Smock – Jacket, Jacket – Smock ???

  • Hey Guest, Early bird pricing on the Summer Moot (29th July - 10th August) available until April 6th, we'd love you to come. PLEASE CLICK HERE to early bird price and get more information.

Jaeger

Full Member
Dec 3, 2014
670
24
United Kingdom
As the question has recently been asked (again) and as I am soon to post a short review on what is thee best jacket for BC :)lmao:) I thought that it might be interesting to pose this question in advance as the terms appear to be being used in an inter-changeable fashion – rightly or wrongly –

‘When is a jacket a smock?’ (And vice-versa).

Has this been discussed within the BCUK community previously and what was the outcome?

Here are my thoughts:

Q? Does it matter? A. Probably not - but it might be useful when discussing garments without images to hand.

My understanding has long been that a jacket has a full length opening down the front with (zip, buttons, toggles whatever to close it).

A long (long) time ago I was issued with a combat ‘jacket’ with a full length front opening and also later with a canvas ‘smock’ which had no opening which you had to pull over your head.

I had never heard a combat jacket referred to as a combat ‘smock’ with the exception of the Denison smocks – originally a pull over the head garment but later issued with a full length zip and official labelling within referring to them as a ‘smock’. (Probably the MOD cost cutting and using old labels? – cynic me! :))

I suspect that if a civilian (none ex service person) had been asked the question back then – ‘what is a smock?’ they would probably have envisaged the type of over-garment with no front opening worn by country folk of old. (Some limited research suggests that the word smock comes from Old Norse/Old English meaning a pulled-over-the head garment).

In my experience it wasn’t until many years later when commercial companies started to sell ‘Gucci’ versions of combat ‘jackets’ and wanted to ‘big up’ their products (told you I was a cynic!) that combat jackets became openly referred to as combat ‘smocks’.

So is it the case that the terms smock and jacket are now (acceptably) interchangeable?

Taking it a stage further – is there a difference between a jacket and a coat or are they the same thing?

Again a little research suggests that a jacket is of a length down to the waist (think ‘bomber’) or slightly further to the hips, whilst a ‘coat’ extends at least to cover the thighs (makes sense – if you coat something – you cover it).

Now, if I asked my better half to pass me my FJ jacket, should I expect my No8 smock or the Skogsvo jacket?!

Or am I just being an anorak?:lmao:
 

sunndog

Full Member
May 23, 2014
3,561
477
derbyshire
Seems to me a "smock" can be either a overhead type garment or a zip opener thats cut to be especially roomy, i think thats where the civvy description of "smock" comes in


And yeah, to me a coat is longer than a jacket
 

Limaed

Full Member
Apr 11, 2006
1,293
70
48
Perth
I can't imagine any SF guys (or even regular troops) kicking around in an Anorak, Combat DPM (or words to that effect) so smock it is!
 

dewi

Full Member
May 26, 2015
2,647
12
Cheshire
You can define the two by the fit I think.

A smock is a loosely fitting over-garment meant to protect your clothes. A jacket is a close fitting over-garment meant to protect your clothes.

Technically a coat isn't like a smock or a jacket because a coat should be a longer garment, often lower than the knee, whereas a jacket/smock barely goes past the hips.
 
Nov 25, 2012
8
0
Melbourne
Wasn't there something that was called a driving coat, that was only as long as a jacket?
And is a Trench coat longer than an ordinary coat?
But I agree with the smock school~ definitely pullover.

sent from another galaxy
 

John Fenna

Lifetime Member & Maker
Oct 7, 2006
23,137
2,876
66
Pembrokeshire
It appears to me that the confusion arose with the Paras (typical ain't it!) and the issued Denison Smock.
The original Smock was an over the head garment but so many Paras had it altered to have a full front zip for ease of wear that later models were made with a zip front - but still called a Smock!
As later combat jackets were based on the highly valued Denison they too were called Smocks...
My understanding of the history of the Anorak is that it was originally an Eskimo (Kalaallisut) kayaking garment with minimal openings for avoiding water ingress and which could even be sewn to the Kayak. I seem to recall reading that the first use of an Anorak in mountaineering was in South America when a visiting (Victorian?) English eccentric grand Lady borrowed a museums exhibit to climb an Andean summit but dates and names escape me...
 

