Bavarian Haube currently on the bay

Z

zook

New member
Folks...
I am intrigued by this Bavarian helmet currently listed on the Bay.
At my first "novice glance" (I am still learning) it seems right, and looks to be in great shape! (obviously not "Prussian" as the seller indicates).
However, in my short time as a member learning my way at this forum/hobby, I have read (seen) very little that is totally "right" about some of the nicer, rarer helmets listed on the Bay.
Anyway, #Item number: 6637088103
and the link should be:
http://cgi.ebay.com/WW1-GERMAN-PRUSSIAN-PICKELHAUBE-SPIKE-HELMET_W0QQitemZ6637088103QQcategoryZ13965QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

I have just recently asked for a photo of the back of the wrappen... would be happy to share it if/when I get it...
I look forward to some further education on this helmet by the forum veterans and senior collectors! regards, Dan
 
Dan, Nice helmet that has been reworked I think. It is Fibre which is why the body looks so good. That maker's mark is always an indicator of fibre. I think the visor is leather and I do not like the rosettes. I'm not sure these are replacements but given round chinscaless I am more comfortable with oblong ones.
P
ost Feb 1914 wapopen and chinscales.
 
Hello Dan and Joe:

While I agree with Joe that vaulted chinscales are usually secured by elongated Rosetten, these wartime Depaheg Patent helmets seem to have a unique Rosette that is both circular and convex.

Not too long ago, I acquired a Bavarian Chevauleger that is a virtual silver twin of the eBay listing. You can see pictures of the Rosetten in the link below.

http://www.pickelhaubes.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1437

Joe, I think the visors are fibre and just showing their age a bit. Personally, I like the helmet.

Good luck, Dan!

Chas.
 
Hello Everyone,

Joe, I am very interested in your comment about the wappen being post-1914. What characteristics differentiate it from earlier plates?

Cheers,

Laurie
 
....and to expand on Tony's excellent text:

PICT0629.jpg


Chas.
 
To add to the excellent comments by Tony & Chas, we should not assume that when a new or modified helmet component was adopted all private purchase helmets manufactured or assembled after that date will automatically incorporate the new part or parts. Stocks of existng parts would have been used before changing to the new components. This Bavarian helmet illustrates the point. The helmet has a leather body, pre 1914 front plate, pre 1915 chinscales & rosettes but has a 1915 style spike base. This manufactuerer likely ran out of spike bases but still had a supply of earlier front plates & chinscales.

bav19156dx.jpg

Reservist1
 
I got more pictures from the seller that I cannot open??? Anybody heard of files ending in .411?


I asked for differant type of format and have not heard from him yet?

James
 
James -
Same thing on the pics for me! ... I requested pics and he says he would send them straight away. Then, I get them in an unreadable format. So, I ask for .jpgs or any other format and have gotten no response as of yet.

As for the postings - great information! Thanks Joe, Chas, Tony, Laurie!!

Dan
 
Interresting. T nice article. Ok I have one thought but fully agree with R1.
The Kriegsministerium-Verordnungsblatt Nr. 17 of the 20th of February 1914 introduced convex scales for officers of foot troops. The flat scales were permitted to be worn until the 1st of January 1916
Click to expand...

I also have a similar Bavarian. This one dated 1905 and identified to an Arty officer -- Hauptmann Wolfram Freiherr Ebner von Eschenbach. This wappen and top are new style.

M15top.jpg
 
reservist1 said:
Nice helmet. Is the marking actually 1905 or is it 1915?
Click to expand...

I ageee, nice helmet. But I am going to be shocked if that helmet is dated 1905 with a removable spike. However, I suppose a spike base and top could have been replaced by the owner, simple to do, stop in at the local helmet guy when home on leave, would not take more than five minutes? Especially if the helmet had been dropped and the spike damaged in the field.

And Joe, (once again) who are you quoting? Could you please just add that to quotes? I would really appreciate it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top