THE HISTORY OF BOOTS AND SHOES IN ENGLAND.
Before the arrival of the Saxons, who have transmitted to us many
valuable manuscripts abounding in various delineations of their dress
and manners, we shall not find much to engage the attention where it is
our present object to direct it, the history of the coverings for the
feet. There is, however, little doubt that the rude skin-shoes, worn by
the native Irish and the country people of Rome, was the simple
protection adopted in this country in the earliest times. Shoes of this
material are found in all nations half-civilized, and the ease with
which they are formed by merely covering the sole with the hide of an
animal, and securing it by a thong, must have had the effect of insuring
its general use. Naked feet would, however, be preferred in fine
weather, and when shoes were worn, they were generally of a close, warm
kind, adapted to our climate; the most antique representations of the
Gaulish native chiefs, as given on Roman sculpture, and which may be
taken as general representations of British chiefs, may be received as
good authorities, their resemblance to each other being so striking as
to draw from Cæsar a remark to that effect.
The Saxon figures, as given in the drawings by their own hands, to be
seen in manuscripts in most of our public libraries, display the costume
of this people, from the ninth century downward; and the minute way in
which every portion of the dress is given, affords us clear examples of
their boots and shoes. According to Strutt, high shoes, reaching nearly
to the middle of the legs, and fastened by lacing in the front, and
which may also be properly considered as a species of half-boots, were
in use in this country as early as the tenth century; and the only
apparent difference between the high shoes of the ancients and the
moderns, seems to have been that the former laced close down to the
toes, and the latter to the instep only. They appear in general to have
been made of leather, and were usually fastened beneath the ankles with
a thong, which passed through a fold upon the upper part of the leather,
encompassing the heel, and which was tied upon the instep. This method
of securing the shoe upon the foot, was certainly well contrived both
for ease and convenience. Three specimens of shoes are here given from
Saxon drawings. The first is the most ancient and curious; it is copied
from “the Durham Book,” or book of St. Cuthbert, now preserved among the
Cottonian manuscripts in the British museum, and is believed to have
been executed as early as the seventh century, by the hands of Eadfreid,
afterward bishop of Lindisfarne, who died in 721. It partakes of the
nature of shoe and sandal, and with the exception of the buttons down
the front, is precisely like the Persepolitan sandal already engraved
and described, as well as like the Roman ones constructed on the same
model, and it is curious to see how all are formed after this one
fashion.
[Illustration: No. 1.]
[Illustration: No. 2.]
[Illustration: No. 3.]
No. 2, is copied from Strutt’s “complete view of the dress and habits of
the people of England,” plate XXIX., fig. 16, and which he obtained from
the Harleian MS., No. 603. It very clearly shows the form of the Saxon
shoe, and the long strings by which it was tied. Fig. 3, delineates the
most ordinary kind of shoe worn, with the opening to the toes already
alluded to, for lacing it. But little variety is observable in the form
of this article of dress among the Saxons; it is usually delineated as a
solid black mass, just as the last figure has been here engraved, with a
white line down the centre, to show the opening, but quite as generally
without it, and these two forms of shoe or half-boot, are by far the
most commonly met with, and are depicted upon the feet of noble and
royal personages as well as upon those of the lower class.
Strutt remarks that wooden shoes are mentioned in the records of this
era, but considers it probable that they were so called because the
soles were formed of wood, while the upper parts were formed with some
more pliant material: shoes with wooden soles were at this time worn by
persons of the most exalted rank; thus, the shoes of Bernard, king of
Italy the grandson of Charlemagne, are thus described by an Italian
writer, as they were found in his tomb.
“The shoes,” says he, “which covered his feet are remaining to this day,
the soles of wood and the upper parts of red leather, laced together
with thongs: they were so closely fitted to the feet that the order of
the toes, terminating in a point at the great toe, might easily be
discovered; so that the shoe belonging to the right foot could not be
put upon the left, nor that of the left upon the right.” It was not
uncommon to gild and otherwise ornament the shoes of the nobility.
