Unusual Leather Decoration

Kristen St. John, a book conservator at UCLA, has an intriguing post on their Preservation blog.  She has found an unusual method of leather decoration.  The book is French, from 1753.  It appears to be some kind of block print, although it she mentions it might be a stencil.  There are many more pictures on the blog, including some close ups. I haven’t seen any decoration like this before, and there is no reference in either Diderot, Dudin or Gauffecourt about the use of stencils in leather decoration, in eighteenth century bookbinding. ?

____________

J-V Capronnier de Gauffencourt, Traite de la Relieure des Livres, W. Thomas Taylor, Austin, 1987.

Diderot & d’Alembert, Encyclopedie, Neufchatel [Paris], 1765.

Dudin, M. The Art of the Bookbinder and Gilder, The Elemente Press, Leeds, 1977.

Millboard Shears

Three years ago, I wrote a post about board shears and their relationship to boarded and early case binding.  But before the board shear (aka. board chopper, table shears), which likely entered bookbinderies in the 1830’s, millboard shears were used for trimming book boards square.  They are essentially large tin shears, bench shears, or tin snips as they are commonly referred to. I had never seen a pair of these, except in early manuals and in a great photo from Middleton’s Recollections on page 37.  The caption for the photo, taken in 1999, notes that this was the first time he had used them since 1960.

But a couple of weeks age, I found something very similar in an antique store…

Fig. 1. Large tin snips with a 12 inch ruler on the bottom.

Although I think these are actually large tin snips, but I doubt that there is much difference if they were made for metal or binders board. The Peck, Stow & Wilcox Co. lists an almost identical bench shears, availiable in a variety of sizes. Likely, earlier ones were a bit larger than my example, but this size works quite well. They will be interesting to use in the workshop I teach on early 19th century bookbinding –bringing us one more step closer to using tools appropriate to the time period of the binding.    This shear has a 6″ cut, and is stamped “Roys & Wilcox Co. / East Berlin Ct. / Cast Steel / 5 ”  The slight bend to the end on the top handle on the upper arm, is very important, because it keeps the heavy arm from pinching your hand as you operate the shears.  The other handle was bent, I believe, to insert into an anvil for the smith to secure it while cutting.  The shear is quite stable when clamped in a lying press.

Fig. 2.  Mill board shears in action.

The Whole Art of Bookbinding, 1811, simply mentions cutting out of boards with “the large shears” (p. 8)  Martin, in 1823, states that “The pasteboards being roughly cut with shears to something like the size (p. 14). Cowie, in 1828, interestingly mentions a “press-shears” for squaring the boards after lacing on, which must refer to these types of what later became know as millboard shears (p. 19).  Middleton notes that millboards were availiable to binders as early as 1711, and the last hand-made millboards maker ceased production in 1939.  Did the name, millboard shears stick, perhaps because paste boards were soft enough to be cut with a smaller shears or knife?  French bookbinders, from around this time, used a large pointe to cut their boards.

Fig. 3. Nicholson’s table-shears. Observe the lack of gauges for cutting-there is only an outer gauge, the foot clamp, and the graceful positioning of the worker’s left hand and feet.

Nicholson, in 1865, makes no mention of the millboard shears, but does refer to board shears as “table or patent shears” (p. 65), suggesting this was still a somewhat new machine, at least in the US?  One can almost imagine the evolution from a millboard shear, somewhat difficult to use because of its short cutting length, being reconfigured with larger blades, one fixed, like clamping the bottom blade in a press, and a handle, added for leverage on the other.  The table also prevents flexing of the board, which improves accuracy in cutting. Note that the table shears In the 1920’s or 30’s, Hickock, in catalog #88, subtitled their board shear as a “Gauge Table Shears”, on page 10.

Fig. 4. Image from 1892 Harrild and Sons catalog of millboard shears.

The Harrild and Sons catalog has a picture of their ‘millboard squaring shears”, stamped with their logo– note the the market was large enough for them to carry three different sizes, a 7″, 8″ and 9″.

Fig. 5.  Crane’s illustration of how to lay out mill board for cutting with the millboard shears. This is very similar to how French boards were cut 100 years earlier.

