HR 17 pelzmutze

DSCN0107-1.jpg


DSCN0108.jpg


DSCN0109.jpg


DSCN0110.jpg


DSCN0111.jpg


DSCN0112.jpg


DSCN0115.jpg
 
Lurch

What does that white marking say on the inside top of the Busby? It is not a 17 is it? Can you read the date on the KBAG? So many questions and it is not even noon yet...
 
The number in white inside the crown is "15". The PlzM appears to be dated "1917". I received some rather disparaging news about it from a very respected collector. He suggested asking these additional questions:

1. Would a private purchase Busby be made from Ersatz Kunstfell (fleece/artificial fur)?

2. Is it okay that the the cords carried by HR17 were yellow but the loops on the top of this one are white?

3. Is it normal for a private purchase piece to have issue marks?

4, If its private purchase, why does it have an issue liner?

5. If its not, and its issued, why does it have officer chinscales?

6. Is the issue mark on the liner in black normal for HR17?

Any additional thoughts/comments are appreciated.

Thank you,

Christopher
 
Lurch

I don't have a Busby so I'm learning too. The Mark's, liner and the ersatz nature of this hat all give me problems but I don't know enough yet.
 
Chris: The questions raised by the "very respected collector" are very valid concerns. In my opinion the answers to the questions are as follows:
Question 1, 2, & 3 - No
Question 4 - if it is private purchase it should not have an issue liner.
Question 5 - the busby should not have officer chinscales. I would also point out that officer chinscales for HR17 are unique to that regiment and are quite different from standard officer chinscales.
Question 6 - The issue mark for HR17 would not normally be on the back side of the liner. The mark should be "HR17" and a date. The marking is normally found on the top of the busby either on the outside, under the kolpak, or on the inner surface of the top. The marking is usually in white.

In addition to the above points, the busby does not have any bandeau. An HR17 busby, issue or private purchase, should have a large brass bandeau with the wording "Peninsula-Sicilien-Waterloo-Mars la Tour." If the helmet dated from the 1867 - 1873 period the bandeau would read "Peninsula-Sicilien-Waterloo."

You may wish to consult the following references, all of which have good information on and illustrations of proper HR17 busbys:

Formations und Uniformierungsgeschichte des Prussischen Heeres 1808 bis 1914 by Paul Pietsch, Volume II, pages 127 - 131.
The German Cavalry from 1871 to 1914 by Ulrich Herr and Jens Nguyen, pages 393 - 415.
Militarische Kopfbedeckungen der Kaiserzeit by Reiner Herrmann, page 87
Das Deutsche Heer Volume 1, pages 150 - 153, Volume 2, plates 93 and 98.
Casques A pointe et coiffures prestigieuses de l'armee allemande 1842 - 1918 by Jean-Louis Larcade, Volume II, pages 106 - 108.

I hope the above is helpful.

Reservist1
 
joerookery said:
Our example is red like Bing. Perhaps wrong or unusual?? Any thoughts?

YOU have a HR17 Pelzmütze??? When did you get that? My understanding, (having looked for one for 20+ years) is that the marking is found in both red or white, and inside top as you show above.
 
YOU have a HR17 Pelzmütze???

No unfortunately I do not -- but I am willing to except one as a birthday present! No I only have a picture of the Mark. It is on the communal list.
http://www.pickelhauben.net/articles/Kammer2.html
 
These red markings are from my HR17 busby and I can certify that this hat is rigorously 100% authentic in the smallest detail. I know two other similar EM HR17 busbies with the same red markings, although I have also seen some with white markings. No doubt at all...
Bruno
 
911car said:
These red markings are from my HR17 busby and I can certify that this hat is rigorously 100% authentic in the smallest detail.

Absolutely, and you have a superb example Bruno, I could only hope some day to find a text-book example like yours. What I really have to question, is a black unit mark under the liner like Chris posted, which also appears to be done by hand. Joe, when you say "our example" it sounded like it was yours, not Bruno's in your maker's mark list.
 
Here's more photos.

The loops holding the yellow chord appear to have been dyed black - but wore away exposing the white material underneath.

Christopher

DSCN0134.jpg


DSCN0136.jpg


DSCN0138.jpg


DSCN0141.jpg


DSCN0142.jpg


DSCN0144.jpg


DSCN0145.jpg


DSCN0146.jpg


DSCN0147.jpg


DSCN0148.jpg


DSCN0149.jpg


DSCN0150.jpg
 
P1010004.jpg

P5010012.jpg

P5010023.jpg


Bruno sent me these other pictures of his Busby. Like I said I don't have a Busby. I try to give credit on the various lists and footnote extensively. I have very few helmets compared to most of you. And I think only three issue helmets. I consider the lists to be communal property not mine. Thank God Bruno has contributed repeatedly like so many of you have.
 
Thank you for the photos. What a GORGEOUS piece!!!

I think mine is questionable. The fur under the skull looks like the skull had been upon it for some considerable time. The white "15" in the crown is a painted stamp - not hand drawn. I found a repro bandeau and there were pre-existing holes in the PlzM. which match perfectly to the prongs on the bandeau.

All the parts (except for my bandeau) appear genuine. The PlzM/ body is real - but perhaps not for this regiment.

What is the final verdict for this helm?

Thank you,

Lurch

DSCN0158.jpg


DSCN0159.jpg


DSCN0160.jpg




DSCN0154.jpg
 
Lurch Adams said:
// The fur under the skull looks like the skull had been upon it for some considerable time.

Chris, its not fur; its like a wool or 'fuzzy' material right? Its Ersatz Kunstfell (fleece/artificial fur)? Because it is not fur as I can see. Tony
 
Yes, it is ersatz kunstfell. Thank you.

Is it an outright fake or simply questionable / non-standard?

Here's a photo which came with it.

C.

DSCN0163.jpg
 
Back
Top