2nd Division or Early 8th Division?

[bbmilitaria]

I initially thought this was a 2nd Division helmet, but another collector thought it may be an early 8th Division. One of my old references has an early 8th patch with a very similar profile. Any thoughts are always appreciated. Thank you for looking.

[bbmilitaria]

[gearhead1968]

That was me, who thought this was an early 8th Davison Helmet, which seemed to match what WWI Nerd was saying here:

 

[aef1917]

What's the rim marking?

[bbmilitaria]

U.S. made helmet with lot number ZC187. Has the initials S E T under the Indian head.

[warguy]

I am with Gearhead, far more likely an 8th division variant than second division. I owned a gas mask bag once that had an Indianhead logo on it with a painted diamond behind it in the same color as the Indianhead on this helmet. It came out of a very well known collection (from a collector once prominent on this forum) and was supposedly Marine Corps (Second Division) related. There was no star behind the Indianhead logo, and there were some battles referenced on the bag that the Second Division wasn’t involved in, so I never had the confidence the bag was Marine or Second Division related, and I feel much the same about this helmet. Good luck! 

[bbmilitaria]

Here is a photo of my reference, which I know is not always known for period original examples, "Britton and Washington U.S. Military Shoulder Patches, Fifth Edition", but the resemblance is very close, minus the number of head feathers.  

[tredhed2]

You do raise a valid point, but B & W should best be used to ID patches, not to show 100% period originals. For one thing, they couldn't find period originals so they substituted repros. It was an early attempt to ID as many patches in color (and affordable) as possible.  

 

In this case, they and now you, are correct. Early 8th Div insignia.

[Bugme]

I love the incised trench art on this helmet!