Jump to content

A Few of My Helmets...


Fortunes Of War
 Share

Recommended Posts

Fortunes Of War

Gwar- Thank you for posting that often displayed magazine cover.  As you show, we already know that good luck flags were faked; there really is nothing new there.  Since 2007-2008 in particular, modern, nicely forged good luck flag reproductions now join the ranks of the wartime (but obviously fake), CB produced flags.  In addition to those, we know that other militaria was embellished (see Jareth's above photo).  

 

Jareth- Yes, always buy the item and not the story.  But that is the driver behind this discussion.  I think one of the points is that there are people (especially new or younger collectors), who don't know whether they should buy a helmet that is not painted in "standard dead grass" khaki.  They want to be certain that they are spending their money on an authentic Japanese helmet and paint scheme.  Fortunately or unfortunately, they are entering into a topic that has not been fully settled in the minds of the community.  It's possible that as more of us older collectors die off, the scales will fully tip and the remaining collecting or commenting community will place a firm rubber stamp-"FAKE" on these examples.  For now, that doesn't solve the problem for these people.  One side tells them not to purchase because they (the Japanese) would never paint them (well, perhaps a few), like that.  Another view point says that, depending upon the provenance, go ahead and buy it. 

So what is the difference between "a story" and "provenance"?  The two are not the same thing.  A story is defined as "An imaginary account told for entertainment."  There is little about it that can be found to be real.  Provenance is "A record of ownership, as in an antique, used as a guide to authenticity."  The more information you gather, the better.  As the years go by, provenance can be tougher to determine but is not impossible to uncover. 

Many collectibles and works of art dating back hundreds and even thousands of years, may have provenance.  Even lacking that, they can be shown to be authentic examples.  For items that have an incomplete or no provenance, it often takes comparison between other known vintage examples in order to determine whether something has a chance of being correct-vintage-real-period produced (whatever word you choose.)  That is also part of reason this topic means so much to so many different readers and non-collector commentators.  If you can prove that the whole idea behind black painted helmets, or "dead grass" helmets with white-bare metal-yellow-red-black, etc. painted stars is completely false, then the argument is pretty much over.  Unfortunately, again, the men who brought them back may be dead and dying, but the helmets, with provenance that they brought back is not going away.       

Hi Bill-

     That's the point.  What you are reading are assumptions about why it might have been painted in that fashion.  Right now, I place little on the assumptions and simply fall back on the items and the people who brought them back.  Conjecture seems(ed) to work with the Japanese helmet examples.  The classic one is the "shinyo" boat helmet. 

 

Adachi-

     Happy to finally see you here.  Ouch, you really got me on that one!  Maybe someone can pick up the torch on your comment and really take this thread to a place it doesn't belong.  Sorry, it won't be me.......     

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's an exert from a postwar study on Japanese night fighting tactics I posted on WAF earlier. This study was constructed by interviewing a number of former Japanese servicemen and is quite thorough. I have not been able to find mention of black helmets in Japanese so far. While this doesn't completely disprove the existence of black helmets in the Japanese military, it does seem to debunk the theory they were used for night fighting.

6y2Tlzo.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes provenance to me would constitute capture papers, period photo of GI holding exact item or soldiers records. Hearsay/stories are not provenance. For example a GI might of been on a few islands, in a few battles then in Japan with occupation troops. How does one ascertain exactly where his souvenirs were actually picked up? Leap of faith ? I wish I had a nickel (dollar with inflation) for every “ sniper rifle” that turned out to be a normal type 38 rifle. Every plane part is off a zero especially those from Pearl Harbor. Choose the most popular island battle to enhance any item etc. My opinion is black painted helmets and colored stars are in that category 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, adachi said:

So much talk about these mysterious photos in John Egger's collection and not a single one in sight. If the photos will prove these helmets to be legitimate, let's see them already. 

Austin, I am editing a 1,000 photos of Johns into high res. digital files for his book that show the detail required, while working full time with family obligations, so it is not moving as fast as I would like. But when the book is published you can purchase his book ( as I have done yours) and base your decisions on what the photos depict in his published work. 

Just now, Dean Brock said:

Austin, I am editing a 1,000 photos of Johns into high res. digital files for his book that show the detail required, while working full time with family obligations, so it is not moving as fast as I would like. But when the book is published you can purchase his book ( as I have done yours) and base your decisions on what the photos depict in his published work. 

And Austin I really liked your book!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fortunes Of War

     Let me say that there isn't anything "mysterious" about John's photographs.  Rather than labeling them as that, I would prefer to use the correct term, "unpublished".  I am not the only person to see them, and they do show the examples that I have mentioned.  Thanks Dean for corroborating that.  I don't, however, expect them to convince any of the "assumers" (is that a word?), to change their minds; most have already made up their minds on the subject.  Further, I prefer not to pin an assessment on just one thing (the existence of the "mysterious" photos).  This thread has covered quite a few other points, some of which has been conveniently ignored. 

