Spectacles

[Sue Light]

Perhaps a bit of a dim question, but were there any problems associated with the wearing of spectacles for men in Infantry Battalions? I have been looking at a man who was granted a commission in the Duke of Wellington's [West Riding Regiment] in February 1915, and his medical examination shows him to be so severely short-sighted that he would have been useless without his glasses. He had experience with Cadet/OTC's at Haileybury, Cambridge, and with the Penang Volunteers, but he didn't go to France until 27th May 1916 after being attached to the 2nd Battalion, so he wasn't exactly 'rushed out.' He was killed in action in October 1916. So how did very myopic officers [or men come to that] cope with life in the trenches, and gas masks, and mud....... or was it 'just one of those things' which no-one bothered about?

Thanks - Sue

[paul guthrie]

Kipling's son John had terrible sight and he pulled strings to get him in though unqualified, I am sure this is part of the reason he was so guilt filled, " Tell them because their father's lied..."

[David_Bluestein]

Good question. I wondered the same thing. Here is a man I have been looking at:

Lieut. Laurence DeK Stephens 42nd Bn. RHC. Missing 2/6 June 1916 Sanctuary Wood.

[Muerrisch]

I have an officer, Capt John Charles Mann who rose to be adjutant 2RWF, Military Cross, "myopia corrected with glasses" who routinely wore them. Died an heroic death Passchendaele Sep 1917. Thiepval Memorial

RIP

[paul guthrie]

Why is he on Thiepval?

[Sue Light]

"myopia corrected with glasses"

My man, Lt. Guy Sugden also had his short sight 'corrected with glasses,' but without them he was not able to read even the largest, [top] letter on the chart - this would have been at either 6ft or 9ft. This must have had enormous implications at times - how did he keep the specs. on for instance, when running, or jumping into shell holes; and I tend to think it's a bit far fetched to imagine him stopping to wipe the rain off, or spit on them to clean the mud. Did a gas mask fit over them - well, presumably it did, but difficult enough to see in the ordinary way, his 'double layer' must have been opaque pretty quickly. Did sun glinting on them make him more of a target? If he did drop them, lose them, or break them in any 'combat' situation, he would not have been able to see where he was going, or where his men were, or which direction any fire was coming from - and definitely no nipping down to Specsavers...... If I was in his platoon I think I would find the situation worrying - If I had been him I think I would find the situation even more worrying......

On the positive side [!] I guess he would still have been able to read a map up close, but it all seems a bit like being up a creek without a paddle.

God bless all myopic officers [but not necessarily all the 'short-sighted' ones]

Regards - Sue

[Muerrisch]

Why is he on Thiepval?

What what what! Just testing. Begins with a T, that should be enough for most people.

Sorry folks. Tyne Cot.

[walrus]

Sue,

Re Lt Sugden:-

I must assume that his service would have been limited, I suspect that he would have been classified as Class B (or even C) - I'm afraid I can't check as I don't have the appropriate book to hand).

I would assume that any glasses would have to be retained be tapes or elastic to be of use in the field (or have very curved ends to the side bars). In 1916, his respirator would be either the PH or PHG gas hood which could cause a lot of problems for glasses wearers as it is very easy to lose one's glasses while putting it on.

Tom

[Muerrisch]

Captain John ["Jack"] Charles MANN MC, as above, wore specs to correct myopia, and was most certainly A1, had a distinguished career as Adjutant 2RWF. As to how he coped, I know not, but every photograph I have of him he is wearing his glasses.

[Joe Sweeney]

SueL,

KR 1704 Glasses maybe worn by all ranks on or of duty.

Joe Sweeney

[Sue Light]

Re Lt Sugden:

I must assume that his service would have been limited, I suspect that he would have been classified as Class B (or even C)

Tom

Yes, it seems that tapes and elastic might well have been a myopic officer's best friend in the field! As for his service being limited, it didn't stop his head being sliced off by a piece of shrapnel at Le Transloy on 12/10/16 - or perhaps that was limiting enough! Although I would suspect his eyesight was the reason for his 18 months in the UK following being commissioned.

LB

I would be interested to learn more about the effect that short sight had on medical classification. All myopia is correctable with glasses, but there must be a great difference when assessing a soldier who cannot distinguish a number 49 bus at a hundred yards, and one who cannot see the number when it's standing at the bus stop. Perfect sight = no disability, blindness = maximum disability, I assume that the grey areas in between will probably result in varying classification.

Thanks to you all - Sue

[Myrtle]

Ivor Gurney wore glasses. He was rejected by the army in 1914 because of his defective eyesight but then managed to enlist in 1915.

[Bob Coulson]

David Phillip Hirsch VC 4TH Yorkshire Regiment.

On the few photos I've seen of him he always has spectacles on.

Bob.

[walrus]

In checking the classifications, I find that Category A (from 1916)

Men fit for general service. i.e. able to march, see to shoot, hear well and stand active service.

i. Men fit for despatch overseas in all respects as regards training and physical

and mental qualifications.

ii. Recruits who should be fit for Category A1 when trained

iii. Men returned sick or woumded from an expeditionary force who should be fit

for A1 when hardened by work

iv. Recruits under 19 years of age.

While Category B

Men fit for service abroad but not for general service i.e. free from serious organic disease and able to stand service on lines of communication in France or any garrison in the tropics.

i. Any garrison or provisional units *

ii. Any labour units or any garrison or regimental outdoor employment +

iii. On sedentary work as clerks or storemen only ++

* Men who could march at least 5 miles, see to shoot without glasses and hear well

+ Men able to walk not more than 5 miles to and from work and to see and hear sufficiently well for ordinary purposes

++ For men suitable for sedentary work only.

I find it odd that the "see to shoot without glasses" note only appears on Category B

Of course, this is for other ranks; Officer classification may be different.

Hope this is of use.

Tom

[Sue Light]

Mmmmm......I agree about the 'see to shoot [with or without glasses]' bit - as far as Lt. Sugden goes, it will just have to go down as a 'don't know, won't know' fact.

Thanks again - Sue