Wurttemburg ?13th Train Batallion e.m. helmet found today

ww1czechlegion

ww1czechlegion

Well-known member
Hello,

I just purchased a Wurttemburg enlisted pattern spike helmet out of the woodwork this afternoon. The family I purchased this from acquired it many years ago at a local auction.

The inner side of the liner is maker marked and dated 1915. Size is marked "58" in pencil inside the shell. Spike is removeable.

No extra holes behind frontplate, and lots of nice "ghosting/dust" behind frontplate.

There are two odd things about the helmet: The state cockade is incorrect, as it is for Prussia, and not Wurttemburg. The chinscales (what is left of them) are curved, and the style used normally with the M91 side posts.

I am guessing that this helmet is for the 13th Train Batallion which is from Wurttemburg, due to the removeable spike, and the curved chinscales which would have been for parade and garrison use, and the non-ventilated backspine. Am I correct?

A trichter with black hair bush would have been worn for parade.

I look forward to your comments.

Best Regards,

Alan




















The other possibility with a removeable spike would be for the 120th Infantry, but it would have a ventilated backspine, and the chinscales would have been flat, correct?

I look forward to comments and insights.

All the Best,

Alan
 
Difficult to say what kind of unit this would be from without markings. Is there any sign of M91 posts having been used? It looks as if the chinscales were for side posts, rather than rosettes. The only marks are from a Wurt. plate? I'm asking because of the Prussian cockade, either the plate or cockade is wrong, in spite of the oxidation under the plate. I'm sure others will help you with better advice than I can offer. No unit markings on the liner? Yup, it may be a parts helmet, or it may be a good helmet in need of a few replacement parts.

:D Ron
 
a parts helmet. By Member drewlarge.
Click to expand...

Really? Did I take such poor photos, and explain the details and the story where it came from so badly?

I don't say that flippantly. I simply posted this helmet because I believe (even with the incorrect N.C.O. style Prussian Kokarde) that this helmet has been unmessed with since possibly as long ago as WW1. I know where it came from (a small rural Iowa town of less than 150 people. The folks I bought it from have had it for 30-40 years, and they apparently bought it from an estate of a WW1 soldier in their local town. Yes, I know it's a story that most of you who don't know me won't believe)

Part of the reason I posted the photos and my comments for discussion is because I believe there is another thread here somewhere in which someone had a helmet they showed with the M91 style chinscales attached by rosettes, instead of the proper M91 side posts. Can anyone please help find the link for the other helmet posting? I believe someone on here posted a similar strange helmet with M91 chinscales attached by rosettes, sometime within the last year or two.

Difficult to say what kind of unit this would be from without markings. Is there any sign of M91 posts having been used? It looks as if the chinscales were for side posts, rather than rosettes. The only marks are from a Wurt. plate? I'm asking because of the Prussian cockade, either the plate or cockade is wrong, in spite of the oxidation under the plate. I'm sure others will help you with better advice than I can offer. No unit markings on the liner? Yup, it may be a parts helmet, or it may be a good helmet in need of a few replacement parts. by Member poniatowski (Ron)
Click to expand...

Thanks Ron, for your insight & comments, I appreciate it!

To answer your excellent questions: There are no signs of M91 side posts ever being on the helmet, without my taking off the current rosette system. The rosettes don't look like the split brads have ever been removed. (I'll take some more photos tonite to show details. I should have done that originally for everyone to see, sorry I missed that point.) And there are no signs of any extra holes on the sides inside the helmet for attachment of M91 side posts. Clearly to my eyes it doesn't look like there were ever any M91 side posts mounted on this helmet. Even with having to use my bifocals :D

The split brads for the spike bass are totally un-messed with as well. They give me all the signs when viewed in person of never having been re-bent or re-attached to the helmet shell.

I will also take a photo of the heavy dust underneath the frontplate. The incorrect Prussian (n.c.o. style) kokarde is "melted" or stuck into the black finish of the helmet, and doesn't turn. Apparently from the helmet being stored in some place like an attic for many years of hot and humid Iowa summers.

The majority of my enlisted helmets don't have unit markings under the back visors. It's unfortunate that this one isn't marked either. I am only logically making a guess that this helmet is configured for the 13th Train Batallion, even though it is not unit marked. The configuration of all brass fittings combined with the non-ventilated backspine, the removeable spike for using a trichter for parade, and the curved chinscales (even though they are the incorrect M91 style chinscales) can only point to a 13th Train Batallion helmet. A 120th Infantry Reg't helmet would have had flat chinscales with the removeable spike, but would have used a ventilated backspine, correct? The one artillery regiment would have had a ball top, and not a spike.... That's where my estimate of it being for 13th Train Batallion comes from, the configuration of fittings...

I've collected helmets for 32 years now, and still get a lot of helmets from families that have had them since WW1 or WW2, which may be hard for people who don't know me to believe.

I'll post more photos tomorrow of the frontplate removed to show the heavy white/gray dust, and the inside of the helmet where the rosette split brads are attached.

