|
October 2003 A bit of time has passed since I
suggested a discussion of the meaning of some terms used
by contemporary builders to describe their work. If you
have been following the various threads this spawned you
will remember the terms I threw out for discussion were:
handmade; built from scratch; stocked from the blank;
stocked from a per-inlet blank; built from a pre-carved
stock and built from a kit.
I think we had some good input and, as some of you
speculated, I would eventually like the Contemporary
Longrifle Association to come up with a set of formal
definitions that at least our membership could agree to
use. My interest in this dates back several decades to
my time in the Colonial Williamsburg shop but in 2001 it
was called to my attention that the exhibitors at the
CLA show were not doing anything to educate the
potential customers about all the different ways the
guns on display were made. A man with money to spend
became so confused by the huge variation in pricing
(some of which comes from how the rifle was made) that
he ended up not making a purchase. I’ve always said that
gunsmiths make lousy salesmen.
This discussion seems to have run it’s course. Here’s my
attempt to extract and summarize some definitions:
Handmade—I have to go alone with Ric and Webster’s
Dictionary on that one—made by hand or hand processes…no
power tools used in the manufacture of the object. On a
“handmade” gun all the components are handmade. (I
differ with those who said that the availability of
ready made locks and barrels in the period would allow a
gun with a Chambers lock and Getz barrel to be called
handmade.) Even a forge welded barrel is not "handmade"
if it is reamed by a power tool or surfaced with a mill
or grinder.
Production of the raw materials from which the gun is
made (stock blank, bar iron and steel, sheet and scrap
brass, etc.) is not generally considered the work of the
gunsmith. So, to me, it is okay to consider a gun
“handmade” even though the raw materials have been
produced by modern processes.
However, this definition of handmade leaves open the
whole question of materials, processes and tools. As I
mentioned in the original posting, sawing a flintlock
out of bar stock (even some totally modern alloy) by
hand could result in a “handmade” lock. Ryan McNabb from
TN wrote me off list and asked if a hand cranked forge
could be used, instead of a bellows, to make a hand
forged gun barrel or lock?
So just saying something is “handmade” is not enough. To
really define it we, as Joe said, need qualifiers.
Maybe—Totally handmade, from period correct
materials, using period correct tools and processes—would
be enough.
Of course not even that mouthful is a clear
definition of how the gun was made because there were,
in any given period, many different tools and processes
in use. A lock made in 1775 in a Birmingham factory was
made very differently from one turned out by a gunsmith
in Augusta Co. Va. in the same year. As several
respondents said, to be completely clear a narrative
would have to be written.
So is it hopeless? I hope not. I hope this attempt to
define handmade has cast a strong light on what is not
handmade.
______________________________________________________
Responses I got about the meaning of "built from
scratch" varied widely. A few folks said it meant the
same thing as handmade. Most interpreted it to mean a
gun stocked from a blank but using modern commercially
made components such as the lock, barrel, and castings.
Whether the mounts were made or purchased made a
difference to a few and it certainly would to me as a potential
customer.
The consensus seemed to be that a "scratch built" gun
differs from a kit in two important ways: the builder is
selecting the individual components and the stock is not
pre-shaped or pre-inlet. (top) |
