Is this a Jean-baptiste Vuillaume?

[reg]

Hello all

Just had an old couple in the shop not 2 hours ago. They presented with a violin which they want to give to their granddaughter!

I did a double take, because (Vuillaume or not) it is very lovely instrument in good condition, and on questioning them it hasn't been out of the case since before WWII - not something you give to a 6 year old to play with?

I had just 10 minutes to take photos on my phone - which don't really do it justice

Label is dated 1839

[martin swan]

Doesn't look quite Vuillaume (the button is huge unless it's the photo, the arching is a bit bulbous and what we can see of the varnish looks slightly tradey) but it's a nicely made French violin worthy of further research.

Were the pins in the back half-covered by the purfling? They look suspiciously visible in your photo ...

Actually the varnish looks much better in the side and scroll shots.

[reg]

Thank you Martin

I will have to ask them to come in again, as they scuttled off like frightened bunnies!

Could I have a few salient points to check eg the pins covered by purfling etc

I am sure the photography is poor because it was a rushed job

[reg]

Incidentally the original bridge is stamped Edward Withers 22 Wardour str

[Jeffrey Holmes]

1 hour ago, reg said:

Thank you Martin

I will have to ask them to come in again, as they scuttled off like frightened bunnies!

Could I have a few salient points to check eg the pins covered by purfling etc

I am sure the photography is poor because it was a rushed job

I know I'm not Martin... and the varnish does look a little "bright" and the arching a bit "round", in the photos you posted (although lighting and camera angle can throw things off)... but internal numbers (center of and just under the upper block on inside the back), Vuillaume's "hieroglyphic" signature (inside the treble side upper bout of the back), and his small brand (often located just above center on the inside of the top and back) would be useful data. I've posted photos of these details several times on this forum, and images can be found in the Millant/Hill Vuillaume book.

[reg]

Thank you Jeffrey

 

[TedN]

Just now, Jeffrey Holmes said:

I know I'm not Martin... and the varnish does look a little "bright" and the arching a bit "round", in the photos you posted (although lighting and camera angle can throw things off)... but internal numbers (center of and just under the upper block on inside the back), Vuillaume's "hieroglyphic" signature (inside the treble side upper bout of the back), and his small brand (often located just above center on the inside of the top and back) would be useful data. I've posted photos of these details several times on this forum, and images can be found in the Millant/Hill Vuillaume book.

Hi Jeffery,

Do you happen to know the name of the thread that contains the photos? I'd be interested in taking a look. I performed a quick search, but didn't see it.

Thanks!

[Jeffrey Holmes]

1 hour ago, TedN said:

Hi Jeffery,

Do you happen to know the name of the thread that contains the photos? I'd be interested in taking a look. I performed a quick search, but didn't see it.

Thanks!

Many more than one...but I don't think I ever uploaded all three details on a single thread. I remember the timing of maybe a one thread (or if if I'm lucky two) off the top of my head, but after more than a couple decades of moderating here, the time line and titles of the threads tend to blur! I'll fill in the blanks from my archive. Someone remember where this one is for me, OK?   

I'll give it a try.

OK. I found this recent one:

Link to brand

Here are a few archive shots (3 different fiddles; Number, brand on back, signature 1, signature 2):

 

[MikeC]

53 minutes ago, Jeffrey Holmes said:

 

 

This is a flourish typically underneath 18th and 19th century signatures.  As in John Hancock and Ben Franklin seen here.  Just pointing out the difference in a flourish and a signature.  Although V. seems to use it as a signature. 

 

 

Here's an eve better example

 

[Jeffrey Holmes]

2 minutes ago, MikeC said:

This is a flourish typically underneath 18th and 19th century signatures.  As in John Hancock and Ben Franklin seen here.  Just pointing out the difference in a flourish and a signature.  Although V. seems to use it as a signature. 

 

It's referred to by many as a hieroglyph. I'm fine with either of the three designations. I just prefer it be there.  

 

[MikeC]

Just now, Jeffrey Holmes said:

It's referred to by many as a hieroglyph. I'm fine with either of the three designations. I just prefer it be there.  

 

You replied while I was editing  check the third picture.  

[Jeffrey Holmes]

Just now, MikeC said:

You replied while I was editing  check the third picture.  

Thumbs up!

 

[TedN]

Very interesting. I learned something new today! Thanks for digging up those photos Jeffery. Much appreciated!

So he would stamp the inside, write the date on the inside, and then write a "hieroglyph" or "flourish" on the inside.

I have seen the John Hancock signature before, but I never noticed the lines and circles below it. I also didn't realize that they referred to that as a flourish.

It's also interesting that Vuillaume would opt to just use the hieroglyph/flourish and not include the signature along with it. 

[Jeny Mahon]

@reg How exciting!  That is a pretty fiddle   I'd love to see the varnish in sunlight.  I hope they come back! 

