Ex-Army MOD kilts

[way2fractious]

... Consequently we have a big pile of kilts in QM that don't fit anyone.

We're experimenting with ways to 'splice' two of the dwarf kilts to make one 'biggie' - also we keep a role of 22oz kilt-cloth on hand to make kilts for the troops as needed.

Do these "wee" kilts get surplused out to the public somehow?

[Moose McLennan]

FWIW, you could join the army at 15. Several of my classmates did in the 1980's. Age 15 we were all a little trimmer. Nuff said.

As to size; Scotland suffered huge losses in WWI. Soldiers had to be at least 5'4" - so go figure. The gene pool has only begun to recover in the last three decades.

I`m 37, 5'6" and 130 lbs - exactly the same size as my grandfather. Nowadays I'm tiny, but I know several guys that went to school with me who are smaller.

My ex MOD kilt (Thom. Gordon, Glasgow 1975) is a 29" waist and fits me - just! No more room for middle age spread...

M.

[Barb T]

Childhood nutrition is a significant factor in adult size - and I'm not talking about people being overweight. In the early part of the last century, childhood nutrition was comparatively poor for many people, and the average body size of British soldiers, for example, was smaller than it is today.

The bulkiness of modern American and British soldiers is unusal, historically-speaking. I don't mean fat - just muscle-bulky. If you watch movies of WWI or WWII, soldiers look almost universally scrawny by comparison. And, actually, it's quite striking how much bulkier American and British soliders are in comparison to Iraqi soliders, policemen, and citizens.

B

[macwilkin]

Childhood nutrition is a significant factor in adult size - and I'm not talking about people being overweight. In the early part of the last century, childhood nutrition was comparatively poor for many people, and the average body size of British soldiers, for example, was smaller than it is today.

The bulkiness of modern American and British soldiers is unusal, historically-speaking. I don't mean fat - just muscle-bulky. If you watch movies of WWI or WWII, soldiers look almost universally scrawny by comparison. And, actually, it's quite striking how much bulkier American and British soliders are in comparison to Iraqi soliders, policemen, and citizens.

B

Excellent point, Barb! And to add to it, if one has ever been around uniforms from the 19th century, one will see positive proof of what Barb says -- the uniforms I worked with in the NPS would probably fit large children, but not the adults of today.

John Baynes devotes several pages of his book about the 2nd Scottish Rifles (Cameronians), "Morale: A Study of Men and Courage" to the nutitrition (or lack thereof) of Glaswegians, who made up the bulk of the Battalion. Whilst jokes about army food are very universal, Baynes maintains that to the average ranker, army food was ample, even though sometimes not the most apatizing!

It's also noteworthy that the Civil War was responsible for "off the rack" clothing, as the US Army introduced "generic" sizes (I, II, III and IV) to issue to troops.

Cheers,

Todd

[bubba]

It's also noteworthy that the Civil War was responsible for "off the rack" clothing, as the US Army introduced "generic" sizes (I, II, III and IV) to issue to troops.

Cheers,

Todd

and all of it a bad fit.

[James]

Going back to WW1, the difference in height between the average officer and the average man was several inches, in the main due to nutrition. Too it was a sad fact that the average German and French soldier was fitter than his British counterpart due to their large peasant population, compared to the British more urban recruiting pool.

Too we must not forget the bantam units.

Out of interest reading the various posts, I had a look at some of my old pictures from the 50's: and apart from a very few senior officers and long service NCO's everyone was a lot slimmer than today's servicemen.

All suggesting that there has for whatever reason been an increase in the average man's size over the last fifty years.

So whilst agreeing with Hamish that much so called MOD stock being sold is imitation: I do not find the sizes questionable in respect of outdated military clothing. Too MOD kilt can stay in the stores a very long time: in the mid sixties I indented for some replacement stores for the Vickers MMG-what turned up was perfect, yet still in its original 1917 packaging-nigh on fifty years. So I'd not be surprised if in some long lost store, there are not Boer War uniforms just waiting to be issued.

Also throughout the sixties, uniforms were being made and held in store, in case of the need to reintroduce conscription: so again that might be a source even today.


James

[macwilkin]

So whilst agreeing with Hamish that much so called MOD stock being sold is imitation: I do not find the sizes questionable in respect of outdated military clothing. Too MOD kilt can stay in the stores a very long time: in the mid sixties I indented for some replacement stores for the Vickers MMG-what turned up was perfect, yet still in its original 1917 packaging-nigh on fifty years. So I'd not be surprised if in some long lost store, there are not Boer War uniforms just waiting to be issued.

A story is told of a stevedore unit in France during the First World War, mostly African-Americans, who opened a crate of uniforms and found original Civil War Federal Army issue fatigue blouses (sack coats) and trousers, in their original packages! :mrgreen:

Cheers,

Todd

[Rex_Tremende]

Childhood nutrition is a significant factor in adult size - and I'm not talking about people being overweight. In the early part of the last century, childhood nutrition was comparatively poor for many people, and the average body size of British soldiers, for example, was smaller than it is today.

An article in today's New York Times discusses the changes in human health and body size over the last 100 years.

People even look different today. American men, for example, are nearly 3 inches taller than they were 100 years ago and about 50 pounds heavier.
[....]
Men living in the Civil War era had an average height of 5-foot-7 and weighed an average of 147 pounds. That translates into a body mass index of 23, well within the range deemed “normal.” Today, men average 5-foot-9½ and weigh an average of 191 pounds, giving them an average body mass index of 28.2, overweight and edging toward obesity.

The article discusses possible reasons for this (Barb knows what she's talking about), and consequences, such as the inability for Civil War re-enactors to fit in replica tents.

Regards,
Rex in Cincinnati

[Cinnabar]

An article in today's New York Times discusses the changes in human health and body size over the last 100 years.

Just a little tip: NYTimes along with Washington Post and a few other newspapers require you to have an account to read their articles. IHMO, this is annoying, invasive, and unnecesasry. You can always get around this by going to www.bugmenot.com to find a generic password. For NYTimes, try
e-mail:biteback
password:biteback

Thanks for article, nonetheless, Rex. Interesting read.

[Southern Breeze]

Here's something else to consider- many of the smaller sized kilts may be for boy's. I have a couple of kilts that are from the Queen Victoria School. Here's a pic of the tag and info on the school.



http://www.qvs.org.uk/intropg.htm