A bit of help on making some shoes/calcei

[Aetius Helvius Merula]

They sure didn't! It's a small part of what made them so stealthy. But, their moccasins could be made from tanned deerhide in no time at all, and they carried spare hides for general fix it jobs, so it didn't take them long to replace them. And they carried as little as they could get away with. The legionaries were much more weighted down than the Native Americans; you'd think they needed the extra traction and durability from their footwear.

[Et tu brute]

Hi, i'm going out to pick up some leather in tem mins or so, so I think it'll be a day of trial, error and a fair amount of frustration!

[Et tu brute]

Cancel that, I just found out that they're only open Monday to Friday! I'll definately be going on Monday though

[Martin Moser]

The simple answer is, there ARE no hobnails! That's what Martin meant when he said no additional sole layers. No external sole...no need for hobnails.
Martin, correct me if I'm wrong here.

No, that's exactly what I meant

Out of curiosity, I did a search for "carbatina" and "newstead" and came across this image. The accompanying text for the center shoe (#5) read:
"Close shoe (calceus) with heavily nailed sole"
I was under the impression that virtually all shoes of this type were unsoled, like Martin says. Also, what's the best date for the Newstead finds?

First, original terminology is not secure. Nowadays authors speak about carbatinae when they talk about shoes that are made from a single piece of leather forming the upper and the sole, without any additiional soles or nailing. A caliga would then be basically a carbatina with an outer and inner sole and nailing added (see my caliga howto thread here on RAT for more details). A calceus now normally means a shoe built in a way somewhat close to modern shoes, i.e. the upper does not form part of the sole(s), but rather has its (so-called lasting) margins sandwiched between the sole layers. The resulting height difference is corrected by adding pieces of leather held in place by strips of leather - probably a picture explains it better:



The crisscrossing thread is the bracing used to keep the upper thight and in place. This is then covered by the outer sole, often attached with a tunnel stitch:



After that the shoe was normally nailed, although unnailed calcei have also been found. Alternatively the outer sole could also be held in place by nailing only.

So, what we have here in the Newstead finds are different kinds of shoes from a point of modern (and most likely ancient) terminology, and that's why some are nailed and some are not. As for a time frame, the designs of the uppers cover the range from early 2nd to late 3rd cent. AD I'd say.

[Flavius Promotus]

Time to elaborate a little on this subject (waffle mode on :wink: )

Also, what's the best date for the Newstead finds?

I agree with Martin (= early 2nd to early 3rd century). The boot on the left looks a little like a type 'Fell' boot, early 2nd century AFAIK (probably the successor of the caliga), while the carbatina in the upper right reminds me of one of the Welzheim carbatinae (early 3rd century?)

There are no surviving examples (that I'm aware of) for heavy, hobnailed boots or sandals in the later empire. Only low, flimsy, unsoled shoes.

There is one example! Take a look at 'Roman Military Clothing III' (D'Amato & Sumner, p. 20) which shows an image of a nailed shoe sole from Aquileia which most likely belongs to the destruction layer of 452 AD (Attila's coming to town). Furthermore, the Strategikon (12 B1, 2-6) from around 600 AD recommends footwear with at least some nails for soldiers.

But that presupposes the hobnail's purpose was for traction, but it's not- it's to preserve the leather sole, and have the nails wear instead, being rather easier to replace nails than soles. They also provide traction, but that's a secondary function.

Sorry Matt, but I disagree
The hobnails certainly gave Roman footwear a MUCH higher longevity (if you replace lost nails then you can cover hundreds of miles!), but the traction thing was at least equally important IMHO. I once tried to 'storm' the muddy banks of a bayou of the Danube near Vienna in unnailed 4th century shoes and any onlooking barbarians must have found the sight very amusing (oops, slide, slip, ARGH). On the other hand I've used nailed footwear on mud, on snow and in rocky terrain, and their traction was always excellent (with the exception of polished stone or metal). Now imagine a battle with slippery ground (rain, blood, guts etc.)...

Florian

PS: Martin, that's a very nice boot you've made!!

[Tarbicus]

They also provide traction, but that's a secondary function. ..... American combat boots, didn't have any nails but were still leather, so the traction must have been sufficient.

I'm with Florian on that. Why have fancy patterns and designs if they weren't meant to leave the mark in the ground (or occasionally faces)? Legionaries were so unused to their hobnails on smooth stone paving they could cause great amusement negotiating corners in Rome.

The same as a rugby or football boot - great traction in a scrum, or agility on slippery grass. Did American combat boots have a patterned sole for traction? Are you sure the photos you've seen aren't showing wear and tear on the soles which has smoothed out the sole, as seen in a few photos here?
http://www.ljmilitaria.com/footgear.htm

http://www.combat.ws/S4/MILTERMS/IMAGES/2BUCKLE.JPG

[tlclark]

Josephus records two instances in the jewish wars where soldiers slipped on the paved court of the temples. Julian, a centurion, heroically battles back the zealots from the narrow entrance to the antonia when he slips on his hobnail shoes and fall, and gets speared.

So they must have been intended for turf and not roads.

[Paullus Scipio]

I'm inclined to agree, Florian........I recall reading somewhere that Roman road surfaces (the stone cobbles) were covered in earth or turves........
This would be for the better traction of hob-nailed boots, hippo-sandals etc.

[Et tu brute]

Update: I got the leather yesterday, it's 1.6 mm and i've got 9feet square (alot I know, but that was the smallest hide they had, and I suppose it allows for a few failed attempts!)) and hopefully i'll be able to try a few things out today. I'm going to practice the pattern on thich paper first and then the leather, and i'm probably going to use some saddle soap to soften and slightly darken the leather.

[Franklin]

You'll be surprised how fast 9' disappears. Shoes (or any project really) always take up far more material than you imagine.