What kit was issued per man?

[alliekiwi]

A very general question, here.

What kit were men issued with once they'd enlisted? Apart from various and sundry guns etc, how many uniforms did they get? How often - if ever - were they issued new/extra uniforms? Did this vary from force to force such as BEF, Canadian, NZEF etc? What happened if they were injured - were they given a new uniform, or did they have to get their old one mended? Did they have to pay for new gear themselves? How much did they have to rely on packages sent from home for clothing etc?

Allie

[Moonraker]

Allie

Not a direct answer to your question but:

When Jacko Thompson of the 45th Training Reserve Battalion arrived at Camp number 9 at Sutton Veny in October 1917, he was given tea consisting of :

"a couple of slabs of beef (?) 5 rounds of bread (stale) and a chunk of margarine Also a basin [underlined three times] (+ milk & sugar - which was VILE) … after that we were issued with towels, soap, boot and button brushes (rotten and second-hand)."

He was also given a kitbag which included:

3 shirts (quite O.K.)

2 prs pants ( " " )

3 socks (fair)

1 cardigan (passable)

1 pr. braces (O.K.)

& a hussif (rotten)

(A "hussif" or "housewife" was a repair kit for clothes containing needles and thread.)

Thompson was allowed to have five pieces of army kit washed at the camp each week, but regularly sent other clothing home for his mother to wash. His bed consisted of "a sort of bolster stuffed with rotten straw", three horse-rugs and a straw-filled sack laid on three boards raised about six inches from the ground. "Have also got knife, fork and spoon, also razor, toothbrush and shaving brush (all atrocious)."

Moonraker

[stiletto_33853]

Allie,

Sometimes the 'Articles of Clothing and Necessaries in Possesion' can be found in a soldiers Service Record.

Here is one that I dug out from the records in my files for you.

Articles of Clothing and Necessaries in Possesion.

Boots, ankle, pair 2

Caps, Service Dress 1

Drawers, Pairs 2

Greatcoats, D.M. 1

Jackets, Service Dress 2

Putties, Pairs 1

Trousers, Service Dress 2

Waistcoat, Cardigan 1

Gloves, Leather, Pairs 1

Badge, Cap 1

Bag, Kit 1

Braces, Pairs 1

Brass, Button 1

Brush, Brass 1

Brush, Clothes 1

Brush, Hair 1

Brush, Polishing 1

Brush, Shaving 1

Brush, Tooth 1

Comb, Hair 1

Fork 1

Holdall 1

Housewife 1

Knife, Table 1

Laces, Leather, Spare Pairs 1

Shirts, Flannel 3

Socks, Worsted, Pairs 3

Spoon 1

Titles, Metal Pairs 1

Towels, Hand 2

Andy

[stiletto_33853]

This might not come out to well with the resizing, but if you need the full size copy let me know and I will e mail it to you.

Andy

[Kath]

And I wonder, to how many men this amount of equipment would have seemed luxurious.

Kath.

[grantsmil]

A plate showing method of laying out infantry field kit.

[Joe Sweeney]

Allie,

The answer to this question varied considerably. Some of the previuos posts on British soldiers pretty much show what was issue to a soldier once he reported and is very much IAW what is called out in the Clothing Regulations of 1914 with one or two differences. This would be the scale issued in Garrison or back in England. Once a soldier was sent to an active front this would change. I've attached a copy of the Winter Scales issued by the BEF with GRO 1824 Sept 1916 and to take effect on 15 October. This only shows section I of III.

The biggest difference that can be seen is that SD uniform items were no longer issued in doubles, a soldier got one issue of jacket for example--except for socks, Drawers and shirts all items were issued in singles. Also quite a bit of useless paraphanalia was dropped like the Button Brass (Button Stick). This were commonly taken to France and maintained by the soldier when first sent but never show in any issue scales published by the BEF. There is also a lot more utilitarian gear for keeping warm.

