William Henry of Nazareth pistols

[spgordon]

For Henry to make a pair such as this for his father showed that he had "arrived" - having put a scandal behind him, filled contracts for the young US, and now just built a home and shop, married and set up in business with much help from Dad.

Just my opinion, but I think we need to think outside our 21st century box/assumptions to understand work produced in these Moravian villages at this time. It's easy to think that human nature is everywhere the same and so a young man such as Henry, at the start of a career and having produced these beautiful arms, would necessarily feel this sort of worldly pride or ambition--to "arrive." But it's worth considering that young men like Henry were part of what we would consider a religious cult in which members were taught to think of any hint of worldly ambition such as this as a failing, a lapse from appropriate humility, and a fault that needed to be cured (and monitored until it was cured). These people aimed at eliminating self, not celebrating it. I've never seen an expression of pride in worldly success in any Moravian letter, public or private, that I've read over the last decade.

That doesn't mean, of course, that an individual might not have felt what the church discouraged him from feeling (worldly pride, a sense of worldly accomplishment). And Henry did chafe under church controls fifteen years or so later. So we can only speculate, in the absence of any evidence from Henry himself of what he felt--but we can base our speculations on contexts.

These pistols were made in the early 1780s. Nazareth had only been laid out a decade earlier, in 1771, and the town had about 15 homes at the time, as well as a brothers' house and a sisters' house. It was a tiny place and everybody knew everybody else's business. We today would be unable to tolerate the level of observation of spaces that we would consider "private" (but they were not) by authorities and neighbors. I wonder what these neighbors--whose highest aspiration seems to have been to eliminate self so they could focus on their Savior--would think of these pistols. Would they have seen them as a sign of worldly accomplishment? Or something else? Would Henry have wanted to produce pistols that sent such a signal or message for all to see? How would that have played in the tiny village of Nazareth?

[Seth Isaacson]

Remember that George W. and others here had wanted desperately to become English officers, but were passed over.  Look at the pair of pistols George carried - fine English officers' pistols.  I agree that a pair of such pistols was highly desirable and a symbol of status.  For Henry to make a pair such as this for his father showed that he had "arrived" - having put a scandal behind him, filled contracts for the young US, and now just built a home and shop, married and set up in business with much help from Dad.

Absolutely! You find English pistols and swords in the collections of many of our Founding Fathers. Not surprising since we were originally English colonies. Many of the founders pre-Revolution wanted to be seen as English gentlemen, but their counterparts treated them as "provincials" and pretenders. Social status was a very precarious thing in the 18th century and early 19th century. Even after the Revolution, many American gentlemen purchased fine English pistols and other arms. Note for example, the dueling pistols used in the famous Hamilton duels. Insecurity about social status is actually part of the reason for fighting some duels. By engaging in a duel with a man considered a gentleman, you announce to everyone that you too are a gentleman since only gentlemen fight formal duels and a men would not exchange shots with a man beneath his social status. Refusing to fight a man considered by others to be a gentleman on the flip-side could destroy a man's career and social life.

[spgordon]

I agree generally with everything just above--this continued-desire-for-things-British has been one of the transformative insights of historians in the past couple of decades (and literary historians: the opening chapter of The Importance of Being English, a study about the earliest American novels in the 1790s, is a tour de force).

But I would just stress that Moravian communities defined themselves in opposition to exactly this. Individuals who cared about worldly honor were reprimanded and monitored; if individuals had dueled, they would have been immediately expelled. The people who lived in these communities, in most cases (certainly Henry, in these early years), wanted to remove themselves from mainstream culture and live according to these other rules, where their Savior mattered above everything else. The men and boys who made these arms were Moravians first (and second, and third) and gunsmiths if convenient for the community. The small Moravian shops functioned as a small cog in a large and complex Moravian economy.

I believe that this context is important & to analyze the meaning of these arms (or aspects of them) outside of that context runs the risk of producing a substantial distortion effect.

Enjoying this conversation--keep it going!

[rich pierce]

In remaining Moravian work including guns and pottery I do not see an expression of “plainness” as is seen among some Amish and other groups, and from what little I know of their lifestyle and beliefs, do not see a silver-mounted, English-styled pistol as out of order.

[spgordon]

I didn't mention plainness--and didn't suggest (or mean to) that the Moravians only would have made plain items. Oerter's rifles show they made beautiful, ornate, high-end work.

I meant only to say that, when in the 1780s William Henry of Nazareth made these British-style pistols (which he obviously did, several times!), he would not, in my opinion, have done so to announce that he had "arrived." That would have felt to him like a boastful and worldly, perhaps even a sinful, attitude.