All the Best,

Alan
 
Hi Guys,

Here's more photos:
1.) Ghosting behind frontplate and no extra or enlarged holes behind frontplate
2.) Backside of frontplate
3.) Inside of helmet showing split brads for the rosettes with the gray washers
4.) Inside of helmet showing split brads for the rosettes with the gray washers
5.) I reluctantly bent up the split brads for 1-rosette and removed the washer to show that there has never been any evidence of this helmet having had the M91 side
posts on this helmet shell from what I can see. Tell me if you see otherwise.

See what you think. Thanks!

Best Regards,

Alan










 
Thanks for posting the photos! Unfortunately, I can't offer any help and would certainly like to see that other post as well. I must've missed your mention of the M91 chin scales. Two different styles of rosette? Too bad the WWI vet couldn't offer any history before he departed. With the 1915 date and brass trim, who knows what may have happened during and after the war! I say that because on Age of Kings, they have a Prussian infantry helmet (all original) marked to a Hessian unit. Also, Beck in Koln (sorry no umlaut on my computer) Koeln... had a Prussian officer with a Wurt. cockade, which they asserted was 100% correct, but wasn't 'correct' enough to entice me to purchase the helmet, since it's beyond my expertise. Perhaps Adler, Brian, Joe, Tony or some of or more expert members can help. (sorry if I forgot any names in that short list).

:D Ron
 
Well....my 2 cents worth. Is this not a private purchase helme? Two reasons....the split brad fixation for the spike is custom purchase not govt regulation as is the rear spine. Govt purchase hauben have a screw post and square nut on the rear visor. This has a private purchase split brad holding the end of the rear spine to the underside of the visor. This lacks the usual spike base support disc for the spike...its not a govt purchased item. The large holes for the wappen also lack brass grommets which again indicates private purchase. Thus gentlemen.....NO markings
I am also nervous concerning the wappen......too shiny when compared to the patina on the rest of the brass fittings. I recently learned, that the brass wappen on my regt marked Wurtt helme is a repro. I have had this helmet 20+ yrs. The helme is original but the wappen is fake. Yea me!! This one looks like the one on my helme.
I do not believe that this is a Wurtt helme. The prongs holding the chin scales and kokarden on have never been moved, thus they indicate Prussian NCO private purchase NOT Wurtt. The kokarden are original but not the wappen.The patina on the rings of the kokarden (grey) also are typical of how 1915 manufacture looks today.
Far easier to put a Wurtt plate on this and do a quick flip through an auction. Were the owners of this...the people you bought it from haube collectors, even militaria collectors or civilians who just bought something shinny at an auction and were fed some auction BS?? B
 
This certainly is a interesting haube that raises a variety of valid questions. Its just my opinion tough, but I think that Brian has put forward a very plausible explanation.

Regards,

Edwin
 
Regarding Ron's last post here...having collected for quite some time, I have heard this "story" before from dealers...the soldat was transfered to a different regiment blah blah blah which explains anomalies. Crap! In my experience regarding wappen switches. The Wurtt wappen is the easiest to replace the standard Prussian eagle thereby increasing value. Saxe, Bavaria...the spacing of the loops or screw posts is too small. To mount one of these you have to punch in an extra hole. Hesse...too wide and low. Saxe dutchies...Oldenburg, Weimar easy to add on because they are basically eagles. Prussian Garde???....a wide spread requiring at least one extra hole. So, watch out and always take a pause before shelling out your bucks!
 
I have been on a month-long road trip where commenting was difficult. So I finally get to jump in on this!

I say that because on Age of Kings, they have a Prussian infantry helmet (all original) marked to a Hessian unit.
Click to expand...

Ron, this is very common – there is a great deal of photographic proof of mixed wappen in Hessian units.

ps564 by joerookery, on Flickr

I don't like the front plate either. My first impression was that it was an artillery helmet for the field artillery that got converted at some later date. Certainly has posed a lot of discussion! :thumb up:
 
Joe, et al, I knew you guys would have answers. I've no Wurt. E.M. helmets, so don't really know much about the plates (I have one officer type).

Joe, would that practice of 'mixed plates' also have been common in Hessen artillery units?

:D Ron
 
Yes, Prussian was the default plate. I have not seen mixed plates from Bavaria or Saxony. However, everywhere else and everything else seems to have been fair game. Particularly those units that were mobilized in the original Falkenhayn mobilizations.

here are a couple of more examples:

ps1455 by joerookery, on Flickr


ps566 by joerookery, on Flickr
 
Thanks Joe! Actually, that's good news for me. The first M15 I purchased was marked to a Hessen artillery unit, but has the Prussian plate, which looks 100% original. Looks like I don't need to keep looking for a Hessen plate now.

:D Ron
 
Hi Alan,

How do you go about finding your treasures? How do you locate families with unwanted beauties like this sitting in the attic willing to sell?

I'm in Australia, so I promise I won't be muscling in on your potential sellers if you share ;)

Thanks,

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