Thanks for that info, to both of ya'll, I didn't realize it started so early in the production of barrels. Were these machine hammered ones considered to be of less quality than the ones that were hand forged? I'm sure they were probably cheaper, but I am asking specifically about the quality.
The method of hammering has nothing to do with the quality of the barrel. Both can produce excellent barrels, both can produce garbage.
Bad damascus was produced. Even the Belgians complained about it.
We cannot too much insist on the careful choice of a bad materials which is used in this fabrication especially in our days were the imitations and falsifications are executed and large proportions, in order to realize a cheaper price for procuring or rapid sale, and everybody will be the same opinion with us the careful workmanship which constitute the principal part in this manufacturing most reasonably not be sacrificed on account of a slight difference in the cost price of the barrel when make use of bad raw materials instead of using iron and steel of first quality.
Hunting changed as people had more leisure time and money. It stopped being the sport of kings and nobles. Damascus was an alternative to the poor fluid steel in the early years. The challenge was to produce strong light barrels that could handle the pressures of gun powder. Eventually the steel making improved and the need which had created the desire for damascus ceased.
Pete