[rich pierce]

Got it, and agree!

[Eric Kettenburg]

I think it a mistake to force every single member of the brethren into the straightjacket of conformity to the church.  I value very much what you are saying, Scott, and I respect your learned interpretation.  I also generally agree with you.  BUT.  Can we really know what any man may think or feel in his heart when in private?  I don't think so, and I don't think there is any way for us now to realistically even make the attempt to know.  The only true "bottom line" here is that we have examples of very accomplished pistols that we know were made by Willam Henry II.  It's always fun to speculate and I think we all enjoy it, but we genuinely have no idea what the man may have felt about them.

From John Jacob Fries in a diary letter May 30, 1754:  "I made the top of a Table for myself, and 31st cut wood for feet on the Table.  They shall be Lyons Claws; is not that too much?  One day I am a Joiner, the next a Carver; what could I not learn if I was not too old?"  This is from Adelaide Fries translation in Vol. 2 of the Records of the Moravians in NC, pg. 531.

If that is not a personal expression of pride, I don't know what is.  The caveat, *in my interpretation of his words,* is that he seems to be recognizing his pride and expresses some guilt in regard to its presence.  Nevertheless, there it is.  I doubt he was the only member of the church who struggled with such private feelings.

[spgordon]

Can we really know what any man may think or feel in his heart when in private?  I don't think so, and I don't think there is any way for us now to realistically even make the attempt to know. 

Yes! This is exactly the reason that I thought it important to counter the very modern assertion that somehow these handsome English pistols showed that William Henry thought he had "arrived." We have no evidence whatsoever about what he thought. And so I tried to offer an alternative perspective on how Moravians tended to think and why it is not likely (in my opinion) that these pistols signaled some worldly pride on his part.

The quotation from JJFriis is fantastic. And it sure sounds like an expression of worldly pride (i.e., pride in his accomplishments). But consider this, from Frederick Marschall as he worked to construct the town of Salem in 1771: “the present building of Salem is an extraordinary affair, which I would not have undertaken had not the Saviour Himself ordered it. I verily believe that the rich city of London could not do that which we must accomplish." Marschall acknowledges that he and his brethren had accomplished great things, yes. But did he consider that such accomplishments came from him? He seems to have thought just the opposite--indeed, to have believed that he accomplished these things himself would have felt like sin, a failure to recognize that without his Savior he could not have accomplished them at all. To express pride in one's accomplishments, Moravians thought, was a species of ingratitude--claiming for oneself things that somebody else deserved credit for.

It is important that the Friis quotation occurs in a letter to a guy who had led the single brothers' choir in Bethabara. So Friis is writing to his former spiritual leader, who is in England with Zinzendorf: i.e., this is for Zinzendorf's eyes too. It's not a "private" diary, it's a public record. Given that, I think it's even more likely that the expression you quote ("what could I not learn if I was not too old?") is less an expression of worldly pride in the many skills he has than testimony to what his Savior has enabled him to do--an expression of humility rather than pride. But, as you say, this is my interpretation, not a "fact."

We don't know whether William Henry of Nazareth believed this wholeheartedly. But we sure have no evidence to think that he didn't.

[Mike Brooks]

Do we know for sure the wood on these is English walnut or Black Walnut? I think there is a possibility they could be an English export product "personalized" by Henry for sale through his shop.
 If you look through 'GREAT BRITISH GUNMAKERS"  by Neal and Back you'll notice every feature about this pistol is commonly English.
 I had a Bilby Hyde & CO. SXS flint gun that the only thing Bilby Hyde & CO. did was had their name engraved on the locks...they weren't gunmakers, they were sellers.

After finally getting to the section in the book about the pistols I now lean towards these being stocked by Henry. I still think it's possible some or all of the mounts came from England or Philly.

[Eric Kettenburg]

Scott, I certainly can see how the quote - or any such quote written or otherwise documented by a Moravian - can be interpreted in exactly the manner you describe.  I think we essentially are in agreement here that it's largely impossible now (and probably would have been impossible then, short of talking to the individual) to ascribe a purpose or underlying meaning to any act.

