PhilB Posted 2 September , 2009 Share Posted 2 September , 2009 The caption to this photo says soldiers detested putting them on. The man seems to have rolled his trousers up - to dry his socks? Not many memoirs mention the comfort of puttees, so just how uncomfortable were they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irishmen1916 Posted 2 September , 2009 Share Posted 2 September , 2009 Hi Phil, I have always wondered about putties, if they where not put on correctly then they where more of a hindrance to the solider, imagine going over the top and into barbwire and your putties begin to unravel. Could would one of our re-actors let us know, are they as difficult to put on as they look ? Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilB Posted 2 September , 2009 Author Share Posted 2 September , 2009 This might help:- http://www.hardscrabblefarm.com/80th/putting_on_puttees.htm I found this comment:- When wrapped properly, puttees will snugly insulate the leg from cold weather and potential sources of injury without restricting freedom of movement. In fact, puttees can be so good at insulating that some soldiers complained about them; in the First World War, for example, puttees could trap water which would turn to ice, causing frostbite and extreme pain. The main source of potential discomfort and irritation from puttees lies in the trousers which are paired with them. Many historical military uniforms were specifically designed to be worn with puttees, and they had features which ensured that they would fit smoothly over the calf. Looser garments can cause discomfort as the fabric of the trouser folds under the puttee, creating a ridge of material which can feel very unpleasant. http://www.wisegeek.com/what-are-puttees.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
centurion Posted 2 September , 2009 Share Posted 2 September , 2009 It should be mentioned that puttees also had the function of supporting the muscles of the lower leg if the soldier had to walk or march any distance. Indeed the puttee was part of civilian dress in some parts of the sub continent long before soldiers started wearing them and for this very reason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Broomfield Posted 2 September , 2009 Share Posted 2 September , 2009 Certainly puttees were used in India way before they were used over here (hence the Hindu (I believe) derivated name). My dad told me that he learned to tie them when he first joined up (1938); he believed they gave you varicose veins, but I have no idea if this is true. dad liked them ; I don't think he was overly-keen on the anklets that succeeded them. Myself, I wore 'short puttees' with Boots, DMS, in the 70's and 80's in the TA, and much preferred them to ankle boots which were becoming the thing at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel Marshall Posted 2 September , 2009 Share Posted 2 September , 2009 Picking up on Steven's post and his reference to short puttees for DMS boots; just what length were Great War period puttees. I know that as a cadet when I wore the modern version, they were longer than I was tall. Cheers, Nigel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NigelS Posted 2 September , 2009 Share Posted 2 September , 2009 Certainly puttees were used in India way before they were used over here (hence the Hindu (I believe) derivated name). My dad told me that he learned to tie them when he first joined up (1938); he believed they gave you varicose veins, but I have no idea if this is true. 10 out of 10 Broomers! One of the modern day treatments for the relief of varicose veins and other circulation problems of the legs without resorting to surgery is, I believe, the wearing of compression stockings which can't be too far removed from puttees - dependant, of course, on how tightly they're worn. Following on from Nigel's query on length: would WW1 versions have been as long as the 4 yards given in the 1875 quote? Elsewhere I've read that they could be used as emergency bandages - would this have been realistic or suggested in training? unless unworn (I doubt whether men carried spares into battle) they wouldn't have been that hygenic, plus the time taken to get them off in a life and death situation - although, that said, in the absence of anything better, if needs must... NigelS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wainfleet Posted 2 September , 2009 Share Posted 2 September , 2009 Great War puttees are about 9 feet long. One reason for wearing puttees is that they are a lot easier, and more convenient, to remove, clean, and dry than trousers. W. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mk VII Posted 2 September , 2009 Share Posted 2 September , 2009 Some people wear long socks under them to try alleviate the 'tram lines' they produce on your calves from the folds of trouser material. It itches like mad once you take them off. The proper answer is to get the trouser legs narrowed at this point, more like breeches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonraker Posted 2 September , 2009 Share Posted 2 September , 2009 They would have had to be reasonably tight to stay in place. I wonder if they inhibited circulation of the blood? Moonraker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobL Posted 2 September , 2009 Share Posted 2 September , 2009 If put on properly, they are comfortable - if put on too tightly, they can inhibit circulation of blood, but when on right they are fine, and they're a very useful piece of equipment. As for why the man in the photo isn't wearing them I have no idea. Quite a lot of photos of RFC ground crew show them not wearing puttees in the summer months, but then again they aren't as likely to get stones in them etc as well as uniform regulations being a lot more lax when working on aircraft Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T8HANTS Posted 2 September , 2009 Share Posted 2 September , 2009 Having worn puttees for years at living history shows, and for up to a week on other occasions I can say that put on properly they are quite comfortable. I concur fully that the trousers, must be properly shaped or folded with care. Knitted style socks can also cause discomfort. The one item not worn by many reenactors that make a considerable difference in comfort is a pair of long-johns, over which the socks are worn! You can get what is known as puttee itch as