Gebirgsjager boots on estand

[me6_130]

In Austria there were 2 suppliers of GBJ Boots, one in Innsbruck other one in Villach, both made slight differen Version of GBJ Boots and and delivered only in Austria. And both were chosen on the proposal of Fulpmes and GBJ Reg 139 to supply the high mountain units, because they simple say the so called Wehrmacht Issued Boots are rubbish. Look at this Picture, from him i own from Medals to his personal Gear everything, including his Boots who i guess can clearly be seen are not Wehrmacht Issued Boots.

Your boots might have been produced for Gbj troops and been issued to the Wehrmacht, original war time with a solid provenance...but are not "textbook". They are a variation, and that is what Patrick is saying

Carles

[AntiqueWW2]

Absolute Correct, but worn and produced for GBJ. "Textbook" is always a nice Term in a Forum where you can put alot under its wings, but to me, both are GBJ Boots as long as they are worn by them. Fulpmes and the 139er sure had there Reason why they wanted different Boots.

Your boots might have been produced for Gbj troops and been issued to the Wehrmacht, original war time with a solid provenance...but are not "textbook". They are a variation, and that is what Patrick is saying

Carles

[Mark Sheffy]

I would tend to agree with the “Textbook “ reference. Without getting too far off of the subject, how about period photos of WH troops wearing US double buckle boots.
In the field anything goes when survival is number one.
For display purposes, a photo next to it, proves provenance.
This collecting/displaying is fun just like these conversations should be .

[me6_130]

Absolute Correct, but worn and produced for GBJ. "Textbook" is always a nice Term in a Forum where you can put alot under its wings, but to me, both are GBJ Boots as long as they are worn by them. Fulpmes and the 139er sure had there Reason why they wanted different Boots.

So we all agree then.

As collectors, when we start, we like to get the so called "textbook" items because they have been well studied and are a clear example of what is standard. As time goes by, and we learn more, we like to pic other items that might also be good but do not conform standards. Now, at some point if we are asked, we have to make a clear difference between what is acceptable, what is textbook, what is a variant, what is uncommon and what is not acceptable. If someone resquests our opinion, thats what we give, our opinion based on our experience. There are some quite knowledgeable members here and I always like to hear what they have to say, and learn from them.


Carles

[Graham G]

It is a very long known fact that GJ wore a variety of boots, of course including these Austrian made ones. But, they're not standard issue GJ boots, and you even said that. Saying they're the same as the issue ones makes no sense, then.

[Gene T]

Speaking of "Textbook", many years ago, someone (Manny?) had posted a scan of line drawings from an actual reference book on WH equipment, showing standard M28, M30, and M35 patterns of the Bergschuhe. I tried to look for that post, but there are now more than 1300 threads containing the word "boots" on this sub-forum alone, and many old picture links are dead, so trawling through the archives here has become genuinely time-consuming and unproductive.

Does anyone remember those drawings and what book they came out of?

I do have to agree with AntiqueWW2 that those Austrian boots are obviously superior to the standard M35 design (one piece vamp with no external stitching is inherently better than multi-piece construction in terms of waterproofing, and more expensive to produce; the thicker and stiffer soles would also offer much better foot support in steep and uneven terrain while under heavy load), so it would make sense for any Austrian GJ who had actual mountain-climbing experience to prefer such a design. The only question is whether this was a purely ad hoc phenomenon or sanctioned thru official directives.

[AntiqueWW2]

Hochgebirsgschule Fulpmes, and Tragtierstaffel Spittal/Drau request official new GBJ Boots, different to the so called Textbook, Beschaffungsamt place a Order of Boots for GBJ, Boots are produced and then delivered to the GBJ Unit in Spittal/Drau and Fulpmes. And now tell me Mr Textbook Standart Issue, are they issued now or not? I guess they are, so to me they are GBJ Boots. I never talked that much about a pair of Boots.....

It is a very long known fact that GJ wore a variety of boots, of course including these Austrian made ones. But, they're not standard issue GJ boots, and you even said that. Saying they're the same as the issue ones makes no sense, then.

[AntiqueWW2]

Correct, because the Boots produced in Austria are way superior to that what the Wehrmacht had to offer, the Hochgebirgsschule followed by the Tragtierstaffel choose to get there own Boots made. They requested them and they got them. I talked to many former GBJ, including Heeresbergfuhrer, and so i got it confirmed. As well, i own 2 Letters written in 1942 at Fulpmes, from a Uffz who attend the Winter Bergfuhrer Lehrgang. In this Letter he wrote to his Brother who was as well GBJ, that they got new Equipment, including finally improved Boots. In my Books this is more then enough proof that this are GBJ Boots, worn by them and issued for them. Textbook is a nice word, for someone who start Collecting true, same for Books with there Pictures, but sometimes there is way more to it then whats written in them. And so, i can only say it again, my Boots are issued GBJ Boots, same as the so called Textbook, just mine are simple not given to every GBJ Unit, only to the special Branch, as Bergfuhrer, Tragtierstaffel ect. And if you ever was at the Mountains for a longer Tour, i can insure you, the most important Item are your Boots.

Speaking of "Textbook", many years ago, someone (Manny?) had posted a scan of line drawings from an actual reference book on WH equipment, showing standard M28, M30, and M35 patterns of the Bergschuhe. I tried to look for that post, but there are now more than 1300 threads containing the word "boots" on this sub-forum alone, and many old picture links are dead, so trawling through the archives here has become genuinely time-consuming and unproductive.

Does anyone remember those drawings and what book they came out of?

I do have to agree with AntiqueWW2 that those Austrian boots are obviously superior to the standard M35 design (one piece vamp with no external stitching is inherently better than multi-piece construction in terms of waterproofing, and more expensive to produce; the thicker and stiffer soles would also offer much better foot support in steep and uneven terrain while under heavy load), so it would make sense for any Austrian GJ who had actual mountain-climbing experience to prefer such a design. The only question is whether this was a purely ad hoc phenomenon or sanctioned thru official directives.

[Gene T]

And if you ever was in Mountains, i can insure you, the most important Item are your Boots.

Yes, I had spent plenty of time in the Alps in my youth and still go hiking in the hills here in California whenever I can, so I know exactly what you are saying; which is why I thought your claims were quite plausible.

Given that this is an international forum with participants from all over the world who don't actually know each other in person, you shouldn't take the questioning too personally. Everyone's opinion is a product of his own experience. Consensus exists in the area where these experiences overlap. Given the diverse background here, you can imagine that the overlap is necessarily limited, so a skeptical reaction is quite normal and understandable whenever something outside the consensus is shown.

You have some interesting information about these boots that is new (at least to me), so it is definitely commendable that you are willing to share it with us, especially if it's backed up by documentation. If it's not too much to ask, could you post a scan or an excerpt of the actual letters you mentioned? I think this would go a long way towards easing the skepticism expressed by the participants here.

As someone else already said above, we are here to learn and to have fun. A discussion like this satisfies both of those objectives! So please don't take our comments the wrong way and feel free to chime in anytime, if you are still game.

[Mark Sheffy]

Here is a great example of non regulation . DAK officer with shorts and boots.
Original pictures from my collection