One always needs to look out for fakes and forgeries, although on occasion these have a fascination all of their own and can sometimes match or even surpass the interest of an original.
Here we would like to discuss two such instances in the field of collecting T.E. Lawrence. The first relates to the books from what is known as the “Clouds Hill” library, these being the books that were in TE’s cottage at the time of his death in 1935. It is well known that these are catalogued in “T.E. Lawrence by His Friends” and this section of the volume may indeed lend itself to being used as a kind of “faker’s bible”. The books were mainly widely dispersed by A.W. Lawrence and the majority bear a small bookplate to identify them. However, there are books around with a “fake” or ”second state” bookplate, possibly prepared by a bookseller. I have had through my hands the same title, one with a good bookplate and the other with a “second state” or “fake”. I have never come across a provenanced “Clouds Hill” volume, bearing a “fake” bookplate. The fortunate thing is that the bookplates are easy to tell apart, if you have seen them before, so do not be taken in.
The other thing to add is that A.W. Lawrence retained a few of the books, only disposing of them many years later and these do not have the bookplate but can usually be identified by other means of provenance.
A more entertaining and possibly contentious item is the so called “Schwartz Packet”. So called after an American, but London based bookdealer and bibliophile, who was mainly active in the 1930s from his Ulysses bookshop. This is Jacob Schwartz, who was apparently a charismatic character, perhaps mostly remembered, if at all now, as an authority on James Joyce material and the compiler of “1100 Obscure Points” a bibliophile’s handbook.
He was probably the owner, and certainly close to the item of TE interest here mentioned: it comprises three manuscript pages, of T.E. Lawrence’s study of James Elroy Flecker, written in black ink, on thin typing paper, the actual paper purporting to be re-used transcripts of letters from Hussein Ibn Ali and General Wilson. These sheets have been splendidly bound in quarter leather by renowned binders Sangorski and Sutcliffe, in a style that fits with the Golden Cockerel Press TE volumes. Presumably, this binding was commissioned by Schwartz to enhance and preserve the pages and improve their saleability.
Supposedly written in the 1920s by TE, if a forgery this was skilfully undertaken and deserves further research. The paper they are written on was apparently used to provide corroborating evidence, although possibly a little unconvincing in their content. Using the same method, the compiler also inserts a loose letter purporting to be from Lord Stamfordham with a two-line note supposedly in TE’s hand at the foot.
A comparison with the facsimile contained in one of the thirty copies of the special Golden Cockerel Press edition of Men in Print of 1940 indicates some minor discrepancies that may give the “Scwartz” item away or possibly indicate a different version, it does not appear as a straightforward tracing?
Whatever, TE’s brother A.W. Lawrence decidedly took against the manuscript and the enclosure, noting on the letter: The above two lines of writing are not in my brother’s hand & no such note appears on the original holograph letter in my possession from which this copy was typed after the death of T.E. Lawrence. A.W. Lawrence May 11, 1938.
He was apparently also equally unimpressed with the three pages of manuscript and Ed Maggs tells me that he has seen a letter written to Mrs Flecker dated January 1938 where AW states, I found a manuscript about your husband among my brother’s papers and had it typed by a man who took the opportunity to trace the original and sell his tracing to a dealer as being a genuine document. In addition, AW inscribes the first blank of the bound manuscript to a similar effect.
He obviously had for whatever the reason felt so strongly about this matter that he insisted the manuscript and letter be sealed and stored with his solicitor, indeed the whole beautifully bound volume and related material still remains housed in a stout legal envelope sealed with red wax and elaborately signed by both Jacob Schwartz and AW over the seals.
Now all this begs a number of points; why did AW go to such apparently elaborate lengths to have the pages sealed and signed with wax and stored at his solicitors rather than have them destroyed. Surely with his opinion of them this would have been a safer course of action rather than leave them for posterity.
This TE account of James Elroy Flecker has an interesting history in itself. In a letter of 27.IV.27 to E.M. Forster TE writes; Lets be exact. My note on Flecker was written one wet Sunday in Clouds Hill . Since light was vouchsafed to me I have written no more. My writing isn’t good. It was first published by the Corvinus Press in 1937 in a tiny edition of just 32 copies, there was also a small American printing that year to protect copyright that was not for sale or circulation. These editions followed the manuscript but contained a number of mis-readings and mistaken editorial changes, in what David Garnett terms, a corrupt text. Viscount Carlow annotates a copy; This book was printed to cover the copyright of certain documents that were stolen. No copies are in general circulation. So here is a slightly different account of the manuscript to that given by AW elsewhere. It seems that the events around this manuscript led to the desire to publish in a limited way to protect copyright.
In 1940 A. W. Lawrence published an edited and reduced text in the Golden Cockerel Press edition of “Men in Print”, itself an edition of only 500 copies, 30 being specials with the facsimile and with a note that sets out the basis for AW’s version. He also provides Hellé Flecker’s opinion of the text. Her statement that Flecker showed no Jewish traits is, perhaps, understandable at that date, since the population of Greece, her native country, was under threat from Nazi Germany. A Jewish connection might have put members of her family in danger. So as can be seen the text was at this time rather contentious and there are reasons that AW may not have wanted copies of the original text too readily available. It is only in recent times being made more generally available in reprint format, first by M. Valentine in 1988 and later (1992) in a facsimile version of the Corvinus Press edition.
So, the moral of these tales is surely Caveat Emptor, but do not always take things quite at face value, there are always stories to uncover and things may not always be just as they seem.
Thanks for assistance in putting this together to Ed Maggs and for further information on Jacob Schwartz see William S. Brockman, “Jacob Schwartz – The Fly in the Honey” contained in Joyce Studies Annual 1998. See also “The Corvinus Press, A History and Bibliography” by Paul W. Nash and A.J. Flavell. 1994. However, the interpretation , such as it is, is all mine!
I will welcome thoughts and comments.
