Last night the BBC aired its latest edition of the Antiques Roadshow filmed last summer at the wonderful Stanway House, near Cheltenham in Gloucestershire which has always been one of my favourite places in England to visit , with its magical garden, originally planned by Charles Bridgeman in the 18th century,and which, since the 1980s, has undergone a process of extensive restoration.
At one point in the show we were treated to a Jane Austen fest. A lady who possessed some old looking editions of Jane Austen novels appeared. She owned rather tatty copies of Pride and Prejudice,Mansfield Park and Emma. She wanted to know if they were first editions and if it was worth having them rebound. She had inherited them from her father who had, in turn, inherited them from a godmother.
They were in pretty poor condition, as they had lived for 25 years in a suitcase in her attic.
However on closer inspection, and in my opinion, the binding shows them to have been originally owned by an earl, looking closely at the coronet on the bindings. An English earl is entitled to wear a coronet which has eight strawberry leaves (four are visible in depictions of it) and eight silver balls (or pearls) around the rim (of which five are visible in depictions).The bindings are also marked with the cypher “A. R.” .
I do hope the owner does some research into the original owner before she replaces the original bindings.
She was assured that they really were first editions and was delighted with this discovery. Some slightly dubious comments were made by the expert about anonymity, as to why Jane Austen didn’t put her name to her works, but I’ll gloss over that. He advised that all three novels( three volumes each, making 9 volumes in all) were worth being rebound, at a probable cost of £1000…
for he estimated their worth at £5000 each, a low estimate he hastened to add. I would say very low, frankly in the current market. But it was lovely to hear that the owner was a Janeite, almost word-perfect on the novels, and she was delighted to realise that she had in her possession, three (THREE!!!) first editions of books written by her favourite author. Good luck to her!
If you are able to access the BBC iPlayer, the programme is availabe to view for the next 6 days, and the item under discussion appeared approximately 40 minutes into the programme.
14 comments
January 16, 2012 at 3:39 pm
Lauren Gilbert
What a wonderful find! Maybe, if she does have them rebound, they could replicate the original binding-it would be a shame to lose that connection. It would be great if she could find out who the original owner of the volumes was. Thanks for posting!
January 18, 2012 at 9:58 pm
jfwakefield
My pleasure, Lauren. I suppose financially it would be worth her while to rebind them, but I hope they research the bindings first.
January 19, 2012 at 1:22 am
Laurel Ann (Austenprose)
Julie, I think your instincts are correct. The research on which Earl’s initials are on the binding could be important, and if proven, would add to the value of the books. Rebinding would remove that possible bit of history. I would have them restored instead, or at the very least, rebound identically to the current binding. I have always been a strong proponent to hanging on to history. Would a list of Earls during this era solve the mystery? I know. not as easy as that, huh? Would the initials be his Christian and family name? Or his peerage name?
January 19, 2012 at 10:28 am
jfwakefield
I fear this is all academic-the books may have been rebound by now for the series is filmed in the summer :( The initials would probably represent his given names,but may be those of his wife…so I don’t think just looking at a list of teh earls will necessarily solve the conundrum.
January 17, 2012 at 3:24 am
Cathy Allen
My immediate reaction is that I would think that having them rebound would be a travesty! I mean they are original bindings! (Well, DUH — that’s what first edition means; I know!) But, ORIGINAL BINDINGS! Isn’t there some way to preserve what remains, without rebinding them? What’s your opinion, Julie?
Also, I’m curious about the Earl A.R. I wonder if they’ll let us know? American Antiques Roadshow sometimes posts updates about interesting finds…
January 17, 2012 at 4:17 am
jfwakefield
I’d keep them in their current state….but don’t expect an update soon. The programme didn’t spot the significance of the bindings, or, if they did, it was left on the cutting room floor. I spotted the coronet when I was taking the screen cap. I would love to know the identity of the original owner as its all part of the Jane Austen story, and would add a little to our knowledge of her.
