Intriguing 1908 Barling

[sablebrush52]

What do you think about the extension/condenser?

I think it's inconclusive, though intriguing. I've seen this shape on a couple of other Barlings, and it's been used on Petersons, and I first saw it on a pipe that was neither, a number of years ago.

I go on more than a single feature, if I'm going to speculate. My first thought, when Doug asked me, was that the shaping looked promising. The tenon with extension isn't standard for Barling. It's been on less than a handful of pipes. If it was a Barling feature of the period, why isn't it on a lot of their pipes?

That I've seen this tenon extension on a few Barlings only means that its presence here doesn't exclude it possibly being a Barling.

But the waters get murkier, because besides this MARTIN pipe, another one showed up on eBay last week, with stamping for Josiah Brown Co:

1920's Josiah Brown Nottingham "Martin" Straight Grain Billiard Pipe | eBay

This one has been cleaned, stem soaked and given a polish. Whoever gets this pipe is in for a treat. It's a fine pipe. Thick chamber walls on this billiard. Stunning straight grain surrounds the bowl.

www.ebay.com

And it has the same tenon with extension, and an orific bit, AND Josiah Brown also had the MARTIN trademark, starting around 1951. That seems a bit late for an orific bit, though not to mention any construction of this type from Barling. So either Skillington allowed Josiah Brown to sell some MARTIN pipes under their own name. Brown took over control of the trademark much earlier than can currently be found in the Tobacco World Annual. Or who knows? And, of the two examples of this MARTIN pipe, both have this particular tenon extension, while with Barling there are 3 or 4 out of hundreds of surviving examples.

The data set is way too small to make any assumptions. We have two MARTIN pipes, one each from the two companies that owned the trademark, and 100% of the known examples have this tenon with extension, in other words, two out of two. How do we know that the word "MARTIN" doesn't pertain to the tenon design? Maybe the Barlings were special ordered, and had these "MARTIN" extensions made for them?

All of which shows that making assumptions may be a lot of fun, but doesn't prove anything.

 

[OzPiper]

Here’s a new Barling with the same Extension or “condenser” as the OP’s. This does not have hallmarks, maybe lost to time; however, it has pipe shop stamping.

These are from the very reputable seller.
View attachment 144302View attachment 144303View attachment 144304View attachment 144305View attachment 144306

Doug and Geoff are 2 of THE best vendors. Pipes skillfully cleaned.
And not buffed to death or sporting a shine like they have been lacquered with floor varnish

 

[ashdigger]

This may sound incredulous but these are great answers to my questions.

It really shows how much stuff is lost to time.

 

[sablebrush52]

This may sound incredulous but these are great answers to my questions.

It really shows how much stuff is lost to time.

Absolutely! That's part of the fun, and part of the frustration.

Here's another example to ponder. You see a pipe from the 1930's that lacks a known manufacturer's logo but has a P-lip. Maybe it has a tobacconist's name on it. Did Peterson make it?

Maybe, maybe not, because Oppenheimer sold lines of pipes fitted with P-Lips in the 1930's and later. How do I know this? I own 2 Oppenheimer catalogs from the 1930's and they both feature lines of Oppenheimer made pipes with P-Lips.

We fit together the pieces of the puzzle, one at a time.

 

[OzPiper]

This may sound incredulous but these are great answers to my questions.

It really shows how much stuff is lost to time.

Yep.
I posted sometime back that the information you get here on the Forums from Jon, Jesse and Ken Barnes (when he was with us) are gold.

And often not available elsewhere. Not unless you know where/how to ferret out these nuggets. Like Jon

 

[runscott]

I have a sort of frustrating Peterson that went through a life that might be similar to what your Barling's went through: the 1903 hallmarked stummel has obviously been smoked very heavily. The stem is obviously very old, made by Peterson and NOT original. It's just not worn enough, almost unused other than oxidation - the bone tenon has almost no use and the hole in the p-lip is too far forward for pre-1910.

I don't consider it a horrible situation - just part of the normal life of a great pipe that was loved so much that it had to get a new stem.