Eginhart describes the shoes worn by Charlemagne on great occasions, as
set with jewels.
[Illustration: Fig. 1.]
[Illustration: Fig. 2.]
[Illustration: Fig. 3.]
The Normans wore boots and shoes of equal simplicity, rustics are
frequently represented with a half-boot plain in form, fitting close to
the foot, but wide at the ankle, like fig. 1, of the group here given,
only that in this instance, an ornament consisting of a studded band
surrounds the upper part. Such boots were much used by the Normans, and
are frequently mentioned by the ancient historians; they do not appear
to have been confined to any particular classes of the people, but were
worn by persons of all ranks and conditions, as well of the clergy as of
the laity, especially when they rode on horseback. The boots delineated
in their drawings are very short, rarely reaching higher than the middle
of the legs; they were sometimes slightly ornamented, but the boots and
shoes of all personages represented in the famous tapestry of Bayeux,
are of the same simple form of construction; and this celebrated early
piece of needlework was believed to have been worked by the wife of the
conqueror, to commemorate his invasion of England and the battle of
Hastings. Another form of Norman shoes may be seen in fig. 2, which is
more enriched than the last, and it is curious that the ornament adopted
is in the form of the straps of a sandal, studded with dots throughout.
In the original, the shoe is colored with a thin tint of black, these
bands being a solid black, with white or gilded lines and dots. Another
example of a decorated shoe, fig. 3, is given from a MS. of the eleventh
century, in the British museum, and shows the kind which became
fashionable when the Normans, firmly settled in England, began to
indulge in luxurious clothing. These shoes were most probably
embroidered.
“We are assured by the early Norman historians,” says Strutt, “that the
cognomen _curta ocrea_, or short boots, was given to Robert, the
conqueror’s eldest son; but they are entirely silent respecting the
reason for such an appellation being particularly applied to him. It
could not have arisen from his having introduced the custom of wearing
short boots into this country, for they were certainly in use among the
Saxons long before his birth: to hazard a conjecture of my own, I should
rather say he was the first among the Normans who wore short boots, and
derived the cognomen by way of contempt, from his own countrymen, for
having so far complied with the manners of the Anglo-Saxons. It was not
long, however, supposing this to be the case, before his example was
generally followed.” The short boots of the Normans appear at times to
fit quite close to the legs; in other instances they are represented
more loose and open; and though the materials of which they were
composed are not particularized by ancient writers, we may reasonably
suppose them to have been made of leather; at least it is certain that
about this time, a sort of leathern boots, called bazans, were in
fashion; but they appear to have been chiefly confined to the clergy.
“Among the various innovations,” continues Strutt, “made in dress by the
Normans during the twelfth century, none met with more marked and more
deserved disapprobation than that of lengthening the toes of the shoes,
and bringing them forward to a sharp point. In the reign of Rufus, this
custom was first introduced; and according to Orderic Vitalis, by a man
who had distorted feet, in order to conceal his deformity;” but he adds,
“the fashion was no sooner broached, than all those who were fond of
novelty thought proper to follow it; and the shoes were made by the
shoemakers in the form of a scorpion’s tail.” These shoes were called
_pigaciæ_, and were adopted by persons of every class, both rich and
poor. Soon after, a courtier, whose name was Robert, improved upon the
first idea, by filling the vacant part of the shoe with tow, and
twisting it round in the shape of a ram’s horn; this ridiculous fashion
excited much admiration. It was followed by the greater part of the
nobility; and the author, for his happy invention, was honored with the
cognomen _Cornardus_ or horned. The long pointed shoes were vehemently
inveighed against by the clergy, and strictly forbidden to be worn by
the religious orders. So far as we can judge from the drawings executed
in the twelfth century, the fashion of wearing long-pointed shoes did
not long maintain its ground. It was, however, afterward revived, and
even carried to a more preposterous extent.
