|
The reproduction of the binding shown above can be found online at the website of KOLLER International Auctions. Within their information about this unique item they tell us that: "This superb mss work of the Tales of the Fountain was executed for Louis XV by Madame la Duchesse de Dubary (Du Barry), his mistress and it is enriched with 71 miniatures of the greatest beauty. It is believed to have been made in 1771" noting also that: (This note is to be heeded with caution. Madame Du Barry (1743-1793) had neither artistic talent nor outstanding calligraphic talent. It could only be assumed that she had acted as commissioner of the manuscript in order to make the gift to the king). For us, this is an exceptionally lucky find, not only are the reproductions of KOLLER of high quality, but the critical information given allows us to be relatively certain that this binding was made sometime around 1771 and or probably not later that 1774 nor earlier than 1768. (see the somewhat tragic history of Madame du Barry). |
|
We have on the previous pages attempted to separate the works of Louis Douceur, Plumet and Fetil. It is interesting to note that Louis Douceur started his career as bookbinder in 1721 and retired in 1766 (according to the BnF).
While Plummet and Fetil only entered the trade in 1748 (Barber -2013 p.150-152) thus we might imagine them as debutants that Douceur hired as decorators in his workshop, where, after 30 years, he would have acquired a large and important clientelle. We do not know how long Plumet worked as a bookbinder nor really which of the 4 registered Plumet binders in this period that he may have been. On a previous page we have documented a signed 1768 Plumet binding with a few Fetil tools in evidence (see this). |
| In Comparative Diagram 1, we see Barber's DCT 15 and DCT 16, at first these tool models look so similar that one might think that this is really the same tool, Barber's reference binding for DCT 15 is W.Cat.255 and I show that just below. This binding that could be from around 1751and looks to be a real Louis Doucer with its elaborate outer roulette that we see on some of his signed bindings of 1754. We do not see any obvious Plumet or Fetil tools. Now this then is very interesting, as it suggests that DCT 16 that is found on a Fetil signed binding is a copy of the original Douceur tool, a somewhat perfected copy. |
| In Comparative Diagram 2, we look at four examples of DCT 15 from W.Cat.255 and 4 examples of DCT 16 from W.Cat.502 (with Fetil ticket). The green arrows are pointing out some of the more obvious differences of symmetry found in DCT 16, while the blue arrows are pointing to a detail in DCT 15 that is visibly different from the corresponding detail found in DCT 16. This is however so slight that it would be hard to detect with the naked eye even if you had the two different examples close at hand. The fact that we are finding imprints that are nearly identical raises the bar when it comes to attributing the decoration to one person or another. |
| The reproduction shown above is found in the LIBRAIRIE SOURGET catalogue - MANUSCRITS ET LIVRES PRECIEUX - CATALOGUE N° XVII - 1998 . I originally wanted to show this binding that is from 1774 or later. We see here some of the same imprints as on our Lot 171. I have documented this binding previously (see this) However we can look further into these DCT imprints here, to show that there are at least 3 different models of this type. |
| In Comparative Diagram 4, we see the three variants of what may have been originally a Louis Douceur tool. DCT 15 may be the Douceur example while DCT 16 and rl-6 being the Fetil examples. In this diagram I have shown a date of 1782 for the rf-6 however this is only speculation. The binding shown above 194 could have been made somewhere between 1774 and 1782. In as much as we see that Fetil was using the DCT 16 around 1771 - 1774 then I am guessing fr-6 as being somewhat later. However there no guarantees here, Fetil may have had the fr-6 from the beginning. Only a close examination and inventory of Fetil bindings might reveal the chronology of these tools. Note however that most observers would not notice the differences in these tools. |
| In Comparative Diagram 5, I show fr-6 examples enlarged and you will see that it is rare that the imprints are exactly the same even though deriving from the same tool. There are limits to enlarging printed images however it may be that the dots that crown DCT 15 and DCT 16 have now in the case of rf-6 been converted to rings, with the uppermost leaf piercing the lowest ring. |
| In Comparative Diagram 6, we look at Barber's FL 143. In comparing our Lot 171 example with his type model we can be relatively certain that these imprints are identical. However not all examples of this type of fleuron are the same |
| In Comparative Diagram 7, I show a high resolution zoom from a binding found in the the Morgan Library compared with an FL 143 imprint from the Lot 171 binding, these are not the same. Although very well made the Morgan copy can no longer fool us. On the next page we are going to explore the high resolution zoom images from the Morgan Library to compare two mysterious mosaic bindings, that have been, in the past, attributed to Louis Douceur. |
|
click here to return to the HOME page. click here to see the INDEX of the 2017 pages. see below links to previous work |
| Even experts are sometimes wrong, before you spend thousands on a book, please do your own research! Just because I say a certain binding can be attributed to le Maitre isn't any kind of guarantee, don't take my word for it, go a step further and get your own proof. In these pages I have provided you with a way of doing just that. |
| Virtual Bookings, created by L. A. Miller | return to the Home page of VIRTUAL BOOKBINDINGS |