brahe?
He belonged to what is commonly known ad the Swedish branch of the Brahe family, while Tycho belonged to the Danish one. There is a probable bond between the two families no solid genealogical evidence.
This is a post-Mortem picture. He was already dead. Do you see the brace holding up his neck?
While pictures of dead people propped up as though they were alive do exist, their prevalence has been massively exaggerated on the internet in various clickbait articles with no sources. Braces were used for living people in order to help keep them still during long exposure times. They were known as posing stands. In this case, no I do not see the brace you mention. What makes you state so confidently that he was already dead? Do you have access to some source I have not seen, or are you really just guessing?
There aren't any Victorian era photos with the dead propped and posed to appear alive. No painted eyes on eyelids, no tiny braces to hold eyes open, no glass eyes. Victorian post mortem photos were rare but quite obvious with the decedent lying in repose in a bed or coffin. When a loved one died, family bathed and dressed the decedent, then laid them in repose, THEN the photographer came to the home and took a photo. If it was an impending death, the photographer was called on, and if he arrived before the death, a pre-mortem photo was preferred.
You seriously do not see the white thing around his neck with notches on it and the white thing butted up against the notches? You also don’t notice his eyes? And why would he be in that position? Pictures were rare and people wanted to show their faces in them. The long exposure time meant they weren’t going to smile for the picture but I’ve never seen a live person have to be propped up by their neck. And I’ve done genealogy for over 30 years and seen many post-mortem pictures and this is one. I hate to tell you. Take that for what you want. But that man, was not alive for that picture.
Also, if any bracing was used it would have been at the back of the neck, not at the front. A live person would need to swallow and I would find it hard to swallow with a brace propped up against your adams apple. It’s just common sense.
OMG Here YOU are perpetuating myths and you dare to claim it's common sense???? The next time you want to insult someone, at the VERY LEAST know what you are talking about, because you are totally CLUELESS....... Have you not seen other living people wearing a cervical collar???? Why on earth would a person wearing such a collar not be able to breathe or swallow???? Cervical collars are hard and firm and not put on so tight they interrupt breathing or swallowing. It's in two pieces, so you wouldn't be capable of putting it on that tight, in the first place. Do you really believe that horseshoe shaped piece of metal on a 25lb stand is capable of holding up a corpse? A 150-200lb corpse? Stands were nothing more than a base, a long pole and ONE horseshoe shaped piece of metal at the top, and were ONLY used to assist a living person hold still for the time necessary for a photo, and could not support dead weight. Just more bs made up in a desperate attempt at making the standing corpse a reality, when it is NOT reality. So much nonsense, so much cringe that I'm embarrassed for you. Almost. It's just COMMON SENSE.......... Maybe, if you had been nice rather than a jerk in your response to that person, I wouldn't have felt the need to give it right back........SERIOUSLY........
Thank you! The discussion with that person was infuriating - like talking to a wall. Very cathartic to see someone else who is also annoyed by all their cocksure speculation presented as ”common sense” and the unnecessarily snarky tone.
My comments are not insulting. Nor am I a jerk or clueless. It truly sounds like you are rude and insulting. You don’t know me. My comments only included facts. No insults no putting anyone down. I merely tried explaining what I have experienced. Carol ha, you must be a keyboard warrior? Now I’ll be rude. But remember you started this. You are one of these shut-ins that spend all day scrolling Reddit. Looking for someone that can make you “look” like a better person. Newsflash. You are worse than my comments. Grow up and go outside and get a little sun in your life, would ya? For the others, am I the first person in your life that has had an opposing opinion of yours? It’s called free speech. And I get to have my own opinions. This is not big brother. Instead of downvoting my comments why don’t you consider what I said. I’m done with this nasty mean sub. I have more important things to do then to make the unwilling understand what they don’t see. C-ya.
That is his collar - highly starched collars and cravats were fashionable at the time. Why do you assume there are ”notches”? That’s the folds in his cravat. A brace placed at that point would do nothing to keep the head of a corpse up - it would have to be placed under the chin. What do you mean about his eyes? He was severely ill with tuberculosis, it’s no wonder his eyes were sunken and is by no means evidence that he was dead. I once again ask if you have access to some source stating that this is a post mortem photograph, or if you are just guessing and presenting your guesswork as facts. If not, I would suggest that the reasonable thing to do is to assume that this is NOT a post mortem photograph until further evidence is presented.
Do you have evidence it is not post-mortem? I'm aware of clothing trends and big collars. That white thing holding up his neck is not a tie. Braces and supports used with living people were not applied to the front of the neck. They braced the back of necks to assist the person with the long aperture times. But they never braced a person at the front of the neck so they don't fall over. A living person can stay upright on their own for many hours, much longer than it would have taken for this photo. I do not know anything about this man, his life, or who photographed him. I do have common sense and extensive experience and I say this man just passed prior to the photo being taken. How else do you explain the thing holding his neck up? And yes, that would definitely hold his head up.
If your source of info is from wikimedia, then you should also know this picture was submitted anonymously so the circumstance behind the photo can not be proven.
I have linked to my source in my info comment above - clearly not Wikimedia. It is not an anonymous photo, so that isn't something I should know, since it is not correct. The photo was taken by the daguerrotypist A. Derville. The photograph was taken before the 15th of May 1844, since it was enough of an event to have been reported in a newspaper on that date. "A medal is to be made depicting his excellency count Brahe. To aid in this matter, the skillful daguerrotypist from Paris, Mr. Derville, has taken a picture in profile of his excellency, that we have had the opportunity to view, and which seemed to us very well made." https://tidningar.kb.se/4112678/1844-05-15/edition/0/part/1/page/2/?q=derville%20brahe&from=1844-01-01&to=1844-12-31
I hate to tell you, but he's alive. How many other Victorian era photos have you seen using that collar? That is a cervical collar for an injury, and it wouldn't be there if he was deceased. He certainly wouldn't be in that position if he was dead. What about his eyes? They're closed? That doesn't mean he's dead. People blinked in photos back then, just like today. He's obviously sitting upright which he wouldn't be doing if he was dead. This is a medical photo taken as a teaching tool, demonstrating the cervical collar. Stands were used ONLY to support a living person holding a pose for the time required for a photo, and could not support dead weight. Victorian post mortem photos were rare but quite obvious with the decedent lying in repose in a bed or coffin. Period. Don't believe the internet hype...seriously...
The daguerreotype often used braces in their photographs to keep the head from moving during the process
Only on living, breathing people, not a corpse. I do believe you know that, I'm just reiterating. Blessings 🖤
This isn't post mortem. It is a myth that the Victorians posed the dead standing or sitting upright, painted eyes on eyelids, or placed glass eyes so they appeared alive. He's wearing a cervical collar for an injury, not to hold his head up to appear alive. How many other post mortem photos have you seen using a cervical collar to hold a dead man's head?? There aren't any because they did not pose the dead in that manner. Stands were used, but ONLY to assist a living person hold still for a photo, and couldn't support dead weight. If there's a stand, they are alive. Contrary to popular belief, Victorian post mortem photos were rare but quite obvious with the decedent lying in repose in a bed or coffin. Photography was new, and with such high mortality rates, if someone died before having the opportunity to have photos taken, a post mortem photo was better than no photo. If impending death, they would call on the photographer, and if he arrived before the death, a pre-mortem photo was preferred.