Royal Academy Pictures - 1896. Reprint?

I recently came across a copy of the Royal Academy Pictures - 1896 and was immediately stricken by the glossiness of the pages. I then assumed it had to be a reprint and looked for a publisher date, but there was absolutely no information or even anything to do with copyright beyond a statement on one of the introductory pages which read: "[Permission to Reproduce the Pictures and Sculptures herein contained has been accorded by Artists and Owners, and Copyright is in every case strictly reserved]" Upon further research I found the cover to be distinctly different, and from the limited resources I could find the others included a gallery map, while mine instead included an introduction I couldn't find in the others. I researched the publisher and found it to be the Cassell and Company, Limited, London, Paris & Melbourne, while the last page read: "Printed by Cassell & Company, Limited, La Belle Sauvage, London, E.C" spine is bound by thread and not staples, and there's noticeable aging on some of the first pages. I'll admit to being absolutely confounded by this. What do you think?

 

Your pictures are quite blurry, but i would not doubt that this is from 1896. This kind of paper was used for books with many illustrations and can look like new today. The binding also looks correct for the time, maybe somebody didn't like the original cover or wanted it to be uniform in his library (or a public library). At that time its also quite common that there is a cheap cloth bound version, a more expensive half leather like yours and maybe a even more expensive full leather version for the same book.

I think this is your book, where did you find a version with a plan in it? Its also not unusual that plans were taken out and got lost, or that someone added a plan he purchased separately.

 

I agree that this is probably a library binding, commissioned.

 

I think you found some good information there. Since it was issued as an annual supplement to a magazine the nature of the original cover or covers should be researchable.

 

Massive thanks and my apologies for the blurriness of the pictures. My supplementary research led me to find what I believed to be the only photostatic copies of the work at the website here: https://www.royalacademy.org.uk/art-artists/exhibition-catalogue/ra-sec-vol128-1896. The plans which I referenced can be found on the fourth photo in the link provided. Again my massive thanks for your and everyone's invaluable insight and prudent responses

 

Welcome to the Forum, HailCthulhu!

 

That is a different publication from the one you have. It looks like this link goes to a reproduction of the official exhibition catalogue, printed by William Clowe's and Sons for the Royal Academy. The one you have is different. It's a supplement to The Magazine of Art, published by Cassell. If you read the introduction, it says that they attempted to obtain permission to publish all of the works in the exhibition but some were "unobtainable." That might mean they were not granted permission, or that they could not get copies for republication.

 

Thank you! Only one day in and I'm already stunned by just how warm, welcoming, and helpful the community has been! I was at first trepidatious, more through ingrained timidity than anything, but I still hope to contribute often, and help despite mine being a bit of a tyro to anything more than idle collecting

 

Yes, and welcome to you!

 

Again, my massive thanks. The link you first provided is exactly what I happened to have, and your illuminating explanations all but cleared up the slightest hint of ambiguity. I'm extremely glad for this opportunity to understand more and develop a greater appreciation for antiques, both those of my own collection and of others!

 

Just to give the proper credit, @McAdder provided the first link! I just looked at it and explained some things. I worked as a librarian at universities and research libraries for a long time, and my favorite part of the job was always helping people with their research questions.

 

Welcome HailCthulhu!

You wouldn't happen to have any rare old H.P. Lovecraft books taking up space in your library that you might want to get rid of, do you?

 

To my crowning rage, nothing but contemporary compendiums of his fiction. In fact, I think any book publication of his works would be fairly recent, but I've been keeping an eye out for any old copies of the magazine Weird Tales, where his works were first published. But even those that contain his lesser-known tales are few and of great value. I'll never stop looking though, he must have penned thousands of letters in his day, and some still go for auction every now and then. Someday, if the stars are right, perhaps.

 

I'd take a sweet first edition of 'The Outsider and Others' or 'Behind the Wall of Sleep.' DANG!!!!!!