Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post - lobster-tail helmet for comment

A Senefelder · 20th March 2013, 04:07 PM

Cerjak, I picked one of these up about 6-7 years ago when they first started turning up with some frequency and have watched a number of them when they've come up for sale. Based on the one I owned and the one you have pictures my thoughts are as follows. I am somewhat suspicious for several reasons. First, nearly everyone i've seen including the one I used to own had the cheek plates installed backwards, the cut out/indentation about halfway up the back edge of the cheek plates was meant to face forwards and would line up about eyelevel and was meant to make sure that periferal vision was clear ( i've seen these installed correctly on dozens of other cavalry helmets of the period ). Second every one I have seen has the leather lining straps ( the straps riveted to the inside of the helmet for stiching in the quilted liner ) on the tail completely intact, without fail. This is unusual to find normally on armour components but to see it all the time on every example of this particular type with the peaked " turkish " bowl ( mine had a small finial at the top of the peak. I've seen both with and without over the last 6-7 years ) gives me a little pause. Third the seam up the middle of the helmet bowl. Whilst forge welding of helmet bowls from two halves rather than raising the bowl from a single sheet of steel was done as an expidiency to manufacture of munitions armour, it was mostly replaced by the crimped comb method by the begining of the 17th century as it was quicker and required less technical skill to produce. Forge welding a seam like this would not typically yield an entirely visible seam, nor one so nearly totally straight and for a helmet of this late type would have been unusual especially in the quantities that i've been seeing these. Mine had this same seam although not as visible. There are some things I like to see, cut washers and some unevenness to the underside of the rolled and countersunk edges, the wieght at least of mine was good, and the functionallity, other than the reversed cheek plates was fine but when the other features i've noted were added in I was hesitant to make the call on the side of these being original. Its not out of the realm of possibility of course but those features gave me pause about mine and the number of these i've seen over the last decade. My personal opinion only and certainly should be taken as anything more than that.

20th March 2013, 04:07 PM	#2
A Senefelder Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 214	Cerjak, I picked one of these up about 6-7 years ago when they first started turning up with some frequency and have watched a number of them when they've come up for sale. Based on the one I owned and the one you have pictures my thoughts are as follows. I am somewhat suspicious for several reasons. First, nearly everyone i've seen including the one I used to own had the cheek plates installed backwards, the cut out/indentation about halfway up the back edge of the cheek plates was meant to face forwards and would line up about eyelevel and was meant to make sure that periferal vision was clear ( i've seen these installed correctly on dozens of other cavalry helmets of the period ). Second every one I have seen has the leather lining straps ( the straps riveted to the inside of the helmet for stiching in the quilted liner ) on the tail completely intact, without fail. This is unusual to find normally on armour components but to see it all the time on every example of this particular type with the peaked " turkish " bowl ( mine had a small finial at the top of the peak. I've seen both with and without over the last 6-7 years ) gives me a little pause. Third the seam up the middle of the helmet bowl. Whilst forge welding of helmet bowls from two halves rather than raising the bowl from a single sheet of steel was done as an expidiency to manufacture of munitions armour, it was mostly replaced by the crimped comb method by the begining of the 17th century as it was quicker and required less technical skill to produce. Forge welding a seam like this would not typically yield an entirely visible seam, nor one so nearly totally straight and for a helmet of this late type would have been unusual especially in the quantities that i've been seeing these. Mine had this same seam although not as visible. There are some things I like to see, cut washers and some unevenness to the underside of the rolled and countersunk edges, the wieght at least of mine was good, and the functionallity, other than the reversed cheek plates was fine but when the other features i've noted were added in I was hesitant to make the call on the side of these being original. Its not out of the realm of possibility of course but those features gave me pause about mine and the number of these i've seen over the last decade. My personal opinion only and certainly should be taken as anything more than that.