I find it a struggle to discuss the makers of any of these old guns in a manner that involves some depth or a more three dimensional interpretation.  It's easy to simply view the surviving work, and consider the maker in somewhat of a secondary fashion or as a hazy flat presence.  It's difficult to express what I'm trying to say.  On one hand we can go overboard and apply an entire modern human experience and mode of thought to these old dudes.  In the other extreme we can view them strictly as stiff and entirely opaque, unknowable.  I think it best to utilize a bit of give and take.  Of course they lived lives very different from our own but through any cursory study of history we can see that some human characteristics transcend many centuries or more.  While I try to avoid imparting modern ways of seeing or thinking to discussions/speculation of their lives, work and motives, at the same time we're all humans despite the passage of time and it's hard not to constantly think, "how would I..."

[spgordon]

Eric, I agree with you that it is impossible to know such things for sure. But we can speculate based on evidence. We are not left with a toss up between different possibilities, at least I don't think so.

To me, context determines the meaning of most things. If I write to my brother, "I want to kill Dad," the context determines the meaning of that statement. My brother (and anybody who reads it in that context) will not believe that I am plotting a murder. Out of context, somebody could misinterpret badly.

We know a great deal about how Moravian communities such as Nazareth were set up, what behaviors they encouraged and what behaviors they discouraged (severely). This knowledge makes it unlikely (but not certain) that WH of Naz would have produced something in his semi-public workspace that would signal worldly pride or some sense of "arrival." It is not impossible, of course, and without access to his own thoughts we cannot know. But I don't think we should abandon the attempt to puzzle such things out because of the fact that we will never know for sure. I think we can make better or worse arguments in favor of something, even though none of those arguments can settle the matter for sure.

There may be human characteristics that transcend time (pride in one's workmanship)--but, as I suggested in an earlier post, Moravian communities were set up to discourage (sometimes even punish) that very feeling and those who joined them willingly strove to squelch that natural, human attitude. They struggled against that. So, again, context matters. In that community of Nazareth, why would Henry produce something (handsome pistols to boast that he had "arrived") that only proved he had failed to live up to his community's and his own ideals?

So why did he make these handsome English pistols, if not to testify that he arrived? Perhaps because the customer asked for them that way?

[Eric Kettenburg]

So why did he make these handsome English pistols, if not to testify that he arrived? Perhaps because the customer asked for them that way?

Yes, often the most straightforward explanation is also most accurate!

[spgordon]

Here is a barely related sidenote that will probably be of interest to few on this list (probably not even to the few who have continued to read this long thread!).

Moravians such as William Henry in Nazareth submitted all the decisions that we consider the most important and private--who we marry, where we live, what trade we practice, who we hire, who our children can marry, etc.--to the Lot. This would be utterly intolerable to us, or to anybody who did not believe that the answer chosen by Lot (yes, no, or blank) was not random but was selected by Jesus himself. It is impossible to imagine how a community could tolerate such a system for generations if it did not believe in it, if it was not certain that a higher power was guiding the answer that the Lot gave. Nobody would submit the most important decisions in their life to random chance.

It is a serious struggle for anybody in the 21st century, I think, to wrap our head around this. It is hard for us to believe that they could have believed so confidently that Jesus selected the yes, the no, or the blank slips of paper. But without trying, at least, to imagine a belief system so "other" than our own, we will misunderstand so much about what Moravians did and how the trades and the craftsmen worked.

[Eric Kettenburg]

I don't find it hard in abstract to comprehend the system the Moravian church implemented, although of course I find it hard to comprehend the concept of myself (as an individual) living as part of this system.  I think the picture you paint is based upon the idealized concept of the church, the manner in which as a 'system' the church strove to operate.  I have no doubt, just via research presented by yourself and Bob and others, as well as my own more limited investigations into the broader church (as opposed to merely focusing upon a specific gun stocker or other craftsman), that by and large the church operated in this way and was able to achieve a degree of such perfectly-tuned harmony.  However, there are many examples to be found of individuals who apparently were challenged with forceful inward struggles over their dedication to the church beliefs in opposition to some form of personal perception of... their own individualism or perhaps pride?  On that particular note I can not say, because again I don't believe it is possible to truly know another man's heart or private thought.  Nevertheless, once again using Fries' translations of the NC records as an example (they're much more easily accessible to those of us challenged in the reading of Bethlehem's records!), the Collegium minutes are full of examples of the elders attempting to deal with this very issue among their flock.

I'm not really arguing with you and I very much agree with what you've written; I'm aware that you've researched the church and the original records much more than I, so I really wouldn't argue with you anyway!  I only wished to re-state my belief that in an example such as that presented here [William Henry's pistols], while the simplest explanation ("...the customer asked for them that way...") is often likewise the accurate explanation of purpose, I would not completely eliminate the mere possibility of prideful thought as playing some role.  Speculative, sure, but short of an explanation penned in his own hand we can never know.

