World-Wide Pen Club Blog

IS IT A PEN? IS IT A PENCIL?

By Ian P Williamson

A quick look at the extraordinary pen/pencil combination.

 

A facet of this great hobby of pen collecting that caught my imagination recently is pen/pencil combinations. Although combinations first appeared in the mid 1800s, these consisted of a dip pen at one end and a pencil at the other.

 

The Eagle Pencil Company of New York is generally credited with producing the first one using a fountain pen in 1890; however it was Julius Schnell’s ‘Penselpen’ of 1929 that gave birth to the ‘Golden Age’ of the fountain pen/pencil combination, unfortunately it also led to the demise of Schnell’s company.

It is this ‘Golden Age’ era that interests me the most, it lasted between 1928-1939, this was the period when ‘combos’ really came into their own and almost every pen manufacturer introduced a model, although it is fair to say that the mainline pen makers did not get too heavily involved and consequently examples from these makers are rare today. The tier 2 and 3 pen makers, on the other hand, really went to town with combinations which of course means that a very attractive and unusual collection can be built up for moderate cost.

 

The concept of combining a fountain pen and a pencil into one integrated instrument is, at first glance, a very interesting idea, however in practice it was doomed to failure as ink capacities were limited for the pen and only one lead could be carried in the pencil with no self contained reserve available.

 

On the question of quality of manufacture I have been surprised to find that some of the tier 2 manufacturers have excellent quality products that are, in my opinion, the equal of many of the tier 1 makers. New Banker combinations for instance have lever boxes similar in style to those used by Waterman’s. Many have a metal threaded connector joining the pen to the pencil; both Remington and Wearever along with New Banker have models with this connector feature. I have also noticed that there is normally no warping around the lever pivot which is quite common with ‘normal’ pens of the secondary brands. Plating on the tier 2 models is, in the main, as you would expect – a thin wash, but I have some examples were the plating is the equal of any of the tier one pens.

 

 

Combination pen/pencils come in a wide variety of styles and sizes; my personal preference is for the larger sizes with the streamlined caps reminiscent of the Sheaffer’s Balance. Flat cap models also feature strongly in my own collection. Sizes vary from 156mm capped down to a petite sized 110mm capped. Filling systems in the main seem to be lever fill but there are variations, Len Provisor in an article that appeared on Pentrace refers to a depression era Parker produced in 1932 that was a button filler.

There seems to be no apparent reason why combos fell out of favour with the public and no research that I have carried out has provided any hard evidence for their demise, in fact there is very little reference material available on them at all. Could it be that the ‘big boys’ having first jumped on the combo band wagon realised that in so doing they were decimating the lucrative market that they had in pencils and decided to make a strategic withdrawal from the market place; the public, noticing this withdrawal were influenced in their buying decision to buy a ‘standard pen and pencil set rather than the unusual combo?

 

Recent years have seen some major manufacturers reprise the combination in various forms, Conway Stewart produced a limited edition Churchill combination fountain pen and ballpoint pen, Visconti and Lamy have also produced variations on the combo theme. Kaweco has a current limited edition combination fountain pen and pencil called the Combimatic and this is quite something as it is a piston filler. At the lower end Uranus have a model which has a Chinese calligraphy brush at one end with a gel roller ball at the other.

   

Moving back to the ‘Golden Age’ era pen makers to look out for are New Banker, Travelers, Wearever, Remington, Packard and Beatsall amongst many others; these are readily obtained for reasonable prices. ‘Tier 1’ manufacturers such as Parker, Sheaffer’s, Conway Stewart, Conklin, Mabie Todd and Waterman are more difficult to find and carry a premium price.

 

 

 Whilst perhaps not providing good investment material combinations do provide an unusual and exciting niche collection and whilst there are still plenty of the lesser brands around I have noticed a steady increase in asking price which would indicate that collectors are getting switched onto these wonderfully unique writing instruments.

 

Ian P Williamson

Cathedral Pens - England

SEARCHING FOR CONTINUITY IN CONWAY STEWART - 1936 to 1955

by Barry Rose of Writetime Conway Stewart Ink Pens Blog.

For many years, Conway Stewart collectors have been trying find some logic in the numbering system of the hundreds of different pens made by the company, but up to now, no-one has been able to crack the code - if there ever was any ! 

 

Unlike Swan, Onoto, and Waterman's, there seems to be no pattern in the numbering, and though we have no firm documentary evidence, it has been suggested that, at the Conway Stewart factory, there was a book, into which the model numbers were entered - and sometimes it seems that all they did was to find a number that had not been previously allocated to another model, and use that.

 

There are, however, occasional patterns to be found in the numbering of some models, and though we can only guess at the reasons for allotting those numbers, here is short example.

 

This is a page from a 1938 catalogue.

 

 

and here you will see the No.35 model, and also the 380 (more of that later).

 

It is one record that the No.35 model was available from the end of 1935, and that it also has a No.35 nib - so could the year of manufacture be responsible for that model number ?

 

That theory is immediately demolished when we move up ten numbers to the No.45 (the middle pen in this group of three), which replaced the No.35 when that was withdrawn from production, in 1942,

or the 45 was made available from the end of 1943 (1945 would have been more helpful), and, to confuse the issue further, it is fitted with a Duro 40 nib !

 

Those of you who have handled or collected a No.45 will know that was manufactured both in Vulcanite and plastic - and that surely had something to do with the availability of raw materials during wartime.

 

The 45 was withdrawn from production in 1946, and the model number that superseded it jumped by a further ten digits, to No.55. Fitted with the same Duro 40 nib (as in the No.45), here was a more chunky pen, with the attractive embellishment of three cap bands, a sort of updated version of the pre-war No.35. In fact, the caps are identical, though the 55 pen is a little shorter than the No.35.

 

And it was the No.55 that was to be the flagship of the Conway Stewart models until 1949, when it was discontinued in favour of the more familiar streamlined 'new look' No. 58.  Why alight on the number 58 ? Well, one far-fetched theory is that the cap has three bands (similar to the No.55) and 55 + 3 = 58.  Not very likely solution, I know ! 

 

So, by the beginning of the 1950's the more traditional shape of the Conway Stewart - such as the No.55 and the No.286 - had disappeared from the shops, and we wonder if there might have been some sort of backlash from CS customers, asking "please, where can we find the more traditional style of Conway Stewart pen" ? Again, this is pure guesswork, but it MIGHT possibly account for the introduction of the No.388, (the lower of the two pens in this image)

in early 1952, to satisfy those requests. Whatever the reason for its manufacture, in appearance, the 388 is similar to the No.55, albeit much slimmer, and it seems to be have remained in the catalogues until October 1955. Who knows, maybe by then, the newer 'streamline' style had been universally accepted ?

 

And why use the number 388 ?  Well, if you look at the first (colour) picture, from 1938, you will see, on the left, the slim 380 pen. And now look at the picture of the 388 pen. It may have one more cap band than the 380, but it has a definite similarity in both girth and length.

 

So perhaps there is some logic in the Conway Stewart numbering system after all.

 

Or am I (like so many others) just groping the in the dark ?!!

 

Barry Rose.