Monday, 12 February 2018

Review: 'Field Equipment of the European Foot Soldier 1900-1914' | 'Sac au dos. Études comparées de la tenue de campagne des fantassins des armées française et étrangères.'

Cover (front), 1994 version

Versions:

1) The original 1902 version was written / compiled by Commandant, Émile-Charles Lavisse (1855-1915), and published by the French army.

2) The 1906 version is (US) English translation of the original, with amendments by the US Army. The section with US Equipment was removed, although bits of information remains in chapter two of the book. It is taken for granted that the reader has an intimate knowledge of the US basic equipment of the late 1890s - early 1900s.

3) The 1994 reprint of the 1906 version. Added the British Patt. '08 webbing as an appendix.

Original title: Lavisse, Émile-Charles. Sac au dos. Études comparées de la tenue de campagne des fantassins des armées française et étrangères. Paris, 1902.

1994 reprint: Lawton, Edward P. (trans.) & Lavisse, Émile-Charles. Field Equipment of the European Foot Soldier 1900-1914. Nashville: The Battery Press. In association with The Imperial War Museum and Articles of War Ltd., 1994. 

-----------------------------------------------------

When reading the English translation of Sac au dos, one wonders if the US army in 1906 had no one better at translating French, than Capt. Edward P. Lawton. However,  the original French version was (and still is) not known for its prose, and one can easily understand why it was difficult to translate.

Translation aside, this review is based on the English reprint from 1994 as it is the version most - if not all - potential readers will have easy access to.

The book is a treatise by Lavisse in two parts: 

Chapter one expound in detail the basic equipment of the 1890s in France, Germany (Prussia), Great Britain, Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Spain, Italy, Norway, The Netherlands, Russia, Sweden, and Switzerland. It is important to note that although the 1994 reprint of the 1906 version incorporates all the changes made by the US Army to the original text, most accounts are still based on the observations and informations compiled by Lavisse in the late 1890s. E.g.: The section about Great Britain in the 1902 version only mentions the Valise Equipment, Pattern 1888 - aka the "Slade Wallace Equipment". An antiquated design - even by 1890s standards, that was replaced by the Bandolier Equipment 1903 as a consequence of lessons gained in the Boer Wars. However, the US translation from 1906 does not mention this change, even though the 1903 Bandolier Equipment saw use in 1906. The same problem is evident when it comes to Denmark, where the uniform and equipment changes in 1903 are wholly absent. Hence why, it is evident that the publishers preface from 1994 overvalues the amount of new information the 1906 version gained from being: "... revised by American military attaches to reflect any changes from the original edition." (p.7).

Based on the observations in the first chapter, Lavisse argues in chapter two, that the French army needed to change its basic equipment and uniforms. The chapter presents and explains in great detail the problems and possibilities offered by each individual piece of equipment that turn of the century soldiers depended on. From great coats, entrenching tools, boots, and belts. Everything is covered, and it is interesting to note that Lavisse was a strong advocate for uniforms in "neutral" or "earthy" colours (p.71-77). It is well known that the French soldiers in 1914 wore bright red trousers and caps, a costly error that could have bee avoided had the men responsible listened to Lavisse in 1902. Especially considering that Lavisse argues the colour-scheme of the French uniforms were a problem as early as the Franco-Prussian war of 1870-71 (p.73).
In regards to leather care, Lavisse is no lover of the international practise at the time of blackening the leather equipment (as done in e.g. France and Denmark.) "Does one ever see on the feet of the hunter or of the mountain climber a polished shoe?" (p.87) he asks rhetorically - and the short answer is of course "no!" Leather polished to a mirror finish hardens, cracks and becomes permeable to water - most certainly caused by the fact that shoe-polish in the late 1800s contained sulphuric acid.
Lavisse argues that time spent on polishing shoes and leather equipment is "a loss of time; how many hours used up without profit to military instruction. What a source of punishment. [...] Polishing might had its utility in the way of filling up leisure moments when the length of time of military service was long, but to-day, when the time passed with the colors is becoming shorter and shorter, when minutes are precious, why continue such methods? We inflict on our soldiers a task which displeases many of them, who are not necessarily for that poor soldiers." (p.90).

To surmise. Throughout the book Lavisse argues, that the army is first and foremost a fighting force, and must be equipped as such. Each soldier should carry just enough to keep him dry, warm, and relatively well fed. Uniform aesthetics are an irrelevant concern, and the individual solider should only worry about keeping his uniform clean and his leather equipment properly waxed. 