Tiley

Life Member
Oct 19, 2006
2,364
375
60
Gloucestershire
Perhaps inconveniently for the Paras, the word 'smock' first appeared in the English language in about 1300 as 'smok', referring to a woman's undergarment or chemise. The word stems from a broad range of northern European linguistic cultures, including Old High German, Old Icelandic, Proto-Germanic, early Indo-European and Middle High German amongst others. Perhaps most interesting of these is the Old Icelandic cognate where the word means 'to creep into or put on a garment'. I suppose that this meaning of the word suggests a more loose-fitting garment, much along the lines of the smocks sometimes favoured by painters over the ages.

By contrast, the word 'anorak' made its formal appearance in the English language in 1924. At that time, it specifically referred to the waterproof garments used by the Greenland Eskimos; it does not appear to have been used to refer to Western imitations of the garment until the 1930s.

So, do the Paras really wear women's underwear or have we just got sloppy about how we use, adopt and mangle language?

I've always understood a smock to be something that is cut loosely for both comfort and ease; an anorak would therefore be more closely cut to make it more practical to the situations in which it is being used.

I've always be slightly mystified by the different attitudes to 'jacket' on either side of the Atlantic: in the U.S., a jacket, particularly for outdoor use, is almost always a waist-length garment; if you want something longer, they seem to dub it a 'parka'. Over here, a 'jacket' - originally described a short coat (circa 1451) - now seems to cover much more of the body, whereas a 'parka', which originally referred to a jacket with a hood, usually made from pelts, hardly gets used this side of the herring pond, except to refer to U.S.-inspired combat jackets. It's all a bit baffling!
 
Apr 8, 2009
1,165
144
Ashdown Forest
as i suggest a nurses smock. however in military terms a smock always has a hood

and artists smocks....

There was also the WW2 british issue windproof smock (available in camouflage, white and khaki). These are indeed hooded, have no zip, and the original military labels identify them as 'smocks'. the forerunner of today's 'sas smock' (and a great rabbit hunting jacket, sorry, smock).
 
Last edited:

honisoitquimalypense

Full Member
Sep 14, 2015
92
0
oxford
absolutely. think smock originally was to protect artists clothes. and of course a para smock had a diaper flap.! also the original Denison was designed with fade out colour so SOE boys could blend in with French locals if job went pear shaped. so if you have an original Denison that isnt totally faded its fake.
 

John Fenna

Lifetime Member & Maker
Oct 7, 2006
23,137
2,876
66
Pembrokeshire
absolutely. think smock originally was to protect artists clothes. and of course a para smock had a diaper flap.! also the original Denison was designed with fade out colour so SOE boys could blend in with French locals if job went pear shaped. so if you have an original Denison that isnt totally faded its fake.

Historically speaking in Britain from at least the 1600s Smocks were generally agricultural labourers' voluminous over-garments often with ornamental gathering on the chest and cuffs "Smocking" - well before "artists" took to wearing them. In effect they were garments worn to protect under-layers and often bore markings to identify to whom the wearer was affiliated ... much like the role of the military smock.
When I was a Fashion Student I actually looked into historical working clothing and the smock (a multi- national development) was nowt but a loose fitting protective garment in whatever fabric suited the trade of the wearer but in the UK more field workers wore them as an identifying uniform with regional/estate/trade markings than did industrial workers. In France the smock developed into the "bleu-de travail" which eventually became blue denim overalls (Denim was "toile -de-Nimes" a fabric woven in Nimes, "Jeans" a cut of trouser worn by fishermen from Genoa and worn by British poets to swim the Helespont - the original Levis were made from Hemp tent fabric not cotton Denim...canvas was originally hemp - the name "canvas" has the same origins as "cannabis")...
If you want soldiers wearing ladies garments just look up the term "Frock Coat":)
 

BCUK Shop

We have a a number of knives, T-Shirts and other items for sale.

SHOP HERE