4443Re: Digital collection
- Dec 5, 2007Hi Susanne,
The terms Papier Tourniquet, Papier Coulé, and Papier Croisé are
all found in Fichtenberg's Papiers Des Fanatasie. Paris, 1852. Samples
that closely match the images in the database can be found on "Cartes
d'Echantillons" samples at the back of the book. Planche 2 "Papier
marbrés d'Anglaise et Francais", nos. 11 (Coulé), 12 (Croisé),
and 13 (Tourniquet).
Also shown on the same leaf, no. 16, is a sample of "Papier Agathes" is
As you say, the sample is not the same as Papier Tourniquet. It has
features somewhat reminiscent of the Papier Croisé, but it is not
exactly the same. I do believe the term is derived from "agate" stone,
but I also know that there is a term "cailloute", although I wonder if
the latter is appled more often for what we call "shell" in English.
If you look at the samples on the site for the Papier Croisé, it does
mention that it is one of the three styles of d'Annonay papers:
"This pattern is amongst the d'Annonay papiers attributed by Wolfe (pg
113) to F.M. Montgolfier beginning around 1830.
Papier Coulé is one of the three types of Annonay papiers.
Identifying this amongst the three styles of Annonay papiers
distinguishes them as amongst the two Wolfe categories of 'imitation or
pseudo-marbled' papers attributed to French creation (Wolfe paraphrasing
M. Fichtenberg also suggests that both the Germans and the French made
versions of each others' pseudo-marbles at the same time so discerning
the absolute country of origin varies often). All three of the Annonay
papiers were, according to Wolfe, created in the same basic way though
their end results came from the way in which they were finished be it
splattered, sponged, etc.
Papier Coulé is related to the other Annonay papers but is closest in
appearance and creation to Papier Croisé. The difference being that
in a Croisé the wet paste is allowed to trickle in multiple
directions whereas a Coulé is only run in a single direction."
Personally, I wonder use of the term "Turkish" routinely applied solely
to "spot" or "stone" patterns in the database seems to me a bit
antiquated and imprecise. The use of the term "Turkish" was once used
by many European writers (though there are notable exceptions such as
Sir Thomas Herbert) to describe all marbled papers. The sample book of
the Augsburg manufacturer Georg Christoph Stoy, which Haemmerle thought
dated to about 1730, shows combed designs, rather than spots, associated
with this term (see Wolfe, p 21 and plate IX). About 250 years later,
Halfer uses the term "Turkish" only for spot patterns in his "Progress
of the Marbling Art".
--- In Marbling@yahoogroups.com, "hamburgerbuntpapier_de" <studio@...>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> Now I've finally found the time to glance through the pictures, and I
> feel there are some things I should say.
> Croisé would be dribbled paper; my French customers use the term
> papier coulé.
> The 'bench marbled papers' are not marbled at all, as is mentiones
> somewhere on the site. The term is just another piece of evidence for
> the dominating role of marbled papers among all decorated papers, now
> and in centuries gone by. Most of those 'bench marbled papers' were
> made in sprinkled techniques.
> Tourniquet and Agathe patterns are not the same. The term tourniquet I
> have never heard before; the correct term in German is Gustavpapier.
> Agathe is definitely wrong, that's a girls' name. What I suppose they
> mean is agate paper, agates being semi precious gems. Some agate
> stones have feathery veins very close to those on the agate papers.
> Gustavpapier is what is shown on the other photoes, i.e. sprinkeled
> with ragged edges and rims in contrasting colours. These contrasting
> colours are achieved by additives to the paints. Sprinkles in agate
> papers are monochrome, predominantly black, with feathery edges. There
> is no agate among the 45 pictures. No. 11 is a sprinkled paper, the
> others called tourniquet are Gustav patterns.
> If the dating of 1713 as mentioned for no. 37 is right, I'll eat my
> hat. Both Gustav and agate papers were 19th century, mostly produced
> in industrial or at least semi-industrial process (and to reproduce
> them by hand is hellish). While it is perfectly possible that the book
> mentioned was bound for the first time, this happenend certainly not
> in 1713 with this very cover paper. Another possibility is that, while
> the binding was not touched, only the covering paper was changed into
> something more modern, an effect frequently seen by restorers. This
> would leave the first binding intact and is, if done on a high
> professional level, only visible for a specialist.
> Susanne Krause
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>