Crane, in 1885, somewhat oddly, provides the above illustration for the marking of millboard for cutting with a millboard shears but does not include an image of the shears.  First the boards are divided with a large compass, marked off with a bodkin, then the cutting lines drawn using a straightedge. He does include instructions on how to use the millboard shears. “The Boards are generally cut up with the millboard shears. These are screwed up in the end of the laying-press nearest to the operator, and, the millboard being placed between the jaws, the dege of the upper jaw coenciding with the mark upon the board, the upper handle is worked by the right hand, and the board is readily and quickly cut. The millboard is held in the left hand during the operation.  In most regular establishments of any pretensions, the shears are now almost superseded by the board-cutting machine… (p. 67)”

Fig.6.  Image of Mill board shears from Zanesdorf.

Zaehnsdorf, 1903,  also provides some instruction on how to use mill board shears. “To use the shears, screw up [!] one arm in the laying press, hold the board by the left hand, using the right to work the upper arm, the left hand meanwhile guiding the board. Some little tact is required to cut heavy boards.  It will be found that it is necessary to press the lower arm away with the thigh, and bring the upper arm towards the operator whilst cutting. (pp. 52-53)” The photograph of Middleton, in Recollections, shows this exact method of holding the board. (p. 37)

Fig. 7. Cockerell’s improved millboard shear attachment.

Cockerell notes that if “The straight arm of the shears is the one to fin in the press, for if the bent arm be undermost, the knuckles are apt to be severely bruised against the end. Any blacksmith will bend the arm of the shears and make the necessary clips.  This method saves considerable wear and tear to the ‘lying’ press. Where a great many boards are needed, they may be quickly cut in a board machine, but for ‘extra’ work they should be further trimmed in the plough, in the same way as those cut by the shears. (pp. 126-127)”  I’d be curious if anyone has a lying press with some telltale indentations at the ends? I wonder if board shears of the time gave a slightly rough, crude cut, or was it just tradition to later plough the edges?  Ellen Gates Starr, an American who spent 15 months studying bookbinding with Cockerell, seems to mention this method of attaching the shear in the 1915  Industrial-Arts Magazine. “The boards are roughly cut to approximate size (We do it with a huge pair of shears of which one handle is made fast. I have never seen a pair except for my own in this country) (p. 104).”  Were millboard shears that uncommon in the US?  It seems that by the 1920’s, millboard shears had gone out of fashion.  Thomas Harrison remarks in 1926, that, “…millboard cutters are now used instead of the shears…” (p. 65)  But he includes an image of the Cockerell type attachment, although given the similarities of the renderings, I’m tempted to speculate that Harrison was at the least highly influenced by Cockerell’s drawing, or it may be a copy with slightly altered perspective.

Fig. 8. Harrison’s version of Cockerell’s attachment.

In my own experiments, these shears cut binders board quite well.  They are obviously slower to use than a board shear and take more skill to operate. With a fairly large sheet, it is difficult to rejig it with the blade for each cut, so a little longer blade would be advantageous.  The reason the shears are often positioned about 45 degrees to the press, is so that they are roughly in line with the eye of the user.  The thickness of the blade requires that the board be parted during the cuts. It is difficult to realign a cut when in the middle of it, so it the cut strays from the line, it tends to be for the length of the blades, which may a clue to identify how 19 century boards have been cut and what size millboard shears were used to make the cut.  I’ve tried it on both Davey and Eterno board, .080 and .098 thickness, and I imagine, although haven’t tried, that large tin snips might do a decent job of rough cutting of sheets to size, before trimming with a straight edge and knife– easier for those who don’t have a board shears.

Even today, one of the most common difficulties, for those who lack a Kuttrimmer or Board shear, is trimming binders board to size.  Cutting through a wide section of binders board is very difficult with an Olfa type knife and a straight edge– the board tends to pinch and squeeze the blade.  Cutting a narrow strip (1/2″ or so)off the edge of a board is much easier, since the board can be pealed of pulled away, making room for the thickness of the knife blade.  This is also why I prefer thinner knife blades.  Millboard shears could be useful for binders who mainly do fine binding, and don’t make boxes, or for those who have a smaller Kuttrimmer, incapable of cutting a full sheet of board.  Perhaps there is still a use for this almost obsolete bookbinding tool?

Acknowledgements

Thanks to Tom Conroy for information on early board shears,the Middleton, and Peck, Stowe & Wilcox references.

______________________________________________

[NA] The Whole Art of Bookbinding. Owestry: N. Minshall, 1811.

Cockerell, Douglas.  Bookbinding and the Care of Books.  New York: D.Appleton And Co., 1902.

Cowie, George. The Bookbinders Manuel. London: Cowie and Strange, [1828].

Crane, W.J. E. Bookbinding for Amateurs. London: L. L. Upcott Gill, 1885.

