Jump to content

Thin Barracks Shoes and Great Hobnailed Hulks


world war I nerd
 Share

Recommended Posts

world war I nerd

Photo No. 63: If you disregard the varying shades of the breeches worn by the members of this unknown military band, nothing out of the ordinary appears to be visible. A careful examination of the shoes worn on the men’s feet and the spare shoes displayed on the ground for the Saturday morning inspection reveals two distinctly different shoe styles.

 

Photo compliments of the John Adam-Graf collection

post-5143-0-56867100-1409636260.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

world war I nerd

Photo No. 64: The close up at left clearly shows that the men are wearing 1912 Russet Leather Shoes. The detail shots of the two pairs of shoes laid out in the foreground look like they might have steel reinforced heels. This could just be the result of the light reflecting off of the nails in the heel. It could also be another variation of the Heavy Marching Shoe – one with steel heel plates, and without hobnails? Any opinions?

post-5143-0-01931800-1409636311.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

world war I nerd

Photo No. 65: Again I apologize for the poor photos, but I can only use what’s available. The upper left hand photo is of a 1917 dated, and QTMC marked, unlined, rough side out leather Army shoe with a toe cap used for a reconstruction of the uniform of a U.S. Marine at Belleau Wood. This shoe was identical to the Heavy Marching Shoe, except for the rivets used to reinforce the front of the external heel counter. The two lower photos are of the same shoe as used for a reconstruction of the uniform of a 42nd Division infantryman in December of 1917. Note the shoe’s toe cap and side rivet. Also of interest is the fact that this variation of the shoe has a two piece heel counter – one piece that wraps around the shoe and a narrow strip or “back strap” that covers the backstay seam which runs vertically up and down the center of the back of the shoe.

post-5143-0-67017900-1409636402.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

world war I nerd

Photo No. 66: Other than the rivet and two piece heel counter this shoe closely matches the overall shape and style of the 1916 Heavy Marching Shoe. It’s possible that these minor differences represent an as yet undiscovered 1917 specification change that was made to the 1916 Heavy Marching Shoe?

post-5143-0-54098100-1409636450.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

world war I nerd

Based on the small amount of material I could find, the 1916 Heavy Marching Shoe held up better than the 1912 Russet Leather Shoes during the fall and winter of 1917. The Heavy Marching Shoe however, still fell short of what was expected when it was exposed to the inclement weather of “Sunny France”. This fact was noted in an online article titled Little Tanks about the development of the WW I American Trench Shoe. In it the author stated that the Russet Leather Shoe:

 

Did not hold up well under the conditions U.S. troops were subjected to on the Mexican border. Because of this problem a new shoe was developed based on the pattern of shoes being manufactured by American firms and supplied to both the French and Belgian army. The new shoes were the beginning of what would eventually become the 1917 Trench Boot* This shoe differed radically from the old Russet Marching Shoe.** The shoe was constructed of a Chrome Vegetable retanned cowhide***, a half middle sole covered by a full sole that had 5 rows of rounded hobnails and iron heel plates affixed to the heel of each shoe. The soles were attached by waxed linen stitching, screws and nails****. This, along with the Russet Marching Shoe, simply did not hold up under the rough treatment they received in France. Both this shoe and the Russet Marching Shoe made it to France.

 

Little Tanks, by Jim Bond @ http://www.worldwar1.com/dbc/i-tanks.htm

*Technically, in the U.S. Army, a “Boot” was characterized as any type of footwear that did not feature a lace front or one that extended above mid-calf. A “Shoe” in the U.S. Army was considered to be any type of footwear whose front was closed by means of laces and ended somewhere between the top of the foot and mid-calf.

 

**In a number of military publications the Russet Leather Shoe was erroneously called the Russet Marching Shoe whenever it was being discussed in its role as a “marching” or “field” shoe.

 

***In several post war publications, a hobnailed field shoe that superseded the Russet Leather Shoe but preceded the hobnailed 1917 Field Shoe is mentioned, but never named. In each of these books, the wording is such that the information appears to have been derived from a single source. That source was likely written by the QTMC. In each description the shoe is said to have been constructed from “cowhide”, not “veal” (a type of calfskin) as was called for in the 1916 Quartermaster General’s annual report. Either there was some confusion on the part of the authors or there was a specification change made to the Heavy Marching Shoe that changed the veal calfskin to that of cowhide.

 

****The above also applied to how the Heavy Marching Shoe’s sole was constructed. It’s possible that the soles of the 1916 variation of the shoe were sewn, nailed and screwed together as mentioned. I suspect that the initial design called out for just stitching and nailing, and that the screws were incorporated on a later variation of the shoe. This however, cannot be backed up with any type of documentation.

