Shoe concealments

[hidesmith]

While building a house recently, I created, quite by accident, a small space that was unused. It was coincidental and I thought it a good joke to put a child's shoe in it. Whomever found the shoe would surely laugh and wonder why it was put there. I related my joke to some of my colleagues later that week, and they all laughed. Several liked the joke, and decided they's play similar jokes in buildings they were constructing. Some couldn't find shoes, so they said they used a hat in one situation, a shirt hung on a nail in another situation. We speculated on what the finders might say, as well as how long it might be before someone else enjoyed our joke.

This is, of course, a dramatization of a fictional past, based on nothing more than my own sense of mischief. It should not be taken as discounting in any way research done by others relating to reasons for shoe concealments . I just think it might account for at least SOME of the shoe concealments.

[dearbone]

Naughty naughty naughty,Bad boy.

[kevin_l]

I too have left in the wall of my basement a "time vault" that included among other things a .45 caliber round, a lead bullet, a quarter, a TOONIE from Canada, and a Tandy leather stamp. The stamp was a bad woven wire, but a good 'ETERNITY' stamp. It will bring a question, or two, a few hundred years from now. Yes?

[dearbone]

http://www.newsweasel.com/mystery-of-maple-leaf-gardens-time-capsule-revealed-2

[mcmanning]

For those who may be interested, my recently completed thesis, "Homemade Magic: Concealed Deposits in Architectural Contexts in the Eastern United States," is available for download on academia.edu:

http://www.academia.edu/2174815/Homemade_Magic_Concealed_Deposits_in_Architectur al_Contexts_in_the_Eastern_United_States

A good deal of the thesis discusses concealed footwear. In case you don't want to read all 473 pages (and I don't blame you), I would suggest reading pages 61-77 in Chapter 2, all of Chapter 4, pages 347-363 in Chapter 7, and looking through Appendix A. I'd love to hear any feedback.

Best,
Chris

[SharonKudrle]

Fairbanks House, Dedham MA concealed shoes photos 1-3:
Fairbanks House Dedham MA concealed shoes

I apologize Admin., I wasn't successful in compressing the photos enough to upload them here. After compressing I ended up with 2.1 MB and I kept getting a yellow error triangle with an exclamation mark, despite my best efforts.

They are lined with linen and they are edge creased along the top edge. The stitching and thread is fine, someone put a nice effort into making these low-heeled flats pretty. The docent said they were thought to be early 1700s man's shoes, but I think they might be late 1700s, there is an early pegging jack with a straight oval toe last on it so there was a shoemaker in the family. Jonathan Fairbanks, who built the house, was a spinning wheel maker.

[das]

Without pix it will be hard to tell you more date-wise. Pegging jacks are fairly late-comers--along with pegged construction, not common until the 1820s-30s really.

[SharonKudrle]

Photos should be on my Flickr page and public. I'm sorry I don't seem to be able to upload the photos to the Crispin Colloquy, at least so far. I thought they would be of interest since fewer flat/very low heeled leather shoes survive, especially single-hole latchets with pointed toes.
The house was built in 1636, so concealed shoes could span a number of years what with renovations and additions to the house. The career of one shoemaker could span 1780-1820, or there could have been several shoemakers in the Fairbanks family. I'm sorry you can't view the photos. I have already compressed the photos, and I don't know what else I can do to upload them to the HCC Crispin Colloquy, but I'll keep trying. They should be viewable on my flickr page using the link above.

[das]

Sharon, all I saw on your Flickr page was 3 photos of one pair of men's. No idea of scale for size, but they look like male shoes c.1790s-1810s. The extreme pointed toe is not "feminine" by that date, Google French "incroyables"

[SharonKudrle]

3 photos are all I was able tp get on that visit. They are in a small dark room in a locked case with humidity control. They are very small, a woman's size 5 or smaller I'd guess. I don't know which addition to the house they were concealed in. Can I ask why you decided they were men's and not women's shoes? What made the difference. I thought women's heeled flats *non spring) of the era would be one latchet hole, leather and pointed as well.
Subscribe to topic isn't working either on this forum for me. I did pay my HCC dues this year too...

[SharonKudrle]

3 photos are all I was able tp get on that visit. They are in a small dark room in a locked case with humidity control. They are very small, a woman's size 5 or smaller I'd guess. I don't know which addition to the house they were concealed in. Can I ask why you decided they were men's and not women's shoes? What made the difference? I thought women's heeled flats (non spring if i remember right, as that would be pretty definite) of the era would be one latchet hole, leather and pointed as well.
Subscribe to topic isn't working either on this forum for me. I did pay my HCC dues this year too...

I can go back and ask permission to take more detailed photos, it just wasn't possible then. I'm sorry I forgot to add the size guesstimate to my original description. I took these photos with my phone and uploaded them to the computer to compress them.

