| The decorative detail shown above is from a Dubuisson binding (193) that we have already looked at on a previous page (see this). This binding appears to have the same imprints as a binding (No. 10) that Barber has listed in his category of Bindings with Interlace tools associated with waddesdon catalogue 305 (W.Cat.305). The No.10 binding covers the same publication as 193 and Barber's list of tool imprints for No.10 (shown above) matches those of 193, we can assume then that these two bindings are very similar if not identical. We have shown that the imprints found in the decoration of binding 193 prove to be those of Dubuisson. I show here Barber's information for No.10 and I have crossed out Padeloup's name in it, because Padeloup did not decorate this binding and if Padeloup was using CB 2 as Barber claimed he would have had to borrow it back from Dubuisson who had been employing it in the years previous to 1750. This is getting all too obvious, and seems rather mysterious how Barber after all his research never managed to see what is going on here. The reason we are showing this 193 detail again is to show the imprints that Barber has catalogued as INT 21 and INT 24. |
|
In Comparative Diagram 1, we see at the top Barber's INT 21. imprint model, below this I show an extracted 193 example as well as the actual 193 imprint. Next to this I show a Le Gascon imprint from RELIURES FRANÇAISES DU XVIIÉME SIÉCLE by Isabelle de Conihout; Pascal Ract-Madoux. Published by Somogy, 2002, page 20. Below this an imprint from Bibliothèque Raphael Esmerian 8/12/1972 Vol II, page 5, No.3.
Here we enter into a very complex and interesting subject. Raphael Esmerian maintained that Padeloup le jeune (Antoine-Michel Padeloup) inherited certain tools from from his grand father who worked in the atelier of Pierre Rocolet (see this). In a nutshell (according to the BnF)
The Maitre Dorer, an unidentified gilder, designated by convention with a name evoking the virtuosity of the execution of the decorations attributed to him, was active from the beginning of the 1620s until around 1638, when his workshop was probably acquired, according to the hypothesis put forward by R. Esmerian, by Pierre Rocolet, who then entrusted its management to the bookbinder Antoine Padeloup. So we might wonder if this strange out of place, 17th century looking, tool might have come from Rocolets atelier. However the Conihout example is missing a few details and the Esmerian example looks very close but is not the same size. I went to great lengths to confirm the size of this imprint. Esmerian shows many of his reproductions at 100 percent scale i.e. the reproduction is same size as the actual item, however to be sure I searched for other examples of this publication, an Estienne c.1550 Bible Libri Regum IIII, these appear to be very rare, but probably they are the size that Esmerian has presented. Thus this imprint although very close to the Barber INT 21 example is not the same. This imprint does not come from the tools of Padeloup, this is a Dubuisson tool and curiously you can see in the Esmerian example, that is from the atelier Le Gascon, an imprint that closely resembles another Dubuisson favorite that I have detailed on another page (see this) this must be the source of the original sharkstooth palette design! |
| In Comparative Diagram 2 I show with green, blue and yellow arrows that the rings are an added detail and not part of the original tool as Barber has illustrated it. The red and mauve arrows pointing out that these bars are also added details and not part of the original INT 21 imprint. We can see also in this diagram that the dots that radiate out from the rings have been very carefully placed one by one. These small dots are about a millimeter in size and are separated by a gap of about a millimeter, any error here is immediately obvious, I see this as a sort of tour de force that leaves the observer wondering how it was done. |
| We can see in Comparative Diagram 3 that Barber has shown this imprint with a outline around it, this indicates that he does not have a full sized scanned imprint to show us. Below it, I show a 193 example at the correct size and below this my Dubuisson catalogue example that has been extracted from a high resolution scan that I made from an actual Dubuisson dentelle à l'oiseau binding that I acquired in an eBay auction on July 15, 2010. (see this) |
| Here in Comparative Diagram 4, we see an enlarged example of pd-7-5, click on this image to see it at 1200 dpi. When you can enlarge imprints to 1200 dpi or greater you can at last, see all the small details that normally go undetected even in Barber's catalogued examples, and really without being able to see these details a comparative analysis is of limited value, mainly due to so many clever copies, that have been made by binders wishing to produce look-alike decorations. Derome le jeune is a good example of someone who had copies of most of Dubuisson's tools. However the pd-7-5 imprint is one of from the early part of DubuissonÕs career and one that he rarely used after 1750, Derome as far as I can see never had a copy of this unusual tool, that is a throw back to the open tools that were popular more than 2 centuries earlier. Dubuisson had a number of these tools that produced imprints that I have loosely grouped in the pd-7 category, (see this). |
| It is easy to show in this diagram the matching Dubuisson imprints in both of these corner details. Binding 193 with a Padeloup ticket inside was probably a binding that Padeloup paid Dubuisson to decorate, there are no obvious Padeloup imprints found in this decoration and therefore we have no reason to attribute this decoration to him with or without a ticket. |
| This binding I have detailed previously (see this) it is found in the Royal Library of Spain, where it has been thoroughly studied by the Library staff, measured and photographed. Each part of the decoration carefuly recorded and catalogued. There is no room to doubt the authenticity of this binding or the Library attribution of this work to Dubuisson. This is therefore a nail in the coffin of Barber's Padeloup theories, especially as concerns CB 2 which is plainly evident here as well as INT 21. |
|
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 |
