Possible early use of toecase boots?

[tocemma]

Hello Joe,

Bit tenuous this one....toecase boots being worn by this RGA gunner. Obviously blackened but what period? Has to be pre 1924 because he is RGA. The cap looks like a private purchase which would indicate a wartime date. I doubt that Officer style cap would be tolerated in peacetime.

Looks like he has KD breeches on too.

Poor chap looks a bit unwell. Bit of a Rudolph Valentino thing going on around the eyes!

Do I win a coconut?

Tocemma

[wainfleet]

I wonder if this was taken in Italy, what with the boots being originally intended for that theatre? Plus he's wearing KD and it's been known to be warm there! I don't know of KD being worn in F and F (though perhaps a learning experience is now imminent?) and the background looks more European than India or Mespot.

Add: I've definitely seen a photo of these boots being worn in Cologne in 1919. Can't place it but then again, not exactly wartime.

[Andrew Upton]

A slight warning, it was possible to wear private purchase boots - someone posted here before a picture of some Territorial soldiers about to go overseas, and one was wearing a very fancy toecapped pair (more like an Officers pair). I think Joe Sweeney posted the rules before now (I recall the words "toes must not be excessively pointed").

Edit - The joys of having a good memory - whole thread's on the subject of toecapped boots, but post 29:

http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/i...l=toes&st=0

"Private purchase boots were extremely common. Pre-war Terriers were required to provide their own boots during annual training and on embodiment at the outbreak of war. These did not necessarily have to be of Army Patterns but must have been sufficiently serviceable to last three months. For this the Territorial Force soldier was paid a grant of, £1 4s. Since the War Office could not immediately take over the supply and equipage for the embodied Territorial Force the County Associations were required to contract for its own supply of boots, putting itself in competition with Army contracts. These boots usually equipped only first recruit issues. These boots should not have War Office acceptance stamps, as County Association contracts were not considered government contracts (War Office) unless they purchased additional quantities off existing War Office contracts which probably were not possible after August 1914 and for sometime there after.

In addition out of personal preference soldiers acquired ankle boots. Even the Guards allowed their soldiers to buy non army pattern boots. The Standing Orders of the Irish Gurads simply state that soldiers were allowed to acquire their own boots but the toes "must not be excessively pointy"."

[wainfleet]

Andrew

I remember that thread, but these are definitely the toecase boots, being exactly to pattern. Also the brogues tend to resemble civilian boots, ie. the toecap line goes straight across instead of in a crescent. Compare with the ones posted by yours truly in, for ease of location, the Leather Equipment thread.

Regards,

W.

[RobL]

Speaking of KD on the western front - IWM photo E 714 (can't find it online) shows an Australian dressing station set up inside a captured German bunker near Polygon Wood, and one of the men is wearing a KD jacket (also with collar insignia!) - don't know if the Aussies had a seperate KD jacket to the British as well as wool jacket though

[Andrew Upton]

As toecase and toecap mean the same thing and the early military issue pattern of 1918 was not specifically identified, I was just making the point it is possible to see toecapped boots in use well before then.

[wainfleet]

Here's a picture I located after much searching, in Barthorp's "British Infantry Uniforms since 1660". It's credited to the NAM. The original's not great quality and I'm not sure how this scan will turn out, but hopefully you can see that this soldier is wearing the toecase boot. It doesn't look very frontline, but the leather jerkin and helmet cover are not normally associated with home service. Strangely for 1918, his web equipment has the early unmodified LH pouches. He has 4 good conduct chevrons and a marksman's badge, but no service stripes that I can see. The SBR bag is stamped Q.R.R., and he is wearing regimental buttons that look like a strung bugle, so maybe someone can figure out the unit. [Add: that's not a patch on his left sleeve, just a shadow]

[john gregory]

What about these fancy pair then, 5th battn Notts & Derby

[centurion]

Do you have any further info on the man. He looks very like my Great Uncle Basil Mowbray Kirby who was invalided out of the RGA in 1917 having only served for 3 months. He got a SWB

[wainfleet]

What about these fancy pair then, 5th battn Notts & Derby

Yes, but they are private purchase boots, often seen in photos throughout the war. The "toecase boot" is the official issue pair that succeeded the B5 boot, approved for Italy in May 1918 and the Western Front in July 1918, a big heavy clumpy thing with a crescent-shaped toecase rather than the elegant ritzy beast you've posted.

[john gregory]

Yes, but they are private purchase boots, often seen in photos throughout the war. The "toecase boot" is the official issue pair that succeeded the B5 boot, approved for Italy in May 1918 and the Western Front in July 1918, a big heavy clumpy thing with a crescent-shaped toecase rather than the elegant ritzy beast you've posted.

Yes I know they are private purchase thats why I called them a fancy pair !!!!

[wainfleet]

Yes I know they are private purchase thats why I called them a fancy pair !!!!

