Balmoral Boots

[Two Types]

http://archive.org/stream/eatons19202100eatouoft#page/n363/mode/2up

This is a link to the Fall & Winter 1920-1921 Catalogue for Eaton's Department Store in Toronto. From page 362 there are a large number of balmoral boots. These appear to be in a wide variety of styles: pointed toe; rounded toe; bulbous toe. Most with a toecap, some without. I know it is difficult to tell from illustrations, but it appears that some of the rougher looking boots (such as the police boot) actually have a higher heel than some of the more dainty, point toed boots.

I hope this helps.

 

[herringbonekid]

these are scanned from (my own copy of) Montgomery Ward Spring-Summer 1920. i've specifically chosen three that mention a low, broad heel in the description, and have a similar toe and last shape to the boots posted by Mr. Speakeasy, but i've thrown one in there from the same catalogue that shows a bit more variety too (button side).

Issh, if you have a catalogue image of a boot from the 40s that looks more like Mr. Speakeasy's pair than the images above, then please show us.


p.s. i also have three more eary 20s catalogues if anyone would like to see more examples.

 

[Baron Kurtz]

I would. I like pictures.

 

[herringbonekid]

these are scanned from (my own copy of) Charles William Stores catalogue Fall-Winter 20-21:

 

[The Wiser Hatter]

http://archive.org/stream/eatons19202100eatouoft#page/n363/mode/2up

This is a link to the Fall & Winter 1920-1921 Catalogue for Eaton's Department Store in Toronto. From page 362 there are a large number of balmoral boots. These appear to be in a wide variety of styles: pointed toe; rounded toe; bulbous toe. Most with a toecap, some without. I know it is difficult to tell from illustrations, but it appears that some of the rougher looking boots (such as the police boot) actually have a higher heel than some of the more dainty, point toed boots.

I hope this helps.

Two Type thanks for the link to the catalogue great stuff.

 

[Isshinryu101]

these are scanned from (my own copy of) Montgomery Ward Spring-Summer 1920. i've specifically chosen three that mention a low, broad heel in the description, and have a similar toe and last shape to the boots posted by Mr. Speakeasy, but i've thrown one in there from the same catalogue that shows a bit more variety too (button side).

Issh, if you have a catalogue image of a boot from the 40s that looks more like Mr. Speakeasy's pair than the images above, then please show us.


p.s. i also have three more eary 20s catalogues if anyone would like to see more examples.

you posted all pairs with mild spade sole. OP has no spade aspect at all. Everyone completely ignores the forefoot shape. Also, there are no ads with sole pics. The upper styles are nearly unchanged from decade to decade. The window is in the sole.

 

[Isshinryu101]

these are scanned from (my own copy of) Charles William Stores catalogue Fall-Winter 20-21:

more mild spades. Do you see a trend here? Even the last one, the pic of the boys' boot has a mild point at inner forefoot. OP pics have none.

 

[KILO NOVEMBER]

How 'bout the eyelettes? I've always heard that "The eyelettes are the windows of the sole."

 

[herringbonekid]

Issh, i'll repeat; show us a balmoral/oxford boot from a 1940s catalogue which you think looks closer to Mr. Speakeasy's boots than the ones i've posted above.

 

[Isshinryu101]

Issh, i'll repeat; show us a balmoral/oxford boot from a 1940s catalogue which you think looks closer to Mr. Speakeasy's boots than the ones i've posted above.

you mean closer to his non-spade boots than any of the mild to serious spade boots you posted?

 

[herringbonekid]

show us ANY 40s balmoral/oxford boot.


p.s. in the next batch of scans i'll post only boots that don't have any spade so you won't get hung up on that.

 

[Isshinryu101]

Very cool and thanks for sharing. However, they are much newer than 1910. More 1940's. Love those Vintage Boots and please share more!

note the COMPLETE lack of ANY sort of spade on both the OP's boot & on each of these 4 above. Each and every catalog scan shown has at least a mild spade at the instep. This was a major hallmark of pre 1930's boots.

 

[Isshinryu101]

Couldn't find a thread about Balmoral Boots so I though I would get it started

Here's a Pair I got from around 1900-10 and I've kept them in the condition I found them, the leather may look dry and cracked in the pictures but the leather is actually in great shape and still soft and pliable, they are just very worn in

note the COMPLETE lack of ANY sort of spade on both the OP's boot & on each of these 4 above. Funky angle of pics taken aside, his sole pic clearly shows the shape. Each and every catalog scan shown has at least a mild spade at the instep. This was a major hallmark of pre 1930's boots. Catalog scans are great and SHOULD be used, but they must be combined with actually handling the shoes/ boots in your own hands. Many times they are artists drawings rather than photos, and they are always taken at a single angle (deemed most flattering by the company). They completely ignore the sole shape.

On a side note, the close cut waist on the outstep of OP's boots is actually a sign of a VERY good bootmaker. The closer cut to the uppers, the greater the skill level. To be able to cut so close as to hide the welt is the sign of an expert's expert. It is what top shoemakers of today strive for. JL Paris and G&G do this very well. Dellos and Bestetti actually cut the outside of the waist MORE narrow than the upper. It creates the illusion of a more "voluptuous" shape without actually altering the last.

 

[Isshinryu101]

EG, C&J & JL. All modern. The point is that the shape of OP's boots are the basic POST 1920's standard (more like late 30's and later). Boots today are still made in this basic shape. Also note that they are completely devoid of the standard (at minimum) mild spade or pointy toe present earlier boots.

 

[herringbonekid]

thanks... the top pair look similar, but the sole is much chunkier than Mr. Speakeasy's pair. have another look at his pair... the last is also more elegantly sculpted.

the lower three are derbys not balmoral/oxfords. ignoring the entire upper, they also have way chunkier soles/welts.

edit: this is in response to the first set above, not the second set of new boots you posted.

 

[herringbonekid]

btw, i'm going to post you some early 20s non-spade images later.

 

[herringbonekid]

also, if you're calling this a 'mild spade' (looking at the under view of the sole)...

then this...

... is also a mild spade.

 

[Isshinryu101]

Uh... no. look at the boot pic. funny that the boot drawing shows a heavy spade, but the underside shows less? Do you actually HAVE any in your possession? I showed near 10 boot pics that are ALL 40's or later that look more like OP's boot than any you have posted. Do you have any actual personal experience with boots from the era?

Or, how about I frame it like this... what screams 1910's about those boots. You had to search thru a ton of ads to find one that's even close. And, the drawing is questionable...

 

[Isshinryu101]

 

[Bruce Wayne]

For what it is worth, Allen Edmonds has their Fifth Street boots on Clearance.