January 17, 2012 at 6:11 am
Laurel Ann (Austenprose)
Lovely Julie. You always bring us the best Janeite news. Thanks for sharing.
P.S. I wish I had three first editions of Jane Austen tucked in my attic!
January 17, 2012 at 7:38 pm
jfwakefield
LOL- I try as best I can ;) And yes, I’d love to find one, not to say three first edition in my attic.I fear that only spiders,Christmas Decorations and old baby clothes in suitcases lie there.
January 18, 2012 at 1:50 am
Caitlin
You have the best eye for Austen related intrigue! Thanks for the explanation of the coronet. I’ve heard the term, and now have an understanding of it.
January 18, 2012 at 10:26 am
jfwakefield
I’m a terrible winkler, as Mrs Jennings was described in Ang Lee’s S+S ;)
January 18, 2012 at 4:24 pm
Robin Clark
Well, I am not sure I would describe them as original bindings. They are contemporary but would they have been in paper covered boards or in cloth? it would be interesting if someone could post details of how they were originally sold. I think it would be more problematic if they were in the original cloth in a tatty state. i almost wrote that I was glad it was a dilemma I don’t have to face but I don’t think that would be true
January 18, 2012 at 4:55 pm
jfwakefield
Not necessarily. This is a rather vexed question.It has been assumed, in the past, that most 18th century/early 19th century books were originally issued by printers bound in plain board form. This is note, not cloth bound, that was a later process.The boards used in the early 19th century were paper covered cards, usually pale bluish/ grey in colour. This practice allowed the owner to have his books bound later, on purchase, in a “livery” binding that matched the other volumes in his library and it has been assumed that all books were issued in this state. However, from the 1780s most booksellers/publishers issued more books bound originally in leather than in board. Cadell, as an example, issued over 80% of his books in his catalogue from the 1780s onwards in leather bound bindings. Therefore, leather bindings can sometimes be termed “original ” as I did in the post above, and it is not erroneous to do so. The point I was trying to make regarding teh earls coronet was that I would like some research to be made into the identity of that owner. The books, the first editions, note, were not bought by the present owner, who presented them to the programme for assessment: she inherited them from her father who had, in turn, inherited them from one of his god-mothers.
January 18, 2012 at 6:44 pm
Robin Clark
yes, interesting- thank you. I have looked at one or two images on google of Emma and Pride and Prejudice and there are some images of the quarter bound blue/grey boards with the cloth or paper spine and printed label. On the question of cloth bindings I have seen these dating from about 1815 I think but they again tend to be quarter bindings with a shiny cloth not the embossed cloth which seems to appear about 1850. Another point is that a number of the publishers were booksellers not just of their own books with extensive catalogues. I wonder if it is the copies in boards that fetch 6 figure sums- that’s what I would buy if i won the lottery a couple of times. Your comments prompted me to do a bit of research. The only book i have is Bernard Middleton – the History of Craft Bookbinding. It seems that publishers sometimes sold on the sheets to retailers who sold them onto to buyers to bind in their own style. Some of those sold in leather were often done by the retailers in a simple style. I noticed on google a couple of presentation copies and these seem to be half leather bindings with the proportions of the leather to paper looking quite mean. So perhaps the fancier bindings of the more well to do were bought as sheets or in boards. The critical time of change seems to be 1820 when new techniques came in. There is scope for a book here Bookselling, book binding techniques and social change. Not very profitable perhaps
With these copies the best thing may be to restore them but they look very crumbly – what I don’t think would right is some of the over the top fancy binding. The interesting thing is that they look quite well preserved internally
January 18, 2012 at 7:33 pm
jfwakefield
Certainly the first edition of Pride and Prejudice looked very clean, almost unread. That is why I’d like more research undertaken regarding the original owner. Whosoever it was, they certainly don’t seem to have read and re- read the books. But it would be typical of Jane Austen’s first readership for the original owner to have been part of the elite. I’d just like to be able to add a name , or title,to our knowledge of her first audience.