There was never a
European and British Union for the Nomenclature of Damascus Barrels, makers could name their barrels whatever they wished, and one maker’s ‘Boston’ was another’s ‘London’, and English ‘Boston’ didn’t necessarily look like Belgian ‘Boston’, and almost all of the barrel makers in Liege were probably making a ‘Boston’ variant for the British makers.
U.S. makers often simply referred to patterns as “Good”, “Fine” and “Finest”
The British (mostly) labeled the patterns '2 stripe' or '3 rod', often adding "Best", but no criteria existed for “British Best”
And aesthetic attractiveness didn't necessarily translate to strength
Damascus quality is best judged based on the overall grade/quality of the
gun, not the appearance of the Damascus pattern
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YJxP1k3PzmtmrG1HEGxd8X6g0-1GL0KNY8WMIMkdKr0/editIMHO this is spectacular damascus, but would not be found on a British "Best" gun
as is this pattern. Note the symmetry in shape and pattern of the scrolls. I can't comprehend the mechanical artistry that could create such a pattern
Parker 6 Iron "Turkish" which is almost never found on British Best (nor is Bernard). Greener thought 4 and 6 iron patterns were "over-twisted"