[saintclair]

I just joined this Forum a few days ago, but I notice that many comments reference "The Book of Colt Firearms" By Wilson. I have the original version of that book (with blue jacket)
which lists the authors (note plural) as Sutherland and Wilson. As a trained scientist who has written many peer reviewed technical papers, I know that one should always refer to the
original seminal publication as opposed to later editions unless the later editions contain specific new information not in the original.
I understand that Sutherland has passed away, but I suspect much of the original research in the original edition was done by him. I hope people in this Forum will not let the record
of his accomplishments be lost.

 

[Colt-SL]

I have the BOCF Third Edition. I have always presumed that the original information was updated via later information gleaned after Mr. Sutherland's death. Appreciate your passion for this subject!

 

[weagle99]

My understanding is that Surherland contributed most of the guns for the book while Wilson completed the bulk of the research.

 

[ohiobuckeye]

There is little chance their accomplishments will be lost. The book is considered by most serious Colt collectors to be "The Bible" of the Colt collecting hobby. It has some errors, but until someone comes along with a more complete and accurate upgrade, this is THE book to have. There are many other books to supplement the BOCF, but this one remains the best source of info for Colts to be found in one book.

 

[Bushwhacker]

The only writing Bob Sutherland did was to sign the checks. Larry Wilson did the rest.

 

[JudgeColt]

The only writing Bob Sutherland did was to sign the checks. Larry Wilson did the rest.

And made a handsome profit on some of the guns he "appraised" for Sutherland to buy. It was that kind of breach of fiduciary duty that got Wilson some prison time a few years ago.

 

[rhmc24]

My copy was given me by my friend's widow, his book collection, some 30 years ago for appraising his gun collection after he passed. Taking me into his office saying, take anything you want because the rest is going out on the curb. Wishing since i'd been smarter I just collected up a few books about Colt or S&W. Probably missed a lot of good stuff because he had been curator of several major museums before he retired. At the time I was into real old guns back to the wheellock period, with little interest in anything later than about 1800.

Another case of too soon old & too late smart. I'm 89 now, expecting 'smart' to kick in at any time.

 

[what would you say]

i got faith in you though Rhmc that you're gonna come around someday.. we've seen that you've got plenty of good sense already though !

 

[smokey04]

I bought a NEW 1st Edition at the Denver Gun Show when they first came out. I thought ,MY CHRIST ,$50.00 for a book? Wow,I wish I had bought a whole case of them! As an aside,I was in a "conversion" with a fellow at a gun show here in Alabama. The subject was, the fake and parts guns he had for sale [1911 & 1911A1s] He said," I guess you know everything ,huh?". I said, "no, but I do know how to read and I just paid $550 dollars for the Bible["Clawsons Big Book"]. He might near swooned and said,"$550 for a book? You must be crazy,I can buy another pistol for that!" My response was simple," That's why you have $10,000 dollars worth of price tags on your table for $1800. worth of junk". I can't post his response here but ,needless to say when I see him at a gunshow I just bypass his table, his attitude,and his dumba$$. Nick

 

[saintclair]

I have studied the original book by Sutherland and Wilson as well as at least two later versions by Wilson. The original book has just about everything (90+%) that is found in the later versions. If Wilson did all the research and Sutherland was supplying the $'s as Bushwhacker states, that still does not seem right to remove an author's name on subsequent versions unless the original contribution was in $'s, alone.
In graduate school, my professor provided funding and the laboratory space and I did the research, but the professor is always considered as 'First Author' on such ventures. He initiated the area of research and gave his advise and oversight of the student (me).
That philosophy may not apply to book writing/publishing, so Wilson certainly had the right to publish subsequent versions in his name, alone, I suppose.

 

[JudgeColt]

I am curious to know what constitutes the 10% difference between the First, Second and Third Editions. I cannot find any, other than the cover, jacket, title page and added serial number charts in the Third Edition. The errors in the First Edition are repeated in the Second and Third.

The gun book publishing business is not governed by the ethics of academia. From what we know of Mr. Wilson, he is not governed by any kind of ethics.

