Lord Stirling review - smoking a bit of history

FROM JANUARY, 2012:

Recently I came across some letters my Dad wrote to his folks during WWII. A few of the letters are from the South Pacific when he was in action, but most are from his training days. He mentions playing baseball every day except that he missed three days after injuring his ankle during a game. He joked that there were more ball players in the Army than there were left in the big leagues. It made me think of one time when, as a kid, I mentioned Joe DiMaggio to my dad, and he looked at me thoughtfully and said (he was a man of few words), "I played baseball with Joe DiMaggio. <pause> All the DiMaggio boys. <pause> In the Army."

Well, the Lord Stirling cigar I smoked on December 31st bore a hand-written tag that read, "40's" and "dry."

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-a...0/IMG_6967.JPG

So, about the time this cigar was made, my Dad was playing baseball with "all the DiMaggio boys" "in the Army."

Here's something interesting - I removed the cello, and look at what else came off with it:

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-6...0/IMG_6968.JPG

Sitting in the unseasonably warm sunshine, reading Tarzan Returns aloud to my wife, sipping some Shiraz, and smoking a pre-embargo, clear Havana cigar given me by a generous friend - what could be better? Maybe if I could hold the book in one hand and still turn the pages with the same hand ... oh, wait - I can! Thank you, Kindle!

The cigar started off with a nice, very smooth and rich tobacco flavor mixed with a little tart creaminess. The draw was perfect, and the burn matched it except for one canoe late in the process. Lots of nice, fragrant smoke swirled in a little breeze. As I went along, all the first impressions gained in intensity, and about halfway through a little peppery tingle showed itself. Never the slightest hint of harshness. It wasn't the most complex cigar, really only presenting the flavors mentioned above. But I think a 60+ year old stick sure could have been a lot more plain than this one turned out!

I'm not sure about the "dry" designation. It tasted great - a mild-medium, very pleasantly-flavored smoke I could enjoy any time at all. It drew absolutely perfectly, and burned very well. It felt a little soft (nothing extreme) to a gentle squeeze, but I experienced the same thing with another cigar of that age. I think it's just a result of extended aging.

ADDED TODAY:

I may have to take a chance with Gotham and pick up a couple of more pre-embargoes when I have a special occasion - like a Panama Canal cruise in 2016 ...