Headwear: Victorian foreign service helmet markings

[Neil Bates]

Hello,

I have what I believe to be a late 19C foreign service helmet stamped WD with arrow and the numerals 80. Has anyone any idea whether the 80 has any meaning re regiment or date or is simply some manufacturing code or similar. I don't think it would be possible to post a photo as they are very faded and dirty. Many thanks for any help. Neil

[Stuart_Bates]

Hi Neil,

the practice of stamping government items for the military was introduced in or about 1880 and consisted of the month and year with the broad arrow and WD. Note that officially there never was such a thing as the "War Department."

This system seems to have been revised in 1917 when it becomes "enigmatic" to say the least. However, if there were another numeral, say "4" for April, then "80" would be the year 1880. But the correctness of that assumes commensurate wear and aging to the helmet itself. Why not post a photo of the helmet and have a go at photographing the WD marks.

Stuart

[Neil Bates]

Thanks for the reply. I'll have a go at posting some photos in the next day or so when I have found out how to do it!!! Neil

[Neil Bates]

Here they are - any help would be appreciated. Neil

[Stuart_Bates]

Neil,

I am afraid that the interior fittings to the helmet are somebody's afterthought.

1. The cork spacers, if indeed they are cork, are far too large
2. The "webbing" strips with a drawstring is totally wrong.
3. I am not at all sure that the puggaree is also not a later addition, with only four pleats it doesn't look right for the period.
4. The collet to the interior should be a 4 or 8 spoke cartwheel

Is the binding around the brim leather or cotton drill? An officer's helmet should have the former and an OR's the latter.

You are right about the WD marks as they cannot be made out from the photos, so I can't give an opinion on them.

I also note that the interior hooks for the chinstrap are missing.

I attach photos of the two interiors - OR's and officers.

Stuart

8 cork spacers.jpg (116.19 KiB) Viewed 1210 times

Colonial Officers interior.jpg (180.01 KiB) Viewed 1210 times

[Stuart_Bates]

I just took a photo of the WD marks in one of my helmets for comparison. I am not sure but it may be that the full year was used rather than the last two digits as all of my examples have such.

Stuart

RND WD Marks.jpg (114.18 KiB) Viewed 1210 times

[Jocktamson]

Hi Neil, I have to agree with everything Stuart says, the webbing type straps i've never come across on a Foreign Service Helmet and the pugaree doesn't look very well done, The WD markings from what I can see, look like they have been put on to make the helmet look old. Ive posted a couple of shots of the interior of my own other ranks Foreign Service Helmet showing the WD markings and liner construction. Look out the book Military Sun helmets of the World by Peter Suciu and Stuart, ( do I get paid for plugging your book there Stuart? ) but seriously there is loads of great information on pith helmets. I hope the helmet didn't cost you a lot of money, Officers helmets from the Boer War can run easily into thousands of pounds for a nice example.

[Neil Bates]

Thanks for your replies. No it didn't cost me a fortune, so don't worry on that front! I find this helmet odd (even strange) myself - that's why I posted it. It is certainly like nothing I have seen before, and I am familiar with these helmets to a degree. The photos aren't great so they probably don't give the real 'feel' of the helmet.


I think you are certainly right that the full year date was normally used, which is one reason I was puzzled. There is no doubt it is very old though - the cotton covering has many old grease and dirt marks etc and the leather headband is stiff with age. The collet is covered in verdigris. There are NO cork spacers, everything else internally is webbing, which I have never come across before. The inside of the helmet was thick with dust when I found it (it also smelt strongly of linseed oil) and obviously hadn't been touched for very many years. Personally I would say the puggaree was original but I agree that four pleats seems odd. There are no brass hooks, but as far as I can see there never have been (again strange). I would say the markings inside are original because they are so indistinct (and were almost totally obscured by dust originally). The edging is cotton drill, as is the lining. It is certainly odd and I just hoped someone out there might have seen something similar. Maybe it will just remain an enigma, but any other views are welcome.

[ED, in Los Angeles]

I saw this post this morning and said to myself to reply to it after work. Well, it has pretty much all been said and correct but I do have some things to add.

The collet that holds the ventelater cap on to the top of the helmet appears to have the color green showing under several of the holes. This on a vetilator cap and you should see the bottom of the cap. It does ventalate. The suspension system of webbing is just like the steel helmets of The 20th century. The web straps are a thick herringbone cloth or light herringbone canvas. Was that kind of cloth used in any manner by the victorian British Army? Was this even a weave used as webbing in the 19th century? How about a bread bag strap? I do not know. How is the herringbone webbing attached to the shell of the helmet? It looks like a cut was made through the inner green fabric and then what....attached to the shell with a rivit or glue? Does the webbing go through the shell and attached to the outside of the helmet to be hidden by the faux puggaree?
Look at the incisions made for the webbing on the underside of the helmet. The incisions are not symetrical with the helmet. Certainly a template would be used to mark where the cuts should be made. The incisions look like they were not well thought out and furthermore, the webbing does not even match symmetry with the human cranium! This is the type of webbing job a guy would do in his livingroom, with the helmet up-side down in his lap, and a sharp knife in one hand and a beer in the other.I will never believe that the suspension sytem was ever, ever, a product that came out of a helmet makers shop and War Departmet accepted.

