Ah, I leave town for a few days and I see that my good friend Scott Gordon has posted his argument that young Henry Albrecht was sent to learn the joiner’s trade with Wm. Henry, Jr. – to learn fine woodworking rather than gunstocking! We have argued this point over several years, and now Scott is using this public forum for the knockout blow. Show me a fine bookcase or window sash with WH and HA makers’ marks!
As Dave M suggests, we need to study the old records with care and an open mind. The stockers were part of the woodworkers’ guilds in the old countries, along with joiners and instrument makers who used the same tools and techniques. The Locksmith & Gunstocker’s shop at Bethlehem ordered a set of joiner’s tools shortly after Albrecht arrived – presumably for gunstocking work, and I’ve seen Albrecht referred to as a cooper later in life at Lititz. But I agree that the Moravian records were usually taken down by men who knew the details and got them right.
These guys are our heroes, and we go into an argument with certain expectations! I had suggested to Scott that since Henry Albrecht probably worked with his Dad, then was sent to Wm. Henry, Jr who his father trained as a gunstocker, since Wm. Henry, Jr. wanted to return to gunstocking, and since H Albrecht left Henry to go directly to J Dickert, it seemed possible – likely even that WH, Jr. taught him something of the gunstocking trade – whether he told the town Elders or not. It was common to send a seasoned apprentice on their Wanderjahre or “wandering year” for a bit of different exposure. Scott knew which trade Henry was practicing when H Albrecht arrived, and argued for the joiner trade. I was relieved in checking one Nazareth record that did not give an exact trade. But Scott has continued his tenacious research to include additional Lititz and Nazareth records, and I admit that his argument is formidable. I need to wander the village and look for examples of their joinery output. Maybe further study of related trades, store records, home construction or orders for such work will mention their names?
I do find solace in several points. However busy or idle, successful or frustrated, Andreas Albrecht somehow built enough fine rifles and/or taught and influenced others to do so that he set a basis for artwork on rifles over a very large area and for many years. Somehow Dickert and others’ work look like they apprenticed to him, when they did not. In that time before digital cameras and the Internet, Andreas and his old world skills spread far and wide, and here we are talking about him today. That his first long term apprentice Christian Oerter became such a creative force in just a few years is remarkable. Then AA taught young Wm. Henry the gunstocking trade, who like his father had many other talents, but who returned with his sons and grandsons to gunmaking on a very large scale - warms my heart a little. Whatever H Albrecht learned with Henry, he left for Dickert, a wife and family, and a lifetime of stocking very fine rifles which we admire today.
Scott began his article with the connections between the two families. My interests in gunstocking began with the Rocky Mountain fur trade – noting rifles by T J Albright of St. Louis and by J Henry of Boulton. I eventually learned of their fathers Henry Albrecht / Albright of Ohio and PA, and JJ Henry and his father Wm. Henry, Jr, and even earlier to Andreas from the old country, and Wm. Henry who apprenticed to another old world German gunsmith. That the two families continued their connections and support as the young country expanded is another story. Scott also shows how certain communities directed many details of trade and life. Beginning around the Revolution, many young men began to chafe against that control and desired “American freedom”, were not happy with the Helpmates or spouses chosen by the Lot, and like Henry Albrecht, some left the closed communities.
Lately I feel like a Daruma Doll – Scott keeps knocking down my idols, and I have to find some way to bounce back. But the real story is often better, richer than the one we started with, so keep that good work coming!
I agree that folks should spend the $12 for a copy of the Journal article if interested, as this supports making these wonderful Archive materials available for further study, and allows for interesting arguments such as this one. Without these records, we could not tell the stories. Bob
