Jump to content


Photo

U.S. Army Field Shoes 1902 to 1917


  • Please log in to reply
90 replies to this topic

#51 world war I nerd

world war I nerd
  • Members
    • Member ID: 5,143
  • 7,493 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 26 August 2014 - 03:22 AM

This is the 1907 Improved Marching Shoe, Single Sole, Orthopedic Last.

Attached Images

  • 1907 Improved Marching Shoe a.jpg


#52 world war I nerd

world war I nerd
  • Members
    • Member ID: 5,143
  • 7,493 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 26 August 2014 - 03:28 AM

Here's another shot of the 1907 "Improved" Marching Shoe that turned up in an early issue of Popular Mechanics magazine. According to the caption this too is the single sole, orthopedic last variation.

Attached Images

  • 1907 Improved Marching Shoe b.jpg


#53 world war I nerd

world war I nerd
  • Members
    • Member ID: 5,143
  • 7,493 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 26 August 2014 - 03:40 AM

I'm pretty sure that this guy is wearing a pair of 1902 Russet garrison Shoes.

 

Russet shoes were adopted in 1902 to go with the Army's new olive drab uniform.

 

The 1902 Black dress and Russet garrison shoes both featured lacing hooks at the top of the shoe. The hooks were abolished in 1904 because they were easily bent or broken and because they prematurely damaged the canvas leggings.

 

The engraving is of an early Black Calfskin Shoe. The cut of both the russet and black shoes were supposed to be identical, so I've included it here for comparison.

Attached Images

  • 1902 Russet Garrison Shoe.jpg


#54 US Victory Museum

US Victory Museum
  • Members
    • Member ID: 1,529
  • 1,487 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Gainesburg Florida

Posted 26 August 2014 - 07:48 AM

Superlative work, Brian.

 

I'll be bookmarking this page for future reference for sure.

 

Msn



#55 world war I nerd

world war I nerd
  • Members
    • Member ID: 5,143
  • 7,493 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 30 August 2014 - 04:31 PM

This photo circa 1900 - 1908, which came to me via US Victory Museum, is of a soldier wearing what looks to be the 1904 Black Calfskin/Dress Shoe. This shoe appears to be nearly identical to the engraving of the Black Calfskin Shoe shown above, except for the fact that it lacks lacing hooks, which is correct for the 1904 pattern shoe.

Attached Images

  • 1904 Black Dress Shoe.jpg


#56 268th C.A.

268th C.A.
  • Members
    • Member ID: 87,654
  • 2,947 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

Posted 22 January 2015 - 10:24 AM

Maybe the can pin this thread this is an excellent subject. Thanks guys. Mine does have the pull tab at the back of the boot. So after reading & comparing. I'd say your right they are 82/85 shoes. THANKS! Now I know. David

p/s excellent pictures of boots. I thought I had footwear.....until I seen these.....



#57 268th C.A.

268th C.A.
  • Members
    • Member ID: 87,654
  • 2,947 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

Posted 28 January 2015 - 12:54 PM

Hey let me know if I can talk you out of a pair of Pershing boots, Those are beautiful! David



#58 solcarlus

solcarlus
  • Members
    • Member ID: 241
  • 1,028 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pinard land

Posted 03 February 2015 - 05:08 AM

Bonjour.

I present to you, which in my opinion, is a pair of "marching russet shoes Mod.1912" I find no markings or manufacturer or size.
What about you?

solcarlus.

004.JPG

003.JPG

005.JPG

006.JPG

Edited by solcarlus, 03 February 2015 - 05:09 AM.


#59 world war I nerd

world war I nerd
  • Members
    • Member ID: 5,143
  • 7,493 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 February 2015 - 07:25 PM

I’m pretty sure that your shoes are not a pair of 1912 Russet Leather Shoes as they are constructed entirely different. Note the difference between the 1912 Russet Shoe on the left and your shoe on the right.

Attached Images

  • 1912 Russet Shoe.jpg


#60 world war I nerd

world war I nerd
  • Members
    • Member ID: 5,143
  • 7,493 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 February 2015 - 07:26 PM

In many ways your shoe resembles the 1904 Marching Shoe shown on the left. However, there are number of differences between the two, especially in regard to the overall height. The dissimilarity between them leads me to believe that they are not the same shoe.