[Mike Brooks]

I'm really surprised by the economic issues surrounding these pistols. Certainly it would have been much cheaper to have had a similar pair of pistols imported from England. Unless of course it was wartime and they were unavailable.

[Eric Kettenburg]

I'm really surprised by the economic issues surrounding these pistols. Certainly it would have been much cheaper to have had a similar pair of pistols imported from England. Unless of course it was wartime and they were unavailable.

That's a very interesting point.  Certainly prior to the War.  Would this have also been the case after the War, once European trade resumed?  On that note, I'm not sure.

[spgordon]

while the simplest explanation ("...the customer asked for them that way...") is often likewise the accurate explanation of purpose, I would not completely eliminate the mere possibility of prideful thought as playing some role.  Speculative, sure, but short of an explanation penned in his own hand we can never know.

I agree entirely that it is possible that worldly pride in his accomplishments played some role in Henry's decision to craft such pistols--I just don't think it's likely, for all the reasons I've laid out. But certainly possible.

It was when this (to me) unlikely possibility was stated as fact ("For Henry to make a pair such as this for his father showed that he had 'arrived' - having put a scandal behind him, filled contracts for the young US, and now just built a home and shop, married and set up in business with much help from Dad.") that I tried to offer an alternative perspective.

I've tried to avoid talking about what was in Henry's mind when he made these pistols. I have mainly suggested that, whatever level of devotion he felt in his heart, it would be odd for him to create an object in order to display worldly pride in a tiny village that carefully monitored and punished such expressions. Given such circumstances, other explanations for why he would have created such pistols (such as: a customer preferred this form) seem more promising ones.

[rich pierce]

I’m sure they had a good deal of Scripture memorized to guide them daily and probably
Colossians 3:23-24 was among their guides for work. They certainly were an industrious lot.

[eastwind]

Sorry I got on this one late. A few years ago when I was in the throes of research for the Kindig Collection book, I spent a fair amount of time looking at pistols, including the famous Zorger pistols at Winterthur (which Kindig found).I've handled the pair and found the elaborate, unmarked, silver sideplate (not the same as Henry design) was not up to the high standard of English pistol silver side plates. In fact, the surface itself had what could be described as tiny holes, which indicate inferior castings or perhaps re-casting. Also, the Winterthur "object report" indicated that the silver content was below the British sterling standard at the time of supposed build.
The J. P. Beck pistol in our Lancaster Long Rifle Exhibit at Landis Valley Museum in 2012, also contained an unmarked silver side plate and a grotesque butt cap. It too had pockmarked silver. The Jacob Sees pair in the Exhibit did not have a sideplate, but its silver trigger guard of English design appeared of better quality, but the butt plate was a plain simple design, which makes me believe the trigger guards were from another pair. I'm suspicious of any British sideplate or grotesque butt design seen on American pistols, when claimed to be made by an American gunsmith.

 I've seen this disparity of quality between English and American silver on numerous firearms and frankly, on other silver. I do not recall the source, Neal, Dixon or maybe, Blackmore, but I've read that the British Silver (Goldsmiths) Guild allowed "inferior" gun hardware to be exported - without silver marks, since it was considered inferior by Guild standards.

The sideplate panolpy design on the Henry pair is perhaps the most often seen design on British firearms, and although I can't see the closeup here that well, it too appears to have a rough surface, as does another photo I've seen of this pair. I suppose I'm suggesting Henry may have either imported the silver or re-cast from another casting. And, Scott,- I'm sure I've seen this basic design on other American pistols/guns-I'll search again. By the way, this pair of pistols is now in the Philadephia History Museum at Atwater Kent, Philadelphia, I just never got around to seeing it. Someone should handle the pair and determine the level of quality of the Henry silver sideplate, before concluding Henry made it from scratch.
Another thought - how many times have you seen these British sideplate designs on American long guns? The Brits used them on high-end fowlers.  This subject of American gunsmiths using English parts, or for that matter German or French, is long overdue due for a good informative book.


Patrick Hornberger

[spgordon]

Thanks, Patrick, for this informative response. I love this sort of information--because I think that answers to some of the issues you raise (can we tell whether WH cast these sideplates himself? how common in America at this time was the "panoply of arms" sideplate?) do hint at what it means that Henry made these pistols. For instance, say we learn that (a) he did not cast them and (b) they were relatively common sideplates on early American pistols. This would suggest (not prove, but suggest) that he used them because they were at hand, not because of any meaning (elite status, British-identification) that they had. If, on the other hand, we learn that (a) he did cast them and (b) they were relatively rare, it suggests a much more intentional choice on Henry's part--a choice that deserves further explanation.

