What I love about this image is that it illustrates three very distinct periods of footwear history. Can you identify the correct chronological order? Post in the comments with your answer :-)
V27: French Shoes of a Various Assortment
I pinned this great shoe illustration on Pinterest, via Athena. It is from the NYPL Digital Gallery.
What I love about this image is that it illustrates three very distinct periods of footwear history. Can you identify the correct chronological order? Post in the comments with your answer :-)
What I love about this image is that it illustrates three very distinct periods of footwear history. Can you identify the correct chronological order? Post in the comments with your answer :-)
++Anna+Ashton,+later+Mrs+Thomas+Case'+(2).jpg)
Posts
I don't know much about historical footwear but these are yummy!
ReplyDeleteThis is a guess but I'd say the middle shoe followed by the top shoe followed by the bottom shoe - all beautiful!
ReplyDeleteyou should do the second one with gold or silver embrodiery on silk-- that way they can be dyed --
ReplyDeleteI agree with Sharon P. Middle (1700s?), top(1800s?), bottom(1900s?). Very pretty shoes. :)
ReplyDeleteMiddle is 1770s or 1780s, the bottom is 1870s or 80s, the top I'd say is 1890s, but the split sides are throwing me.
ReplyDeleteHmmm... is it top: 1920's, middle: 1780's, bottom: 1870's?
ReplyDeleteI'm no expert but I would say Top- 1910s or early 20s, middle- 1770s or 80s, and bottom- 1880s. All Gorgeous!
ReplyDeleteMiddle, bottom, top is my guess.
ReplyDeleteCongrats to Libby, Caroline, Olympe, and Nicole - the top shoe is the youngest, in an almost-d'orsay style that became popular in the late 19teens and 20s. Everyone got the middle shoe right, and the bottom shoe is late 1870s-1880s - the bow and heel shape confirm it :-). I like that the artwork does not identify them - it's like a little mystery :-)
ReplyDeleteAs a note, I would LOVE for you to manufacture a pair of those 1870s-80s evening pumps. I have a couple close modern approximations, but nothing that's -just- right.
ReplyDelete