 

The height of the‘improved’1907 Marching Shoe was reduced, but by how much, I don’t know. Without additional information or a photograph of the 1907 ‘Improved’ Marching Shoe, there is no way to know whether or not if your shoe is a 1907 ‘Improved’ Marching Shoe.

Attached Images

  • 1904 Marching Shoe.jpg


#61 world war I nerd

world war I nerd
  • Members
    • Member ID: 5,143
  • 7,493 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 February 2015 - 07:26 PM

If it is a WW I shoe, and with the information at hand, my best guess is that these shoes are a pair of officer’s private purchase field shoes. Private purchase shoes were available in a wide variety of styles and finishes, and sold on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean.

Attached Images

  • Private Purchase Shoes.jpg


#62 solcarlus

solcarlus
  • Members
    • Member ID: 241
  • 1,028 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pinard land

Posted 04 February 2015 - 12:23 AM

Bonjour.

have carefully observed the various models that you presented. There was always a difference, either in height or sewing. What amazes me is the absence of marking on my shoes. In general, civil manufacturers strive to make their mark and highlight resistant to time.
Thank you for the info.

solcarlus.

#63 Slobo

Slobo
  • New Members
    • Member ID: 6,862
  • 29 posts

Posted 11 February 2015 - 03:38 AM

For the late 19th century black campaign or field shoes, what kind of metal was usec for the eyelets, hooks and rivets? Was it brass (yellow) or steel (white) and was it painted or japanned black? The specs don't seem to indicate. Thanks.

#64 world war I nerd

world war I nerd
  • Members
    • Member ID: 5,143
  • 7,493 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 11 February 2015 - 05:53 PM

I don't have any of the specifications for Army shoes manufactured prior to 1913. I suspect that both brass and steel were used, based on which material was cheapest or the easiest to obtain.

 

The specifications for Army, Russet Leather Shoes made between 1913 and 1917 simply state that the eyelets were to be "metal" with brown celluloid tops. The only photo I could find showing the inside of an eyelet of this type was made from white metal.

 

The specifications for the rough side out "Field Shoes" used from 1916 to 1918 also call out for "metal" eyelets. However, photographic evidence indicates that the majority incorporated brass eyelets.

 

In this photo of 1882-85 pattern Campaign Shoes, the right hand pair posted by Kration definitely have brass lacing hooks and rivets, and they look to have brass eyelets as well. The left hand pair posted by RayG also definitely have  brass lacing hooks and rivets, but I cannot tell what type of metal the eyelets are made out of.

Attached Images

  • 1885 Pattern Campaign Shoes.jpg


#65 world war I nerd

world war I nerd
  • Members
    • Member ID: 5,143
  • 7,493 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 11 February 2015 - 05:55 PM

This photo of Navy issued shoes circa 1913 shows eyelets and lacing hooks which appear to be steel.

Attached Images

  • Early Navy Shoes.jpg


#66 world war I nerd

world war I nerd
  • Members
    • Member ID: 5,143
  • 7,493 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 11 February 2015 - 05:57 PM

Finally the steel eyelets on a pair of 1917 pattern Russet Leather Shoes and the brass eyelets as used on rough side out Field Shoes.

Attached Images

  • Russet & Unlined Marching Shoe.jpg


#67 Slobo

Slobo
  • New Members
    • Member ID: 6,862
  • 29 posts

Posted 12 February 2015 - 04:17 AM

In this photo of 1882-85 pattern Campaign Shoes, the right hand pair posted by Kration definitely have brass lacing hooks and rivets, and they look to have brass eyelets as well. The left hand pair posted by RayG also definitely have  brass lacing hooks and rivets, but I cannot tell what type of metal the eyelets are made out of.

 

Thanks. I had looked at those 2 photos and wasn't too sure if the rivets were brass, particulalry the left. With your enlargement, it is certainly clearer, particulalry for the shoes pictured on the right. I believe the regulations for 1892 were the first time that rivets were specified for field shoes, but as you indicate they simply state "metal."

 


1882 - 1885 field campaign shoes -- note confirmed brass rivets on 2 separate pairs.jpg



#68 268th C.A.

268th C.A.
  • Members
    • Member ID: 87,654
  • 2,947 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

Posted 17 September 2015 - 04:08 AM

Just picked up these outstanding WW1 officers boots, Antique Mall find! Could not believe it!

Attached Images

  • WW1 Boots patches AAC maniqueins 001 (263x350).jpg
  • WW1 Boots patches AAC maniqueins 002 (263x350).jpg


#69 268th C.A.