A specimen of the shoes that were worn at this period, and which so
excited the ire of the monkish writers, is here given from the seal of
Richard, constable of Chester, in the reign of Stephen; in the original
the knight is on horseback, the stirrup and spur are therefore seen in
our cut.
[Illustration]
The effigies of the early sovereigns of England, are generally
represented in shoes decorated with bands across, as if in imitation of
sandals. They are seldom colored black, as nearly all the examples of
earlier shoes in this country are. The shoes of Henry II. are green,
with bands of gold. Those of Richard are also striped with gold; and
such richly decorated shoes became fashionable among the nobility, and
were generally worn by royalty all over Europe. Thus, when the tomb of
Henry VI. of Sicily, who died in 1197, was opened in the cathedral of
Palermo, on the feet of the dead monarch were discovered costly shoes,
whose upper part was of cloth of gold, embroidered with pearls, the sole
being of cork, covered with the same cloth of gold. These shoes reached
to the ankle, and were fastened with a little button instead of a
buckle. His queen, Constance, who died in 1198, had upon her feet shoes
also of cloth of gold, which were fastened with leather straps tied in
knots, and on the upper part of them were two openings, wrought with
embroidery, which showed that they had been once adorned with jewels.
Boots ornamented with gold, and embroidered in elegant patterns, at this
time became often worn. King John of England, orders, in one instance,
four pair of women’s boots, one of them to be embroidered with circles;
and the effigy of the succeeding monarch, Henry III., in Westminster
abbey, is chiefly remarkable for the splendor of the boots he wears;
they are crossed all over by golden bands, thus forming a series of
diamond-shaped spaces, each one of which is filled with a figure of a
lion, the royal arms of England. One of these splendid shoes is engraved
in plate III., fig. 1.
[Illustration]
The shape of the sole of the shoes at this time, may be seen from the
cut here given of one found in a tomb of the period, and called that of
St. Swithin, in Winchester cathedral. The shoe is engraved in “Gough’s
Sepulchral Monuments,” and the person who discovered it in the tomb
thus describes it: “The legs of the wearer were enclosed in leathern
boots or gaiters sewed with neatness, the thread was still to be seen.
The soles were small and round, rather worn, and of what would be called
an elegant shape at present; pointed at the toe and very narrow, and
were made and fitted to each foot. I have sent the pattern of one of the
soles, drawn by tracing it with a pencil from the original itself, which
I have in my possession.” Gough engraves the shoe of the natural size in
his work, the measurements being ten inches in length from toe to heel,
and three inches across the broadest part of the instep. It will be seen
that they are as perfectly “right and left,” as any boots of the present
day; but as we have already shown, this is a fashion of the most remote
antiquity. As these boots are at least as old as the time of John,
Shakspere’s description in his dramatized history of that sovereign, of
the tailor, who eager to acquaint his friend, the smith, of the
prodigies the skies had just exhibited, and whom Hubert saw
“Standing in slippers which his nimble haste
Had falsely thrust upon contrary feet,”
is strictly accurate: yet half a century ago, this passage was adjudged
to be one of the many proofs of Shakspere’s ignorance or carelessness.
Dr. Johnson, ignorant himself of the truth in this point, but yet, like
all critics, determined to pass his verdict, makes himself supremely
absurd, by saying in a note to this passage, with ridiculous solemnity,
“Shakspere seems to have confounded the man’s shoes with his gloves. He
that is frighted or hurried may put his hand into the wrong glove, but
either shoe will equally admit either foot. The author seems to be
disturbed by the disorder which he describes.”
In the “Art Union,” a journal devoted to the fine arts, are a series of
notices of the various forms of boots and shoes in Great Britain, by F.
