Shoemaking Techniques and Traditions--"...these foolish things..."

[DWFII]

I own a pair of wooden pegged sole shoes and they squeak like crazy. Not sure if it's just my pair but it is very annoying and I don't wear them for that very reason but they are nice to look at.

That's leather rubbing against leather. Only way I know to avoid that is to use a neoprene cement and very tightly bond the outsole to the insole. Or if you're wanting to avoid the occlusiveness of the cement, use paste and run a piece of felt in between the insole and outsole.

On the other hand, if the shoes are double soled, sometimes you can run just a piece of cloth between the outsoles.

Same thing--creaking--could and does happen with welted shoes if a maker isn't careful.

 

[ajd578]

Not sure if this is the right thread for this question, but I'm curious about toe structure. At what point did this become common on the types of footwear we see today? Was there ever a time when most men wore shoes and boots similar to today's styles, but with 'soft' toes?

 

[DWFII]

Not sure if this is the right thread for this question, but I'm curious about toe structure. At what point did this become common on the types of footwear we see today? Was there ever a time when most men wore shoes and boots similar to today's styles, but with 'soft' toes?

I might be able to get back with you with a more definitive answer...I need to check some things...but I can't see toe stiffeners or much in the way of any internal structure while turnshoes were the main means of construction. So soft toes until at least the early 1500s.

Also many boots and shoes were soft toed right up through the mid 19th century whether by design or that the stiffener hadn't quite caught on--here in this country most boots were not lined in the foot, not entirely lined in the leg, if at all...and a toe stiffener is usually sandwiched between the liner and the vamp.

As I mentioned I need to check some sources but I wouldn't be surprised if toe stiffeners didn't evolve as a natural progression from toe caps. And toe caps don't seem to be anywhere in evidence prior to about the turn of the century (1885-1900).

 

[ajd578]

As I mentioned I need to check some sources but I wouldn't be surprised if toe stiffeners didn't evolve as a natural progression from toe caps. And toe caps don't seem to be anywhere in evidence prior to about the turn of the century (1885-1900).

You know I had the same thought about toe caps being a precursor to stiffeners. It would be interesting if the reason it's common for toe caps to be ornamental rather than functional (partially overlapping pieces rather than the vamp extending underneath to the toe) is that the introduction of the stiffener made that extra structure unnecessary.

 

[ntempleman]

The old horse riding/military boots I’ve seen from the around the mid 19c have toe puffs which makes sense when you consider the use. I particularly recall an elastic sided boot from the early 20c which had no toe puff, but as a sample style it’s hard to know if this was done for expedience rather than function

 

[brax]

Here’s the website. A quite young Vienna-based maker, maybe 5 years old or so.

That's amazing; a savant! Imagine what he'll be able to do when he reaches adulthood.

 

[j ingevaldsson]

That's amazing; a savant! Imagine what he'll be able to do when he reaches adulthood.

Nah, they push him like the Russian gymnasts, he’ll be worn down and destroyed before turns 20. Better get your orders in quick folks!

 

[razmaftei]

Nah, they push him like the Russian gymnasts, he’ll be worn down and destroyed before turns 20. Better get your orders in quick folks!

he relocated to his hometown hamburg

 

[KtSty]

My whole career (50 years+) has been intimately associated with pegging. I may have driven more pegs in my time than any shoemaker posting here. You might expect that I would be particularly defensive about pegged sole construction, but I'm not...I prefer objectivity whereever I can find it. .

Pegged outsoles are, as mentioned, faster and cheaper to do than welting a shoe or boot. But they create their own their own unique set of problems and ultimately their own destruction--each resole...and fewer and fewer cobblers really know how to properly peg these days... makes more holes (on top of old holes) in the insole. It's like perforating a sheet of paper in the same spot over and over again. After two or three resoles the insole and lasting margins of the upper are so chewed up the job depends more on the cement than on the pegs. I suspect four resoles is about the limit before it all crumbles into tidbits and detritus.

Would a midsole solve these problems? The maker that was linked has a delicious plain toe derby on their front page with handwelted midsole and pegged outsoles. Presumably it is easier to replace the midsole than the insole.

 

[DWFII]

Would a midsole solve these problems? The maker that was linked has a delicious plain toe derby on their front page with handwelted midsole and pegged outsoles. Presumably it is easier to replace the midsole than the insole.

Well, there's a disconnect there somewhere--unless something that I don't understand is going on--midsoles cannot be handwelted. Welting (AKA 'inseaming') is a process by which the upper and the lining and a welt are attached to the insole. At that point, if done by hand, the shoe is said to be handwelted. Then the outsole (or a midsole...or both) can be attached by sewing it to the welt.

If the shoes in question (in the link) are handwelted and a midsole is attached by sewing it to the welt, it might be sufficient to peg the outsole only to the midsole. But it begs the question: Why, if the midsole is going to be stitched to the welt, is the outsole not stitched to the welt, as well (many double soled brogues are done exactly like that)??!!

And then the question is: What's the point of pegging? Pegging, as dear to my heart as it may be, is not as good an attachment as stitching. So why bother to peg in addition to all the other work involved in handwelting and stitching? Except for novelty or some misguided notion that pegs are ornamental.

If the shoe is handwelted and the midsole is not stitched to the welt, what's the point of welting? The only reason to add a welt is to provide the means to stitch the outsole to the shoe.

And yes, it would be easier to replace a midsole than an insole, esp. if it were stitched to the welt. But if the pegs are long enough to penetrate through the midsole and into the insole, the intiial problem remains no matter how many times you replace the midsole.

 

[KtSty]

Well, there's a disconnect there somewhere--unless something that I don't understand is going on--midsoles cannot be handwelted. Welting (AKA 'inseaming') is a process by which the upper and the lining and a welt are attached to the insole. At that point, if done by hand, the shoe is said to be handwelted. Then the outsole (or a midsole...or both) can be attached by sewing it to the welt.

If the shoes in question (in the link) are handwelted and a midsole is attached by sewing it to the welt, it might be sufficient to peg the outsole only to the midsole. But it begs the question: Why, if the midsole is going to be stitched to the welt, is the outsole not stitched to the welt, as well (many double soled brogues are done exactly like that)??!!

And then the question is: What's the point of pegging? Pegging, as dear to my heart as it may be, is not as good an attachment as stitching. So why bother to peg in addition to all the other work involved in handwelting and stitching? Except for novelty or some misguided notion that pegs are ornamental.

If the shoe is handwelted and the midsole is not stitched to the welt, what's the point of welting? The only reason to add a welt is to provide the means to stitch the outsole to the shoe.

And yes, it would be easier to replace a midsole than an insole, esp. if it were stitched to the welt. But if the pegs are long enough to penetrate through the midsole and into the insole, the intiial problem remains no matter how many times you replace the midsole.

I expect that is what the maker meant - that the midsole is stitched to the welt by hand, and then the outsole is pegged. Maybe Jesper knows. EDIT: my mistake, I didn't see a comma in the description - "hand welted, midsole stitched, outsoles pegged"

My understanding is that pegging the outsole would be more traditional for an Austrian shoemaker, which shouldn't be dismissed in my view, even if it is done purely out of tradition. I guess it is also less labor intensive. But perhaps Maftei can speak better on this.

 

[florent]

A question about midsoles and outsoles: there are some models where the outsole is attached to the midsole with a separate row of stitching, like this:

I guess the reason today for this construction is mostly aesthetic, but what was the technical purpose originally (if any)? It feels like a huge amount of extra work.

 

[DWFII]

You know I had the same thought about toe caps being a precursor to stiffeners. It would be interesting if the reason it's common for toe caps to be ornamental rather than functional (partially overlapping pieces rather than the vamp extending underneath to the toe) is that the introduction of the stiffener made that extra structure unnecessary.

As I mentioned...I needed to check some sources. Unfortunately almost all the literature I have is post mid 19th century (earlier stuff is scarce and dear). Checking those sources I didn't find anything to add to what I had already posted, so I turned to my friend, D.A. Saguto, who is one of the foremost shoe historians in the world and the English language translator of AotS (Art du Cordonnier--aka Art of the Shoemaker), par M. de Garsault, 1767.

Here is what he had to say about it:

Historical Toe Stiffeners 101—Cliff Notes Version: The earliest I’ve seen date from the advent of the sharp-cornered square toes c.1660. For men’s leather square toes, they were often leather, lasted prior to lasting the upper. The uppers were then lasted over them with a little paste smeared on top first, and there was no whip-stitching to secure the skived cut edge, so they often curled in and “hurt the foot” (see ‘AotS’). Women’s, about the same date, were safely inserted between the lining and the upper proper (usually textile) and sewn in with the upper during welt/rand sewing to the insole, kinda like modern ones. By c.1680s-1750s, men’s high square (box toes) were hot (think the old Frye snoot boots only wider). Those were often built off of a toe extension/elongation of the insole (exceeding the last, folded up flat against the last’s toe), then a separate “box” piece was butt-stitched to it (I think we discussed this years ago re some similar western boot toe box technique?), and the uppers lasted over that. Women’s 18thc shoes lost their square toes for pointed, then round/oval toes, w/ stiffeners (by then rag paper or cardboard!) inserted between lining and out textile layer. Men’s round toes (worn “forever”) were totally soft-toed (zero stiffeners). This is how it remained largely until c.1800, when women’s went soft-toed too. Not until after the Am. Civil War, roughly, did men’s shoes begin being to be lined, and then they went to inserted stiffeners like women’s had.

Hope that helps....

 

[ajd578]

As I mentioned...I needed to check some sources. Unfortunately almost all the literature I have is post mid 19th century (earlier stuff is scarce and dear). Checking those sources I didn't find anything to add to what I had already posted, so I turned to my friend, D.A. Saguto, who is one of the foremost shoe historians in the world and the English language translator of AotS (Art du Cordonnier--aka Art of the Shoemaker), par M. de Garsault, 1767.

Here is what he had to say about it:


Hope that helps....

Fantastic. I'm really grateful to you for following up on this. Cheers!

 

[j ingevaldsson]

As I mentioned...I needed to check some sources. Unfortunately almost all the literature I have is post mid 19th century (earlier stuff is scarce and dear). Checking those sources I didn't find anything to add to what I had already posted, so I turned to my friend, D.A. Saguto, who is one of the foremost shoe historians in the world and the English language translator of AotS (Art du Cordonnier--aka Art of the Shoemaker), par M. de Garsault, 1767.

Here is what he had to say about it:


Hope that helps....

Really interesting! Will try turning the topic into a blog post if I can, of course with proper credit.