I wanted to discuss this attached image. To me this is a very unusual "pot " helm (the definition given by the auctioners) as it is unlike any I've seen before. I'm sure that this would not have been a rarity in its own time but not too many survive from this period to tell us. I have collected very many images of Armour, esp. helmets over the last five years and I don't believe that I have anything much by way of period paintings or drawings that shows a helm like this one. I am fascinated by this sort of image because it touches on one of my pet peaves in that it helps to show the great variety of armour ( and arms) that once were commonplace and forces us to think in broader terms. If I were asked to draw a helm from this period I wouldnt have drawn anything like this one. BTW, this helm comes with a Carbon-14 dating certificate.
I wish I could supply more details ! Heres the direct link ... http://www.galeriefischer.ch/auktionen/396/vorschau_e.htm
Weighing in at 5.2kg (<11.5lbs) I guess that would make it no lightweight as would be expected.
I am suprised at the heart shaped opening ( a bit big to call an occullum ? ) and I would guess that it would cover the mouth, mostly. I am more suprised at the shape of the base as it concaves on each side. But most of all, I am suprised that its for sale at an Auction !
Does anyone have pics of helms like this one ? Does anyone have any period art reference showing anything like this in paintings or drawings ? I would like to hear your feedback and comments please.

---

 Attachment: 103.14 KB

That's interesting. Looks almost like some barbute-style helmets, only closed in the front and with that nasal guard riveted on. Is the mouthpiece riveted over what used to be an opening? I can't quite tell from the picture. I wonder what was attached with those extra holes, and what the hinge on the bottom used to be connected to. What an unusual helmet. Like a confluence of different aspects from three or our other styles of helmet.

BTW, forgive my possible ignorance, but I was under the distinct impresison that carbon-14 dating was only accurate with regard to organic material, or things that once were organic, like fossilized bone and wood. I know steel contains carbon, but does it decay in the same way that plant and animal carbon does?

I think a more important question might be, bearing in mind the alleged great age of the helm, is it genuine?

I'm not saying it's necessarily a fake, but it might be a 19th century theatre prop or part of a theatre costume armour.

Hi.............yes, of course the Carbon-14 is for organic materials.....I assume that they had tested an original fragment of the lining or small bit of leather strapping that was inside. Certinally the helm could be a fake...it looks like something from the Monty Python movie "Holy Grail", however my German is far too basic to translte the info which I finally found ( Fischer's have many catalogues of amazing armour) ...and so I will post it here for your reference plus the side view............

Transcribed roughly:

Pothelm, European, 13th century, of corroded iron. Made from 3 formed plates rivetted together. 1.4-2.2mm metal thickness, 34 rivets. 6 holes for the lining. Hole in the skullcap/plate for the crest. Heart-shaped eye port, with a nasal guard fastened by 2 rivets, previously broken. The attached mouth-plate with locking hinge assembly is probably a later addition, to keep the helm attached by means of a chain (funeral helm?).

Height: 42cm Weight: 5.24kg

Price: a whole bunch, whatever currency it's in!!!


The question of authenticity is often brought up with "Pothelms". The argument is, that even though thousands of European knights wore "Pothelms" from about 1230 to 1380, very few of these shapeless helmets actually survived. They could have been recycled, or turned into funeral helms. Unfortunately, metallurgical tests are just not very meaningful in dating something of this nature. Only materials of organic origin can be dated with any reliability. Luckily, a type of organic grunge was found between the "Pothelm's" rivetted iron plates. Through electron microscopy and x-ray efflourescence spectroscopy, it was determined that this grungy layer was most likely composed of dried oil, plant based wax, and powdered minerals. A carbon-14 dating of the organic layer was additionaly undertaken at the ETH Zurich, and the results showed with an almost 94% certainty that the age was between about 1390 to 1520. It is from these results that we can deduce that the helm is not a copy, nor a 19th century forgery.

There are several issues I find somewhat odd with this specimen.

First, the six holes for attaching the lining are all located around the front brow area. Second, the back/neck plate overlaps onto the front/face plate, creating a substantial edge susceptible to catching frontal blows/strikes. Third, the "added" plate covering the mouth area just doesn't strike me as being different in manufacturing methods or material. The hinge itself looks like it's of finer make...

My take; I think some neighbor's boys were allowed into the shop during off hours, and had some amatuer fun... lol

I would be prepeared to say 100% that it is a fake. Most likely a 19thC fake.