W. Fairholt, F. S. A., from which we may borrow the description of the
elegant coverings for the feet in use in the reigns of the first three
Edwards. Boots buttoned up the leg, or shoes buttoned up the centre, or
secured like the Norman shoe in the second figures of the first cut
given in this chapter, were common in the days of Edward I. and II. The
splendid reign of the third Edward, says Mr. Fairholt, extending over
half a century of national greatness, was remarkable for the variety and
luxury, as well as the elegance of its costume; and this may be
considered as the most glorious era in the annals of “the gentle craft,”
as the trade of shoemaking was anciently termed. Shoes and boots of the
most sumptuous description are now to be met with in contemporary
paintings, sculptures, and illuminated manuscripts. The boot and shoe
here engraved from the Arundel MS., No. 83, executed about 1339 (pl.
III., figs. 2 and 3), are fine examples of the extent to which the
tasteful ornament of these articles of dress was carried. They remind
one of the boots “fretted with gold” and embroidered in circles
mentioned by John. The greatest variety of pattern and the richest
contrasts of color were aimed at by the maker and inventor of shoes at
this period, and with how happy an effect the reader may judge, from the
examples just given, as well as from the three also engraved in pl.
III., Nos. 4, 5, and 6, and which are copied from Smike’s copies of the
paintings, which formerly existed on the walls of St. Stephen’s chapel
at Westminster, and which drawings now decorate the walls of the
meeting-room of the Society of Antiquaries. It is impossible to conceive
any shoe more exquisite in design than fig. 4, of our plate. It is worn
by a royal personage, and it brings forcibly to mind the rose windows,
and other details of the architecture of this period; but for beauty of
pattern and splendor of effect this English shoe of the middle ages is
“beyond all Greek, beyond all Roman fame,” for their sandals and shoes
have not half “the glory of regality contained in this one specimen.”
The fifth figure in the same plate is simpler in design but not less
striking in effect, being colored (as the previous one is) solid black,
the red hose adding considerably to its effect. No. 6, is still more
peculiar, and is cut all over into a geometric pattern, and with a
fondness for quaint display in dress peculiar to those times, the left
shoe is black and the stocking blue, the other leg of the same figure
being clothed in a black stocking and a white shoe. The form of this
latter one is that usually worn by persons of all classes, of course
omitting the elaborate ornament. The shoe was cut very low over the
instep, the heel being entirely covered, and a band fastened by a small
buckle or button passing round the ankle secured it to the foot.
The boots and shoes worn during the fourteenth century, were of peculiar
form, and the toes which were lengthened to a point, turned inward or
outward according to the taste of the wearer. In the reign of Richard
II., they became immensely long, so that it was asserted they were
chained to the knee of the wearer, in order to allow him to walk about
with ease and freedom. It was of course only the nobility who could thus
inconvenience themselves, and it might have been adopted by them as a
distinction; still very pointed toes were worn by all who could afford
to be fashionable. The cut here given exhibits the sole of a shoe of
this period, from an actual specimen in the possession of C. Roach
Smith, F. S. A., and was discovered in the neighborhood of Whitefriars,
in digging deep under ground into what must have originally been a
receptable for rubbish, among which these old shoes had been thrown, and
they are probably the only things of the kind now in existence.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
Two specimens of boots of the time of Edward IV., are here given to show
their general form at that period. The first is copied from the Royal
MS., No. 15, E. 6, and is of black leather, with a long upturned toe;
the top of the boot is of lighter leather, and thus it bears a
resemblance to the top-boots of a later age, of which it may be
considered as the prototype. The other boot, from a print dated 1515, is
more curious; the top of the boot is turned down, and the entire centre
opens from the top, to the instep, and is drawn together by laces or
ties across the leg, so that it bears considerable resemblance in this
point to the Cothurnus of the ancients.
Fashion ran at this time from one extreme to the other, and the shoes
which were at one time so long at the toe as to be inconvenient, now
became as absurdly broad, and it was made the subject of sumptuary laws
to restrain both extremes. Thus Edward IV. enacted that any shoemaker
who made for unprivileged persons (the nobility being exempted) any
shoes or boots, the toes of which exceeded two inches in length, should
forfeit twenty shillings, one noble to be paid to the king, another to
the cordwainers of London, and the third to the chamber of London. This
only had the effect of widening the toes; and Paradin says that they
were then so very broad as to exceed the measure of a good foot. This
continued until the reign of Mary, who, by a proclamation, prohibited
their being worn wider at the toe than six inches.