In peace time a soldier was responsible for the cost and up keep of his entire uniform. Only items condemned through fair ware and tear were not charged. Even items such as Tooth brushes, shirts etc that fell into a category of Free Kit--(Necessaries) were only supplied to a soldier once--upkeep and replacement were at his cost.

This is not as big a hardship as may first appear as each soldier (british Army) was entitled, in peacetime, to a quarterly clothing allowance of 30s 6d for the upkeep and maintenance of his clothing and necessaries. Of this allowance, 15s 3d per quarter were allocated for upkeep of the free kit.

Once on Active service loss of kit could be written off and replaced at Government expense. However, this did not de-obligate the command structure from charging a soldier the cost of an item lost through gross neglect.

Frequancy of reissue also varied. In peace time uniforms were intended to last for a set period of time. This was only a guide as a piece of uniform intended to last 5 years if at that point and the pattern was still valid and the piece in good condition it would kept in service. If the wear-out date passes and the the upiece is deemed worn then it can be replaced at government cost.

On active service the system of supply or requisition was one of where clothing and equipment needs were fulfilled by indents submitted by unit quartermasters to the divisional Ordnance officers or the Ordnance officer of whatever administrative circumstances a unit was in. Clothing or equipment would then be drawn in exchange for a like number of turned in unserviceable articles, a statement from the commanding officer that said articles were lost, or a soldier charged the cost of any missing articles. During field service clothing would be replaced free of charge, along with necessaries that have been certified as lost or made unserviceable due to the exigencies of the campaign.

That was how the system was supposed work. However, it could promote waist and extravagance and much depended on the units at various levels. It was not uncommon for divisions to possess dumps of immense size where a floating stock of regularly consumed articles could be kept. In a mobile war this type of dump was not possible and excess articles would be sent back to base depots. However, the bulk system of issue in effect for British Army meant that these dumps could exist and expand in stationary warfare.

As the war progressed it became critical to curtail waist. In fact a system was developed where-by Divisions kept comparative statistics of issues to turn-ins. This haphazard system changed again in 1918 to one of an allowance of articles.

Issue to a wounded soldier would also vary. If evacuated to Hospital his uniform would be turned in and Hospital Blues issued. He would probably not get his old uniform back but this depended onn nature of wound, where he was evacuated too andhis release back to huis unit.

Soldiers would also depend on "Comforts" from home and volutnary donation. At first the collection of donations and volunteer work was a bit haphazard but would later be brought under control during the last half of the war by the Director-General of Voluntary Organizations, Sir Edward Ward. This organization was to provide items intended to supplement officially issued articles. However, it might be that comforts were occasionally issued in lieu of official issue. Goods provided in this fashion were distributed through the Military Forwarding Establishment, with instructions to commanding officers to inform the Assistant Military Forwarding Officer, Havre, of the particular articles needed by their units to expedite distribution. Mitts and Mufflers were distributed by this same system. Through this system no fewer than 1,742,947 mufflers, 1,574,155 pairs of mittens, 435,580 helmets (presumed to be Balaklava type knit helmets), 3,607,059 pairs of socks, and 123,666 sweaters were provided for the benefit of the troops

Hope this helps,

Joe Sweeney

[alliekiwi]

It's time like this I truly appreciate the forum. Thanks so much for all your posts! I've been wondering about this for ages.

I guess there would have been people who worked at the hospitals doing mending of uniforms as needed.

It's interesting to see the toothbrush on the list. I remember reading somewhere that the brushing of teeth did not really become common until after WW2. However, this might relate to the USA as the book I read it in mentioned US troops. No doubt my mind will now go off on a teethbrushing tangent.

Allie

[Kath]

So this might interest you, Allie!

http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/i...;hl=false+teeth

Kath.

[Pete1052]

It's uncanny that the terminology Joe Sweeney has quoted to describe Great War British army policy on the losses of clothing and equipment--"fair wear and tear" and "gross neglect"--is almost identical to what I knew in the U.S. Army during '77-'84. Instead of "gross neglect" our regulations use the term "gross negligence."

