PhilB Posted 8 November , 2004 Share Posted 8 November , 2004 I`ve never worn puttees, and always assumed they were uncomfortable, especially in wet conditions. Does anyone know what the WW1 men thought of them? Phil B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurel Sercu Posted 8 November , 2004 Share Posted 8 November , 2004 I think there may be some useful in : http://1914-1918.org/forum/index.php?showt...9429&hl=puttees Aurel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkristof Posted 8 November , 2004 Share Posted 8 November , 2004 I wore them several times, also in wet conditions, wel they do protect your legs... but they can be very uncomfortable too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilB Posted 8 November , 2004 Author Share Posted 8 November , 2004 Thanks, Aurel and bk. I`ve read your previous posts with interest! Phil B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Upton Posted 8 November , 2004 Share Posted 8 November , 2004 Puttees..when I was just interested in WW1, I had nothing good to say about them..but my opinion has changed for the better since I started WW1 living history and have to wear the things! They're difficult to put on, get tidy, keep done up - but if you overcome the problems, they are very smart when done right, in wet weather they keep the water off your lower trousers and out of your boots, they insulate your legs in cold weather, and are very effective at keeping stones out of your shoes! And they're also supposed to be good at deflecting snake bites, although I have my doubts about this... Not contemporary, but my opinion all the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AthollHighlander Posted 8 November , 2004 Share Posted 8 November , 2004 Wore them early eighties when serving with local TA battalion. I personally found them a bit of a pain to be honest. Mind you never had to sit in a water filled trench for periods of time so maybe the practical benefits outweighed the problem of getting the bl..dy things on at 5am while a Corporal screamed at you to get your a..e onto the parade ground double quick. Happy memories! of Glencourse Barracks.... Atholl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T8HANTS Posted 8 November , 2004 Share Posted 8 November , 2004 Hi all Do you get the infernal itching from the smaller viens as the blood moves around, when you take them off? Remember with long putties, they must be kept on the same leg each time so they gain a bias. (Fox's used to mark theirs with a little button for right and left). The tape should be neatly tied with the end invisible. (yes I know lots of photos show dangling ends). Old soldiers and me have learnt to cross them at the front to show our skill, and I have one in my collection that is if I remember corrrectly 162 inches long. Footsloggers start at the bottom of the leg and work up, mounted troops at the top and work down. Most reeenactors who use ex surplus 1970's versions do not give themselves enough length. Having said all that if put on correctly they are comfortable, protect the leg and soft squashy parts from dust which when combined with sweat on the Indian plains turns into grinding past. I much prefere them to the 37 patttern gaitors of my ACF days, which is why I suspect they were reintroduced, but the high leg boot which was such a revolution in British military footware, post Falklands was around as the yeomanry boot in the 1890's, so why we adopted putties in the first place can only be down to War Department meaness. Gareth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Upton Posted 8 November , 2004 Share Posted 8 November , 2004 Oh gawd... I'd forgotten the itchiness! At least I know why this occurs now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilB Posted 9 November , 2004 Author Share Posted 9 November , 2004 Footsloggers start at the bottom of the leg and work up, mounted troops at the top and work down. Any idea why? Phil B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkristof Posted 9 November , 2004 Share Posted 9 November , 2004 I believe it is because the upper part of the calf touches more the horse... Like that the puttees should become lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilB Posted 9 November , 2004 Author Share Posted 9 November , 2004 But why would winding them the other way help? Phil B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkristof Posted 9 November , 2004 Share Posted 9 November , 2004 if you look to a seated rider, you will notice that his feet at the height were the puttees are fixed do not touch anything else. So like that they don't come lose because of riding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gem22 Posted 9 November , 2004 Share Posted 9 November , 2004 Footsloggers start at the bottom of the leg and work up, mounted troops at the top and work down. I was under the impression that it was all to do with the style of boot. The infantry boot being much shorter than the cavalry boot meant you could start at the bottom and make certain you covered the opening at the top of the boot. Thus keeping out water, dust, snakes etc. With the higher topped cavalry boot you start at the top to cover the opening. If you start at the bottom you risk running out of puttee before you reach the top. Bearing in mind that not all legs are the same length but puttees are. Garth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilB Posted 9 November , 2004 Author Share Posted 9 November , 2004 How high is a cavalry boot then? Phil B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gem22 Posted 9 November , 2004 Share Posted 9 November , 2004 Phil I believe they were calf length. http://www.britishempire.co.uk/forces/army...rms/uniform.htm Garth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Clinton Brunt Posted 9 November , 2004 Share Posted 9 November , 2004 Fellows, In reference tying the puttees at the ankle or knee- Remember that Mounted Infantry wrap their puttees as Cavalry- from knee to ankle, tied at ankle. Mounted infantry are issued, generally, the same boot as infantry so I don't think the boot height is the key. My understanding is that when mounted, the inside of the knee contacts the saddle and would in theory tend to loosen or unravel the puttee if tied like infantry. So mounted troops wrap 'down'; the ‘tied’ section away from any rubbing or chaffing that otherwise may tend to unravel with constant friction Makes sense but I ain't saying its fact Sincerely, Clinton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkristof Posted 9 November , 2004 Share Posted 9 November , 2004 Clinton confirms what i think + indeed cavlary boots are the same like infantry boots. But with no or less hob nails. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.29d4195f801e5a5004f52840449366a7.jpg)
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