[Illustration: No. 1.]
[Illustration: No. 2.]
We have here engraved two specimens of these broad-toed shoes of the
time of Henry VIII. No. 1 is copied from the monumental effigy of
Katharine, the wife of Sir Thomas Babynton, who died 1543, and is buried
in Morley church, near Derby. It is an excellent specimen of the sort of
sole preferred by the fashionables of that day. The second cut exhibits
a front view of a similarly-made shoe. They were formed of leather, but
generally the better classes wore them of rich velvet and silk, the
various colors of which were exhibited in slashes at the toes, which
were most sparingly covered by the velvet of which the shoe was
composed. In the curious full-length portrait of the poetical Earl of
Surrey, at Hampton Court, he is represented in shoes of red velvet,
having bands of a darker tint placed across them diagonally; which bands
are decorated with a row of gold ornaments.
During the reign of Edward VI., a sort of shoe
[Illustration]
with a pointed toe was worn, not unlike the modern one. It was of
velvet, generally, with the upper classes; of leather, with the poorer
ones. The former indulged in a series of slashes over the upper leather,
which the others had not. We give here two specimens of these shoes,
from prints dated 1577 and 1588; and they will serve to show the sort of
form adopted, as well as the varied way in which the slashes of the
velvet appeared, and which altered with the wearer’s taste. Philip
Stubbes, the puritanical author of the “Anatomy of Abuses,” 1588,
declares that the fashionables then wore “corked shoes, puisnets,
pantoffles, and slippers, some of them of black velvet, some of white,
some of green, and some of yellow; some of Spanish leather, and some of
English, stitched with silk and embroidered with gold and silver all
over the foot with gewgaws innumerable.” Rich and expensive shoe-ties
were now brought into use, and large sums were lavished upon their
decorations. John Taylor, the water poet, alludes to the extravagance
of those who
“Wear a farm in shoe-strings edged with gold,
And spangled garters worth a copy-hold.”
The shoe-roses were made of lace, which was as beautiful, costly, and
elaborate, as that which composed the ruff for the neck, or ruffles for
the wrist. They were elaborately decorated with needlework and gold and
silver thread.
During the reign of the first Charles, the boots (which were made of
fine Spanish leather, and were of a buff color) became very large and
wide at the top. Indeed, they were so wide at times, as to oblige the
wearer to stride much in walking, a habit that was much ridiculed by the
satirists of the day. There was a print published during this reign of a
dandy in the height of fashion whose legs are “incased in boot-hose tops
tied about the middle of the calf, as long as a pair of shirt-sleeves,
double at the end like a ruff-band: the top of his boots very large,
fringed with lace, and turned down as low as his spurs, which jingled
like the bells of a morris-dancer as he walked.” These boots were made
very long in the toe, thus, of this exquisite we are told, “the feet of
his boots were two inches too long.”
The boot-tops at this time were made wide, and were capable of being
turned over beneath the knee, which they completely covered when they
were uplifted. They were of course made of pliant leather to allow of
this--“Spanish leather,” according to Ben Jonson.
During the whole of the Commonwealth large boot-tops of this kind were
worn even by the puritans; they were, however, large only, and not
decorated with costly lace. The shoes worn were generally particularly
simple in their construction and form, and those who did not wish to be
classed among the vain and frivolous, took care to have their toes sharp
at the point, as a distinction between themselves and the “graceless
gallants,” who generally wore theirs very broad.
[Illustration]
With the restoration of Charles II. came the large French boot, in which
the courtiers of “Louis le grand,” always delighted to exhibit their
legs. Of the amplitude of its tops, the woodcut will give an idea, it
is copied from one worn by a courtier of Charles’s train, in the
engravings illustrative of his coronation. The boot is decorated with
lace all round the upper part, and that portion of the leg which the
boot encases, seems fitted easily with pliant leather: over the instep
is a broad band of the same material, beneath which the spur was
fastened; and the heel is high, and toe broad, of all the boots and
shoes then fashionable.