[G. Martin] The Bookbinder’s Complete Instructor. Peterhead: P. Buchan, 1823.

Harrison, Thomas.  The Bookbinding Craft and Industry. Garland Publishing, Inc: New York & London, 1989. [1926]

Middleton, Bernard C. A History of English Craft Bookbinding Technique. New York & London: Hafner Pub. Co., 1963.

Middleton, Bernard C. Recollections: A Life in Bookbinding. New Castle and London: Oak Knoll Press and The British Library, 2000.

Nicholson, James B. A Manual of the Art of Bookbinding. Philadelphia: Henry Carey Baird, 1865.

Zaehnsdorf, Joseph.  The Art of Bookbinding. London: George Bell And Sons, 1903.

The Nokey Sewing Frame

“In European bookbinding the sewing frame or sewing press is an essential piece of equipment. The primary sewing–that which connects the quires of sections of a text-block– is the very foundation of binding, and I believe a well-consolidated, multi-quire text-block sewn onto bands can only be achieved by using a sewing frame.” Christopher Clarkson, ‘Thoughts on Sewing Frame Design for the Book Conservator’ in The Paper Conservator 19, 1995. (p. 41)


The earliest known representation of a sewing frame is found in the well known Bamberg Miniature, from around 1250.  During the past 750 years there have been few changes to its basic structure.  Essentially, a sewing frame consists of a base, two uprights and a crossbar which can hold the sewing supports at 90 degrees to the signatures while sewing. This allows the supports to be properly tensioned and keeps the entire text-block in precise alignment.  I find it is faster to sew a book on a frame and the sewing is more accurate for all types of supports– even if you are pre-piercing and using tapes.  Additionally, there is an ineffable satisfaction in using a piece craft equipment with such a long history, it makes bookbinding easier and more enjoyable. Many shortcuts in current bookbinding technique– one of them not sewing on a frame– tend to produce a book that can look and feel homemade, rather than handmade.

Despite the essential stability of the sewing frame as standard bookbinding equipment, there have been minor changes: the shift from the base being a table to portable, the Northern European addition of adjustable hooks, gated fronts, and cantilevered uprights,  the (French?) addition of a ‘tenter’, changes in the size and shape of the sewing keys, the use of manufactured woods and other materials for dimensional stability,  etc….  A candle holder, pictured in C. E Prediger’s Der Buchbinder und Futteralmacher, 1745, (reproduced in Mirjam Foot’s Bookbinders at Work) has to rank as one of the more creative improvements. It is only recently that sewing frames have changed significantly.

During the past 60 years or so, sewing frames seem to have the allure of a better mousetrap,  with inventive bookbinders and conservators rethinking some traditional formulations.  Sidney Cockerell used the idea of cantilevered uprights, but improved the rigidity of them by making them solid.  Chris Clarkson refers to this as the ‘Mark I’ style sewing frame.  I believe John Corderoy, in the 1967 Bookbinding for Beginners was the first to mention a folding sewing frame on page 21.   Later Roger Powell created a unique key slot that permitted the supports to be strung at the front of the base, making starting the sewing much easier, and was possibly the inventor of cushioned sewing boards.   Chris Clarkson and Peter Clothier in 1992 contributed several more improvements with their Mark III  sewing frame.  Laurenson-Stuart also made a non-adjustable cantilevered frame modeled in the Cockerell design, which was sold by Hewit & Sons in the 1990’s. Phillip Smith created a single post frame,and a clamp-on version. Most recently,  Tim Ely  has invented the Dreadnaught and Scout,  a modern rethinking of the cantilevered design, made with modern materials, outfitted with a rear view mirror and ‘anubis’ clips to hold supports.  Some  who have caught the sewing frame bug– such as Tim Moore, Keith UramRobert Walp, and Frank Weisner— are not tempted to improve on the traditional design, but are making well crafted, high quality hardwood frames with a modern aesthetic.

Yet the siren song of the sewing frame inspires some truly bizarre ideas– for example, here is a sewing frame made from an old book— conceptually clever, yet I can’t imagine it is actually rigid enough to function, but the author claims it also works as a piercing jig. For some reason, there is also an odd tradition of using the legs of a chair, in this image the chair is placed flat on a table, and the book attached between the legs, from the front to the back, under the seat.  Halliday’s 1930 Bookbinding as a Handwork Subject contains two additional variants of this unfortunate approach; using the chair upside and using the bottom of the seat as the base, and using the chair upright and attaching the supports to the back of the chair.