 

Despite having seen zero photographs of the 1916 Heavy Marching Shoe being worn by U.S. Army personnel in Mexico or by American Doughboys in France, there is enough evidence to convince me that a shoe of this type, along with a few possible variations was indeed worn between 1916 and early 1918. I speculate that stocks of the Heavy Marching Shoe that remained after the Punitive Expedition was withdrawn from Mexico in January 1917 were later issued to the men who served in France. It’s also possible that new contracts for this shoe were signed as soon as America entered WW I in April 1917. Production of the Heavy Marching Shoe likely ended in the spring of 1917 as soon as, or shortly after the 1917 Field Shoe, Specification No. 1257 was adopted by the Army on May 17, 1917.

 

Photo No. 67: In this photo taken during the autumn of 1917, it looks as if at least two types of shoes are worn by these men wearing a mixed bag of overcoats, service dress and ponchos. I believe that the shoe at upper right is the 1912 Russet Leather Shoe. The middle shoe may be a hobnailed shoe of British manufacture, while the bottom shoe could be either a russet, heavy marching or 1917 pattern American field shoe.

 

End of part two. Thanks for looking.

The third installment will be on the 1917 Field Shoe, aka “Trench Shoe”.

post-5143-0-95674100-1409636531.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

world war I nerd

Photo No. 68: While organizing information on the 1917 Field Shoe, I came across these photos of shoes recently sold on Ebay described as WW I “Trench Shoes”. They are in fact what I would call the “1917 Marching Shoe” or the second pattern, 1916 Heavy Marching Shoe. This is the same type of shoe that was used in the above mentioned reconstructions of the Marine and 42nd Division infantryman (photos number 65 and 66). Note the rough side out calfskin, toe cap, two piece heel counter, comprised of the heel counter and a separate back strap, as well as the rivet that was added to the corner of the heel counter. It also appears that this shoe has two full leather soles, as opposed to the half middle and full outer sole that was used on the 1916 Heavy Marching Shoe.

This could account for the many post war descriptions of a “much stouter” shoe that followed the 1912 Russet Leather Shoe, whose description doesn’t really match the 1916 Heavy Marching Shoe.

 

Without knowing that there was the 1912 Russet Leather Shoe, then the 1916 Heavy Marching Shoe, then the 1917 Marching Shoe and then the 1917 Field Shoe (Trench Shoe), the following excerpt of the shoes that were worn by the AEF early in WW I can be quite confusing:

 

In none of its innumerable forms of endeavor did the Quartermaster Corps more strikingly demonstrate its genius as a manufacturer than in the design and production of the army shoe. Before the war our soldiers wore a machine-sewed shoe of russet calf lined with duck, very similar to civilian footwear of the better grade. Shortly after the beginning of hostilities, however, the War Department adopted a new and much stouter shoe. This new model had a much heavier upper* than the old one, with the flesh or rough side out and the grain side in, and with no lining, while instead of a single sole, as in the old shoe, two heavy soles** were used, the bottoms of which were thickly studded with hobnails. But even these, formidable in appearance as they were, did not prove strong enough to stand up under the incredible wear of trench warfare.

 

The Army Behind the Army, 1919, Edward Alexander Powel, page 179,180

*In other passages similar to this one the upper is described as being made from cowhide, which was thicker or “much heavier” than the calfskin that was used to make the Heavy Marching Shoe.

**The 1912 Russet leather Shoe had a single full outer sole, the 1916 Heavy Marching Shoe had a half middle sole and a full outer sole, and I believe that the 1917 Marching Shoe had a full middle sole and a full outer sole.

post-5143-0-83224900-1409888713.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

world war I nerd

Photo No. 69: Close up of the toe cap and the iron rivet that was added to reinforce the seam where the heel counter meets the upper and the “vamp” or the front portion of the shoe.

post-5143-0-41680200-1409888770.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

world war I nerd

Photo No. 70: Comparison between the fore-mentioned shoes and the Ebay shoes showing the two piece heel counter and back strap.

post-5143-0-36550200-1409888854.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

world war I nerd

Photo No. 71: Item no. A 24 in this particular ad from the Denver Army Navy Goods Store appears to depict the 1917 Marching Shoe with a toe cap and smooth sole. Note that the shoe illustrated does not have a rivet on the front corner of the heel counter. Item no. A 25 is the 1912 Russet Leather Shoe and item no. A 26 is for either the 1917 or 1918 pattern hobnailed field shoe.

post-5143-0-82910200-1410254125.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wonderfully researched presentation. Gives the phrase "Foot Fetish" a whole new meaning! Thank you for taking the time to share it. Bobgee

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
world war I nerd

Photo No. 72: It was not my intention to include the rubber boots and overshoes that were worn by the AEF in this post. However, I felt obliged to add the following information on the 1907 Arctic Overshoes and their replacement, the 1918 Four Buckle Gaiter because I had posted a photograph of the later while explaining very little about it. That photo appeared on page number 1; post number 15 of this thread.

