The Realms of the Unreal
In The Realms of the Unreal
A New Breed of Fake Gets Harder to Detect
As the Great War has received more attention in the media
recently, so too has the appearance of fakes also dramatically increased. This corresponds
with an increased demand for genuine pieces and their rising prices. As a
result, some very good -or at least very interesting- fakes have begun to flood
the market. Thus, some discussion of the topic is warranted here as collectors
are now going to be encountering these fakes more regularly.
All of this will be nothing new to WWII collectors, who
have been dealing with fakes since at least the 1960s. However, in comparison, Great
War fakery is a fairly recent phenomenon. What was once limited almost exclusively
to the simple application of camouflage to German helmets has vastly expanded
in scope to include British War Office Pattern helmets, Italian Farina helmets,
and the rarer Adrians. Many of these new forgeries are not merely repaints, but
often the work of highly-skilled individuals who have drastically altered more
common helmets to appear as their more sought-after variants. Sadly, our comparative
safety as Great War collectors is quickly coming to an end.
However, knowledge is still the best defense. Most of
the forgeries ultimately fail a logic check in one way or another or simply don’t
correspond accurately to the forms of known originals. These “new breed” fakes
seem to hail primarily from England, where interest in the Great War has always
been high. Latvia can also always be counted on to produce some semi-convincing
Stahlhelme restorations/repaints,
while fakes from the U.S. seem mostly of the “unwitting collector” type, rather
than the forger themselves, though this is just my interpretation. Fakes from
Germany do surface from time to time and are interesting insofar as they very
often consist of heavily-oxidized steel facial visors of various forms that are
either altogether unknown or undocumented in historical or collection reference
works and should therefore generally be considered fantasy pieces.
W.O.P. Hits the Big Time
In some ways I’m glad to finally see the Brodie’s SteelHelmet, War Office Pattern (W.O.P. hereafter) get the respect it deserves as a highly
desirable Great War piece. It is a rare helmet, especially in good condition, and
genuine examples do not surface often. So, it was only a matter of time before
it would become the target of more dedicated forgery. The W.O.P. helmet has been
faked for some time, but to this point it has mostly been with the simple
removal of the steel rim from the Mark I helmet and perhaps a divisional repaint
or badge embellishment. This is no longer the case. While recent fakes still
use the familiar Mark I helmet as a base minus its steel rim, they have been
far more aggressively altered in a number of ways than we are used to seeing:
1.
The
helmet shell seems to have been subjected to deformation via a high-heat source
(presumably some kind of blowtorch) in order to replicate the uneven wavy pattern
that is sometimes observed on the shells of original W.O.P. helmets.
2.
The
Mark I chinstrap bales have been replaced with bales that more closely resemble
those of the W.O.P. helmet in size.
3.
The
original Mark I liner has seemingly been retained, but has been carefully cut
to approximate the six-finger W.O.P. liner.
4.
The
recognizable “apple green” color unique to W.O.P. helmets is applied and
sometimes overpainted to give the impression of prolonged field use.
Let’s look at each of these items in more detail:
I am not a metallurgist, nor do I have any experience in
welding or metal fabrication, so I cannot know for certain how the Mark I shell
is deformed. I can only say that the overall effect can be remarkably
convincing, particularly if one hasn’t seen many original W.O.P. helmets. The deception
is, however, let down by its overzealous application; original helmets malformed
to this extent would almost certainly have been deemed not fit for military service.
Indeed, W.O.P. helmets do often exhibit some degree of waviness in their shells
(certainly more so than the Mark I), but the low amplitude and high frequency of
these waves makes the overall impression generally slight.
The bale situation is more difficult to discern,
unfortunately, as there was some variation even amongst original examples. Look
for signs of trauma in this area, either in the paint or the metal itself.
Also, pay particular attention to the wire; does it look overly clean –or overly
dirty? This is a gut call. Look also at the chinstrap itself; it should consist
of two pieces only and not have any part under the liner through which the top
rivet might pass. This is a feature of the Mark I and never found on W.O.P.
helmets. Also, keep an eye out for manufacturer’s markings (or the lack
thereof) or dates that don’t seem to make sense. Remember, this helmet was only
in production until about April of 1916.
Intact W.O.P. liners are a rare find, as the design was
poor and they often fell out and were replaced even during the war. Therefore, few
collectors have had a chance to closely inspect an original example. These recent
fakes take some steps to replicate this liner by carefully cutting a common Mark
I helmet liner into six fingers. At first glance, the result can be quite good,
but under scrutiny it falls short in several ways when compared to original W.O.P.
liners, which had a very different design. This is most evident in the
retention of the size-adjustment netting –a feature never present on originals.
In some cases, depending on the manufacture date of liner, the band may also be
of cordite, rather than the leather used on genuine pieces.
