As far as I know and have ever known there is no hard and fast criteria defining "best".
Agree with this statement to a certain extent. I believe that master gunmakers fully understood what was required to reasonably call a gun a best. They not only knew "best" work when they saw it, they also knew what it cost to get it either with in-house labor (an employee had the requisite skill) or from out-workers (a particular job that required "best" work was sent to contractor of known skill with instrructions for "best" and a price to match).
I'm sure the determination of "best" varied from firm to firm and I expect that Purdey's concept of "best" was probably different than Greeners just as an example.
I don't think it varied by much. Individual design required some differences in work detail. But, when you look, there is a lot of similarity in craftsmanship. Considering the specialized shop in which the Greener "G" was built, I doubt that it gave away anything to Purdey's. BTW, the market believes it is something more valuable than an A&D finished to "best".
A long time ago some judge back when they usually had common sense stated. "I don't really think I can define pornography but I recognize it when I see it."
A sensible statement from one who has the experience to know intuitively what he is looking at. However, without said experience it is not such a good idea.
I'm fairly certain my own perception of "best" is in variance with others on this board but I certainly don't have any problem with it's use in describing the triplets that started this thread. They are outstanding in my book.
From such discussions do we all learn.
Jim
I think I saw these guns about 10 years ago. If so,I agree they are "best work."
DDA
