Any Charatan experts?

[Frost]

Just saw what I think may be a pre Lane or perhaps Lane era Charatan on ebay and managed to get a smallish bid in before time ran out. Lo and behold I won it. Anyone able to confirm the age of it by the info from the listing?

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=130367083950&autorefresh=true

It is a pot shape with a saddle stem. No DC bit.

Nomenclature:

CHARATAN'S MAKE
LONDON ,ENGLAND
SPECIAL"
148 There is an "X" under the number
CP on stem

 

[PegLegEd]

You must be living right. Lucky Man!!!!

 

[Frost]

Well until I can say with reasonable certainty what era it is from, it may only be a so-so buy. From what I have gathered, if it is pre-lane it is a good deal, lane era would make it an ok deal, post lane makes it only a half decent deal.

Charatan dating seems to be so foggy it is hard to get a solid read based only on the available internet info I am able to find. Plus, since I have a bad habit of not writing down anything that is important, I tend to get my dating clues confused between the various brands and makers! Lol.

 

[PegLegEd]

I got 25 years worth of brain damage on you guy. What you wreckon all this tobac an pipe research is doing to me? I'm in to big of a hurry to learn it all right now to be able remember where i saw this or that and just what did it say.

You have to agree though yours looks like a better score than mine.

 

[Frost]

Looks like the "X" dates the Charatan to somewhere in the 60's, which would make it Lane era I believe. Either it doesn't have the lane "L" or the seller missed it I assume. That is my best guess based on the info I am able to find.

Edit in: Not necesarilly peg. I paid $90 for the 1920's BBB I got from smokingpipes and it had a decent amount of wear on it. Depending on age your BBB could be an excellent score, especially with the silver (bling, you know?). Either way, the price you got it for was more than a good deal in my opinion.

 

[PegLegEd]

Word!

 

[phillpsych]

Frost;
I'm assuming you have read "Memories of Charatan Pipes and Notes on their Dating" by Ivy Ryan? If not, I can send you a link, but you can
Google for this article, if you haven't read it.

 

[Frost]

Yeah I have read it, but thanks for the tip anyway. I have heard from other sources that there is some misinformation in that article, and of course I do not know what that misinformation might be, so there is still a fair amount of uncertainty for me.

Replied to your PM btw.

 

[thedeep]

A few years back I had a decent collection of Charatans. Gone now. But, from memory, the "X" denotes it is not a double-comfort bit, so it is post-1958 (the official start of the dc bit, though some were made before that time). Not having Lane's "L" probably means it was a pipe made for other than the American market. The "L" only went on American pipes.

 

[Frost]

Thanks sir. That jives with the info I have so far, so methinks you are right and this is lane or later. The only thing I am not sure of really at this point is if the use of the X and shape numbers changed from lane to dunhill. I was able to find the shape number on the 1964 & 65 charatan flyer on pipepages.com, but not on the late 60s european flyer.

 

[hagley]

Waste of time. Tad Gage has forgotten more about Charatans than that woman ever knew.

Mike

Frost;
I'm assuming you have read "Memories of Charatan Pipes and Notes on their Dating" by Ivy Ryan? If not, I can send you a link, but you can
Google for this article, if you haven't read it.

 

[hagley]

The X merely indicates that the pipe was not fitted with a DC mouthpiece.

Mike

Thanks sir. That jives with the info I have so far, so methinks you are right and this is lane or later. The only thing I am not sure of really at this point is if the use of the X and shape numbers changed from lane to dunhill. I was able to find the shape number on the 1964 & 65 charatan flyer on pipepages.com, but not on the late 60s european flyer.

 

[Frost]

Right, I got that about the X. I just wasn't sure if that was still used post-lane. I haven't been able to find Tad's article online yet, only references to it.

 

[thedeep]

Gee, I missed that part...I've owned a couple of 148's. That's an old standard shape for Charatan. Heck, it might be one I had...

 

[Frost]

Were yours decent smokers at least? I kinda have a fondness for the shape. Pot types sort of seem like the ugly stepchild, with billiards, dublins and bulldogs being the favored siblings.

 

[ftrplt]

Frost....I absolutely love a good pot-shaped pipe. Hard to find shape though. FTRPLT

 

[PegLegEd]

I keep looking at the picture of that pipe, it begins to speak of how much it loves to please the the holder, and just how much pleasure it can give.

 

[PegLegEd]

Well until I can say with reasonable certainty what era it is from, it may only be a so-so buy. From what I have gathered, if it is pre-lane it is a good deal, lane era would make it an ok deal, post lane makes it only a half decent deal.

Charatan dating seems to be so foggy it is hard to get a solid read based only on the available internet info I am able to find. Plus, since I have a bad habit of not writing down anything that is important, I tend to get my dating clues confused between the various brands and makers! Lol.

See ifthis site will help any.
http://www.finepipes.com/pipes/english/gbd

It also has Charatons. http://www.finepipes.com/

 

[thedeep]

Funny thing about pots. They, generally, are not pretty, but they sure do smoke! My Charatans were great smokers. The only straight pipe I currently own is an early Peterson pot...a great smoke. I had a couple of Barling pots...great smokes. That 148 will treat you right.

 

[Zeno Marx]

It's interesting that Charatan Freehands seem to try to stay close to traditional shapes, but at the same time, they can be some of the strangest, even downright goofy, looking things ever carved. I'd like to know more of the story behind them. For instance, the double-rimmed Dublins and Billiards. Where the carvers told to stay close to the standard shapes and given only limited leeway? Or maybe a really traditional person carving and thinking these slight alterations were as "out there" as they could handle? The result being some really oddball shapes, though they were attempting the very opposite?