Yes, but the subject of this topic is the toecase boot! Of which, so far, just 2 photos in use have been identified on here.

[john gregory]

Yes, but the subject of this topic is the toecase boot! Of which, so far, just 2 photos in use have been identified on here.

Alright alright, did'nt someone mention private purchase boots earlier in the thread ?

[Joe Sweeney]

ALCON,

Very nice photos and yes probably the only I've seen of those elusive boots being worn.

I wish the actual dates of the photos were known.

TE--I've never found reference to KD Pantaloons in any documents from the War Office or theatre issue scales.

However, this only applies to British Army. Indian Army only had KD Pantaloons--For British Troops in the Indian Army and are found on issue scales for MESPOT. So they were available.

Wainfleet---France issue scales refer to KD uniforms being issued to Engineers. It refers KD frocks and Trousers to be worn as work clothes. What I'm not sure is if they mean the KD uniforms issued in the ME etc or the KD clothing introduced early in the war for fatigues to replace the White Canvas stuff. The nomnc;lature is very similar and the issue scales very imprecise in that regards.

Joe Sweeney

[tocemma]

Joe,

The photo could be post war, but probably not long after because of the soft cap. I don't think that would have passed muster in the peace-time Army.

I also have a photo somewhere of a Tank Corps man wearing KD shorts. Studio photo taken in France. Very sensible too I would think inside a tank.

I have a pair of ORs KD breeches I will photograph. They are named and I will run a check on the former owner to see if this offers any clues.

Regards

Tocemma

[wainfleet]

All

There are probably more photos out there, if only we could spot them! In the pair I posted, the toecase is evident with his back to the camera but practically indistinguishable when facing it. It's clearer in the book, but still difficult to see. And photos do tend to be front views.

Looking again at the soldier wearing KD, it looks as if he has a strip of some sort on his shoulder strap, which could be the divisional sign of one of the Salonika divisions.

Regards,

W.

[Joe Sweeney]

TE,

Steve Chambers book has a TC man in KD shorts--makes sense unless one backs-up too close to the engine.

Joe Sweeney

[wainfleet]

I've just been sent (by a friend without access to a PC or scanner) this photocopy of one of the "Realistic Travels" stereoviews. It is part of a known series of reenactments, evidently taken in and about a network of recently-captured German trenches and bunkers. I say recently-captured because many of the pictures show enemy equipment apparently just discarded.

The soldier on the left in this picture appears to be wearing the toecase boot. If so then the photo cannot be earlier than summer 1918, and the most likely location would be the Hindenburg Line, so probably soon after its capture, ie. early to mid October 1918. (It seems unlikely they would have bothered with morale-boosting reenactments after the Armistice, everyone by then being very tired indeed of the War.) Which would make this the missing evidence of the toecase boot having (just) made it to the Western Front during hostilities.

Another photo in the same series appears to show a different soldier wearing the same pattern, but the picture is ambiguous. If anyone has any originals of this series (captions range from 1916 to 1918 but they are clearly all of the same date), perhaps they could look at the boots the soldiers in them are wearing.

[wainfleet]

Here's a better image. On the original there is no doubt that these are the toecase boots, and hopefully that's also the case here.

[wainfleet]

Here is another photo from the same series, also showing the toecase boot, worn by the corporal on the right of the picture.

[wainfleet]

The 25th Division was reformed in September 1918, and whilst available information is a bit conflicting, its entire infantry complement seems to have come from the Italian front. The new 25th Division went more or less straight into action in the battles of Beaurevoir 3 October and Cambrai 8 October 1918, ie. the final stages of the battle for the Hindenburg Line, going on to the battles of the Selle and Sambre. Since the toecase boot had been authorised for troops in Italy in early May 1918, it's likely that it would have got to many if not most of those men by now, given that the active service life of a pair of boots was reckoned at 8 weeks. So these could be men of the 25th Division reenacting their exploits in the above photos.

I'm not sure anyone is still following this minor detective story other than diehard spotters, but for those fortunate enough to possess a pair of said boots (myself included), it's good to know that they are not purely demob / Army of Occupation issue, but legitimate frontline kit.

[wainfleet]

This N & D photo was posted a while ago by GWF pal John Gregory, I think in the postcards thread. It appears to show the toecase boot being worn. John, do you have any idea who this is and when the photo was taken? It appears to be in the UK - perhaps a 1918 conscript waiting to be sent out?

With thanks, W.

[john gregory]

This N & D photo was posted a while ago by GWF pal John Gregory, I think in the postcards thread. It appears to show the toecase boot being worn. John, do you have any idea who this is and when the photo was taken? It appears to be in the UK - perhaps a 1918 conscript waiting to be sent out?

With thanks, W.

I dont know who he was Ted, nothing on the back of the card either.

[wainfleet]

OK John, thanks for checking anyway. Add: Funny how this one and the first one in this thread are both against the same sort of corrugated iron background!