As a U.S. Army soldier in 1944 my dad's uniforms were lost during amphibious training at Coronado, California. That is to say, the bag containing his clothes went over the side of the landing craft he was riding in. When dad brought up the issue with the supply sergeant the man told him a Statement of Charges would be prepared. That is, the sergeant thought it was dad's gross negligence that led to the loss, and dad would have to pay. Dad replied that he wanted to talk to the battery commander, and the supply sergeant backed down. Dad got a free reissue of his clothing.

The amphibious training for future action in the Pacific came to naught--a few weeks later when the Germans attacked in the Ardennes in December 1944 his division was sent to Europe instead. The first they knew about it was when they were told to turn in their cotton uniforms in exchange for wool ones.

[Joe Sweeney]

It's uncanny that the terminology Joe Sweeney has quoted to describe Great War British army policy on the losses of clothing and equipment--"fair wear and tear" and "gross neglect"--is almost identical to what I knew in the U.S. Army during '77-'84. Instead of "gross neglect" our regulations use the term "gross negligence."

I just want to make it clear that those words are mine and not necessarily official British Terms. As far as the use of "Fair Wear and Tear" it was easier using that phrase than going into the condemnation practice of the British Army and "Boards of Survey"--That's sounding US Army again--Part worn, unserviceable and Worn-out and the practice of selling these garments to contractors for funds etc.

The actual wording in British terms on neglect is: "Public and Personal clothing and necessaries lost or rendered unserviceable through wilfulness and neglect will be replaced at the expense of the individual. A notification will be sent to the accountant, through base records, showing the amounts due from the men." Para 52.4 Field Service Regs 1909.

I think the cost accountants and those who wrote the regulations of all Armies sprouted from the same POD.

Joe Sweeney

[Pete1052]

I know we're off on an obscure tangent here, the terminology in old army regulations. My "U.S. Army Revised Regulations of 1863" contains paragraphs on Boards of Survey to determine culpability for losses of property, and when I served much later, 1977-1984, a Report of Survey was conducted for the same reasons. I was a "Surveying" officer on a few occasions doing those investigations. I believe, but can't prove, that this connotation of the word survey goes back to 18th-century British army and naval regulations, and got carried over into the American ones.

[alliekiwi]

I wonder why mounted regiments got one pair each of cotton and woollen drawers, whilst everyone else got two pairs of woollen? do woollen ones chafe when riding? (Actually, I'd hate to be given woollen ones at any time!)

Thanks for the link about the teeth, Kath.

It must have been dreadful to have been given your list of gear, much of it second-hand, knowing that the chap who 'handed it on' probably did it through the willful neglect of self by getting shot.

Allie

[Joe Sweeney]

I wonder why mounted regiments got one pair each of cotton and woollen drawers, whilst everyone else got two pairs of woollen? do woollen ones chafe when riding? (Actually, I'd hate to be given woollen ones at any time!)

Allie,

Not sure why mounted troops recieved cotton as opposed to woollen. In fact the issue of any woollen drawers to mounted troops was real recent (only in a simlar set of scales issued in Oct 1915). Pre-war and earlier clothing scales (1914) only call out cotton drawers for mounted troops. Your chaffing question may be very close to the reason, but I've never seen it actually stated. I believe the issue of woollen drawers only came-about due to weather.

By the way here are a set of the "universal" woollen drawers--1918 dated. These were meant for year round wear.

It was only in 1915 that "Drawers, cotton, summer wear, long dismounted” were approved for wear by Infantry etc. and I've only ever seen these on issue scales for the MEF.

Joe Sweeney

[6th Hauraki KIA KAHA]

Here is the New Zealand Rifle Brigade Equipment list.

I can not read two of the hand written items.

It wont let me load a decent size scan so i had to type it out.

