-
24th January 20, 02:08 PM
#1
With a 24"-26" waist, as stated in the description, M. R. Fairbairn must have been the smallest soldier in the British army!
-
-
24th January 20, 03:01 PM
#2
Only thing I can thing of is some kind of wartime economy kilt.
-
-
25th January 20, 01:09 PM
#3
24-26" is not that extreme. I routinely see original surplus trousers about that range. Our modern Western Diets and habits don't contribute to such slimness these days. Remember that Britain on the whole was not as properly nourished as they should have been prior to the War. Lord Woolton contributed greatly to correcting the national diet and equalizing availability of quality food.
If you are interested, here is a link to a video series done on the subject of British Rationing during the war. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?lis...k_n9ebj12102sb
-
-
25th January 20, 04:01 PM
#4
So just thinking about the historical background and by 1943 Britain was in a war economy. How many military kilts where made in the later war years. The ones made must of had some cost cutting measures?
-
-
26th January 20, 01:35 AM
#5
 Originally Posted by Howling Dingo
So just thinking about the historical background and by 1943 Britain was in a war economy. How many military kilts where made in the later war years. The ones made must of had some cost cutting measures?
This extract from Hansard of 23 Jan 1940 suggests that none were to be made throughout the war. I'm assuming pipers and drummers were to be equipped from existing stocks.
"The present position is that, for technical reasons largely connected with the possible use of gas by the enemy, kilts will not be worn in a theatre of war or for training, but will be replaced by battle dress. For walking out, however, all ranks in possession of kilts may wear them until worn out, but no further issues will be made during the war except to pipers and drummers. It has been decided not to maintain a supply of kilts because the raw materials and necessary manufacturing capacity must be devoted to the supply of dress actually to be used in war in present conditions. The stock of kilts in hand is 12,229, and 12,684 remain to be delivered by manufacturers under existing contracts. This stock would be quite inadequate to meet further issues for walking-out purposes on the scale anticipated. Moreover, the dissipation of this stock during war-time would make it impossible to fulfill the pledge that has been given that kilts will be available for ceremonial and walking out purposes after the war. Should the supply position alter at any time in the future, I should be prepared to look into the matter again."
From:https://api.parliament.uk/historic-h...egiments-kilts
Last edited by Bruce Scott; 26th January 20 at 01:37 AM.
-
-
26th January 20, 08:46 AM
#6
Sale ended unsold. The seller has a large number of 'military' and 'vintage' items for sale, authenticity tbd.
Quoting from Matt Newsome's blog, "Sometime after WWII, the tartan woolen mills began to offer, along side the normal dark tartans, versions of those same tartans in lighter shades. They called them “ancient” because they were meant to represent what a piece of old, worn tartan, faded with age, might look like."
So if we agree the fabric was made as an ancient colors, then it most certainly would be a fraudulent military kilt.
-
-
26th January 20, 01:30 PM
#7
Perhaps it could a officers private purchase kilt? An officers commission in 1943 who wanted a walking out kilt.
-
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|
Bookmarks