[Philip Perret]

I've heard that type of flourish called a "paraph".

[Jeffrey Holmes]

10 hours ago, Philip Perret said:

I've heard that type of flourish called a "paraph".

That's a new one for me Philip! Definition makes total sense... and I have a new scrabble word! (just enough Ps)

11 hours ago, TedN said:

So he would stamp the inside, write the date on the inside, and then write a "hieroglyph" or "flourish" on the inside.
 

The number on the inside was essentially an inventory number (and several lists have been published listing what numbers correspond to the year the instrument was made),  The last two digets of the year appear in the paraph (gong to use that a few times so I remember it!)

[MikeC]

paraph is a new one for me too.  I had to look it up!    

[reg]

I have contacted the old couple and they will call again next week to show me the violin.

I think they took fright with my (stupid me!) body language and when I told them it was possibly worth more than the £600 they had expected.

I'm told I have an honest face but maybe not...

[christian bayon]

The head could be consistent with Vuillaume, body much less.

[Vafan]

If I may add my 2 cents on the semiotic aspects... A paraph is a signature shortened to a few characters (initials), but it is not a signature in the legal sense, as the name does not have to be necessarily indentifiable. Vuillaume's paraph would be recognizable as something like "JBV" Though most signatures today are often actually paraphs, the one above by Vuillaume (the example without his name, on the back of the instrument) is rather just a "sign" or, in terms of semiotics, an "icon", as it does not consist (at least for me) of indentifiable letters. It coud serve as a cartoushe, though, as used first by the Egyptians to enclose important names. That would would not have been unlikely for the 19th century, as during Vuillaume's times, the fascination for Egyptian script was wide-spread due to the then recent discovery of the principles of that writing system (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cartouche), or the form might have simply been inspired by its similar use in art and architecture (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cartouche_(design)), which, I have to admit, seems even more likely...

Edited February 5, 2022 by Vafan

[jacobsaunders]

I can remember, back in the 80’s. Visiting a lecture Roger H gave to the German vm. Assn. in Stuttgart, where he gave a detailed explanation of how to fake Vuillame’s signature. He started with the 4 circles at the bottom, and he said that the measure of if it were successful, would be if your bank manager would fall for it if it were on a cheque. Well, thank god I’m not a bank manager! The whole room was full of elderly violin makers in their Sunday best, with appropriately matching wives, all wondering if they should call the police.

[MikeC]

32 minutes ago, jacobsaunders said:

I can remember, back in the 80’s. Visiting a lecture Roger H gave to the German vm. Assn. in Stuttgart, where he gave a detailed explanation of how to fake Vuillame’s signature. He started with the 4 circles at the bottom, and he said that the measure of if it were successful, would be if your bank manager would fall for it if it were on a cheque. Well, thank god I’m not a bank manager! The whole room was full of elderly violin makers in their Sunday best, with appropriately matching wives, all wondering if they should call the police.

I've drawn it a few times.  It's simple but would take some practice to make it look smooth and flowing and authentic.  The odd thing about the one on paper that I posed earlier is that one end of the line looks thick and the other end trails off thin which makes it look like he drew it starting on the end that I would finish on.  

[Jeffrey Holmes]

39 minutes ago, jacobsaunders said:

I can remember, back in the 80’s. Visiting a lecture Roger H gave to the German vm. Assn. in Stuttgart, where he gave a detailed explanation of how to fake Vuillame’s signature. 

Yup... An American maker I knew, Don Eckland, could pull off a convincing Vuillaume paraph/ hieroglyph/signature/doodle on demand as well.

[deans]

On 2/4/2022 at 6:44 AM, reg said:

I have contacted the old couple and they will call again next week to show me the violin.

I think they took fright with my (stupid me!) body language and when I told them it was possibly worth more than the £600 they had expected.

I'm told I have an honest face but maybe not...

Why would this be frightening?

[Jeffrey Holmes]

25 minutes ago, deans said:

Why would this be frightening?

Funny things can be happening, or have happened, and one may not know the reason for a reaction at the time. 

Many years ago, a woman from the UP in Michigan walked in to "the firm" with a very nice Pedrazzini violin. She asked if it could be set up so her son could learn fiddle on it. I asked her how she came by it and she showed me the receipt of purchase, from Pedrazzini, from the early '50s. I seem to recall the two instruments were listed at the equivalent of about $500 a piece.

I suggested she might want to obtain a less expensive instrument for her son to learn on, and informed her of what the fiddle was worth. Instead of the happy surprise I expected, she looked upset, closed the case, and left the showroom without a word. 

About a year later, a young woman from the same town stopped in to have her Pedrazzini violin worked on. Same town, fiddle made the same year.  No clue what it was worth. I asked her how she came by it and she said a lady in her town had sold it to her a little over a year ago for $1,000.

So.... I guess I informed the first woman that she had sold a 5 figure fiddle for $1,000.  Kind of explained the reaction.