268th C.A.
  • Members
    • Member ID: 87,654
  • 2,947 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

Posted 05 October 2015 - 06:04 AM

Here is another pair of WW1 officers riding boots. Still had the spur straps attached. Need a little cleaning. Antique mall find.

Attached Images

  • WW1 officers riding boots 001 (263x350).jpg
  • WW1 officers riding boots 002 (263x350).jpg
  • WW1 officers riding boots 003 (263x350).jpg


#70 suwanneetrader

suwanneetrader
  • Members
    • Member ID: 15,934
  • 3,432 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida

Posted 05 October 2015 - 07:46 AM

Moderator Hope you pin this as much much excellent info.  I wish the forum had mailbox or Call it what ever, where Members could store info they wanted to save be it postings or just members names and what they collected, etc.  Richard



#71 RustyCanteen

RustyCanteen

    ADMINISTRATOR

  • Administrators
    • Member ID: 24,355
  • 15,563 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Earth

Posted 31 December 2015 - 10:33 PM

From the 'Shoe and Leather Reporter'; October 25, 1917, pages 23 & 68.  

 

s1.jpg

 

s2.jpg

 

s3.jpg



#72 RustyCanteen

RustyCanteen

    ADMINISTRATOR

  • Administrators
    • Member ID: 24,355
  • 15,563 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Earth

Posted 31 December 2015 - 10:35 PM

Cont'd:

 

I thought this was interesting; although not completely related; a lot of US manufacturers were engaged in production for the Allied powers prior to US entry into WWI.

s4.jpg

s5.jpg

 

Back to the US stuff.

 

s6.jpg



#73 world war I nerd

world war I nerd
  • Members
    • Member ID: 5,143
  • 7,493 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 31 December 2015 - 11:36 PM

Thanks RC, for adding to this ancient thread, I also have some images and new information that I need to add ... hopefully sometime soon!



#74 dave grunt

dave grunt
  • Members
    • Member ID: 152,973
  • 225 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Springfield,Il

Posted 15 January 2016 - 08:29 AM

Just found this auction, that I thought shoe collectors might enjoy.  Milestone Auctions Willoughby Oh. has a WWI shoe sizing kit. Auction is over 6FEB16; opening bid is $25.00 usd. Here are a couple of pictures

Attached Images

  • shoe sizer kit wwi.jpg
  • shoe sizer.jpg


#75 world war I nerd

world war I nerd
  • Members
    • Member ID: 5,143
  • 7,493 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 January 2016 - 01:33 AM

Thanks’ for adding to the thread Dave. What you posted is the Resco Shoe Fitting Device. It was adopted by the U.S. Army early in 1918. The following is a brief history of how that device came to be.

 

U.S. Army Resco Shoe Fitting Device

 

The success of any military force can be measured by its mobility and by its ability to fight. In terms of mobility, Napoleon Bonaparte was reported to have said,

 

“I made war not so much with the arms [weapons] as the legs of my soldiers.”

 

While the famed Confederate commander, Nathan Bedford Forrest defined the art of war as,

 

“Getting there first with the most men.”

 

While Colonel George Armond Furse of the Gordon Highlanders and the author of The Art of Marching, wrote that,

 

“Military success has been won more by marching than by fighting.”

 

And finally, because the ability to march went hand in hand with victory, the great Polish tactician, Von Clausewitz, in his celebrated book on war devoted three entire chapters to the all important subject of marching.

 

In other words, every military commander since the beginning of warfare realized that the key to victory was to arrive at the scene of the battle before their opponent did. By doing so this allowed the army’s leader to select the ground on which he wished to fight, to prepare defenses and deploy his troops, to scout likely enemy approach routes and to prepare ambushes.

 

In short, the speed with which an Army was able to march combined with its ability to have the fewest number of men fall out during that march could very well determine if the military engagement ended in complete victory or utter defeat.

 

Photo No. 01: Below are two shots of the Resco Shoe Measuring Kit adopted by the Army sometime in 1918 – one from its manual and the other courtesy of Bay State Militaria.com. The right hand image depicts the old method of shoe measuring, which utilized a shoe measuring or size stick. Measuring sticks were used by the Army from 1912 until the time that the Resco device became available in 1918. Prior to 1912, each soldier was allowed to choose his own size of shoe. This method was later found to be highly inaccurate.

Attached Images

  • Resco 1.jpg



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users