Finally, one must not overlook the fact that examples of English 

 and other European instruments were available in the Colonies, 

 and that at least some of the early colonial makers undoubtedly 

 copied them. It is apparent from some surviving early American 

 instruments that the materials, designs, dimensions, and details of 

 European prototypes had been deliberately copied. It is possible 

 to see in public collections, for instance, a Davis quadrant of English 

 manufacture exhibited beside a later example, signed by a New 

 England maker, which comes extraordinarily close to duplicating 

 it in every feature. 



As with the presumed influence of published works, the practice 

 of copying imported instruments cannot be documented, but it 

 must have been engaged in by many of the unschooled New Eng- 

 land instrument makers. By this means some may even have 

 profited to the degree that they became professional craftsmen 

 without benefit of formal apprenticeship. 



Yet it is remarkable that although numerous instruments were 

 produced by native artisans, in addition to the substantial number 

 which were imported before the end of the 18th century, relatively 

 few specimens have survived in public collections as well as in 

 private hands. Despite the exhaustive combing of attics and barns 

 throughout the country by dealers in antiques and by avid col- 

 lectors during the past several decades, the number of surviving 

 instruments now known is incredibly small in comparison with the 

 numbers known to have been made locally or imported before the 

 beginning of the 19th century. Since instruments are not items 

 which would ordinarily be deliberately discarded or destroyed, or 

 melted down for the recovery of the metal, this small percentage 

 of survival presents a puzzle which has not been resolved. 



13 