Apple green is a shockingly bright color for a helmet
and was often overpainted. It also often appears quite shiny, with most fake
finishes looking rather dull in comparison. Look for remnants of anti-reflective
cork or sawdust in the finish. These were not used on W.O.P. helmets (which
were smooth) but was a feature of the Mark I.
Epic Thale
Fakes of the model 1918 ear cut-out helmet are
nothing new, but the quality of the fabrication has seemed recently to have
improved. The biggest hurdle in the forgery of this helmet is the very narrow parameters
of the helmet required to construct it convincingly, i.e., an E.T. (Eisenhüttenwerke
Thale)
model 1918 helmet in size 64 only, itself not a hugely common helmet in that
all model 1918 helmets are somewhat more difficult to find -and then, of course,
that the helmet will essentially need to be destroyed in the process. The good
thing is that from the collector’s perspective, these parameters provide an
excellent checklist against which a piece can be compared. Any piece not
conforming precisely to the above, should automatically be dismissed.
Virtue Has a Veil, Vice a Mask
 |
| This helmet was listed as a model 1918 ear cut-out. However, the form of the vent lug (1) indicates that it is size 66 or larger, not size 64. Chinstrap attachment rivets (2) were never a feature of 1918 models and their position (3) is too high, suggesting an Austro-Hungarian origin. This is confirmed by the scant remaining surface paint (4), which is brown. |
Virtue Has a Veil, Vice a Mask
While obviously not a helmet, I've wanted to obtain an example of the British tank crew "splatter mask" for some time. It's a very impressive-looking piece that really exemplifies some of the more Medieval aspects of Great War combat and, consequently, it's extremely popular with collectors in this field. Unfortunately, something disturbing has recently come to my attention regarding this piece: it seems that someone, presumably in the U.K., has been making some very high-quality, artificially-aged copies that are practically indistinguishable from originals, at least in photos.
Over the past six months or so, I had noticed a fairly dramatic increase in the frequency of the appearance of this piece on eBay. Now, approximately 22,000 of these masks were produced during the War and they were in use until 1927. However, they are not exactly common today and seeing four or five excellent examples in such a short span of time sent up some red flags for me. After careful examination, I am now convinced that what we are dealing with here is an individual or individuals with a great deal of skill, producing a product of exceptional quality, designed to deceive collectors -or at least they are now being used for deceptive purposes, if that was not the original intent. Even to produce a fake of this quality must require many hours of work and substantial cost, which makes it all the more odd as genuine masks, while certainly expensive, are not astronomical.
Now, let us examine the obverse of some masks that in my opinion are recently-produced fakes. This mask was listed by the owner as a probable copy:
Well, as we often see with faked Stahlhelm liners, I feel that the leather here is just too good. It's too form-fitting and hasn't pulled away from the mask form at all. It doesn't have that hard, dry quality that really old leather has. It's too shiny, much too thick and, most importantly, it is smooth and not pebbled. Here is another example, undoubtedly by the same individual and again listed as a probable copy:
Note the thick, smooth, tight-fitting leather present on these examples, rather than the dry, somewhat wrinkled, pebbled leather found on originals.
As you can see, these copies are of truly excellent quality; taken in isolation when you think you might have just discovered an untouched original piece in superlative condition, emotion can quickly overtake logic -a very dangerous situation indeed. Let us now turn our attention to the reverse side of these masks, as here the discrepancies are thankfully more pronounced. The reverse-side of original masks is covered with chamois leather. Here is an original mask from the collection of the Imperial War Museum:
Note in photos (above and below): 1) Chamois leather of a generally light and uniform color with a slightly fuzzy nap. 2) Stitching at the very inner edge of the eye-hole. 3) Very tight, dense stitching along the bottom edge of the mask (photo: RobDekk via wehrmacht-awards.com forums):
Now, compare the two above originals to the reverse of masks that we have described previously as probable fakes. Right away, the color of the "chamois" looks too dark and too smooth. Notice too the stitching around the eye-holes: it is several millimeters from the edge, rather than right at the edge.
What should be light, nappy chamois looks too smooth -almost like regular light-colored leather or possibly suede- its large pores of giving it a rather "mottled" appearance. The eye-hole stitching is again too far from the inner edge and the underside stitching is too loose and primitive compared to originals. Here is another example that displays the same characteristics:
Here is a comparison of the bottom-stitching on another example. Compared to the original on the right, it appears to be a far less complex stitch:
This view again shows us the odd "large-pore" suede leather reverse that is quite different from originals, as well as the aforementioned stitching details.
Conclusion
These masks are clearly the work of a very talented craftsman and I'm curious as to who they are and where these are coming from. Due to the exceptional quality of these fakes and the danger they represent, I would recommend against the purchase of any splatter mask until more details become available. Please contact me if you have any further information.