Vintage boots. Need help to id.

#1
Ok fellow ARRSErs, who can tell me whether there were issue or not? Ned Senior reckons that he had them while he was with the Royal West African Frontier Force in 46-49 (ish). He certainly used them in the TA and later as a cadet detatchment commander in the 50s and 60s. He is now 91 but was still using them for gardening as recently as 3 years ago. They have been evicted from his garage and I have been tasked to “get rid of them”. It goes against the grain to ditch them and I sense that they might appeal to some reenactor type. They need a touch of polish but are basically sound.

2A4E9136-8DE8-4CB7-B857-9A778641DB66.jpeg
 
#3
I'm no expert but they look rather like US WW2 army issue* - the Septics would have had zillions of the feckers to get rid of, after 1945. That said, the GI boot didn't have heavy cleated soles, but any decent cobbler could stitch a commando sole to a goodyear welted boot when the original rubber sole was worn through.

P.S. Please confirm that your photography is shiite, and it's not my eyesight making them look all fuzzy round the edges.
- - - -
* Although they could be a tad on the tall side - difficult to know without seeing them with their pilot aboard.
 
#5
I think these are British officer's field boots, probably WW2.
 
#6
CW Horrell DR boots perhaps.


Edit.

Not sure if they are DR boots or officer purchase boots but I think they must be a resoled and welted pair of these.

The Collector's Guild

Quick scan on ebay shows three companies other than Horrell making identical boots, looks like officer's private purchase it is.
 
Last edited:
#7
Last edited:
#8
CW Horrell DR boots perhaps.


Edit.

Not sure if they are DR boots or officer purchase boots but I think they must be a resoled and welted pair of these.

The Collector's Guild
Yup - almost identical ('cept the Guild photo is in focus, and the boots lacck the add-on rubber sole)

I've never before heard of 'British WW2 Officer's Field Boots', nor do I recall ever seeing any pictures of any Brit officer of the 39-45 wearing any boot that:
(a) was above ankle height​
(b) not worn with anklets;​
(c) didn't have a toecap​
I have a sneaking suspicion that the [American? Canadian?] Collector's Guild may be assuming these to be ossifer clobber simply because they are brown, not black.
 
#9
When I saw the Alden style front they rang a bell. Just had to dig a book out

The WW2 Tommy in colour photographs by Martin Brayley and Richard Ingram page 122

Officer's field boots with double buckle integral gaiters and apron- fronted uppers. An ordnance pattern available for sale from RAOC officer's clothing shops, it was introduced in the mid- war period but was never particularly popular.
 
Last edited:
#10
Thanks all. Getting closer I think. Ned Senior was indeed a young Rupert and they might well have been officer purchase. However, he also had some dodgy mates who were big into shifting both US and Canadian kit post WW2. One of them made a very decent packet having bought dozens of Willys Jeeps.

@Stonker - Yes, gash photo, not your eyesight. Better photo to follow later when I have found the time to polish them.

Various. Yes, re-soled at least once. Most recently in the late 70s/early 80s. Now sporting Itshide commando soles.
 
#12
When I saw the Alden style front they rang a bell. Just had to dig a book out

The WW2 Tommy in colour photographs by Martin Brayley and Richard Ingram page 122

Officer's field boots with double buckle integral gaiters and apron- fronted uppers. An ordnance pattern available for sale from RAOC officer's clothing shops, it was introduced in the mid- war period but was never particularly popular.
Spotter Alert!! :-D
 
#14
Found on The FedoraLounge Forum:

RAOC Officers' Boots

May I observe that these are Ordnance Officers boots, and were intended for use by commissioned officers in the Royal ArmyOrdnance Corps - which handled storage and transport of munitions. As officers' equipment they were not issue, but were available through the ROAC depot supply system, having been manufactured according to contract. Not quite 'private purchase', which implies that officers could have bought them 'to pattern' on individual order from suppliers of their choosing.

According to Brayley and Ingram Uniforms of the WW2 Tommy (page 122) they were not popular. Officers in other arms of service may have 'borrowed' them They should not be confused in B&W photgraphs with the motorcyclists' boots ('don-R boots') that have similar uppers but a different toe and are black (but this may not show). Here's another pair:



British Army Motorcycle Riding Boots

@Ned_Seagoon , do not simply bin them, I just saw a similar pair on ebay for 100 quid. The army museum or IWM may like them, you never know.
 
#15
Found on The FedoraLounge Forum:

RAOC Officers' Boots

May I observe that these are Ordnance Officers boots, and were intended for use by commissioned officers in the Royal ArmyOrdnance Corps - which handled storage and transport of munitions. As officers' equipment they were not issue, but were available through the ROAC depot supply system, having been manufactured according to contract. Not quite 'private purchase', which implies that officers could have bought them 'to pattern' on individual order from suppliers of their choosing.

According to Brayley and Ingram Uniforms of the WW2 Tommy (page 122) they were not popular. Officers in other arms of service may have 'borrowed' them They should not be confused in B&W photgraphs with the motorcyclists' boots ('don-R boots') that have similar uppers but a different toe and are black (but this may not show). Here's another pair:



British Army Motorcycle Riding Boots

@Ned_Seagoon , do not simply bin them, I just saw a similar pair on ebay for 100 quid. The army museum or IWM may like them, you never know.
I have no intention of binning them. It would be a treat if someone fancied buying them but, failing that, I will do as you suggest and contact a museum or two.

20 minutes and a hefty dose of Kiwi and they are looking less neglected than they did this morning.
C73AD68E-5E62-4B40-86C0-551B5B7E5350.jpeg
 
Last edited:

ugly

LE
Moderator
#16
Nah.

1. Count the laceholes - 7, not 9​
2. Note the absence of an upper seam on the toe section​
3. Note the absence of 'pebbled' finish. Them'uns is cowhide, with the rough side outermost​
4. Note the double line of stitching where the gaiter is sewn to the boot. Not visible on the OPs items.​
Wrong, look at the picture of the boot on the right, pinterest links are crap
 
#17
Wrong, look at the picture of the boot on the right, pinterest links are crap
Whether you mean the left boot, on the right of the picture, or the right boot on the left, I already did, on my large hi-res work monitor - hence my observations :-D
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
#18
Whether you mean the left boot, on the right of the picture, or the right boot on the left, I already did, on my large hi-res work monitor - hence my observations :-D
Bastard, third picture over to the right
 

Similar threads


New Posts

Latest Threads

Top