Ruth Zechlin, Werkbuch für Mädchen und für alle die Freude am Werken haben, 1961 (first edition 1932)

The tradition seems to be not just confined to America and the United Kingdom, Peter Zillig sent me the above  German example, I presume from the 1932 edition, but am not sure.  It looks like the opposite side of the chair is also strung up, perhaps for a ‘dos-a-dos’ binding?  I’m surprised no one has claimed chair/sewing frame as a combination book press/ sewing frame– after sewing, one could simply sit on the book to press it.  Of course, a simple frame is relatively easy to construct, if you have a few hand tools– drill, saw, router, sandpaper– and some basic woodworking skills, like this one I made  with metal rod uprights.

Many book arts suppliers also offer inexpensive traditional looking wooden versions, though they should be carefully inspected for quality– at least make sure the center of the crossbar coincides with center of the slot on the base and the screws turn smoothly.  Older frames, due to poor storage, are sometimes too loose and warped, which can interfere with accurate sewing.  Also, when evaluating a frame, make sure the  uprights are at 90 degrees to the base and crossbar is rigid. If it deflects, each time you tension a support, it will change the tension on the others.  A few broken or chipped wood threads are common and will not interfere with the action of the nut.  If a wood nut is very tight, the threads need to be filed or sanded slightly larger.

***

I began to make and think seriously about sewing frames in 1997, during a week long Mellon Advanced Conservation Workshop held at the University of Iowa, co-taught by Joel Spector and Tom Conroy.  I made two wood frames– a full size German style cantilevered press, and a smaller, traditional English style.  I’ve also made a dozen of the portable frames, similar to the one  pictured above, for a class I taught at PBI.  My interest in frames was rekindled when I saw a Hickock Blank Book sewing frame, with its easy to use T-slot adjustment mechanism for attaching sewing supports.

A major,  inherent problem with all previous sewing frames is that they are awkward to store when not in use;  often they are placed on a high shelf, difficult to access and exposed to excessive heat and dust, or have to be disassembled, which is also a pain.  I suspect these inconveniences sometimes keep them from being used.  I often found sewing keys difficult.  I borrowed the t-slot idea from Hickock, supports that attach to the front of the base from Powell, added advantage of folding uprights solidly constructed out of aluminum, and The Nokey Sewing Frame was born.

***

THE NOKEY SEWING FRAME

Fig. I: The Nokey Sewing frame strung up with a tape, thin cord, thick cord, double cord and slit thong.

Fig. II: The Nokey folded.

Fig. III: Hex head adjustment driver.

Fig. IV: Close up of buttons with various supports.

Fig. V: Bottom of Nokey, folded,  with 12 inch ruler.

Fig. VI: Large Nokey open, small Nokey closed on top.

***

ADVANTAGES OF THE NOKEY SEWING FRAME

1. Nokey means easy to set up and quick adjustment of  spacing for all types of sewing supports- tapes, single and double cords, thongs, etc….

2. Folds flat for convenient dust free storage and transportation, only 2.25″ thick.

3. Solidly constructed of aluminum and plywood. Zero deflection, this is the strongest sewing frame ever made.

4. Uprights stop at exactly 90 degrees, and can be adjusted.

5. Sewing starts at the edge of the sewing board, making it easy to begin sewing and sew in the round.

6. Rubber feet keep even small size frame from sliding around on the bench.

7. Minimum distance between supports: 1 inch.

8. Buttons which attach supports tighten and loosen with a 5/32″ simple hex head driver, which is included.

9. Partially sewn books can be quickly removed and replaced, which make the Nokey ideal for  schools.

10. Custom sizes and additional buttons available, please inquire.

“Nearly 40 years ago I made my first sewing frame out of scrap wood.  It rocked back and forth like an old table but it taught me the value of the sewing frame as a tool and I’ve never been without one since.  I now have three in my shop.  The Nokey Sewing Frame is a real innovation, taking the best of a traditional design and adapting it to new materials and needs. It is actually fun to use.  The button screws make for very fast and easy setup.And it’s versatile enough to accommodate nearly all the variations on supported sewing I can think of for general bookbinding as well as conservation work. Well designed and well made with high quality materials, this is quite simply a great tool.”

-John Townsend, (aka Anonymous Bookbinder)

*

UPDATED 21 NOVEMBER 2015: I’ve changed the design slightly, see the “Tool Catalog” section of this blog for prices and how to order.