 

[steg]

In my opinion, Larry Wilson's talent is not in writing, but editing. If you read his other collaborations with other authors, the writing style varies from book to book.
As for the 3rd Edition of the Book of Colt Firearms, I feel that it is not worth the money - even at discount. There is almost no new information in it, and the illustrations seem to be printed from worn out printing plates. In addition, he never corrected the information about the serial numbers for the M1862 Pocket Police and the Pocket Navy models. He has nothing about the fact that the Pocket Navy has a separate serial number range and that none were produced before 1865....a major omission, considering this new information was published by others a few years before Larry issued his "3rd Edition".
As for his reprehensible dealings with Colt Collectors, I feel he has earned an old fashioned title of "He whose name is not mentioned amongst gentlemen".

 

[saintclair]

To Judge Colt's comment: I agree that there is little difference among the different version, but since I did not do an analysis, I made a 10% guess.
In regards to Mr. Wilson's many books, I am pleased that he did a more extensive version of Engraved Colts with his two volume set that came out a few years ago.
If you like engraved guns, you have to see pictures!!

 

[johngross]

...one should always refer to the
original seminal publication as opposed to later editions unless the later editions contain specific new information not in the original.

I've never heard of such a thing, and I have been reading about the American Civil War and guns for 45+ years and have published 30 articles about guns and Civil War collectibles. I've never attempted to locate a first edition vs. a later edition of a book. Indeed, some first editions, such as regimental histories written in the late 1800's can be very expensive, hard to locate, and fragile for constant use and reference.

Now what is common and universally excepted among scholars, both professional and amateur, is that one should try and go to the original source. For example, if The Book of Colt Firearms quotes something from Civil War Guns by William B. Edwards, and Edwards references a report written by Chief of Ordnance J. W. Ripley from the Official Records of the War of the Rebellion (known as the OR), it is always best to go to the OR and read/verify the information for yourself. Of course it depends upon the importance and relevance of the information whether one wishes to pursue the original source or not.

Once again, I have never seen a problem using a later edition of a book as long as the author notes which edition he/she has used.

John Gross

 

[saintclair]

Johngross, I agree with your comments that one cannot always find the Original Source, but if they can, they should use it. I certainly have many papers and book chapters in the technical literature where I referred to secondary and even tertiary sources. On many occasions, my reviewers corrected me and even sent my manuscripts back for corrections. In the technical literature one often has to use translations (from German to English), and that introduces possible mistakes due to poor translation. None of us are perfect.
I was just concerned that an author had been removed from a seminal piece of work and people on the ColtForum were over looking his contribution. Of course, a few people who have responded in this Thread have more insight into the development of the original TBOCF. If it is their feeling that Wilson was the person who deserves the credit, so be it.

 

[saintclair]

After being "Holier than Thou" and complaining about not giving Sutherland credit as a co-author on The Book of Colt Firearms, I overlooked contributions by three people on one of the Revolver Threads (about Banker's Specials) when they all recommended that I buy the book on Snub-Nosed Colts by Gary Peer.
I only paid attention to the fourth person who made the same suggestion when I thanked him on a later post after buying the book from a source he recommended.
Another fine example of "Do as I say; not as I do."

 

[Rio]

In my opinion, Larry Wilson's talent is not in writing, but editing.

I have to agree with this. Although Wilson's books are a great read - I have most of them - I feel that he does not particularly do any new research but merely gathers information from previously published works and edits it into a new book. Hence the mistakes, that could and should be corrected.
With regard to his two-volume work on engraved guns, I was led to believe that if you had a pistol that was worthy of inclusion you could pay him to have it in the book!

Rio

 

[JohnnyP]

In Wilson's The Colt Heritage he chose to use the incorrect serial number list for the Model 1911 and Model 1911A1 pistols. There were two serial number lists being published at the time, with one being correct and the other incorrect.

 

[Texas Man]

I beleave Sutherland was own or coowner of Sutherland Lumber Co. Sutherland and his wife went thur a nasty divorce and rumer was at the time she destoryed all the printing plates.