A boot of the end of this reign, forms fig. 7, of our third plate, and
is copied from a pair which hang up in Shottesbrooke church, Berkshire,
above a tomb, in accordance with the old custom, of burying a knight
with his martial equipments over his grave, originally consisting of his
shield, sword, gloves, and spurs, the boots being a later and more
absurd introduction. The pair which we are now describing, are formed of
fine buff leather, the tops are red, and so are the heels, which are
very high, the toes being cut exceedingly square.
With the great revolution of 1688, and his majesty William III., came in
the large jack-boot, and the high-quartered, high-heeled, and buckled
shoe, which only expired at the end of the last century. Sir Samuel Rush
Meyrick, has one of these jack-boots in his collection of armor, at
Goodrich court; and it has been engraved in his work on ancient arms
and armor, from which it is copied in plate III., fig. 8. It is a
remarkably fine specimen of these inconvenient things, and is as
straight and stiff and formal, as the most inveterate Dutchman could
wish. The heel it will be perceived is very high, and the press upon the
instep very great, and consequently injurious to the foot, and
altogether detrimental to comfort. An immense piece of leather covers
the instep, through which the spur is affixed, and to the back of the
boot, just above the heel, is appended an iron rest for the spur. Such
were the boots of the English cavalry and infantry, and in such cumbrous
articles did they fight in the low countries, following the example of
Charles XII., of Sweden, whose figure has become so identified with
them, that the imagination can not easily separate the sovereign from
the boots in which he is so constantly painted, and of which a specimen
may be seen in his full-length portrait, preserved in the British
museum.
A boot was worn by civilians, less rigid than the one last described,
the leg taking more of the natural shape, and the tops being smaller, of
a more pliant kind, and sometimes slightly ornamented round the edges.
We have here two examples of ladies’ shoes, as worn during the period of
which we are discussing.
[Illustration]
The first figure, copied from volume 67, of the “Gentleman’s Magazine,”
shows the peculiar shape of the shoe, as well as the clog beneath; these
clogs were merely single pieces of stout leather, which were fastened
beneath the heel and instep, and appear to be only extra hinderances in
walking, which must materially have destroyed any little pliancy which
the original shoe would have allowed the foot to retain. The second
figure is copied from the first volume of “Hone’s Every Day Book,” and
that author says, “This was the fashion that beautified the feet of the
fair, in the reign of King William and Queen Mary.” Holme, in his
“Academy of Armory,” is minutely diffuse on the gentle craft: he
engraves the form of a pair of wedges, which he says “is to raise up a
shoe in the instep, when it is too straight for the top of the foot;”
and thus compassionates ladies’ sufferings: “Shoemakers love to put
ladies in their stocks, but these wedges, like merciful justices, upon
complaint, soon do ease and deliver them. If the eye turns to the
cut--to the cut of the sole,
[Illustration: Pl. 3.]
with the line of beauty adapted by the cunning of the workman’s skill,
to stilt the female foot: if the reader behold that association, let
wonder cease, that a venerable master in coat armor, should bend his
quarterings to the quarterings of a lady’s shoe, and forgetful of
heraldic forms, condescend from his high estate to use similitudes.”
This shape, once firmly established, was the prevailing one during the
reigns of George I. and II. Figs. 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, of plate III., will
fully display the different forms and style, adopted by the fashionables
of that day. They always wore red heels, at least all persons who
pretended to gentility. The fronts of the gentlemen’s shoes were very
high, and on gala-days or showy occasions, a buff shoe was worn. The
ladies appear to have preferred silk or velvet to leather: thus fig. 10
is entirely made of a figured blue silk, and it has bright red heels and
silver buckles. Fig. 11 is of brown leather, with a red heel, and a red
rose for a tie above the instep. Fig. 12 is altogether red, in a pattern
of different strengths of tint; the tie and heels being deepest in
color.