Now for the helmet shell. It looks vary convincing. But the there should be a large metal lined opening when you un-screw the ventelator top cap. The metal rim lineing the hole should have a bridge across it to insert the cap to be screwed on from the inner helmet dome. Your fastener that holds the venalator cap on looks just like the threaded fastener that is on my New Zealand Police 'fiber' 1960's "bobby" helmet. I cannot explain the WD and 80 marks. I do know that collectable militaria have been faked in the United States since at least the 1960's. I have a very nice example of the Australian Jungle Carbine. They are similar to the British .303 Jungle carbine, only made in Australia. How proud I was to take it home in excellent condition, and I dreamed of other used, worn specimines fielded by stalwart "Diggers" using ladders to scale the ridgeback escarpments of New Guinea to keep the Japanese from invading Darwin. Well....these "Australian" carbines were made here in California during the massive arms importing ito the United States. Also made, was an M1 Garand Tanker Carbine to be used in the small confines of an armored vehicle. Never existed in real life. I also have a Chinese SKS carbine aparently issued only to American collectors and never the Chinese Army. I knew it was not 'real'. I just wanted to have the erzatz gun for my collection. After all, I already had a bogus Aussie Carbine to go with it!!!!!!

EDIT: To be exact on the Aussie Carbine, several trial models were produced as experimental model with 'XP' in the serial numbers. They were sold off in the 1960's as surplus and are very rare, probably less than 700 being made for trials.

[Stuart_Bates]

It would appear from Jock's example that when the markings are stamped on the headband only the last two digits of the year are present. Something that I missed earlier is that the broad arrow always seems to appear between the W and the D.

There is an 1885 stamped helmet on Waterloo Militaria which has 2 and 1885 under the WD and broad arrow http://www.waterloomilitaria.com/shopexd.asp?id=352

Stuart

[Jocktamson]

I can never work out these WD marking codes, they are worse than the German Enigma codes. Ive seen so many variations over the years I just gave up trying to date anything by WD acceptance marks. For every one you see that makes sense to you, you'll find another to contradict it, logically I would read the markings on my helmet as 11th month 1898, however Ive seen other helmets with letters and or numbers with last two digits like 22 or 11 when the helmet in question is obviously pre 1900 not 1922 or 1911.

[ED, in Los Angeles]

Hello Stuart and Jocktamson and Neil and all....

I think we are in agreement that the helmet shell is probably real and the inside of the helmet is some persons handicraft. And Neil states that there were never any brass hooks for the chinstrap. Is there evidence of the original headband and cork spacer mountings? If not, this could be a incomlete helmet that was sold as a surplus 'lot'. Probaly a number of helmet shells attached to a 'sales lot' of more desireable items. It's done today with all sorts of items. Ususally low price/profit items. It is also a way to get rid of the stockpile of now obsolete helmet shells to make way for the Wolseleys. This could be the case if there is no evidence of prior headband attachment points. The question is then...when is the WD and manufacturer code or year put on? Before the helmet and headband and chinstrap are mated together? Is it stamped by the helmet maker or is the mark an acceptance mark put on by the military. I have some WWII American military webbing, and it has no acceptance mark and the manufacturers name along with the letters U.S. are almost certainly put on by the manufacturer.
And in regards to the broad arrow being between the "WD" and not above like Neils helmet....The cypher of the arrow above the "WD" has been around on arms since the 1870's Martini Henry at least.

[Stuart_Bates]

Ed,

it is not likely that the helmet was sold without hooks, headband but with a puggaree. If the "date" stamping is correct then it is highly unlikely that stocks were sold off for the Wolseley which did not make any impact until much later, and add to this that the British Army was very mindful of cost and always used up stocks before a new pattern was introduced. This is why it took several years for the Wolseley to replace the Colonial Pattern, and well after 1900 for this to be completed for the common soldiery.

It would be instructive if we could see the shell under the puggaree or on the inside where the "new" headband has been fitted as that would indicate whether any hooks, spacers etc. were ever fitted.

Stuart

[Jocktamson]

Seeing under the pugaree would certainly help, there's just to many anomalies with the helmet, the pugaree, the lack of hooks, the liner, the WD markings, nothing really looks original or makes any sense, I am not even sure the Helmet shell is original, there would surely be some form of discolouration where the original spacers or liner would have been, I cant see a helmet being accepted by the military without some form of strap.

As far as the WD mark goes I am sure it dates to 1855 when the Board of Ordinance (Arrow with BO Letters mark) was replaced by the War Department. Shortly after the Crimean War it became the War Office and the War Department was amalgamated into it, although the WD stamp was retained.

[Neil Bates]

Thanks for your views which I appreciate. A very odd helmet, especially the interior I agree. I have had some time over the Christmas holiday to take a very close look at it. I think the main problem is that it might very well be impossible to really come to a valid conclusion online without seeing and holding the helmet itself.

I now personally believe the lining to be original and integral to the helmet, ie not added later. The webbing straps inside are held onto the lining by corded loops very neatly and professionally done. There are no slits in the lining. Some edges of green lining are showing through the collet, but generally you can see the ventilator. The screw through the collet is held in place on the underside by a hexagonal nut let into the collet.. As I mentioned before the leather headband is stiff and twisted out of shape. Also the markings inside would appear to be genuine. I am loath to poke about too much or start to take it apart!!!

I have to say that I feel it is very old and obviously of unknown type. Could it possibly be a precursor or prototype for the Foreign Service helmet of 1877. Didn't the Ashanti helmet have a much thinner puggaree? Perhaps it could be kit for India or the Far East.where khaki helmets were worn earlier than elsewhere. I've looked at various photos of troops in India and there certainly seem to be many differences between the helmets/puggarees worn. Could the 80 even stand for the 8oth Regiment of Foot who were stationed in Singapore etc between 1872 and 1877? I just don't know! Possibly the next step would be to consult the National Army Museum in London.