Apart from the ideas of Lavisse, the book is an excellent source to many interesting facts. The contents of packs, the weight of individual items, weight distribution, uniform colours, and other interesting and often forgotten facts are presented in an easy to read manner with many easy to use tables and illustrations. The book is perhaps on of the most comprehensive guides for the re-enactor and historian alike when it comes to the basic equipment of the 1890s - early 1900s.

Apart from its linguistic shortcomings, the 1994 reprint of Sac au dos is well worth a read. However, are you fluent in French the 1902 edition is still, by far, the best. The current publishers (The Battery Press; The Imperial War Museum, and Articles of War Ltd.) should contemplate re-naming the book: Field Equipment of the European Foot Soldier 1890-1914, since it is apparent that not much changed in 1906 when the book was translated into English.  

Monday, 1 June 2015

The euipment of the post war Danish Army - the odd ones.


Once in a while, you stumble upon a configuration of uniforms and accoutrements that you simply can not believe ever saw the light of day - as the above photo. It is the reason why I wrote this small entry. The above configuration is very strange - But it is not at all wrong! All the items seen on the photo were used between 1943 (DANFORCE in Sweden) and the 1950s and beyond.

The items in the above picture, that I can identify, are the following: 

- British mk. II helmet
- Danish M/44 battledress uniform, with the 1949 appropriated collar badges in brass. 
- Danish M/1915 torch (in leather). 
- Swedish M/39 rucksack 
- Swedish "matttornister" M/1911 (underneath the gas mask cannister)
- Swedish M/ 1896 knife bayonet, for the Swedish Mauser Riffles.
- Swedish M/1888 shovel
- Swedish M/1937-39 Husqvarna sub machine-gun.  
- German WWII gas mask canister (M/38?)
- British patt. 37 webbing legging / gaiters.

All in all, it is quite an extensive collection of different bits of equipment. Although the great bulk of it, is made up of Swedish equipment because of the equipment brought back home with the Danish Brigade in Sweden (DANFORCE). 
This tells me, that official equipment (and clothing) regulations are not always the entire truth, and if one were to portray a Danish infantryman in the late 1940s, the above picture is perhaps more of a guideline than the official regs.? 

 The picture below supports the use of the German gas mask canister and the Swedish water bottle (carried in the new model water bottle carrier) continued to at least 1951!

The devil is in the details!



Tuesday, 30 December 2014

Danish M/1910 kepi for the infantry | Hue M/1910, infanteriet, for menige.

Danish uniforms between 1889-1945. Here are shown the following patterns (from left to right):
1889(92), 1903, 1910, 1915 and 1923. Notice that helmets were first introduced in 1923, and that the 1903 pattern were of a "green-grey" wool. The kepi remained the same in seize and shape, only changing the colour, before finally being redrawn from service with the introduction of the helmet.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Following extensive troop trials in 1901-1902 the Danish army introduced a "green-grey" uniform in 1903 with brown leather cartridge carriers and belt - and a back pack and haver sack in the same colour as the uniform. It had a loose cut with a turn down collar and hidden buttons. Not unlike the German 1915 uniform.

It did however not last long in service. The green colour and the loose cut met fierce resistance from certain circles in the armed forces - most from the officers. Most of the army reverted back to a uniform in dark blue in 1910 with black leather gear. The only regiment that kept the grey-green uniform was the Royal Guards where it soldiered on until 1923.

Uniform model 1910:
Infantry units would wear: 
Light blue kepi with black leather and "silver" buttons. 
Dark blue jacket with "silver" buttons and red piping.
Light blue trousers - folded at the bottom and worn outside the boots. 

Artillery, medical and other "support" regiments:
Dark blue kepi with black leather and brass buttons. 
Dark blue jacket with brass buttons and either (depending on regiment) light blue, maroon, green, grey or yellow piping.
Dark blue trouser - unfolded and worn over the most of the boot. 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Following photos are of my own 1910 kepi. It's a standard infantry kepi in a larger unusually large size (about a 61-62 in Europe). It belonged to a private in the 4 battalion. Very little moth damage, and overall very little wear. The leather is however quite brittle and the rear steel support (to keep the shape) is bend a little. Apart from that it is in good condition - considering it has passed 100+ years.
   








---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Source:

Hvidt, A, The Danish infantry's uniforms and equipment through-out the past 200 years.