Tibetan helmet

Battara · 28th October 2015, 12:26 AM

Since one of these items are from a current auction, this thread is closed.

Battara · 29th October 2015, 12:33 AM

Issues resolved. We can now continue.

If i understand right, true antique Tibetan helmets are insanely rare!

estcrh · 29th October 2015, 02:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Battara

Issues resolved. We can now continue.

If i understand right, true antique Tibetan helmets are insanely rare!

Here is a comparison between the helmet being discussed here and what appears to be an authentic one of the same type.

endeavour192 · 30th October 2015, 12:20 AM

Yes thank you, i know "Warriors of the Himalayas, rediscovering the arms and armor of Tibet" by Donald J LaRocca and i met Françoise Pommaret this year during a trip in Bhutan.
Not easy to find real antiques helmets !

Bob A · 30th October 2015, 05:08 AM

While I live in complete ignorance of Tibetan helmets, I'd have to say that to my uneducated eye, there are anomalies that lead me to doubt that the helmet in question is of significant age.

The improper lacing of the plates is apparent, but could be excused as an inept reassembly after having dismantled the helmet for "restoration".

The designs on the bowl of the helmet appear rather fresh, and the riveting seems modern. It seems to lack any sort of patina stemming from use.

All that said, while it may not be new, it seems to be satisfactorily Tibetan, given the source. "Fake" is a term I'd only use if an object was deliberately misidentified for larcenous purpose; the artifact is what it is, and does not seem to lie, or to bear deliberate false witness about itself. That said, I have no knowledge about how it may have been represented at an auction site.

Timo Nieminen · 1st November 2015, 08:36 AM

One might be tempted to attribute the mis-lacing to bad restoration, but it's the standard lacing on this type of helmet. It's how they make them in the first place.

Most of these helmets are sold as antiques. They appear to be made with that intent. I'm happy to call them fakes.

Bob A · 1st November 2015, 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Timo Nieminen

One might be tempted to attribute the mis-lacing to bad restoration, but it's the standard lacing on this type of helmet. It's how they make them in the first place.

Most of these helmets are sold as antiques. They appear to be made with that intent. I'm happy to call them fakes.

My guess regarding the lacing was that the plate overlapping was done opposite the way I would expect - and the way that it exists on the other helmet illustrated. Rather disturbing that the maker should have been so clueless.

I bow to your experience and expertise regarding seller's intent. Caveat emptor, as ever.

28th October 2015, 12:26 AM	#1
Battara EAAF Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 7,272	Since one of these items are from a current auction, this thread is closed.

29th October 2015, 12:33 AM	#2
Battara EAAF Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 7,272	Issues resolved. We can now continue. If i understand right, true antique Tibetan helmets are insanely rare!

30th October 2015, 12:20 AM	#4
endeavour192 Member Join Date: Oct 2015 Posts: 5	Yes thank you, i know "Warriors of the Himalayas, rediscovering the arms and armor of Tibet" by Donald J LaRocca and i met Françoise Pommaret this year during a trip in Bhutan. Not easy to find real antiques helmets !

30th October 2015, 05:08 AM	#5
Bob A Member Join Date: Feb 2014 Posts: 435	While I live in complete ignorance of Tibetan helmets, I'd have to say that to my uneducated eye, there are anomalies that lead me to doubt that the helmet in question is of significant age. The improper lacing of the plates is apparent, but could be excused as an inept reassembly after having dismantled the helmet for "restoration". The designs on the bowl of the helmet appear rather fresh, and the riveting seems modern. It seems to lack any sort of patina stemming from use. All that said, while it may not be new, it seems to be satisfactorily Tibetan, given the source. "Fake" is a term I'd only use if an object was deliberately misidentified for larcenous purpose; the artifact is what it is, and does not seem to lie, or to bear deliberate false witness about itself. That said, I have no knowledge about how it may have been represented at an auction site.

1st November 2015, 08:36 AM	#6
Timo Nieminen Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 422	One might be tempted to attribute the mis-lacing to bad restoration, but it's the standard lacing on this type of helmet. It's how they make them in the first place. Most of these helmets are sold as antiques. They appear to be made with that intent. I'm happy to call them fakes.