| I have already made some comments about this binding W.Cat.690 in 2021 however I want to explore further the dentelle and specifically the imprints that Barber has catalogued for this binding. Below is a complete list of the tools mentioned in the information above for W.Cat.690. |
| There are a few things missing from this list, and a few things that I was wondering about. Such as the corner tool, DCR 8 this is certainly Jubert's model for this tool that many binders had, each had his own variation and this was Jubert's (jj-12). However at the same time Barber also lists DCR 6 which I recognize as the Derome model (dj-12), He states that the DCR 8 is only found on the first volume. Then when we look at the notes for this binding on page 1098 where we also see a black and white reduced size reproduction of W,Cat.690 the text immediately below it reads W.Cat.690. Vol.1. however this reproduction cannot be volume one as it bears the Derome corner tool DCR 6. |
|
In Comparative Diagram 1, we see something very interesting. Barber states that the imprint found on W.Cat.690 is a variant of DCT 19. However when we enlarge Barber's DCT 19 model and compare it with other similar looking imprints (variants) we discover that DCT 19 is in fact a Gosselin tool, what does this mean? It means that all the bindings that Barber has listed, that have been decorated with this imprint; W.Cats.138, 204, 401, 454 (N.-D. Derome ticket), 629, 734. were in fact probably decorated by Gosselin and not Derome le jeune as Barber implies by pointing out the Derome ticket in W.Cat.454. I have tackled some of these bindings: W.Cat.138. and W.Cat.734 here. W.Cat.204. here W.Cat.454. here. W.Cat.239. here. W.Cat.629. here. W.Cat.421. here. W.Cat.401. here. I will go out on a limb here and say that I do not think Derome ever used this type/model/kind of tool such as DCT 19, that was very popular with so many other decorators of bookbindings in the 1770's, Delorme was perhaps the first to popularize this tool in various sizes, closely followed by Jubert and Gosselin. Nowhere is it seen in purely Derome decorations, not pre 1760 nor as late as 1788. (correct me if I am wrong on this point). Dubuisson never used it either perhaps due to passing away before this fad took hold. Why is this important? Well if you ever see decoration that employs this or these tools then you can be sure its not a Dubuisson nor a Derome no matter how many tickets Derome has pasted inside. |
|
In Comparative Diagram 2, I have colorized the obvious Derome imprints with yellow while the Jubert imprints remain in black and white. The two Derome pairs dj-33 and dj-34 do not seem to be in this dentelle. While only the Jubert pairs jj-33 and jj-34-2 can be seen. I have included the other fronds only for comparative purposes and jj-10 and jj-10-2 to show their catalogue numbers.I have not attempted to sort out the small tools. My impression is or was that when Jubert started working as a decorator for Derome le Jeune, possibly soon after he became a licensed binder in 1771, he was using both his own tools and those of Derome. and as he progressively moved into doing his own binding and decorations, he used less and less the tools of Derome. with one or two exceptions where he continued to use Derome tools, and some that were possibly even Jacques-Antoine Derome tools. So, I am tempted to brand W.Cat.690 as an early work of Jubert. The imprints shown in yellow as dj-44a and dj-44b appear to be the same as found in an early J.-A. Derome dentelle (click here to see this) These same tools were later used by Derome le jeune and after also employed by Jubert. |
| I decided to try and make a diagram to prove the idea that Derome le jeune used his fathers tools. First I needed to find some high resolution examples and returned to les collections du chateau de Versailles (see this) where they have items that can be examined with an amazing zoom. This particular coffret (leather covered box that locks) appears to be covered with Derome imprints that can be greatly enlarged (925 dpi). |
| In Comparative Diagram 4, I have extracted and greatly enlarged a J.-A. Derome Imprint from Lot. 377 found in the Sotheby's catalogue CATALOGUE OF VALUABLE PRINTED BOOKS AND FINE BINDINGS FROM THE CELEBRATED COLLECTION, THE PROPERTY OF MAJOR J.R. ABBEY Published by Messrs Sotheby & Co., London: 1965. (see this) to compare it with our high resolution example form the Chateau de Versailles with an overlay. Note: these Derome imprints might not be from 1770. |
| Next I needed high resolution Jubert imprints to follow the story of J.-A. Derome tools being handed down, and found some at Koller International Auctions where they present a large 18th century leather portfolio that has been gold tooled by Jubert and also a good zoom to see it. |
|
In Comparative Diagram 6, we see then that Jubert is still using the dj-44 pair in his decorations along with a number of other Derome tools on this portfolio that the auction experts estimate was made some time between 1775 and 1780. There are a couple of things that come to mind here, the first is that Derome seems to be employing Jubert to decorate large folio sized items, this might explain why we see a mixture of tools in these items but not in Jubert's smaller bindings that were perhaps for his own clients. The next thing that we have to consider, is the question of whether the presence of imprints from Jubert's tools implies that he was the master decorator of these bindings including the spine and inner dentelle even if he employed some of Derome's tools to do it. |
| In Comparative Diagram 7, I have extracted a few imprint examples that match Barber's catalogued tools. Barber did not catalogue all the tools for what ever reason, the first example I want to point out is his DCT 30, on volume 1 we see Jubert's version of this tool that I have catalogued as jj-16. If Derome decorated these bindings as Barber implies (ascribed to N.-D. Derome) why would he own 2 similar but different examples of this tool? The same can be said for DCR 6 and DCR 8. These are red flags that surely need an explanation or… simply hide by not adding them to the catalogue? We can see Barber faced the same dilemma with his DCT 4, that we examined on the previous page, shown here as the actual dj-9. This is the actual Derome model of this tool that Barber avoided putting in his catalogue and failed to mention as being present on W.Cat.690. I have detailed FR 34, on another page (see this) and since that page found that W.Cat.408 which is Barber's reference for his FR 34, and a binding that certainly could never be ascribed to Derome le jeune, is a tool that belonged to Bisiaux! (see this) |
| In Comparative Diagram 8, we see the imprints from real Derome tools, however Barber never catalogued these! They are everywhere on Derome bindings, impossible to miss and since Barber 'ascribes' half of his book to the Deromes it makes one wonder… BUT I have some fantastic news that I will reveal on the next page! |
|
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 |