I think (but am not sure that) Bob Lienemann inspected these pistols at the Atwater Kent when he visited the east coast last fall. Have you seen the photos in the new book?--they're very detailed.

[eastwind]

Scott: I could go on forever with this subject. But, what am I missing? I thought Henry personally made few -if any - guns himself. The ones I've seen attributed to Willaim Henry or his factory are not very sophisticated creations. That is not to say they couldn't copy a British plate, but I don't feel it is his original design, given the frequent sightings on other British gunsmiths work mentioned below. Based on what I've seen I don't think this design was "relatively common" on American pistols, as it was on British pistols.
My questions are somewhat basic: What is the source of this photo (beyond Bob's book) and who wrote the passage crediting Henry? Are these sources reliable? Are there photos of the trigger guard and butt-plate - that could tell us more. British gunsmiths contracted for the silver from the same silversmith to make all the hardware. A quick look at my library shows the Henry side plate design was used by Heylin, Richards, Coombs and Barbar, and undoubtedly many other British gunsmiths. Most of the side plates appear to be on earlier pistols than the Henry by 30-50 years, which may also suggest copying by Henry if indeed he did that.
 By the way, the side plate design on the Zorger pistols is the same as that used by Robert Wogdon, hallmarked 1784.

Much more to this subject is merited. It is just one more chapter in our trying to give the gunsmiths credit for making every part of a gun. I think the next generation will find that theory was wrong in many cases.
 
Patrick

[spgordon]

Patrick,

We have very little signed work by William Henry of Nazareth (1757-1821)--maybe 6-10 surviving signed objects? I don't think we know how much work he produced, but he did have a small gunshop in Nazareth for many years (1780-1810+), though for about a decade (1789-1798) Moravian authorities required him to give up gunsmithing and work instead as the village joiner. He also had a small factory at Jacobsburg between 1798-1803 where he completed a gov't contract. (It is William Henry of Lancaster about whom I'd say, as you did here, that he made few if any guns: I think he largely repaired guns and in any case had left the trade very early.)

But there are three different sets of pistols under discussion here:

• The set of pistols that Bob pictured in his book says "Nazareth" on the barrel and "W Henry Jr." on the lock (so dated 1780-1786). It's the pair at Atwater Kent. I'd always thought these were pistols that WH of Naz made for his father, WH of Lanc, but Bob suggests in the book that they may have been made for a Stephen Balliet, whose descendants donated the pistols to Hist. Soc. of Pa.
  
  
• The set of pistols pictured in this thread was entirely unknown, I think, until I found this photo a bit ago. I believe it says "W Henry" on the lock--and the annotation on the picture, perhaps Granville Henry's handwriting, ascribes it to William Henry of Nazareth. God knows where these pistols are now.
  
  
• Another set of pistols, apparently unlocated if the Atwater Kent ones are not the ones, were made by William Henry of Nazareth for his father (so dated 1780-1786). An 1807 letter from John J. Henry reminded his brother, William Henry of Nazareth, of "a pair of pistols, silver mounted, which you made & presented to our father."
  

It sounds as if the third pair listed above were "made" by William Henry of Nazareth. i don't think we have any evidence to base any guesses on as to whether these other pistols, or the rifles with WH of Naz signatures, were stocked by him, decorated by him, etc.--i.e., how much of the gun he actually "made." My guess regarding the sideplates under discussion here is that he did not recast them but used them because they were readily available.

I don't have the eye or skills to assess the quality of William Henry of Nazareth guns: others have to do that!

[Mike Brooks]

The pistols in the latest Moravian book are no great shakes when compared to high end English work. They do compare well to typical English export work. Especially obvious in the carving behind the tang. The position of the trigger aren't up to top English work either, but could have been acceptable for the export trade. OR Henry could have stocked these pistols up from available silver mounts purchased who knows where. I seriously doubt he did the casting himself. Somebody needs to determine what species of walnut these are stocked in.

[James Rogers]

The pistols in the latest Moravian book are no great shakes when compared to high end English work. They do compare well to typical English export work. Especially obvious in the carving behind the tang. The position of the trigger aren't up to top English work either, but could have been acceptable for the export trade. OR Henry could have stocked these pistols up from available silver mounts purchased who knows where. I seriously doubt he did the casting himself. Somebody needs to determine what species of walnut these are stocked in.

I can't add or subtract anything to/from that ; )