     The fact is that non-standard helmets exist.  We have them in hand and in many cases, we know where they came from, who brought them back, what unit they were in and when, what battle they fought in, etc.  No evidence has been brought forward to explain why these non-standard helmets are fake.  The above reference proves nothing in light of the items in hand, and in my view, nothing is debunked.  I suppose I could type up something similar to this, if I was so inclined (I am not), and put it out there as well.  More importantly, let me add, that I can't say whether these helmets were from banzai charges, worn by troops attacking at night, worn by troops stationed on black sandy beaches, worn post-war (that one's a stretch in light of the examples with cut and/or bloodied tie strings), etc.  I'm not hanging my hat on any of those, and I really don't care.  On the other hand, as long as we are making assumptions, I would tender that even though a few non-standard helmets have come out of Japan (yes, they have been found there too), most seem to have come from the Pacific battlefields.  If any collectors have similar non-standard helmets sourced from other places, please feel free to post them in this thread, along with comments.

       Troops stationed in or near Japan would likely be more compelled to try and maintain the regulation standard, as long as they could.  In the article I wrote on Japanese camo helmets, I discussed that it became less possible for Japanese troops on the Pacific islands to maintain that standard.  In many of the Japanese surrender photos, we see Japanese officers wearing combination uniform pieces.  Some are even wearing field hats that are not rank appropriate.  They were sometimes forced by necessity to put together things that were not regulation.  All kinds of things were seen and brought back that were not standard.  To have a clearer picture, all of these things should be considered.  

     As for capture papers and photographs of soldiers holding the exact same item: capture papers generally list items in this fashion: "1 Japanese helmet, 1 Japanese wrist watch, Japanese photos", etc.  I would hardly expect to find (but never say never) one that said, "1 Japanese Type 90 steel helmet painted black with bare metal star on front".  If the U.S. soldier even went through the process of papering his souvenirs, the biggest concern was to simply make sure that the items did not contain any important military intel.  A Japanese helmet, whether it was painted khaki, khaki with black splotches, aircraft green paint instead of "dead grass" or black, would not be the kind of thing to raise any suspicions.  It is more likely that these things were commonly seen from time to time and no one thought twice about them.  This is borne out by some of the questions asked of U.S. veterans regarding the history of their items.  I covered this in my article as well.  Photographs of the exact helmet in the hand of the G.I. or Marine (and don't forget John's photos showing the existence of these things being worn already), is going to be nearly impossible.  I have collected good luck flags for over 55 years and have owned thousands of them.  I can count on one hand how many of those flags came with the soldier, sailor or airman holding the exact flag in a photo.  Yet, those flags are still considered to be authentic Japanese good luck flags from the war.  It would be so nice if everything fit into such a neat package. 

     So, in the meantime, we are left with, as Jareth said, an opinion.  He has at least owned a number of these helmets and probably examined a handful of others.  I'm not sure how many actual helmets others have studied in hand before expounding here.  I would challenge anyone to get their hands a little dirty and personally look over some of these non-standard helmets before passing judgement, "yeah" or "neh".  They are not too tough to find; many personal collections have them or they can sometimes be found at various military and militaria shows.  Different dealer sites have them as well.  If you buy, examine and don't like, return it.  The more you study, the easier it is to form a knowledgeable opinion.  As an anthropologist, I have studied too much material culture over the years that shattered the norm or was not what we had expected.  In fact, shattering the norm has come to be the norm.  Unfortunately, that might not be comforting for collectors who rely upon the opinions of others to determine which way the winds blow.                 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Dean Brock said:

Austin, I am editing a 1,000 photos of Johns into high res. digital files for his book that show the detail required, while working full time with family obligations, so it is not moving as fast as I would like. But when the book is published you can purchase his book ( as I have done yours) and base your decisions on what the photos depict in his published work. 

And Austin I really liked your book!

 

Thank you for the update on what's happening and your kind comment on my book. I look forward to the releae of this new book and hopefully seeing a few things I haven't seen before. As a researcher I'm naturally skeptical and I set the bar for the legitimacy of items perhaps too high sometimes, but good period photographs and documentation can always change my mind. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fortunes Of War

https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.170.7477&rep=rep1&type=pdf#:~:text=Currently%2C it is only possible,%2C green%2C and blue filters.

 

Of course, data can be cherry picked.  However, modern science, driven by mathematics, is amazing and getting better by the day.  Processes are being developed virtually everyday that take today's impossible to possible, almost overnight.  The crux of the article (see link), is that while difficult to determine, black and white images can be accurately colorized to within an acceptable degree of error.  If the negatives are present, the results will be even more accurate.  Unfortunately, over the years, negatives tend to degrade...still, with enough images and enough data, the error becomes even smaller.       

 

"Moreover, professional black and white photographers regularly use a range of darkroom techniques that would render the inference of ideal response values for points in their prints exceedingly difficult. Film negatives or photographic plates are more attractive data sources, as all the unknowns associated with printmaking are eliminated. Furthermore, photographers make use of numerous conventions that recommend exposure times, filter use, and development processes in particular situations. Thus, there is potential to develop tools for guessing the likely photographic variables associated with a given collection of antique negatives."

A quote from another article: "Also, accurately colorized photos help us learn more about history, as we can see what exactly costumes, uniforms and jewelry from certain periods looked.

 

Guys, I'm sorry but this back and forth is becoming redundant.  Again, please keep up the discussion if you like, but there isn't much more that I can add to this one, so I won't.  Best, Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...