| The binding shown above is found in Giles Barber's 2013 publication; Printed Books and Bookbindings. I have included Barber's description so we will be able to show all the tools that he has catalogued for this binding |
| In Comparative Diagram 1, we see a complete list of the tools mentioned by Barber in the W.Cat.363 information. These have been extracted from his Tools Catalogue, complete with the description given for each. |
| Comparative Diagram 2, I have assembled all the imprints found in the decoration of W.Cat.363 that Barber omitted to mention, included are my catalogued Jean-Pierre Jubert imprint models for each of the omitted tools. Green lettering indicating an imprint not previously catalogued by myself, to which I have assigned a new catalogue number. The jj-45 pair consists of a curved string of small beads that are 11 in number, I assume the W.Cat.363 example is the same, as the size and bead count is the same however one cannot be 100 percent certain with such small tools. |
| In Comparative Diagram 3, we see that Barber's FR 32 and 33 models appear to match the extracted imprints however he omitted to include in this description (and in his catalogue) the smallest example of these tools that are found in this dentelle by Jubert. I have previously catalogued these imprints as jj-34a-2 and jj-34b-2 (2009). |
| In Comparative Diagram 4 we see in DCT 4 a very common imprint form that many decorators used in their dentelles. The importance of such tools should not be underestimated, each one may reveal the identity of the artist. Here is where Barber's catalogue breaks down as he obviously encountered different examples of this imprint, however he only shows one in his tool list and it is that of Gosselin!. It must have been a puzzle to him that decorations by Derome some of which he could positively identify, such as shown in his Fig.45. W.Cat.216 page 255 that he 'ascribes' to the 'Deromes' has been decorated with a tool different to that which he shows in his catalogue. Also on page 256 he shows in Fig.46 a full sized corner of W.Cat.238 which he 'ascribes' to N.-D. Derome (aka Derome le jeune) this binding he mentions as being 'after' 1772, here we see the same imprint (that I have catalogued as dj-9) as found on W.Cat.216. Barber never catalogued this tool, why? Here is the red flag, when he was so meticulous in recording all the imprints but omitted this one. This is only one example where whole bindings were decorated with tools that differed from those of Derome and yet Barber insisted on ascribing these dentelles to Derome. |
|
In Comparative Diagram 5 we see just how closely these tools copy each other.
Only with high resolution images is it nearly possible to distinguish differences. The blue arrows pointing out that the Jubert imprint is somewhat larger than the DCT 4, and the red arrows indicating that the left side of the DCT 4 imprint is taller than the right side. The Gosselin example 'X' matches very closely the X-2 DCT 4, we can say that these two imprints are probably the same. However neither one of these 2 imprint examples jj-9 and dj-9, comes close to Derome's tool of this kind. Barber shows dozens of examples of bindings that he 'ascribes' to the Deromes or Derome, dozens and dozens and yet he has not been able to catalogue a single example of this basic tool that Derome used hundreds of times (aka dj-9). By comparing his list of tools from W.Cat.363 to the actual imprints found on this binding we notice omissions, and this become even more evident in the next binding that Barber associated with DCT 45, namely W.Cat.690, we will be looking at that on the next page, however first, notice in Comparative Diagram 4, that DCT 1, is in fact missing the upper part of the imprint (that I have catalogued as jj-20), this imprint plays an important roll in the dentelle of W.Cat.363 and as there are 4 examples to work with, it seems odd that Barber could have made this mistake? |
|
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 |