 

This is the 1907 Two Buckle Overshoe. The upper photo comes from a 1914 dated military publication, and the lower image is from a set of 1907 engravings published by the QTMD. The right hand photo shows a soldier wearing 1907 Arctic Overshoes while guarding the Trans Siberian Railway in Russia, circa November 1918.

post-5143-0-79819900-1416369311.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

world war I nerd

Photo No. 73: Initially, the 1907 Arctic Overshoe was never authorized as an article of equipment for the AEF. However, a board of AEF officers was convened late in the summer of 1917 to consider the subject of providing adequate clothing against the severe weather conditions that were expected when winter arrived. The result being that 1907, “arctic overshoes were authorized for issue to enlisted men for wear on occasions when rubber boots were not suitable”.

 

Several months later a new pattern of overshoe was adopted on January 4, 1918. The following description of the Four Buckle Gaiter, as it was called, and the reason why it was needed appeared in volume six of a history on the U.S. Army Medical Department:

 

During the winter of 1917-1918 an arctic overshoe was issued to the American Expeditionary Forces for wear under exceptional circumstances. This overshoe was rubber soled and had a waterproof cashmerette upper, the foot of which was closed by means of straps and buckles. For ordinary wear overseas this overshoe proved unsatisfactory. Its constant use in the mud and water stained its outer fabric, and rotted the cloth covering, thus rendering the overshoe useless in a very short time.

 

The sizes of the arctic overshoe ranged from 6 to 13 inclusive, with no variation in widths for separate sizes. As the arctic overshoe was worn over the hobnailed shoe in the American Expeditionary Forces, it was essential that the overshoe had considerable more foot room than it had had formerly obtained, also, and because of the hobnails, it was actually important to have within the overshoe an insole capable of resisting their abrasive action.*

 

The modified overshoe, based on changes recommended by the Chief Quartermaster, A.E.F., in January, 1918, was called a four-buckle gaiter. The outer vamp and the quarters of this gaiter were made of duck fractioned on both sides, replacing the old cashmerette. Within was an insole of chrome leather treated to resist the abrasive action of the hobnails. To permit the new overshoe to be worn over the hobnailed shoe, a new last was developed.

 

The Medical Department of the United States Army in the World War, Vol. VI, 1926, page 633, 634

*The arctic overshoes described in the first two paragraphs of the above were the 1907 Arctic Overshoes.

 

In the less than clear enlargement on the left, you can just make out the four buckles used to secure the opening of the 1918 Four Buckle Gaiter. The illustration next to it which was labeled, “U.S. Army Four Buckle Arctic Overshoes” came from a 1920s surplus goods catalog in which they were being sold for $1.98 per pair.

post-5143-0-59390600-1416369385.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

world war I nerd

Since I wrote the initial post a small amount of new information has come to light in the form of two QTMC russet shoe specifications. In addition, photographs of those two Russet Leather Shoe specifications have kindly been provided by forum member Airborne53.

 

Photo No. 74: QTMD Department engravings depicting the side and bottom of the 1914 Russet Leather Shoe.

post-5143-0-35041700-1416369485.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

world war I nerd

First up is Specification Number 1206, adopted April 30, 1914. It was identical to Specification No. 1188, adopted on May 7, 1913 except for the following:

 

  • Vegetable tanned veal leather was authorized to be substituted for chrome tanned calfskin on the upper due to the difficulty of obtaining sufficient quantities of first grade calf skins.*

*Calfskin was obtained from a calf that was no older than 3 to four weeks. Veal however, was obtained from a calf that was aged between 3 and 6 months. Veal leather is said to have a coarser texture than that of calfskin.

 

Photo No. 75: The inside of a left foot, Specification No. 1206 Russet leather Shoe. Basic characteristics of the 1206 Russet Leather Shoe are as follows:

  • Depending on availability, the 1206 shoe was manufactured from both calf and veal skin.
  • The shoe’s single outer sole was made from 10-iron leather. It was approximately 7/32 of an inch thick.
  • The shoe’s inner sole was approximately 6-iron in thickness. It was approximately 1/8 of an inch thick.
  • The shoe’s bottom filler was made from either ground cork or leather and rubber cement.
  • The shoe was lined with eleven ounces to the yard, white cotton drill material.
  • The backstay was 1 inch wide, and to cover the back seam from the bottom of the quarters up to within ½ inch of the top of the shoe.
  • Size No. 5 through 8 ½ had eight pairs of lacing eyelets. Size Number 9 through 12 had nine pairs of eyelets.

