Mainz Caligae Date

[M. Demetrius]

Would Mainz Caligae be suitable for a late 1st C BC to early 1st C AD impression? I searched the files, but it got to be more about the Mainz gladius, and nearly nothing about the shoe.

[Decebalus]

Of the 18 caligae (some only in fragments) found in Mainz most date to the beginning of the 1st century AD.

Greets

[Martin Moser]

Hi Dave,

yes, the early first cent. AD dating is generally accepted. It is also supported by the dating of the Comacchio ship wreck where a pair of caligae were found as well. Also, the patterns of the finds from Valkenburg and Castleford, dated in the 2nd half of the first cent. AD show features missing in the earlier types. Of course as always we have to keep in mind the very very small number of finds at hand when generalizing.
At any rate, from what we have the Mainz caligae probably are your best guess at the moment for the 1st cent BC.

[Joze Noriker]

I agree, the 1. cent. AD.
BUT what shoes did wear the soldiers ab. 50 BC? In the Germany in Villa Borg the shoemakers were spoken, that "nobody knows the fact, when in the past were made the first shoe-item of the shoe in the research-focus" (hope you understand what i mean)

Joze

[Martin Moser]

In the Germany in Villa Borg the shoemakers were spoken, that "nobody knows the fact, when in the past were made the first shoe-item of the shoe in the research-focus" (hope you understand what i mean)

Frankly ... no. can you explain in different words?

[M. Demetrius]

I think he's saying that nobody knows when a particular shoe was FIRST worn, just when they were first DISCOVERED in the archeological record.

[Martin Moser]

Ah, yes, that makes sense. Hm, yes, although for some types we can be fairly sure down to around half a century, which isn't bad.

[Joze Noriker]

I think he's saying that nobody knows when a particular shoe was FIRST worn, just when they were first DISCOVERED in the archeological record.

Oh yes, thank you for helping me.
Martin: 50 years are in the "fashion-style" a long time; look f.e. on the helmet and other items. My question was, wich shoes in the time from 50 BC- 20 BC and ab. 20 BC. (Lt D2 - the same question i asked you in archaeoforum ab. 2 years ago; --but you still didn't answered it me).
Otherway - i don't know, wich shoes have got the Romans in time ab. 200-100 BC.

Joze

[Maximus Atreus]

Around what year did legionaires stop providing their own equipment and begin being issued state produced arms and armor? I would guess that footwear such as caligae were designed and put into mass production close to the same time, most likely after.

[Martin Moser]

Martin: 50 years are in the "fashion-style" a long time; look f.e. on the helmet and other items.

Considering what we have, I think it is about as good as it gets. Take into account that it takes a while for stuff to get around all regions, the new not shutting out the old like all at once etc. - I don't expect to ever be able to do better than that. We'll never be able to say whe an item appeared for the first time with certainty IMO.

My question was, wich shoes in the time from 50 BC- 20 BC and ab. 20 BC. (Lt D2 - the same question i asked you in archaeoforum ab. 2 years ago; --but you still didn't answered it me).

Oh, must have missed that, sorry! Sadly, all that can be said with some certainty is Caligae and a sort of calceus similar to the Mainz finds and often seen on statues/reliefs. No dated finds from that period at all AFAIK.

Otherway - i don't know, wich shoes have got the Romans in time ab. 200-100 BC.

Even worse here, nothing I have come across so far.

[M. Demetrius]

An unsubstantiated theory I have, based on how few caligae we have actually found, and knowing that each soldier probably went through at least a dozen pairs during his career, there would have been millions and millions of them made. I doubt that any one pair was exactly like any other pair, and that some would have been very basic, others more elaborately cut, depending on the ability of the shoemaker, and the choices of the wearer. Some of the differences could have been not just a matter of "time and place", but "style and preference".

But that's just my theory.

[Martin Moser]

Actually all the finds are different when you look at the details of the cutting patterns, so my thinking as well. Although I think there is a discenrible difference in what is thought to be earlier and later caligae finds. Considering how few finds there are however I have little to really prove this.