Book about English gun trade = Empire of Guns

[Carl Young]

This is in response to Rajin Cajun (Bob's) post about English rifles here https://americanlongrifles.org/forum/index.php?topic=69837.0. I didn't expect much from this book, and was surprised at the details offered about the English gun trades. I am slowly reading the book cover to cover, and it presents some novel ideas and discussion of the gun trades and how they were connected.
Cajun Bob, I have a copy for you that will go out in the mail this week to your "Coon" address


I'm attaching a sample of the book that could address Bob Gerard's question about "gunmakers" and the terminology and customs of the time: https://americanlongrifles.org/forum/index.php?topic=70320.0;topicseen

Regards to all,
Carl

[bama]

Thanks Carl, this looks like a must have book.

[Rajin cajun]

Carl, pm sent....!
😊 Thanks!!!!!!

Bob

[Carl Young]

Hi Bob, no PM arrived yet...I'll be on the lookout. I'm going to PM you my cell# should have done that long ago!
Carl

[BradBrownBess]

That looks super! If it uses the term "Ironmongery" I want a copy!

Thanks for the heads up on that one - looks like it introduces a lot of ideas about gun making as a true "industrial revolution" activity - spread far and wide and sub-contracted down to many levels.

[Mattox Forge]

It should be noted that this book is a liberal Sanford U professor's thesis on the root causes of industrial revolution: how cultural violence, militarism, and greed were the actual drivers of the industrial revolution and not a purely historical study of the English gun trade.

Setting her obvious biases aside, which she made clear in the preface by theorizing that a gun was the root cause of a family tragedy, she has done a good bit of research on the interconnections for the British gun trade in the late 18th and early 19th centuries.

Mike

[Carl Young]

As one example early in the book there are mentions of how many barrels were made and where they were sourced from, and a discussion of barrel iron quality including how horseshoe nails were a highly sought commodity as raw material for barrel forging (especially Spanish barrels). I don't see how the authors anti-gun bias is affecting the historical accuracy of verifiable/collaborated facts. Or who Thomas Ketland was in competition with, and how government contracts for guns were obtained. Or the supposed advantages of Nock's chambered breech patent.

I am skeptical due to probable bias of the author, but I am looking at the factual information it contains, not any conclusions of the author.
As a full professor I rarely pay attention to an author's anyone else's opinions. We professors have a saying "In God we trust, all others bring data."

Regards,
Carl

[Mattox Forge]

After re-reading my post it seems that I am doubting her factual research because of her bias. I did not intend to do that. She did do excellent research using primary sources. Great stuff. I just wanted to point out that the primary intent of the book is not to be a historical treatise.

Mike

[Carl Young]

Hi Mike, I wasn't directing this at anyone in particular, especially you. I've gotten several PMs from members saying they won't read the book because of the author's bias. That's OK with me, but to blindly not read it and then say it is junk seems strange to me 

Thanks for sharing your thoughts,
Carl

[Mattox Forge]

I agree. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water so to say. I didn't realize Quakers were so prominent in the gun trade until reading this.

Mike

[smart dog]

Hi,
This is an excellent book about the British gun trade.  The author did her homework and referenced a huge lot of primary sources.  She also includes references from DeWitt Bailey, Nigel Brown, and Keith Neal about British gun makers. Her work provides insight into the world of 18th century gun making in Britain and about the Birmingham makers in particular. She clearly shows how the gun trade operated in England and why it struggled to adapt to technological and political changes.  Her work is comprehensive, albeit she makes a few errors with respect to the patterns of Brown Bess musket but they detract not a bit from her narrative.  She clearly shows how the major gun makers were mostly businessmen who could shift between very different trades and depended so much on government contracts.  The African gun trade often tided them over during times of peace and of course a lot of that trade went to slave traders.  She describes in detail how the gun makers were manipulated by but also manipulated the governments orders and supplies for arms.  This story shows convincingly why Ferguson rifles would never take hold and those who claim the British would have won the Rev War if they outfitted their troops with Fergusons.  Even if they were perfected technically, the gun trade could never have produced enough at a cost the government could afford. The friction between gun makers and ordnance discouraged new designs and innovation and that was not the government's fault.  It was the reluctance and friction among the gun makers to make changes that did not result in either reduced cost to them or higher prices paid by the government.  This book is enlightening.  It is really valuable to those of us who have studied the British gun trade and can place its activities within a historical framework.  It fills in a lot of missing data.

dave