The Kilt in WW1

[PhilB]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2221824.stm

The above site says that the kilt was banned from use on active service in 1940 after tests showed that it was not practically possible to protect the soldier from certain types of gas damage. Since gas was used from very early in WW1, were any moves made then to suspend its use?

[truthergw]

It is well known that the kilt was worn less and less in later stages of the war for a variety of reasons but one important one was exposure to mustard gas.

[Rob Connolly]

IIRC, mustard gas was most effective against body parts that were wet or damp (due to sweat) - thus the eyes, the armpits and the crotch? I remember reading that those who favoured the kilt claimed it reduced sweating in the crotch and thus rendered wearers less vulnerable to chemical burns. Not entirely sure this is correct and doubtless someone else will be along to inform if not!

[PhilB]

It is well known that the kilt was worn less and less in later stages of the war for a variety of reasons but one important one was exposure to mustard gas.

Would that be an official move or left to individual COs?

[Ghost]

Kilts

There are a few threads about this subject, the above link is to the last and just about sums it up.

Alan

[truthergw]

QUOTE (Phil_B @ Oct 4 2008, 05:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Would that be an official move or left to individual COs?

Any official move is always filtered through all levels of command. In this way a certain division might be denied a rum ration while a certain battalion might choose to wear a particular style of dress. A kilt was not always a drawback. It is surprisingly warm in winter. In a trench which was flooded to the knees, wearing a kilt might be preferable to soaking wet trousers. The trouble with mustard gas was that left a deposit on the ground for up to seven days which would affect any bare flesh which came into contact . The kilt wearer was obviously more at risk in this situation. I have heard suggestions that a kilt could get caught on the barbed wire. So could trousers. It is a lot easier to remove the kilt and disentangle than it is to remove trousers in the same situation. Men were proud to wear their kilt and it was only reluctantly that they put it aside when crcumstances forced them to.

[alex falbo]

There's a IWM picture of fallen Scottish troops at Zonnebeck October 1917 wearing kilts. Apparently some Scot regiments chose to stick with tradition.

[Landsturm]

Mustards gas was introduced in the latter part of the war, around July 1917.

[Joe Sweeney]

During the war there many times Kilts were withdrawn and replaced by SD trousers and shorts. Never actually read that this had anything to due with gas (mustard or not) and was usually related to fatigue or weather related issues.

Usually kilts were withdrawn for winter and returned in Spring. This is especially true of the Canadian Corps were every kilt was withdrawn in winter several years running-but appears to be somewhat haphazard in British units.

There also seems to be a misconception that SD trouser provided better protection. It did for immediate affects but had severe drawbacks.

There are quite a few records in the NA about mustard gas and contaminated clothing. Mustard gas not really being a gas but a persisant liquid when in clothing stayed in clothing with far longer burning affects. End results of the NA records was exposed clothing needed to be exchanged imemediately upon exposure and destroyed as cleaning proved useless.

Joe Sweeney