While I appreciate the sarcasm, the original listing looked unimpeachably authentic, and its original use makes all the sense in the world--given the many other expedients tried on the Western Front in 1915. No, I can offer no evidence as to this particular piece, but I then ask what evidence Mr. Adler has to refute its authenticity. I find that in the militaria world too many are too fast to call fake, and while pickelhauben are not my particular expertise yet, I have found that even those with thirty and forty years of collecting experience in US Indian Wars items make mistakes. One thing I have learned about collectors is that along with the development of the internet and availability of general information, collectors have never been more ill-informed, and we have created and imposed rules on the past that simply did not exist.
Since, I am unfamiliar with Adler's background, I can only assume he is a WW1 museum curator--is that too far off? And that comment is not meant to be flippant, it's what I surmised from his profile.
Indeed, while chain maille items were sprouting up from other nations during WW1, I would again ask why you think it is a ridiculous notion that this would a proposed solution to enemy Artillery. I din't think the argument that chainmail would scratch the helmet rules out its development.
As an artilleryman, and active Soldier, I find it hard to believe that WW1 Germany would document everything they experimented with when even the modern United States does not do so well. I believe this was an attempt--be it a prototype, experiment, or what have you--at solving what was a real problem.
What I can offer, is that there are examples of chain maille linings sewn into British Jackets, chain mail pieces that attached to various helmets, the tank-splatter masks everyone should be familiar with, and other examples of integrating what was a seemingly dead art into protecting the modern force.
v/r
Wolf-Ekkehard
Ron
