Ebay test #2

G

gregM

New member
So I was cruising ebay looking at hauben trying to learn what is good
and what is bad. I came across this Wurtemburg helmet.
( Iam not thinking of buying this one, it is just a learning tool )

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=330263257300&ssPageName=STRK:MEWA:IT&ih=014

This was probably a nice helmet before it was dropped. The overall
shape of the body (except the crushed top) is good. No curled edges
ect. The visors look tight, the body isn't too badly crazed. The liner
is fairly intact.

Now the bad stuff.
The helmet was obviously dropped. The body is slightly crushed down.
The spike was damaged and then very poorly repaired. The wappen
was damaged and is missing some antlers.

I am curious about the stars. I have always thought that if a helmet had silver trim, all the trim would be silver. Same for gold trim or gray trim.
To me--the stars on this helmet look gold and the cruciform looks
silver. Is this an indication that the stars are not original.

OK -- Let me have it.
How did I do?
Thanks

Greg
 
This helmet looks OK to me...
antlers of the deer are often broken on a Würtemberg-plate.
golden stars on silver parts are also common
 
Hi Greg:

In my opinion, this is a parts helmet. The cruciform stars are only part of the equation; of equal importance are the chinscales, spike cone, and Württemburg Landes Kokarde.

Württemburg Pickelhauben with predominantly silver furniture and this specific Wappen fall into the following categories: grenadier, dragoon, and pioneer regiments, and Militärverwaltung (military administration).
The issues are:

Grenadier = flat gilt scales and gilt rosettes (the circular disc anchoring the scales to the helmet).
Dragoner = vaulted gilt scales and silver rosettes.
Pionier = flat gilt scales and silver rosettes
Militärverwaltung = vaulted silver scales and silver rosettes.

The eBay item has flat silver scales and silver rosettes, i.e. a dodgy combination.

Gilt cruciform stars are correct for all the above units.

The eBay spike is actually a two piece assembly. The cone is threaded to the egg and dart spike base, and can be substituted for a Haarbusch. This parade Trichter would be an entitlement of only the grenadier and dragoon regiments. Furthermore, the spike appears to be cross threaded to the base, implying these parts are not original to one another.

I believe the serrated Kokarde is a repaint at best. The one-piece Württ officer Kokarde has a smooth circumference. Now for some illustrations.

Württemburg one-piece Kokarde plus flat gilt scales and gilt rosettes:

P1011019.jpg


Vaulted silver scales and silver rosettes (Prussian Militärverwaltung Zahlmeister [paymaster]):

Zahlmeister.jpg



A "sunken" top doesn't necessarily imply a helmet was dropped. More likely, these Pickelhauben were stored carelessly with significant weight pressing down upon them (at the bottom of a trunk with several wool blankets or uniforms piled on top, for example). Gravity over the ensuing decades does the rest).

In fairness, Wannenwetsch and Hilsenbeck's Königreich Württemberg, die Militärischen Kopfbedeckungen 1869-1919 does provide a photograph of a Militärverwaltung helmet with flat silver scales and silver rosettes on page 93, but the cruciform stars are also silver. Arrrgh! The authors state this configuration is unique to military justice officials, building inspectors, and pharmacists.

One could replace the stars and Kokarde, or the scales and Kokarde, to achieve a "proper" helmet, but I don't think it's worth it.

Chas.
 
wihu61 said:
//de rest is gewoon geouwehoer van een stelletje zogenaamde deskundigen... PUNT
Click to expand...
Nice "point." From your less than illuminating sarcasm, your so-called "expertise" is most underwhelming.

:x
 
Thanks for all the help.
I thought if it were dropped that would explain the crushed body, damaged
threads to the spike and the slight dented tip of the spike. It may have
all happened in one stupid mistake.

greg
 
wihu61 said:
Dat is dan wederzijds
simple: this helmet is OK
Ask your Guru!
Click to expand...
As Moderator, I think I will jump in and stir things up a bit, Wihu61, I believe you owe Chas an apoligy, he has taken the time to explain his opinion, he has illustrated his comments with very good photos that explain what he is saying. If it was not for the "experts" who post on this forum, it would be of little use to those who have questions. If youu disagree with his opinion, then it is up to you to show us where he is wrong, that would be very easy to do as his post lists all the points of his opinion, while yours does not.

As for you GregM,
Keep the great questions comming

Best wihses
gus
 
Thank you Gus.

I would be the first to deny being an "expert." I frequently make mistakes (from which I endeavor to learn). If nothing else, this process makes me "experienced." My "gurus" are the published references I consult on a near daily basis: Lainé, Larcade, Herrmann, Kraus, Pietsch, and, for Württemberg, the afore mentioned Wannenwetsch and Hilsenbeck. Additionally, Web resources like this forum, Kaiser's Bunker, pickelhauben.net, et al. provide tremendous and exhaustive databases. With deference to my friends in the collecting community, reservist1 is a veritable encyclopedia of knowledge.

In discussing the eBay listing, Greg and I were exploring the variables any discriminating collector would consider prior to purchasing an expensive artifact. My opinion that the helmet was, to some degree, an amalgam might very well be wrong, but I am entitled to that opinion nevertheless.

An apology is not necessary, but I do wish "HW" would refrain from making acrimonious soliloquies in Dutch. By now he should realize his original, unexpurgated comment (quoted in my post above) is no mystery to me. OK?

Chas.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top