Tibetan helmet

endeavour192 · 27th October 2015, 12:15 AM

OK i understand !

Gavin Nugent · 27th October 2015, 02:28 PM

endeavour192,

If you want to view better Tibetan and Bhutan Helms, armour and arms, get yourself "Warriors of the Himalayas, rediscovering the arms and armor of Tibet" by Donald J LaRocca and "Bhutan, Mountain Fortress of the Gods", in particular the chapter within, "The Way to the Throne" by Francoise Pommaret.

Attached is one of mine that you may have seen?

Gavin

Battara · 28th October 2015, 12:26 AM

Since one of these items are from a current auction, this thread is closed.

Battara · 29th October 2015, 12:33 AM

Issues resolved. We can now continue.

If i understand right, true antique Tibetan helmets are insanely rare!

estcrh · 29th October 2015, 02:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Battara

Issues resolved. We can now continue.

If i understand right, true antique Tibetan helmets are insanely rare!

Here is a comparison between the helmet being discussed here and what appears to be an authentic one of the same type.

endeavour192 · 30th October 2015, 12:20 AM

Yes thank you, i know "Warriors of the Himalayas, rediscovering the arms and armor of Tibet" by Donald J LaRocca and i met Françoise Pommaret this year during a trip in Bhutan.
Not easy to find real antiques helmets !

Bob A · 30th October 2015, 05:08 AM

While I live in complete ignorance of Tibetan helmets, I'd have to say that to my uneducated eye, there are anomalies that lead me to doubt that the helmet in question is of significant age.

The improper lacing of the plates is apparent, but could be excused as an inept reassembly after having dismantled the helmet for "restoration".

The designs on the bowl of the helmet appear rather fresh, and the riveting seems modern. It seems to lack any sort of patina stemming from use.

All that said, while it may not be new, it seems to be satisfactorily Tibetan, given the source. "Fake" is a term I'd only use if an object was deliberately misidentified for larcenous purpose; the artifact is what it is, and does not seem to lie, or to bear deliberate false witness about itself. That said, I have no knowledge about how it may have been represented at an auction site.

27th October 2015, 02:28 PM	#2
Gavin Nugent Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 2,818	endeavour192, If you want to view better Tibetan and Bhutan Helms, armour and arms, get yourself "Warriors of the Himalayas, rediscovering the arms and armor of Tibet" by Donald J LaRocca and "Bhutan, Mountain Fortress of the Gods", in particular the chapter within, "The Way to the Throne" by Francoise Pommaret. Attached is one of mine that you may have seen? Gavin Attached Images

27th October 2015, 12:15 AM	#1
endeavour192 Member Join Date: Oct 2015 Posts: 5	OK i understand !

28th October 2015, 12:26 AM	#3
Battara EAAF Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 7,280	Since one of these items are from a current auction, this thread is closed.

29th October 2015, 12:33 AM	#4
Battara EAAF Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 7,280	Issues resolved. We can now continue. If i understand right, true antique Tibetan helmets are insanely rare!

30th October 2015, 12:20 AM	#6
endeavour192 Member Join Date: Oct 2015 Posts: 5	Yes thank you, i know "Warriors of the Himalayas, rediscovering the arms and armor of Tibet" by Donald J LaRocca and i met Françoise Pommaret this year during a trip in Bhutan. Not easy to find real antiques helmets !

30th October 2015, 05:08 AM	#7
Bob A Member Join Date: Feb 2014 Posts: 436	While I live in complete ignorance of Tibetan helmets, I'd have to say that to my uneducated eye, there are anomalies that lead me to doubt that the helmet in question is of significant age. The improper lacing of the plates is apparent, but could be excused as an inept reassembly after having dismantled the helmet for "restoration". The designs on the bowl of the helmet appear rather fresh, and the riveting seems modern. It seems to lack any sort of patina stemming from use. All that said, while it may not be new, it seems to be satisfactorily Tibetan, given the source. "Fake" is a term I'd only use if an object was deliberately misidentified for larcenous purpose; the artifact is what it is, and does not seem to lie, or to bear deliberate false witness about itself. That said, I have no knowledge about how it may have been represented at an auction site.