| On the previous page we have looked at Boyet imprints found on a number bindings that he made for la comtesse de Verrue, we also see in the diagrams Boyet palettes lab-XXVI. I have reproduced these in Comparative Diagram 1, they derive from a previous page. Now although these examples look identical to the 1741 examples shown at the top of this page, I was not convinced and this lead to Comparative Diagram 2, where I have been very careful with scale, both of these examples are scans and the measurements exact. What we see is that the 1741 imprint is of a very similar size however I point out with green arrows and corresponding letters, certain details that are not the same in both examples, This is somewhat mysterious as we have on the previous page, determined that the lab-16 and lab-50 derive almost certainly from the tools of Boyet. Here we see that these palettes are only nearly identical this means that these 1741 imprints must derive from a duplicate set that match closely the originals. This too possibly indicating that these tools are in fact post Boyet. |
| In Comparative Diagram 2, the green arrow (a) pointing out that this detail is smaller than what we see on palette XXVI. The green arrow (b) indicating that the gap between the stem and the tendril is significantly smaller than expected. Green arrow (c) pointing out the most significant difference in these two imprints, namely that this entire intersection of stem and tendrils is shaped differently. |
| In Comparative Diagram 3, we see the 1741 palette greatly enlarged in a high resolution photo. Here we can see that the differences pointed out in Comparative Diagram 2 are not simply illusory due to the usual blur that you find when enlarging printed photographs. |
| In Comparative Diagram 4, we see the inner dentelle, and marbled endpapers, perhaps the endpapers would give us a better way of dating this binding if we could find other identical examples elsewhere. The roulette used to frame this paper is unusual and although reminiscent of Boyet roulettes A and B shown on this page this is something different, and not as well made. |
| In comparative Diagram 5, I show the exact length of this roulette (10.45 cm) and if you click on the enlargement link you can explore further the detailing of this imprint. Because I have not seen or catalogued this roulette previously I suspect that this was not used by Boyet. |
| In Comparative Diagram 6, that is a reproduction of the original eBay photo, we see another detail that strikes me as not being anything that Boyet would do. It is the unusual treatment of the board edges, click on the enlargement of Comparative Diagram 7 to see the detail of this more fully. This has been achieved, I suppose, with a roulette however a rather irregular one. |
| In Comparative Diagram 8 we see the treatment of the raised bands, here again this is not what we see on most Boyet bindings and seems to me to be something that came into vogue after Boyet. This diagram has been achieved with a scanned image and therefore the scale is correct with the bars being about half a millimeter in width and a similar width separating them. Here I have to admit that I have not taken the time to collect and catalogue all the examples of this kind of treatment, however it strikes me that it was popular much later than 1740 and this fact added to some of these other post Boyet details leads me to suspect that the decoration of this binding, may have been executed some considerable time after 1741. |
|
click here to return to the HOME page. click here to see an 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 |