3rd N.Z. (Rifles) Bde

1 Hat Smasher

1 Band or Puggaree

1 Chin Strap

1 Great Coat

1 Jacket S.D

1 pr Trousers, S.D

1,, Putties

1,, Boots

1,, Laces Boots

1,, Badges, Collar

1,, Titles, N.Z.R.B

1 set Buttons, Crown & Bugle

1 Jersey or Cardigan

1 Balaclava or Cap Comforter

2 Shirts, Flannel

2 Singlets

2 pr Drawers, Woolen

3,, Socks

1,, Braces

1,, Gloves

1 Towel

1 Housewife

1 Holdall

1 Knife Table

1 ,, Clasp

1 lanyard, Knife

1 Fork

1 Spoon

1 Brush, Shaving

1 ,, Tooth

1 Razor

1 Comb

1 Soap, piece

1 Dressing Field

1 Disc, Identity, with Cord

1 Mess Tin

1 ,, Cover

1 Sheet, Ground

1 Blankets

1 Pay Book

1 Dubbin, Tin

Rifle

unable read---------

Pull thro

Steel Helmet

S.B.R

unable Read----------

Web Equipment Complete

Jonathan

[Joe Sweeney]

Jonathan,

Do you have a date and circumstance for this issue list?

I know very little about the New Zealand effort.

The list is looks to be almost identical to the clothing scales issued by the BEF for British troops in France (I didn't post the equipment list). That is an active service issue list.

Is this list for France?

Joe Sweeney

[alliekiwi]

Great list, Jonathan. Could you possibly put up just the handwritten bit, zoomed in, so we can give it a go? I wonder if that last word is 'sheet'? As in some sort of ground sheet, or waterproof thing? (Not that I know anything about army equipment, it just seems a possibility to my untutored mind.)

Joe, those long underwear have to be some of the most uncomfortable looking undergarments I've seen this side of a corset. Imagine wearing those in summer!

Allie

[walrus]

Re: Woolen underwear:

Any guesses as to whether wool was chosen because of it's durabilitity or did the British Army possibly subscribe to Dr. Jaeger's theory of the heathy properties of wearing wool next to the skin?

Tom

[6th Hauraki KIA KAHA]

Hi Joe and Allie

This belonged to Sgt G Cumming 1st Btn NZRB, B Company

He served in France from 1916 to 1918, so yes for France.

Here is the part I could not Decipher,

??? Jals on Y Boat ????? Ha Ha

Jonathan

[squirrel]

Rifle

Oil bottle

Pull through

Steel helmet

SBR - small box respirator

Looks like "tabs on greatcoat?

[southern geordie]

Off the cuff the note reads

rifle

oil bottle

pull through

steel helmet

S.B.R. (unknown)

? tabs on great coat.

[tocemma]

Hello all,

'Tabs on greatcoat' refer to a set of cloth tabs and tinplate buttons that were issued to raise the hem of the greatcoat. They consisted of small, drill, tombstone shaped tabs which were sewn inside the greatcoat hem. The buttons were attached further, up again inside the greatcoat. The idea was that the bottom of the coat could then be folded up inside and buttoned in position, thereby shortening the coat when in muddy or wet conditions.

I have one of these coats with tabs in situ and also an unused set of tabs and buttons still attached to a length of cord.

Can't recall of the top of my head when they were introduced but I think it may have been winter 1916. I'm away from home at the moment and can't look it up. There is an illustration in the relevant GRO which Joe will undoubtedly have to hand!! Can you oblige Joe?

regards

Paul

[Chris Henschke]

Tabs positioning

[Jon6640]

Allie,

The answer to this question varied considerably. Some of the previuos posts on British soldiers pretty much show what was issue to a soldier once he reported and is very much IAW what is called out in the Clothing Regulations of 1914 with one or two differences. This would be the scale issued in Garrison or back in England. Once a soldier was sent to an active front this would change. I've attached a copy of the Winter Scales issued by the BEF with GRO 1824 Sept 1916 and to take effect on 15 October. This only shows section I of III.

