Through the Mists of Time...

[das]

Help Wanted--Citation Lost!

In the introduction to one of Dr. William Rossi's books or articles on shoes, he opines that he'd encountered no other industry so overloaded with quasi-historical myths and bunk as shoemaking... But I cannot find it. Any help will be greatfully appreciated.

[kemosabi]

If you don't have this already; Here is the Stonehill College archive catalog for Rossi's collection.

Rossi Archive

Maybe this can help narrow your search.(?) There are several titles dealing with "myth".

Cheers,
-Nat

[das]

Nat,

Great post. I'd wondered who eventually got Rossi's stuff.

All I need is the title, date, and page(s) of his discussion of myth-ridden shoe hist. It's not in 'Sex', must have been an article, bunt dang if I can find which one here so far.

Dan? DW? Larry? "Beuller? "Anybody"?

[tmattimore]

Footwear news Jan 1997

[das]

Tom,

Name of article/essay? What page #?

[tmattimore]

Footwear's myths versus facts is the title. I have a request in for an interlibrary loan at the University for four issues but they are apparently out on loan.

[walrus]

Al
I went Through all the articles That Dr. Rossi sent me during our correspondence about the Podometrics book and sizing fitting discussions. The only thing I have is a copy of the article called Shoe Sizes The Big Bamboozle in Podiatry Management.June 1994. In that he talks about the myths involved in shoe sizes,and how the standard was developed .

[das]

Thanks Larry, but it wasn't that one.

[psrivats]

All, my alma mater has really a good subscription (both regular and electronic) to most journals/articles/books. If anyone is looking for a specific article, please feel free to contact me with a message/email clearly stating the article name and author name and I'll be happy to locate a copy for you. If only paper article is available, the library will scan a pdf-copy on request as well.

[sorrell]

I've read somewhere that at some point (in the 1800's I believe) the shoemaking trade was second only to farming in the number of people it employed. Does anyone know where I can find that information?

[hidesmith]

Lisa,
If you check census records of the era, you might find occupations. In my research of the 1880s in Epsom, NH, I discovered that, while there were shoe factory workers, there were also MANY who were listed as shoemakers and farmers. The two often co-mingled - they cropped in the summer and made shoes in the winter. Here in Epsom, there are still a few 'ten-footers', in other words, small buildings that were used as shoe shops, still found on farms.

My first attempt at "self-publishing" involved a diary kept my neighbors of Penny's great-grandfather who were farmers and shoemakers. They got what we might call kits from the big factories in Andover and Stoneham, Mass. and made women's and youth's turn-shoes on their kitchen table. They also had cattle and made butter for resale.
Beware of this avenue, though - it is addicting. During my research, I discovered that Penny's great-grandfather was a shoemaker before he purchased the farm (in 1873) that we still own. There is what may have been originally a shoemaker's ten-footer that was converted to a corn crib still on the property, and I found his lasting jack partially buried under the barn. Making connections with the past takes time, but is pretty darned cool when it happens!

[das]

Lisa,

The cite you seek is J. L. Bishop's 1868, 'History of American Manufactures 1608-1860', vol. II, pp.470-471. Based on the 1860 Census:

"The manufacture of boots and shoes employs a larger number of persons than any other single branch of American industry, not excepting the cotton manufacture. The total number of hands employed in 1860 was 123, 026; of whom 28,514, or nearly one fourth, were females."

Bishop notes that there were 12,487 boot and shoe making establishments nation wide by 1868

[sorrell]

Al,
Thank you! I've wished several times I could remember that bit of information.

Lisa

[das]

Lisa,

Glad to help. Now it's "permanently" on the vast Internet to boot.

[dw]

Just to be clear--in case I'm not reading or interpreting the words correctly...


"Not excepting cotton manufacturing" means not leaving it out of the equation, does it not?

Which suggests that the sentence could have read...

"The manufacture of boots and shoes employs a larger number of persons than any other single branch of American industry."

First, not second. Is that correct?

Tight Stitches
DWFII--HCC Member

[center]Little Jack Dandiprat in a white petticoat,
The longer he lives, the shorter he grows.[/center]

[das]

DW,

You might be onto something there; however, Bishop was working from the "last" available US Census (1860) prior to his 1868 publication, at which time a significant number of US agricultural workers were still slaves. Question this begs is, did the 1860 Census count only paid workers, or include slaves? I have always erred on the side of safety, parsing Bishop by saying, "shoemaking was second only to agriculture just before the Civil War" broke out". Flip-side there is, while the war was a boost to manufacturing (army footwear), it did not take us from tiny to huge IOW--we already were huge. Exports... The British called it "the American Invasion" by the 1880s.

The number of US shoe-workers/firms increased steadily until 1929, sort of leveled-off mid 20thc, before it fell off a cliff in the last 25 years or so. US import penetration is currently something north of 99% now--that is >99% of all footwear sold in the US is foreign-made. Shows you how fickle history is, huh?

We're hardly alone. In the 1738 Parliament reckoned 600-700 firms in London (largest city in the world at the time), plus maybe 30,000 more shoemakers operating "off the books". Today there are _____(?) left in London.

[danfreeman]

Doesn't Ries call our trade the most numermous of all?

[danfreeman]

Pardon me: the correct quote is, "I believe that there is no trade so numerous as ours." Page ix, John Rees (not Ries)

[das]

Here's a link to an on-line version of Ernfird Jafvert's 1938 book on historical shoes--a rare find these days in the flesh Never mind the Swedish, the illustrations alone are worth the price of admission: http://ludvigs.nu/?page_id=809

[sorrell]

Does anyone know anything about this shoe; what this style is called, where it came from, what it's used for?

Never mind, I'm following the image upload instructions and it won't let me upload a picture.

Lisa

(Message edited by sorrell on October 05, 2012)

[das]

Lisa,

When you can the pix up, I'd love to see

[paul]

It's that pesky back slash and brackets. I do a cut a paste from the format section and fill in the parts that relate.
Come on Lisa, you can do it. :-)

[derrick_fischer]

[sorrell]

Trying again now that I'm back in my shop. Does anyone know anything about this type of shoe?

14974.jpg

[sorrell]

Two other views...

14976.jpg

14977.jpg