Featured Help with sold engravings.

I would appreciate the research expertise from some of the internet search gurus here. While doing research I did find some information of this artist and these images. However, I could not find anything about reprints. Perhaps these are old and were framed in more modern frames. I found other prints in the exact same frames and that is the reason I thought these might be later reprints. I found a reference to a set sold at auction in 1902 but no other details.

https://books.google.com/books?id=WRgwAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA191&lpg=PA191&dq=The+wanton+Trick+P.+Tomkins&source=bl&ots=dxNpxdL9hP&sig=iw56RF2YrNNlYjQGFncUN128XBo&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwil48Gf-InfAhUvUt8KHXtqCckQ6AEwBnoECAgQAQ#v=onepage&q=The wanton Trick P. Tomkins&f=false

I found this more recent auction for two prints, one is colored and framed, one appears to be the entire page from a book.

https://www.ukauctioneers.com/aucti...s=50&sortBy=lotsort&lotView=list&imagesOnly=N

The prints appear to be on wove, not laid paper. The artist is Peltro William Tomkins (1759-1840). He was the favorite student of Francesco Bartolozzi. Printed under The Wanton TRICK engraving: P. W. Tomkins (this is unclear but I think it is finu et foulpt) pupil of F. Bartolozzi.

Both image size are 4 1/2" wide including the blue line, 3 7/8" tall.

The other print, L"innocent Badinace, does not have the same info under the image, just Tomkins inu or inv.

Is there a publication that lists reprints? Did I miss something? Thank you in advance for any help.

 

The title should have been "old engravings" not sold. I guess it was wishful thinking.

 

In the mid-60s, my mother bought an eclectic group of pieces to hang over the living room sofa. One of them was L'Innocent Badinage, in that same frame. There was no question of authenticity of any sort. Just decorator items.

 

Not 'finu'; that thing that looks like an f is the last s from Tomkins. Tomkins inv., designed it. Then 'et sculpt:', and engraver [was].

 

Thank you. The frames are the reason I doubted they were original. The wove paper made think it could be an older reprint.

 

I think it says "pinx et sculpt", which means it's his engraving of a painting he did. I've never seen a signature that brags of being someone's student.

I can't tell anything from the photos. You'll have to find something that is reliably original to compare. Are there other engravings besides these, and did he sign them the same way?

I've had repros of mid-19thC fashion plates. There were a number of ways to tell those, but most of all the colors, which were photo-mechanically printed and so had that dot matrix appearance.

 

I expected in to say pinx, but can't see it. Do see inv.
http://www.philaprintshop.com/abbrtb.html#I

Think you are correct, it is Tomkins' engraving of his own art, but definitely says inv. not pinx. It may have been a drawing.

My mother would not have been shopping in a place that had antiquarian prints, nor paying those prices. She had a favorite place that sold classier looking home decor items. (My father pretty much hated them all.) And that is what these were. Nicely framed copies of engravings that were out of copyright.

Tomkins seems to have become respected as a stipple-engraver in his own right. Maybe he continued to pay homage to his master:

https://books.google.com/books?id=T...AgQAQ#v=onepage&q=f w tomkins engraver&f=true

 

Text says they were printed in red.

One of which is in red.

I honestly think it is moonshine to think the posted pair are anything other than reproductions.

 

Here's the inscription under his portrait of Edward Topham in the National Portrait Gallery, London:


So there's that.

 

I just removed one from the frame. The paper now looks like laid paper. There is an ink smudge and I don't see any dot matrix. I will post photographs tomorrow when I have better light.

 

Earlier in the day, I read a paragraph that said Bartolozzi considered Tomkins to be his "art son". Perhaps Tomkins used that on engravings to honor him.

 

It looks like the same frame, left in a peat bog for a while to age. The one my mother bought was new at the time, not antique.

 

@IneedHelp I think that is one that I saw earlier today when I was researching. There was another listed on etsy.

"Left in a peat bog". It's probably 50 years of nicotine.

 

Because there are some for sale in the same frame, I am also quite confident its a reproduction. This listing says its a lithograph https://www.ebay.ie/itm/PELTRO-WILL...-BARTOLOZZI-/123470145477?hash=item1cbf64e7c5 that's a possibility. Especially because the image looks a bit grainy, not like the clear lines of a copper engraving. The original would have been a copper engraving, Can you see or feel an impression of the copper plate?

 

He was a stipple engraver, so graininess is to be expected. Like most then and now, he probably combined every technique available in his prints.

 

If the fundamental question is whether the two in question were printed during the lifetime of the author or reprinted later, the answer is reprinted later, a lot later, by whatever process.

 

Looks like a lithographic reproduction to me.

 

Finally. Every time I tried to post these photographs today, I was interrupted. These have been cut down quite a bit. I compared the paper to other prints and I'm thinking these were cut from a book.