World's costliest helmet `is a fake'
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.THE WORLD's most expensive helmet, bought by the Royal Armouries for pounds 114,000, is an imitation, experts have said.
The Filippo Negroli helmet, thought to date back to the 1530s, was the most expensive single item of armour in the world when it was sold in July 1997. But experts brought in by the museum in Leeds found that it is likely to be the work of an unknown 16th century artisan. The helmet was thought to be one of only three of his helmets on public display. It is now in storage.
Guy Wilson, Master of the Armouries, said the helmet had been subject to "considerable research" since it was bought. It involved taking the helmet to New York in 1998 for comparison with comparable Negroli pieces. "The international experts that were present for the comparison were of the opinion that it was not the work of Filippo Negroli but that it may be by another Milanese armourer of the 16th century working in imitation of Filippo's style. We are currently in discussion with Sotheby's about the implications of this discovery," he said.
A Sotheby's spokesman, Christopher Proudlove, said: "We stand by our original attribution that this was made by Filippo Negroli. What we are talking about is a difference of opinion, whether Filippo Negroli made this or another of his scholars or people who worked with him."
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments