Shoes and slippy decks

[captain.richard.grenville]

Simple meaning very cheap maybe not in construction but in materials such as cotton or linen as the fabric versus a more durable fabric or leather. Buckles versus ties would be dependant on the style of shoe/boot etc more than the cost or design.

[dasNdanger]

Simple meaning very cheap maybe not in construction but in materials such as cotton or linen as the fabric

Hmmm...so piratical sorts DID wear sneakers (trainers), eh??

Thanks again. I would be interested in knowing exactly what sort of shoe this might be - the style, etc.

On a side note, I pulled an old National Geographic book off the shelf (Men, Ships, and the Sea) - published back in 1962. I hadn't given this book much thought because I figured the information in it would be lacking. However, it has some rather interesting pictures. The first pages of the book are photographs of sailors around the world (c. 1962) - the crew of a dhow in the Indian Ocean, men working a galley in the Persian Gulf, fishermen on a Chinese junk - and most, if not all, are barefoot - even the men on the junk straining at the windlass. Later in the book is a painting entitled "Death of Lord Nelson" by Denis Dighton (1792-1827), and it portrays officers and marines in shoes, but most other seamen in their bare feet (and working the guns, no less). Of course, this was painted well after the GAoP, but still could be a valuable reference to go by. Clothing styles may change, but a seaman's habits probably remained fairly consistent over the centuries. It seems from pictures of modern sailors in the tropics, and from the one at Trafalgar, sailors did and still do work the ship in their bare feet. Therefore, I think it would be safe to assume that at least some sailors went barefoot when it was practical or preferred, and had probably done so for ages, especially in warmer climes.

das

[captain.richard.grenville]

One other thought after discussing the matter "off board" with several individuals we came to the conclusion that basic shoe/boot design of the day did not have "tread" as we know it today. Most shoe soles were flat with no cross cuts or roughing done to them. This coupled with the thick tarred ropes and finer hemp rope in moderate sea conditions could be slippery at best and downright wet in others which would lead me to believe that most that went aloft would definately prefer no footware than slippery flatbottomed soles even if they had footware for the "beach". These individuals are costume fanatics so, I will try and post typical sailor footware from mid 15th Centurty through the early 19th when we get it assembled. Please contact me directly if you have individual questions and I can see if I can get answers.

Cap'n Sin

[dasNdanger]

One other thought after discussing the matter "off board" with several individuals we came to the conclusion that basic shoe/boot design of the day did not have "tread" as we know it today. Most shoe soles were flat with no cross cuts or roughing done to them. This coupled with the thick tarred ropes and finer hemp rope in moderate sea conditions could be slippery at best and downright wet in others which would lead me to believe that most that went aloft would definately prefer no footware than slippery flatbottomed soles even if they had footware for the "beach". These individuals are costume fanatics so, I will try and post typical sailor footware from mid 15th Centurty through the early 19th when we get it assembled. Please contact me directly if you have individual questions and I can see if I can get answers.

Cap'n Sin

Thank you again!! Yeah, I am very interested in this subject and would appreciate any additional information you can find. The flat soles would, I think, create a problem under certain conditions, but could the heel actally help in the rigging?? Dunno. If I have something specific, I will certainly contact you in PM...

Could you ask your friends about the earlier mention of modderas, and what that could possibly mean?? That is something I am very curious about - discovering the unknown...

Here's to ya!!

das

[Fox]

Smooth soled or not, shoes in the rigging is definitely better than no shoes, no question. On deck is a different matter of course, but not aloft! See the first page of this thread.

I'd be interested in any source evidence for non-leather shoes being worn as cheap alternatives. I've come across fabirc shoes being used for dainty court wear, and while I can't think of any reason why seamen shouldn't have used cheaper fabric shoes I can't think of any reason why they should have either. As we have seen based on primary evidence leather shoes were not all that expensive, and I've not seen any evidence otherwise.

I must admit that "modderas" has stumped me. I have not a clue. The context makes it fairly clear that it is something to do with footwear, and I doubt it's a "trademark", but beyond that I can only speculate.

I think the slipper type shoes with the short toe you're talking about (looking at the monk riding picture) are actually fairly accurate representations of shoes from the early 19th century when those pictures were drawn, not an artist's impression of earlier shoes.

[Patrick Hand]

Not sure if this form of shoe construction is correct for the time period or not.....

But brogans were wet molded around a wooden form ( I think its called a "last"), and the soles were pegged (using wooden pegs) through the sole, the upper's leather and the insole, holding everything together... (one of the Foxfire books shows how this was done)

In the Smithsonian... American history... in the Kids section there was a demo on how they made shoes, and the uppers were sewn to the insole,then everything was turned rightside out..... this would make a stronger shoe, but would require more labor to make.

[dasNdanger]

I must admit that "modderas" has stumped me. I have not a clue. The context makes it fairly clear that it is something to do with footwear, and I doubt it's a "trademark", but beyond that I can only speculate.

okay - here is a WILD speculation on the 'modderas'.

Could it be related somehow to this shoe""

http://birkenstocks.sandals4less.com/madera/

The spelling is different and of commercial origins (as opposed to traditional), it's a modern shoe and I doubt has any direct connection to the one we are trying to figure out, but still....is there any way to find out when and where this style of 'fisherman's shoe' developed??? I tend to believe that this 'modderas' is of Spanish origin, perhaps something more casual than a fine leather shoe.

das

[Fox]

I tend to believe that this 'modderas' is of Spanish origin, perhaps something more casual than a fine leather shoe.

There's not really any reason to suppose a Spanish origin, although I grant the word does look Spanish to our modern eyes.

The other thing is that there is no reason to suppose that "modderas" is anything more than a place of origin - possibly Madieras, or (since he was aboard an East Indiaman) Madras. If you look at the whole quote he's saying "one pair of new English shoes and one pair modderas"; this could very easily be "one pair of shoes made in England and one pair made in the Madieras/Madras", it needn't be some distinct style at all. In fact, since nobody seems to know of any particular style of period shoe with a similar name it seems likely to me that it was just where the shoes came from, not what they looked like.

[dasNdanger]

The other thing is that there is no reason to suppose that "modderas" is anything more than a place of origin - possibly Madieras, or (since he was aboard an East Indiaman) Madras.

Well that would certainly make sense (there is also a 'Modera' in Sri Lanka...however not sure when the it was named such). My Spanish-speaking friend said that a double 'd' doesn't exist in the Spanish language, but that could just be a mistaken English translation. All the other 'related' words madera (wood), and Modera have the single d. Also, a misspelling of Madras or Madieras seem very likely possibilities. So, a traditional leather shoe made in one of those places, perhaps, and not a specific style - that would surely make sense.

Does this mean I can let the whole 'modderas' thing rest??

Everyone has been so very helpful - I love a good discussion that explores all possibilities. True, we can't discover all the answers, but I think it's clear that there is a bit of wiggle room allowing for personal taste and choice. We will never really know how many men preferred bare feet to shoes while working on deck, or what alternatives they may have come up with...although it appears that a regular shoe was the most likely choice. Pictures and eyewitness accounts are not always reliable, and there are relatively few in relation to the number of pirates that roamed the seas during the time period in question.

You know, in three hundred years, if the ONLY documentation of modern society to survive are copies of Vogue, folks might think that everyone today dressed like Paris Hilton. On a side note, did anyone ever see the issue of Omni magazine from the 1980's when they spoofed an archaeological dig of a modern (in the 1980's) community?? It was a RIOT!! They thought toilet seats were some sort of neckwear with attached headdress, and toothbrushes (because many had a hole on the handle) were ornamentation. Imagine that - pirates with toothbrushes dangling from their ears...Now THAT could be the start of another great discussion...

Feel free to add any additional info you might find on this subject, and thanks so much for all the input so far!

das

[MadMike]

I just received my straight last shoes a week ago from Townsend. Not a bad pair, they are more comfortable than the low quarters I was issued in basic training. Wasn't even a problem putting on the buckles.

Obviously, these shoes need some heel plates to preserve the leather heels.

As for sandals, will probably make a period style pair from some scrap saddle leather I have laying around.

Yours, &c.

Mike

[JoshuaRed]

They used to "armor" the heels by driving a series of nails into the heel for added wear. Here's a pic of my shoes:

[Fox]

Just thought I'd throw in this contemporary picture of John Paul Jones. Bit late I know, but the principal is the same:

Check out the pair of feet on the foot-rope in the background

[Dorian Lasseter]

I's gonna add a bit about sandals....

I can see sailors wearing sandals in the warmer climates, as they provide a solid base to walk and climb with, don't stretch and deform as a leather shoe/boot does when wet...

The type of sandal would be made out of what could be easily had onboard, rope...

I have a few pairs of these; http://gurkeesandals.com/

The "Neptune" style. in natural... Only thing I see different from what might be period is how the sole is put together. They have the cordage laid out along the foot, instead of coiled...

These are a nice alternative to bare feet, might not be proper as the only painting I've ever see with a sailor wearing these is Pyle's "The Bucaneer"

[Kalum]

Dorian,

Myself and Shaelyn were just talking about this the other day on drive back from FLaRF. We got to thinking that maybe the soles would actually be rope as well instead of a leather sole.

I would think that for going aloft they would provide good traction and be easier on the feet. Granted this would be mainly for warmer climates like you said. However, in the warmer months in northern areas they may have been worn as well.

Like you though, I haven't seen any paintings or drawings that depict this, but it's something to think about.

[MadMike]

JoshuaRed,

Thanks for the pic's. How are the heels doing as far as wear and tear?

Although I've located a picture of Inca rope sandals dating from 1400 AD, haven't found any justification for wearing such items (guess I'll go barefoot until we locate some "maderas"- or could that be "madras"?).

Yours, &c.

Mike

[JoshuaRed]

well I haven't gotten too much use out of them yet, but the year is still young. So far so good, though! They do help a little bit with traction...

[dasNdanger]

Guess what I found at K-Mart today?? Cheap piratesque shoes! JR, they're a lot like those in your picture, only the tongue is a bit shorterand the buckle slightly off-center, but otherwise, with the squared toe and all, they're a fairly decent 'imitation' of an 18th century shoe (if the kids ONLY knew they were wearing such old-fashioned footwear... ), and will suffice until I can afford a better and more accurately made shoe. The heel is a little higher than I'd like (about 1.5"), but will have to do for now.

I might invest in a pair of those sandals, too - thanks for the link, Dorian L....

Now, should I paint these heals red...

das

[Fox]

The tongues don't have to be as long as those on Josh's shoes, and would it be possible to move the buckle?

Any chance of a picture of your new shoes Das?

[dasNdanger]

I'll see what i can do about a picture...but...that requires buying film, shooting an entire roll, developing it...and scanning the pic into the 'puter, which means I MIGHT be able to get one up in three or four weeks...

I checked on-line for a picture of one, but couldn't find any. Basically it's a leather shoe, with a rubbery sole. Of course rubber is not period, but it will have to do for now. About moving the buckle - not sure I can...well, perhaps I can... *looks*...hmmm... there might be a way, but if I decided to do that, I'd take it to a cobbler or something, don't want to take a chance. The buckle isn't FAR over to the side, but it's definitely not centered, either. Hey, I can just say they were made in France, eh?? The toe is really squared, though there is the SLIGHTEST angle distinguishing right from left. Gah - I guess it would be best to take a stinkin' picture, eh??

das

[JoshuaRed]

While yer a Kmart getting the shoes pick up a cheap digital cam too! :)

[dasNdanger]

While yer a Kmart getting the shoes pick up a cheap digital cam too!  :)

yeah - i guess i could do that...

das

[Fox]

And another one for you

The British Hercules 1737

[JoshuaRed]

Now THAT is cool.

[Swashbuckler 1700]

As this is a thread about shoe usage on board sailing ships:

Later than Gaop (early 1800s) but still notable as the ship-life conditions etc. wouldn't have changed significantly. (I must say the picture itself is ugly).

The weather is not necessarily really hot as one sailor (right side) has probably a fur cap.

'Deck scene in an Indiaman'

http://collections.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/12572.html

Edited January 19, 2014 by Swashbuckler 1700

[Coastie04]

I'm not convinced that the sailor on the far right has a fur cap, as there are hints of sideburns. I think it's just a lot of really curly hair. Also, it looks a lot like the hair of the sailor in the foreground (what you can see of it).