The biggest difference that can be seen is that SD uniform items were no longer issued in doubles, a soldier got one issue of jacket for example--except for socks, Drawers and shirts all items were issued in singles. Also quite a bit of useless paraphanalia was dropped like the Button Brass (Button Stick). This were commonly taken to France and maintained by the soldier when first sent but never show in any issue scales published by the BEF. There is also a lot more utilitarian gear for keeping warm.

In peace time a soldier was responsible for the cost and up keep of his entire uniform. Only items condemned through fair ware and tear were not charged. Even items such as Tooth brushes, shirts etc that fell into a category of Free Kit--(Necessaries) were only supplied to a soldier once--upkeep and replacement were at his cost.

This is not as big a hardship as may first appear as each soldier (british Army) was entitled, in peacetime, to a quarterly clothing allowance of 30s 6d for the upkeep and maintenance of his clothing and necessaries. Of this allowance, 15s 3d per quarter were allocated for upkeep of the free kit.

Once on Active service loss of kit could be written off and replaced at Government expense. However, this did not de-obligate the command structure from charging a soldier the cost of an item lost through gross neglect.

Frequancy of reissue also varied. In peace time uniforms were intended to last for a set period of time. This was only a guide as a piece of uniform intended to last 5 years if at that point and the pattern was still valid and the piece in good condition it would kept in service. If the wear-out date passes and the the upiece is deemed worn then it can be replaced at government cost.

On active service the system of supply or requisition was one of where clothing and equipment needs were fulfilled by indents submitted by unit quartermasters to the divisional Ordnance officers or the Ordnance officer of whatever administrative circumstances a unit was in. Clothing or equipment would then be drawn in exchange for a like number of turned in unserviceable articles, a statement from the commanding officer that said articles were lost, or a soldier charged the cost of any missing articles. During field service clothing would be replaced free of charge, along with necessaries that have been certified as lost or made unserviceable due to the exigencies of the campaign.

That was how the system was supposed work. However, it could promote waist and extravagance and much depended on the units at various levels. It was not uncommon for divisions to possess dumps of immense size where a floating stock of regularly consumed articles could be kept. In a mobile war this type of dump was not possible and excess articles would be sent back to base depots. However, the bulk system of issue in effect for British Army meant that these dumps could exist and expand in stationary warfare.

As the war progressed it became critical to curtail waist. In fact a system was developed where-by Divisions kept comparative statistics of issues to turn-ins. This haphazard system changed again in 1918 to one of an allowance of articles.

Issue to a wounded soldier would also vary. If evacuated to Hospital his uniform would be turned in and Hospital Blues issued. He would probably not get his old uniform back but this depended onn nature of wound, where he was evacuated too andhis release back to huis unit.

Soldiers would also depend on "Comforts" from home and volutnary donation. At first the collection of donations and volunteer work was a bit haphazard but would later be brought under control during the last half of the war by the Director-General of Voluntary Organizations, Sir Edward Ward. This organization was to provide items intended to supplement officially issued articles. However, it might be that comforts were occasionally issued in lieu of official issue. Goods provided in this fashion were distributed through the Military Forwarding Establishment, with instructions to commanding officers to inform the Assistant Military Forwarding Officer, Havre, of the particular articles needed by their units to expedite distribution. Mitts and Mufflers were distributed by this same system. Through this system no fewer than 1,742,947 mufflers, 1,574,155 pairs of mittens, 435,580 helmets (presumed to be Balaklava type knit helmets), 3,607,059 pairs of socks, and 123,666 sweaters were provided for the benefit of the troops

Hope this helps,

Joe Sweeney

What is a body band?

Jon

[Chris Henschke]

I wonder why mounted regiments got one pair each of cotton and woollen drawers, whilst everyone else got two pairs of woollen? do woollen ones chafe when riding? (Actually, I'd hate to be given woollen ones at any time!)

Allie

Two pairs of woollen drawers was issued to mounted men instead of one pair of woollen and one pair of cotton, in mid January 1917. A General Routine Order amending GRO 1824 was published soon after.

Chris Henschke