A STRANGE PICKELHAUBE

Anything hauben

Moderators: b.loree, joerookery

Post Reply
DPW
Posts: 26
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 6:17 am
Location: DUBLIN, IRELAND

A STRANGE PICKELHAUBE

Post by DPW » Sat Jul 07, 2012 6:47 am

Hi, Just thought I'd put this on the forum as it's the oddest item I've ever come across, everything wrong yet everything right at the same time on this particular helmet! Bayern helmet (no doubt about that, brass Wappen is printed into the leather and ages of built-up dirt behind it), stamped, three times, for artillery but has never had the Bayern-style cruciform spikebase fitted (high magnification search inside and out shows no trace of any repair or imprint matching that shape), does however have the standard 1895 infantry style spike/round base and sliding vent cover (again 'correct' to THIS helmet, imprinted into leather). It is inkstamped on the neckguard 3FsAR, 2B, plus handwriting I can't make out, and II Garniture mark. This has been partly rubbed off, surface of the leather earsed, so it would seem this is a first issue. The crown is stamped into the leather 2FsAR (twice), 12K, 3B, CM, again I assume this was a second issue. So, just what IS this thing? We have a genuine Bayern artillary helmet with an infantry spike & base that every bit of evidence says belongs to it. It can't be an earlier artillary helmet later issued unstamped to infantry, which would explain the spike, since it never had the Bayern cruciform base, seemingly having had a round base from the start. Is this some odd early wartime mix of parts, still using a spike as Bayern did for artillery but with an infantry one prior to the balltops coming in? Seems odd to say the least, but the physical evidence points that way. I'd love to know if anyone else has ever come across anything like this.
I've seen mixed part helmets, have one myself from IR114 with a spike that is brass mounted on the M15 steel base but 100% genuine, presumably painted grey to begin with, but I've never come across one as strange as this Bayern.

Robert
Exceptional Contributor
Exceptional Contributor
Posts: 754
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 12:06 pm

Re: A STRANGE PICKELHAUBE

Post by Robert » Sat Jul 07, 2012 7:36 am

That sounds like an interesting piece, do you have pictures? Such a mixture did happen I assume, compare this helmet marked 1. FsAR:

http://www.aboutww2militaria.com/Decemb ... ikel2.html

DPW
Posts: 26
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 6:17 am
Location: DUBLIN, IRELAND

Re: A STRANGE PICKELHAUBE

Post by DPW » Sat Jul 07, 2012 8:04 am

Hi Robert,
Well well, that's exactly the same, brass fittings, 1895 spike & base AND the vent cover, all on a Foot Artillary helmet! So it seems we have established as fact that Bayern did indeed not only use infantry style spikes without the cruciform base prior to the balltop but also used the vent cover before other artillary! Interesting also that it seems to have gone from one regiment to another. I wonder was this an FsAR thing just in Bayern? I tried to attatch photos but it wouldn't let me. Must try again.

This could open up a whole new topic, couldn't it?

All the best,

DPW

User avatar
joerookery
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6452
Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2005 7:25 pm
Location: Pensacola Florida
Contact:

Re: A STRANGE PICKELHAUBE

Post by joerookery » Sat Jul 07, 2012 4:35 pm

We have a genuine Bayern artillary helmet with an infantry spike & base that every bit of evidence says belongs to it. It can't be an earlier artillary helmet later issued unstamped to infantry, which would explain the spike, since it never had the Bayern cruciform base, seemingly having had a round base from the start. Is this some odd early wartime mix of parts, still using a spike as Bayern did for artillery but with an infantry one prior to the balltops coming in? Seems odd to say the least, but the physical evidence points that way. I'd love to know if anyone else has ever come across anything like this.
Denton approached me with this a while ago and I did not pick it up. I'm sorry for that. I think that I was in the car on the way back from Pensacola but that is no real excuse. What Denton has found and has backed into through the Mark is that this is an infantry helmet marked to the 3rd foot artillery Regiment which was authorized in 1912. We all immediately recoil because it does not have a cruciform base. In fact it has the vent of a infantry helmet. This is All normal. While some references are just wrong few if any come out and point you to the fact that things really changed in 1896. at that time Bavaria split the uniform regulation between mounted troops and foot troops. The 2 foot artillery regiments were considered to be foot troops. So the Bavarian Field artillery had a cruciform base but the Bavarian foot artillery enlisted helmets were the same as infantry helmets. This was not the case for officers helmets so once again we immediately looked at the Spike base. Or the fact that Bavaria had a spike instead of a ball until 1916. So this helmet was originally issued to the 2nd Regiment and then transferred to the 3rd Regiment when it was formed. I think you will find that many references tip toe around this. Some are just wrong, others correct, few with a neon sign that says round spiked base here. By not pointing this out I did Denton a disservice for which I am sorry. This picture is from the Hermann book pg 83.

ImageClick for large view - Uploaded with Skitch
VR/Joe
www.pickelhauben.net
The British philosopher and historian R.G. Colligwood said, "it is not
the facts that are interesting in history, but the questions and their
answers - and these can never be fixed.

dpwickicky
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2012 11:48 am

Re: A STRANGE PICKELHAUBE

Post by dpwickicky » Fri Aug 03, 2012 12:08 pm

I checked Tony's site again carefully and found it does mention it but only in passing, doesn't really make a point of it and easily missed.

Post Reply