In 2013, I visited Leiden University to study Roman archaeological footwear excavated in the Scottish town of Camelon. This remarkable archaeological find included dozens of shoes, varying in size and style, and offered a unique insight into life on the northern frontier of the Roman Empire. What fascinated me most at the time, as curator of the Dutch Leather and Shoe Museum in Waalwijk, was the application of contemporary shoe sizes to analyze these historical finds. This concept not only provided new insights, but also raised questions about how we understand and use shoe sizes.
The Roman shoes from Camelon were compared using modern continental shoe sizes. This approach allowed for the mapping of population characteristics, such as the presence of men, women and children. However, the distinction between women's, men's and children's shoes was made using size 37 as a cut-off. This raises interesting questions: how can you tell whether a smaller size was worn by a woman or a male adolescent? Or a larger size by a man and not by a woman with larger feet?
Shoe sizes as we know them today are a relatively recent development. In ancient times, shoes were often custom-made, without standardized sizes. It was not until the 18th century, with the advent of mass production, that standardized systems emerged, such as continental sizes in Europe, English sizes and American US sizes. Today, there are also Chinese sizes (CN sizes), which are increasingly used worldwide.
However, comparing shoe sizes remains complicated. A size 38 in one system can be a size 37 or 39 in another. This makes buying shoes online a challenge. Some manufacturers use unique sizing charts, and small variations in fit and model can make a big difference.
Contemporary shoe size charts attempt to bring uniformity to a world of variation. Below is an overview of the most commonly used systems:
Even within these systems there are differences. A continental size 40 can be 25 cm long with some manufacturers, while it is 25.5 cm with others. The difference seems small, but can have a big effect on wearing comfort.
When studying archaeological shoes, such as Roman sandals or medieval footwear, it is essential to use the insole as a reference point. The outsole can change size due to wear, repairs (as with medieval footwear) or construction differences (for example with welt-sewn shoes, a technique that became common from around 1500) and therefore give an unreliable size indication.
Regarding modern footwear: Today’s shoe manufacturers are placing a premium on precision. Innovations such as 3D foot scanning and custom-designed lasts allow shoes to better fit the unique shapes of individual feet. However, developing a universal system that works for everyone remains a challenge. This also highlights the importance of caution when comparing archaeological shoe sizes to modern standards.
In summary, the study of both archaeological and modern footwear offers valuable insights into the evolution of sizing and fit. While historical shoes were often adapted to the wearer through craftsmanship and local traditions, modern footwear focuses on technological innovations and mass production. However, finding a universal system that does justice to both past and present remains a challenge. However, combining historical knowledge with contemporary technology can lead to new insights and solutions that have both practical and scientific value.
This blog is a summary of a lecture I gave during the Archaeological Learning Congress in Zwolle on Friday, November 29, 2024.
©Valuable Th'Ing, 2024