[das]

Well, hard to see everything in the photos, but black waxed calf "usually"=men's at that date, but anything is poss. "Very small"=boy's? Take a gander at Rees, and June Swann's 'Shoes' (Batsford, 1982?), for men's v. women's. Need more/better pix, especially bottom of sole, and with inch scale if poss. No idea about any techie glitches you're experiencing on CC. Hopefully Admin. can advise/assist.

[SharonKudrle]

I'll go back and get more photos with a real camera this time, to post somehow. I haven't seen m/any American made leather low heeled flats of that era before even in books or on line museum collections. Thank you very much for your analysis of them.

postscript: The curator told me 8/8/19 that he had taken photos himself, and would send them to me or post them on this forum. This weekend is the Fairbanks family reunion, so it might be next week before he sends them or posts them here. They were interested in the information re. dating and we are interested in the information the Fairbanks family has kindly provided re. early American shoes. 'Thank you very much' to the Fairbanks family and congratulations to them on their annual reunion!

[SharonKudrle]

The Fairbanks House Curator, Daniel Neff, sent me these photos today to post here on the Crispin Colloquy. Thank you so much Mr. Neff, it's wonderful to have the opportunity to see them.

[SharonKudrle]

[SharonKudrle]

IMG_0926.JPG

IMG_0929.JPG

IMG_0930.JPG

[SharonKudrle]

[/img][/img]

[das]

Wow! Thanks for the additional photos Sharon. The c. 1800(?) pointed toe pair still have me bamboozled--nice mats & workmanship, but the style???? I'd be happier with it being on a male foot at that date. The black leather woman's w/ covered wood heel is a nice find, as we know surviving leather upper women's shoes c.1760s-70s(?) are thin on the ground.

[SharonKudrle]

Hmmm. It's v e r y difficult to believe that the pointed toe ones have you bamboozled.
I love the low heel mid century leather shoe too, so practical and comfortable.
I'll ask if we can get the toe to heel measurements inches of all of them, and a photo and measurements of the last on the lasting jack that is there. Is there anything else you'd like to see? Mr. Neff is following this thread.

[SharonKudrle]

I had been hoping the single Fairbanks shoe was 17thc but it wasn't. Several questions came to mind:

why are there holes/cutouts in the sides of 17c shoes? they would let dirt in.

I know you are very involved currently researching Jamestown shoes of the 17thc, are they different than the Puritan footgear of Massachusetts?

[das]

Fashion. The open-sided, latchet tie shoe style starts in the late 1500s--just a fad. All through the 1600s the holes, first large, tended to get smaller and smaller. In the early 1700s a few women's textile shoes still had a tiny vestigial hole at the base of the latchets. All through the 1600s there were also "close" shoes (no holes) too if you wanted. Comparing the Plimouth colony to Jamestown Virginia is nigh impossible. At Jamestown we have +/- 80-90 shoes and frags archaeologically recovered (2 were "close" shoes). In Massachusetts, there are none that I know of until c.1660s (1 Scotto's Dock AKA Bostonian Hotel site, 2-4 Saugus Iron Works), nothing from Plimouth proper. I have examined the shoes in Pilgrim Hall Museum, a few small toddlers' shoes were fancifully attributed to "Pilgrims", but none date much before 1700-1710.

Attaching photos of a "close" shoe and an open-sided shoe, both from the 1628 wreck of the Swedish ship Vasa.

download.jpg

download.jpg

[SharonKudrle]

Thank you for the beautiful photos and for teaching us. The top photo is a beautifully preserved and beautifully made shoe, I'm so sorry for the sailors may they rest in peace.

The holes would show off your stockings/hose if you had them and that 14-1500s did feature a lot of 'slashed' garments that showed off layers of fabric so it makes sense. I love the short quartered shoe with the seam right at the arch and near the heel breast and the high tongues on both.
My first thoughts are: the soles are mighty thick for seafaring, I wonder why? Second is why aren't there any shoes from Plymouth? There were plenty of people up here.

Thank you for the lovely photos.

[das]

17th c shoes.JPG

Sorry the one posted twice, but hey.... Vasa sank in Stockholm harbor on her maiden voyage. Most of the crew got safely off, I believe there were only 18 who "went down with the ship". The soles appear thick, but in this case it's regional. The soles were made from layers of insulating/water repellent "naver" (birch bark). The actual outermost sole layer was leather, but thinner than usual because their cattle, I'm told, were the size of German shepherds and didn't grow very thick. Leather doesn't survive well in dry soil, only under water and mud, etc. Jamestown's shoes only survived down abandoned wells cum refuse pits. Find Plimouth's earliest wells, and you find her earliest shoes. Rusty Moore, who I hope still frequents this Forum,worked up there and examined a lot of locally concealed shoes , some might be as early as 17thc, but you'd have to ask him. Attaching a group of (Swedish) 17thc shoes, not from Vasa. They illustrate pretty well the changes in hole sizes, large (early) to small (later).

[SharonKudrle]

Photos of a “toed clog” or “galosh"

image001.jpg

IMG_1678.JPG

IMG_1674.JPG

IMG_1675.JPG

IMG_1677.JPG