lobster-tail helmet for comment

Raf · 12th November 2013, 09:40 AM

Sorry , 3 was not from the same source ; uploaded by mistake . Heres another one that is. Note that the missing part of the visor looks as if its been cut away rather than not executed. Strange thing to do . Your expert assessment would be appreciated.Oops -forgot pictures

A Senefelder · 12th November 2013, 12:38 PM

This one is a little tougher but here's the things that would give me pause. The upper visor,as you mentioned has definitely had part of it cut away, with it looks like a chisel, I use a chisels to make cuts when installing hinges in bracers and it leaves what appears to be the same kind of rough edge prior to file/abrasive work to smooth it out. Second, the chisel work of the roping, especially on the top edge of the the lower visor seems very ham handed, as if they were trying to create the effect of " cabling " ( a term for a broad type of roping done with a round file rather than a chisel ) by using a big dull chisel ( roping was nearly always done with a sharp chisel ), especially when you compare it with that on the lower edge of the opening for the face and the comb which is much better done. That odd, incomplete weld at the back of the comb. Whilst helmets were made by forge welding two halves together, once the technique of crimping the two halves together along the comb and lap riveting at the brow below on either side caught on in the 16th century, it became nearly universal for two piece helmets due to its ease to produce over forge welding. This isn't an automatic dismissal, i'd want to see the inside of the helmet to determine if in fact what i'm seeing is a grind down of an old electric weld, or in fact a forge weld. I'm not seeing any beveled plate edges where I should either which would give me pause. This helmet is also missing at least one additional gorget lame per side as indicated by the empty holes on the sides of the visible back lame in pic 2

Raf · 12th November 2013, 02:46 PM

I think I agree. Their are some slight contusions of metal on the inside at the base and peak of the comb that could be gas welds but it is genuinely difficult to be sure. As you point out you would expect to find a lap rivit at the peak where the two halves join. Apart from this their doesn't seem to be any other use of modern welding techniques where you might expect to find them . Everything appears to be largely hand raised and shows genuine skill. The problem with all these helmets seems to be that everything is a bit too uniform. The metal doesn't show the uneveness, flaws , inclusions ect you expect to find in an object of the implied date.

So here is something that looks all wrong but I think is right. Described by an auction house as a copy of a seventeenth century funeral helmet . The crown looks recycled from a genuine munitions helmet , the spike looks convincing and the visor has the the comical absurdity that these later funeral helmets seem to have.

A Senefelder · 12th November 2013, 05:18 PM

A very similar helmet wandered around ebay for a while a few years back likewise labled as a replacement funnery achievement. I have read/heard tell of replacements being made up for funnery pieces that disappeared or became so decompoased over the years as to be no longer workable so its at least slightly possible that the attributation " might " be correct. The bowl appears to be of correct " crimped " comb construction to potentially be original. The ebay helmet made mention of the same thing in the write up about being composed of parts of older helmets. While of the same style, including the pointy bit at the peak of the comb, they are definitely different helmets.

12th November 2013, 09:40 AM	#1
Raf Member Join Date: Nov 2013 Posts: 252	Sorry , 3 was not from the same source ; uploaded by mistake . Heres another one that is. Note that the missing part of the visor looks as if its been cut away rather than not executed. Strange thing to do . Your expert assessment would be appreciated.Oops -forgot pictures Attached Images Last edited by Raf; 12th November 2013 at 11:32 AM.

12th November 2013, 02:46 PM	#3
Raf Member Join Date: Nov 2013 Posts: 252	I think I agree. Their are some slight contusions of metal on the inside at the base and peak of the comb that could be gas welds but it is genuinely difficult to be sure. As you point out you would expect to find a lap rivit at the peak where the two halves join. Apart from this their doesn't seem to be any other use of modern welding techniques where you might expect to find them . Everything appears to be largely hand raised and shows genuine skill. The problem with all these helmets seems to be that everything is a bit too uniform. The metal doesn't show the uneveness, flaws , inclusions ect you expect to find in an object of the implied date. So here is something that looks all wrong but I think is right. Described by an auction house as a copy of a seventeenth century funeral helmet . The crown looks recycled from a genuine munitions helmet , the spike looks convincing and the visor has the the comical absurdity that these later funeral helmets seem to have. Attached Images Last edited by Raf; 12th November 2013 at 05:54 PM.

12th November 2013, 12:38 PM	#2
A Senefelder Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 214	This one is a little tougher but here's the things that would give me pause. The upper visor,as you mentioned has definitely had part of it cut away, with it looks like a chisel, I use a chisels to make cuts when installing hinges in bracers and it leaves what appears to be the same kind of rough edge prior to file/abrasive work to smooth it out. Second, the chisel work of the roping, especially on the top edge of the the lower visor seems very ham handed, as if they were trying to create the effect of " cabling " ( a term for a broad type of roping done with a round file rather than a chisel ) by using a big dull chisel ( roping was nearly always done with a sharp chisel ), especially when you compare it with that on the lower edge of the opening for the face and the comb which is much better done. That odd, incomplete weld at the back of the comb. Whilst helmets were made by forge welding two halves together, once the technique of crimping the two halves together along the comb and lap riveting at the brow below on either side caught on in the 16th century, it became nearly universal for two piece helmets due to its ease to produce over forge welding. This isn't an automatic dismissal, i'd want to see the inside of the helmet to determine if in fact what i'm seeing is a grind down of an old electric weld, or in fact a forge weld. I'm not seeing any beveled plate edges where I should either which would give me pause. This helmet is also missing at least one additional gorget lame per side as indicated by the empty holes on the sides of the visible back lame in pic 2

12th November 2013, 05:18 PM	#4
A Senefelder Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 214	A very similar helmet wandered around ebay for a while a few years back likewise labled as a replacement funnery achievement. I have read/heard tell of replacements being made up for funnery pieces that disappeared or became so decompoased over the years as to be no longer workable so its at least slightly possible that the attributation " might " be correct. The bowl appears to be of correct " crimped " comb construction to potentially be original. The ebay helmet made mention of the same thing in the write up about being composed of parts of older helmets. While of the same style, including the pointy bit at the peak of the comb, they are definitely different helmets.