you take them off, if the socks are too rough, and puttee burn if they or the trousers rub directly on the skin. As a six footer I need three short puttees sewn together to make on reasonable length long one, and in my collection I have one puttee made from one and half long ones, from memory I think it is about 14 feet in length. G Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMannus Posted 5 September , 2009 Share Posted 5 September , 2009 I remember an 'auld hand' telling me they stopped rat bites. David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilB Posted 5 September , 2009 Author Share Posted 5 September , 2009 IIRC they were an Indian invention and presumably for soldiering on the Indian sub-continent. One wonders what their motives were - snake bites, prickly undergrowth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Sheldon Posted 5 September , 2009 Share Posted 5 September , 2009 The difficulty with the long puttee and one of the reasons for dropping them, was that the correct winding was a sod to get right. If, when almost finished, the end of the puttee was in the wrong place many soldiers would unwind a small section then pull them hard to get them into the correct position. This was what led to circulatory problems. I, too, liked the short puttee and, quite apart from soldiering in them, have worn them on expeditions to places as far apart as the Andes and the New Guinea jungle. Regardless of the terrain you can always obtain exactly the correct amount of ankle support needed - and the combination is lighter than the heavier combat boot. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FenianRam48 Posted 4 October , 2009 Share Posted 4 October , 2009 This may sound like a dumb/obvious question, bare with me, I'm kinda new to all this stuff. Were puttees worn by officers as well as other ranks? Or did the officers just tend to stick with the leather gaiters? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barry73 Posted 4 October , 2009 Share Posted 4 October , 2009 Some people wear long socks under them to try alleviate the 'tram lines' they produce on your calves from the folds of trouser material. It itches like mad once you take them off. The proper answer is to get the trouser legs narrowed at this point, more like breeches. Now I know why my Great Grandfather had both Puttees & socks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barry73 Posted 4 October , 2009 Share Posted 4 October , 2009 This may sound like a dumb/obvious question, bare with me, I'm kinda new to all this stuff. Were puttees worn by officers as well as other ranks? Or did the officers just tend to stick with the leather gaiters? I'm sure i've seen a picture of Sir Herbert Plumer in Puttees. This is Montgomery during 1st WW. Is that puttees & socks??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piorun Posted 4 October , 2009 Share Posted 4 October , 2009 Certainly puttees were used in India way before they were used over here (hence the Hindu (I believe) derivated name). Myself, I wore 'short puttees' with Boots, DMS, in the 70's and 80's in the TA, and much preferred them to ankle boots which were becoming the thing at the time. "patti" - Hindi - bandage. Surely "gaiters", Steven, not puttees in the '70s and '80s? Or was that the 1870s? Antony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crunchy Posted 4 October , 2009 Share Posted 4 October , 2009 Were puttees worn by officers as well as other ranks? Or did the officers just tend to stick with the leather gaiters? I am looking at a photo of JFC Fuller as a Colonel and he is wearing puttees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
green_acorn Posted 4 October , 2009 Share Posted 4 October , 2009 I seem to recall reading a comment by US troops serving with Australian's during the assault on the Hindeberg Line, that they were lucky as they had their long canvas gaiters, the Australian's in their puttee's would often get caught in the wire, the American's gaiters didn't get caught as easily. So though long (and short) puttees may have had their usefulness as "compression sock's", bandages, and a quick item to clean rather than having to carry spare trousers, in modern combat areas with barbed wire their utility may have been less. Cheers, Hendo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truthergw Posted 4 October , 2009 Share Posted 4 October , 2009 I'm sure i've seen a picture of Sir Herbert Plumer in Puttees. This is Montgomery during 1st WW. Is that puttees & socks??? ........................... One form of dress for a kilted regiment well after WW2 was kilt, boots and puttees, exactly as worn in the picture. What was known as short puttees referred to the way they were worn not to their length. Being the army, there was a specific way to wind them and fasten the tape. The hose worn were lovat green and consisted of stocking legs with no feet. Worn on top of the issue grey stocking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wardog Posted 4 October , 2009 Share Posted 4 October , 2009 Link for Piorun-Antony showing short puttees in use 1982. I can vouch for their use in the RAF up to at least 1985. Cheers. Paul. http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/03/28/...123_468x333.jpg and a link showing a lad from his side of the pond using them in 1951. http://images.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=h...DN%26start%3D18 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Upton Posted 4 October , 2009 Share Posted 4 October , 2009 What was known as short puttees referred to the way they were worn not to their length. Sorry, I've got to disagree there - short puttees are exactly that, ie short, usually about 3-3 1/2 feet long, as compared to the standard "long" puttees of the Great War (about 9 feet long). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
green_acorn Posted 4 October , 2009 Share Posted 4 October , 2009 I only threw out my pair of short puttees last year with my old steel trunk and the puttee's weren't 9' long. But for the life of me I don't know why I had a pair, I wasn't posted to the "tropics" when they were still worn ceremonially with polyester shorts, GP boots, poly socks and boys scout tabs (yes puttees were worn over the top half of long combat boots here in Oz) that the Townsville infantry battalions wore. Cheers, Hendo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now