Photo courtesy of the Airborne53 collection

post-5143-0-92251600-1416369585.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

world war I nerd

Photo No. 76: Front and back of the specification 1206 Russet Leather Shoe. Note the khaki cotton web pull strap, and how the backstay or backstrap piece ends approximately one –half inch short of the top of the shoe. The soldier from the Medical Department in the center is carrying either a British made small box respirator or the first pattern American made small box respirator satchel, which featured a U.S. carrier with a British style shoulder strap.

 

Shoe photos courtesy of the Airborne53 collection

Doughboy photo courtesy of the John Adam-Graf collection

post-5143-0-53950300-1416369633.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

world war I nerd

Photo No. 77: The bottom of the specification 1206 Russet Leather Shoe has been stamped with inspector acceptance stamps on both the heel and the shank portion of the sole, as well as a size “6 ½ C” size and width stamp on the forepart of the sole. Also of interest is the row and a half of square nails, which reinforced the outer edge of the shoe’s heel. The half-row of nails were located on the outside edge of the heel to further protect that area of the heel because it received the greatest amount of wear.

 

Shoe photos courtesy of the Airborne53 collection

Doughboy photo courtesy of the John Adam-Graf collection

post-5143-0-68982500-1416369679.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

world war I nerd

Photo No. 78: Close up of the contract stamp, showing the manufacturer, size, contract number, specification number, and depot as stamped onto the interior lining. Unfortunately, the contract date is illegible. At bottom left is another inspectors stamp. This one located on the leather liner that was cemented over top of the inner sole. The Doughboy on the right is wearing a V Corps SSI and a French pattern overseas cap. His unusually tall cap has been artfully arrayed with a variety of insignia composed of a Pioneer Infantry collar disc, an infantry sweetheart pin, and another pin of unknown origin.

 

Shoe photos courtesy of the Airborne53 collection

Doughboy photo courtesy of the John Adam-Graf collection

post-5143-0-15351900-1416369837.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

world war I nerd

Photo No. 79: The second pair of 1912 Russet Leather Shoes is Specification No. 1258, adopted May 18, 1917. According to the 1258 specifications the upper of the shoe was to be made from “full-grained chrome-tanned side leather. No mention was made as to whether or not the side leather was to come from calfskin, veal skin or cowhide. Side leather is the portion of the hide consisting of only the side of the cow or calf. In other words, it was what remained after the inferior quality leather from the belly, flanks, head and cheeks had been trimmed away. Note that the leather used to make the quarters on this shoe have a much heavier texture. Perhaps the vamp (the lower portion of the shoe was constructed from smooth calfskin and the upper was made of veal skin whose texture is said to be coarser.

 

Photo courtesy of the Airborne53 collection

post-5143-0-32637300-1416369899.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

world war I nerd

Photo No. 80: The construction of both the front and the back of the shoe appear to be similar to that of the specification 1206 Russet Leather Shoe. The center photo shows a YMCA worker who was attached to the 80th Division, wearing what was probably a pair of Specification No. 1258 Russet Leather Shoes.

 

Shoe photos courtesy of the Airborne53 collection

Doughboy photo courtesy of the John Adam-Graf collection

 

post-5143-0-16640800-1416369950.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

world war I nerd

Photo No. 81: All of the basic characteristics of the specification 1258 shoe appear to be consistent with those of its predecessor, the specification 1206 Russet leather Shoe including the placement of the inspector and size stamps on the shoe’s sole and heel. The soldier to the left is wearing the 1910 Enlisted Man’s Garrison Belt with the later “lift-the-dot” 1917 Rifle Cartridge Pockets. He also wears an unusual style of non-regulation canvas leggings in conjunction with his 1912 Russet Leather Shoes.

 

Shoe photos courtesy of the Airborne53 collection

Doughboy photo courtesy of the John Adam-Graf collection

 

post-5143-0-23328400-1416370000.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

world war I nerd

Photo No. 82: The contract stamp on this shoe clearly shows its maker, contract number, size and width, specification number, and depot. The unidentified chaplain to the right also wears a similar pair of Russet Leather Shoes.

 

Shoe photos courtesy of the Airborne53 collection

Doughboy photo courtesy of the John Adam-Graf collection

 

post-5143-0-63332300-1416370052.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

world war I nerd

Photo No. 83: Side by side comparison of the 1914, specification 1206 Russet Leather Shoe (left) with the 1917, specification 1258 Russet Leather Shoe (right).

 

Photos courtesy of the Airborne53 collection

post-5143-0-10002200-1416370112.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
world war I nerd

Photo No. 84: This photo from the Library of Congress shows both the front and top view of a pair of unissued 1912 Russet Leather Shoes.

post-5143-0-73718600-1423024914.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...