Here’s a curious Cumberland example…
The pipe has no COM or date stamp. Just “DUNHILL CUMBERLAND” and the 5-digit code…
I don’t question the authenticity of the pipe in the slightest. It has all of the necessary Dunhill DNA right down to the cut of the tenon and the shape of the stamped characters. Though, I do find it interesting that it’s missing stamping that had been part of the Dunhill nomenclature for better than half a century by the time this one was made.
My guess is that they just didn’t leave themselves enough room for the additional stamping, and then decided to leave it to fix on the next run of the shape. Maybe it’s a first-year production and the Cumberland stamp is a bit larger than the Shell stamp that they were used to (I don’t have two from the same era on hand to compare) or maybe the introduction of the 5-digit code caused some confusion for a short while. I don’t know. I just find it curious and I’d appreciate your thoughts.
The pipe has no COM or date stamp. Just “DUNHILL CUMBERLAND” and the 5-digit code…
I don’t question the authenticity of the pipe in the slightest. It has all of the necessary Dunhill DNA right down to the cut of the tenon and the shape of the stamped characters. Though, I do find it interesting that it’s missing stamping that had been part of the Dunhill nomenclature for better than half a century by the time this one was made.
My guess is that they just didn’t leave themselves enough room for the additional stamping, and then decided to leave it to fix on the next run of the shape. Maybe it’s a first-year production and the Cumberland stamp is a bit larger than the Shell stamp that they were used to (I don’t have two from the same era on hand to compare) or maybe the introduction of the 5-digit code caused some confusion for a short while. I don’t know. I just find it curious and I’d appreciate your thoughts.