It doesn't look like any helm in any manuscript from the period that I have ever seen and it doesn't even look like it would fit a human head properly.

This last example does seem to be made correctly, compared to period manufacture and materials of similar, more "normal" examples. The odd top feature sure might come in handy to securely mount the knight's helm-regalia...

I have a big monitor and I just blew the frony on image up to approx. fukk size and it looks like something that would fit on my medium seven-and-one-eighth size head enen with a maille coif. I beliece that the attachment piece at the very bottom was a latter attachment. remember that this helm would have had a hexk of a bashing over the years as it was obviously modified for the tourney at a later date. I dont think the heart occular is too low because it lines up with the lining holes. Also I have noticed that some early helms had very high crowns ( ref. ""Wagner", etc) and some IMHO looked a bit "silly" and top-heavy. I think this was to hold a fair bit of padding against downward blows. ( My friend has just padded the inside of his harness as well as wearing his Gambeson and he now doesnt feel the blows half as much.) I have the photo blown up as I'm wposting this and the heart-occular was fine to see through.....I make it at around six inches wide because the whole height is 42 cm high.( thats 16.5 inches ! ) thats quite a deep helm. As for the single nasal rivet hole at the bottom....it could have just held a decorative rivet & floret, etc.

---

 Attachment: 106.88 KB
[ Download ]

Oooops !! Sorry, its late here and I should have checked my spelling....wadda schmuck !! :eek:

bruno,

having had the benefit of handling real medieval helmets from a few large collections I can say most w/out padding were bigger than my head. I assume with the proper padding their heads were not very different than ours by any great size. PErhaps most were shorter but the average heights still was 5'6", not a huge jump with some places in our day and their skulls look about the same size as ours. I believe the average now is 5'8" for men

I think the workmanship just looks 19th century to me. I have seen some good fakes having worked in a museum and had access to great resources but that first helmet is just weird. It combines things that do not seem to work for the 13th. That said 13th might be a typo, perhaps 14th century, which would make way more sense for the chest clasp, which would make this a tourney helmet and further it in the late 14th. That said the general type of helmet now is out of the time it would more or less fit in. The face is odd but in general it just looks wierd and the craftsmanships looks very poor. I have seen historic helmets of low quality, every rivet or the piece in general being noticibly asemetric and other things but my guess if later remake. Reminds me of the Violet le Duc one more than nought. Some of the auction companies should be viewed catiously they get things wrong too. I do wonder about them using carbon 14 and that coming out to what they said it did. I wonder if this has been severly modified. I worked on some pauldrons that had clearly been worked on by some local metal worked with minimal understanding of the piece as the lames were attached backwards on one.... It could in part of all be orignal medieval material but just assembled differently later (likely 19th as their are similar fakes of very similar design).

I think the second ones are interesting. They look much more probable as medieval. Any more info one them?
No doubt many types of helmets existed,not sure on number one though.

RPM

Hello all!

Just my gut instinct, having looked at loads of period images and photos and drawings of surviving period pieces; it's a Victorian fake. Sorry to just echo the others, but that's my two cents worth. Looks too rough, and too "abnormal" (and I'm usually one to support some of the more "abnormal" armour ideas - I like the oddballs and misfits :D .) For me, the nasal looks especially odd. Why not make it as one piece with the upper part?

Stay safe!

To me, it bears some resemblance to two 19th century reproduction helms shown in one of the DK books.

Here's another anomoly for the list. The hasp at the base suggests a fastening to a breastplate, which suggests a tournament helmet; but there is no provision for a faceplate, so the face would always be exposed to a lance (= BAD). The only type of tournament combat it would be suited to, would be combat with swords or wasters, since most of those only allowed blows, not thrusts.

As for the carbon dating: if someone in the 19th century set it up as a fake, they were very farsighted, assuming that one day something like carbon dating would appear. Otherwise why go to all the trouble of using genuine medieval "gunk"? How old is carbon dating anyway? Otherwise, we could assume a more recent setup, using scrapings off real period pieces.

I don't have an opinion either way, though I find the whole design and construction very odd, the design features just don't add up for any sort of functional helmet.

The side view is even worst, the chin part is back at least one and half cm, if not two, with respect to forhead.

This just doesn't fit with any human morphology.

Also, bashing or not the metal strips are unevenly cut.

I too vote for a victorian fake, possibly made by modifying an original piece.

Also, a modification of an original piece for funeral, pomp or game purposes is highly likely.