Caligae Construction

[Bryan]

For those who know leather/shoe making, is there anything about the general design of the caligae that makes it simpler or cheaper to produce than previous styles of Roman or Greek military boots, calcei or Iphicrates style?

[Crispianus]

For those who know leather/shoe making, is there anything about the general design of the caligae that makes it simpler or cheaper to produce than previous styles of Roman or Greek military boots, calcei or Iphicrates style?

A few thoughts...

I would say with comparable designs probably No, but as the only thing there is to go on for Greek footware is sculptural representations it can be difficult to tell.

In terms of material, the less you use the cheaper the item is likely to be, since leather is likely to be a relatively expensive commodity, if you have to buy it in....
But then you also have to consider the quality of the leather eg the use of half tanned leather(tanning in this sense I use to cover mulitple techinque: tawed, cured, tanned etc)

In a Modern sense time is money so how long production takes is important to cost, but this also limits the amount of product you can produce, however with slavery (or the use of soldiers as shoe makers) would this really be so relevant...

So time may not be so important, however the more complex the design the more time it takes to make, whether this would actually be reflected in the cost in any meaningfull way is difficult to tell...

There may be external factors determining price, such as Laws, Concessions or Conventions....

Its perhaps easier to go by constructional types: simple Sandal, Solea, Carbatina, Caligae, Calcei etc, the further up the scale you go the less difference you might expect at least in production time, but this depends entirely on the detail and complexity of the overall design...

[Bryan]

Which is more expensive and harder to make? 




or 

[Crispianus]

Which is more expensive and harder to make? 




or 

Ahh I see your not talking about the originals then, neither are examples of replicas from archeological finds....

[Bryan]

I'm not trying to debate. I posted pics of of two of the styles to make this clearer. I don't care if the pics match 100% archaeological finds, that's not what I'm asking, not my concern.

I'm asking, between those two styles, which style was harder to make? Which style was more expensive?

If you don't know about ancient leatherworking/shoe making and you can't answer my question, don't reply. Thanks.

[66kbm]

Martin Moser may be able to help you with the details. He is very knowledgeable in the construction of ancient shoes..
Kevin.

[Crispianus]

I'm not trying to debate. I posted pics of of two of the styles to make this clearer. I don't care if the pics match 100% archaeological finds, that's not what I'm asking, not my concern.

I'm asking, between those two styles, which style was harder to make? Which style was more expensive?

If you don't know about ancient leatherworking/shoe making and you can't answer my question, don't reply. Thanks.

Most people would assume that the boot is more expensive, but this is not necesarily the case since it is relatively simple.

The main area where these differ is in the area of material used, and the general construction type Calcei(assumed for the boot) Vs Caligae, the upper in both is made from only one piece of leather other then that your dealing with details.

Harder doesn't really come into it, an experienced shoe maker in that particular style would find no more difficulty then any other type.... so I would say equally difficult to the novice.

The Greek Boot would require two matched average sized goat skins or similar or a large piece of calf, the Caligae requires a smaller area of thicker cow, thicker leather is more time consuming to tan and seems to be a lot more expensive in Diocletians price list, so this to some extent would offset the cheaper goat or calf etc, though I consider the edict to be unrealistic.

The soles are the same and would require similar work.

The overall stitching, this depends on detail again, the minimum required for both would not be disimilar depending on the techinique, the greek boot could have more stitching but this is offset by the work required to produce the fairly complex Caliigae design.

Unfortunatly to my knowledge there is no extent evidence for the price of Greek shoes though they appear often enough in Greek writings... but if there was, unless it was contemporary, it would be like comparing apples and oranges.

That said in the Modern world the Greek boot would likely fetch a higher price...

In the Roman World a Muleteers Caligae(unnailed see Diocletians Edict) can be more expensive then a Military or Senators Caligae.

[Martin Moser]

Not much to add to what Ivor wrote above. You could say that calcei tend to be a bit more refined when it comes to the techniques employed IMHO. I personally think that work/time was factored higher than material. Roman shoes overwhelmingly use one piece uppers and that inevitably means more waste. Medieval shoes OTOH often show small pieces sewn on here and there to make up a missing corner or so that you just would get out of that last bit of leather left from a hide - something that you rarely see with Roman shoes. So probably the supply of suitable leather was rich and stable in Roman times (also think of the enormous quantities that must have been available for tents and shield covers for the military.

[richsc]

I would think fitness for purpose counts into the equation. A short sword is cheaper to make than a long one, but that isn't why they used short swords. The caligae were cut out, a time consuming process, where they could more easily have left them uncut.

[Martin Moser]

The caligae were cut out, a time consuming process, where they could more easily have left them uncut.

One reason may be that the more material you remove the easier it is to make the remaining slender strapwork adjust to your foot. A fully closed shoe is harder to make so that it fits the foot well. Openwork also of course makes sense in the hotter climates they come from.  Added to that is that caligae most likely stand in the tradition of Greek sandalsand tradition is often hard to overcome.

[Bryan]

I would think fitness for purpose counts into the equation. A short sword is cheaper to make than a long one, but that isn't why they used short swords. The caligae were cut out, a time consuming process, where they could more easily have left them uncut.

So what made them desirable as an all purpose military footwear? I don't buy the open boot for foot breathing argument, I've done ample marching in boot and sandals and nothing is worse than having a rock or something jammed under between the skin and sole of shoe. Most boot marching in history was not done with sandal like footwear. 

Caligae use less stitching than a normal calcei or perone boot, correct? So does that mean less time to manufacturer (cutting from a stencil is easier than sewing), or less skilled individuals can make them?

Was size a factor? Are caligae a more one size fits all boot where the lacing method makes up for differences in foot size, as compared to wrap around boots which are more size dependent?

Its all conjecture of course, but its still a series of questions that I think should be asked.

[Martin Moser]

Most boot marching in history was not done with sandal like footwear.

Probably right, still quite obviously that's what they did for a long period of time.
Anyway, the one big advantage I see for caligae is that you can wrap basically as much as you want around the foot to keep it warm/dry/whatever and you'll still be able to lace it up (as long as the lace is long enough), while a closed shoe has only that much room to cram in stuff that's around your foot.

[Bryan]

Most boot marching in history was not done with sandal like footwear.

Probably right, still quite obviously that's what they did for a long period of time.
Anyway, the one big advantage I see for caligae is that you can wrap basically as much as you want around the foot to keep it warm/dry/whatever and you'll still be able to lace it up (as long as the lace is long enough), while a closed shoe has only that much room to cram in stuff that's around your foot.

Which type of shoe is more forgiving for size differences? Caligae, calcei, or perones?

[Gunthamund Hasding]

Caligae would be as you can better adjust the straps, I wore caligae 2 numbers too big (was not easy but was OK), I wore also 1 number smaller I could fit the straps but the length of the sole got me some problems as my fingers were not so well after a day..

[Bryan]

Thank you for your response!