Her majesty’s grand bal costumé, given during the past year, revived for
a night the fashion of a century ago: and the author of these pages, was
then under the necessity of hunting up the few remaining makers of
wooden heels, in order to furnish the correct shoe, to complete the
costume of many of the most distinguished individuals, who figured on
that occasion.
The making of the high-heeled shoe, was at all times a matter of great
judgment and nicety of operation; the position required to be given to
the heel, the aptitude of the eye and hand, necessary to the cutting
down of the wood; the sewing in of the cover, kid, stuff, silk, or
satin, as it might be: the getting in and securing the wood or “block;”
the bracing the cover round the block; and the beautifully defined
stitching, which went from corner to corner, all round the heel part,
demanding altogether the cleverness of first-rate ability.
[Illustration]
The shoes became lower in the quarters during the reign of George III.,
and the heel was made less clumsy. As fashion varied, larger or smaller
buckles were used, and the heel was thrust further beneath the foot
until about 1780, when the shoe took the form here delineated, and which
is copied from Mr. Fairholt’s notes in the “Art Union,” already alluded
to.
[Illustration]
From the same source, we borrow the following notices by the same
writer: “About 1790, a change in the fashion of ladies’ shoes occurred.
They were made very flat and low in the heel, in reality more like a
slipper than a shoe. This engraving, copied from a real specimen, will
show the peculiarity of its make: the low quarters, the diminutive heel,
and the plaited riband and small tie in front, in place of the buckle
which began to be occasionally discontinued. The duchess of York, at
this time, was remarkable for the smallness of her foot, and a colored
print of ‘the exact size of the duchess’ shoe,’ was published by Fores,
in 1791. It measures five and three quarters inches in length; the
breadth of the sole being only one and three quarters inches. It is made
of green silk, ornamented with gold stars; is bound with scarlet silk;
the heel is scarlet, and the shape is similar to the one engraved above,
except that the heel is exactly in the modern style.” Models of this
fairy shoe were made of china, as ornaments for the chimney, or
drawing-room table, with cupids hovering around it.
Shoes of the old fashion, with high heels and buckles, appear in prints
of the early part of 1800; but buckles became unfashionable, and
shoe-strings eventually triumphed, although less costly and elegant in
their construction. The prince of Wales was petitioned by the alarmed
buckle-makers, to discard his new-fashioned strings, and take again to
buckles, by way of bolstering up their trade; but the fate of these
articles was sealed, and the prince’s good-natured compliance with their
wishes, did little to prevent their downfall. The buckles worn at the
end of 1700, were generally exceedingly small, and so continued until
they were finally disused.
Early in the reign of George III., the close fitting gentleman’s boot
became general; the material used for the leg was termed
_grain-leather_, the flesh side being left brown, and the grain
blackened, and kept to the sight. In currying this sort of leather for
the boot-leg, it went, in the lower part, through an ingenious process
of contraction, to give it _life_; so that the heel of the wearer might
go into it and come out again the easier; the boot, at the same time,
when on, catching snugly round the small of the leg, in a sort of
stocking fit.
After this appeared the “Hessian,” a boot worn over the tight-fitting
pantaloon, the uppeaking front bearing a silk tassel. This boot was
introduced from Germany, about 1789, and sometimes was called the
Austrian boot. Rees, in his “Art and Mystery of the Cordwainer,”
published in 1813, says, “The form at first was odious, as the close
boot was then in wear, but like many fashions, at first frightful, it
was then pitied, and at last adopted.”
The top-boot was worn early in the reign of George III., and took the
fulness of the Hessian in its lower part, and on the introduction of the
“Wellington,” the same fulness was retained.
To describe the last-named boot were useless, it has become, _par
excellence_, the common boot, and is perhaps as universally known as the
fame of the distinguished hero WELLINGTON.