-
1st January 21, 10:09 AM
#11
Fine English-made boots and shoes are another sartorial rabbit hole that is all too easy to disappear into . I have a pair of brogued country boots in dark brown leather with a commando (lugged rubber) sole from Grenson that are a natural match for flannels and tweeds and the like in the winter. I imagine they could do a job if I was kilted at an outdoor event. Given the method of construction and quality of materials used I don't think I'll need to buy another pair! No surprise that the UK-made examples of this kind of footwear are expensive, even in the Sales - I was lucky to pick mine up at a crazily low price from Ebay some years ago. Northampton isn't usually on most peoples list of tourist destinations in the UK but a visit to browse the factory shops is worth considering for shoe enthusiasts;
https://northamptonshoes.com/pages/factory-shops
As OC Richard noted dress boots have a long history and are still readily available - for example;
https://www.cheaney.co.uk/cheaney-ha...-leather-p1098
This boot is said to have originally been made by Cheaney in response to a request from Prince Albert for footwear he could wear outdoors for walking the Estate and indoors for socialising at Balmoral, so there's a decent chance that they have graced the feet of a kilted royal or 2. Can't imagine an occasion I'd wear dress boots under a kilt myself, but I think they could look superb under trews at an evening event.
Regards, EEM.
"Humanity is an aspiration, not a fact of everyday life."
-
-
1st January 21, 02:25 PM
#12
Originally Posted by Jock Scot
I know this may be an obvious point, but I don't think it will hurt to remind some of you. There are boots and then there are boots. The heavy duty style boots with the 4WD tread on them are fine for outdoor wear, but bringing in half a ton of Texas/Inverness/Manitoba/New South Wales into the house in the tread does not go down well with the Lady of the house! Yes! I have---- errr weeeellll umm---- done it--------more than once!
Joking apart, in my humble opinion thick soles like in the picture above do not work for smarter, particularly evening, events. So yes, wear your boots with the kilt, if you must, but please think about the sole the boot for the occasion you plan on going to. There are boots made with thin soles and less rustic treads for the smarter event.
That said Jock I’m sure you would say the same for all footwear that the sole and style should be be matched to the occasion or event
Slainte David
-
The Following User Says 'Aye' to David Dubh For This Useful Post:
-
1st January 21, 05:21 PM
#13
Originally Posted by Tobus
As for tracking things indoors in the lugs, we have a strict protocol at my house where shoes are removed at the door whenever the weather is such that shoes can bring things in. I'm really starting to appreciate the custom practised elsewhere in the world where shoes are not worn in the house.
Yup. I usually always took shoes off in the house anyway, but living in Asia cemented it for me. There, if maintenance or someone came, they wouldn't even bring their shoes into my apartment-- they took them off outside the door. (My Thai teacher did leave hers just inside the door.) Oddly enough, many Westerners would have a problem with this, since most people there wear sandals and a lot of Westerners would be squicked out by people walking in their house in bare feet, and would consider shoes more hygienic...
One of my coworkers there never took her shoes off at her door, until another one pointed out to her: "You know all the gunk and muck you walk through on the streets out there? You're tracking it into your house." She was a convert after that.
Here's tae us - / Wha's like us - / Damn few - / And they're a' deid - /
Mair's the pity!
-
-
2nd January 21, 10:16 PM
#14
Originally Posted by Jock Scot
I know this may be an obvious point, but I don't think it will hurt to remind some of you. There are boots and then there are boots. The heavy duty style boots with the 4WD tread on them are fine for outdoor wear, but bringing in half a ton of Texas/Inverness/Manitoba/New South Wales into the house in the tread does not go down well with the Lady of the house! Yes! I have---- errr weeeellll umm---- done it--------more than once!
Joking apart, in my humble opinion thick soles like in the picture above do not work for smarter, particularly evening, events. So yes, wear your boots with the kilt, if you must, but please think about the sole the boot for the occasion you plan on going to. There are boots made with thin soles and less rustic treads for the smarter event.
I agree totally! My Red Wing "brogue rangers" have a pretty traditional non-lugged sole. I've worn them for a Christmas tea and for a fairly casual California Burns supper. Not sure they'd work for other evening events.
Clan Mackintosh North America / Clan Chattan Association
Cormack, McIntosh, Gow, Finlayson, Farquar, Waters, Swanson, Ross, Oag, Gilbert, Munro, Turnbough,
McElroy, McCoy, Mackay, Henderson, Ivester, Castles, Copeland, MacQueen, McCumber, Matheson, Burns,
Wilson, Campbell, Bartlett, Munro - a few of the ancestral names, mainly from the North-east of Scotland
-
-
6th January 21, 08:10 AM
#15
I have seen these ankle boots referred to as "Hanover" or "George" boots, which I guess associates them with the late 18th/early 19th century era of British royals.
I have a pair of relatively dressy (thin soles, no brogue detailing, in basic black) ones from Johnston & Murphy. My wife calls them "Beatle" boots, although they are lace-up rather than the zip models worn by the Fab Four.
I have worn them with day wear, but for formal evening events, I generally wear a pair of patent-leather oxfords I inherited from my father. They are typical US black tie shoes. Someday I will get a pair of buckle brogues, but it's not urgent.
I also frequently wear hiking boots for more casual kilt attire. They certainly do have chunky soles.
I think the high-top button boot was a pretty typical sort of Victorian footwear. And the use of contrasting materials on the ankle and leg part of the boot can give them a look comparable to spats. However, i don't own any button boots, although I do have an antique button hook that stowed away in the bottom of my suitcase one time after cleaning out some closets in my great-grandfather's old house.
Andrew
Last edited by kingandrew; 6th January 21 at 08:11 AM.
-
The Following User Says 'Aye' to kingandrew For This Useful Post:
-
7th January 21, 02:22 PM
#16
I've mostly seen ankle-high boots called chukkas or chukka boots.
Tulach Ard
-
-
7th January 21, 02:45 PM
#17
Originally Posted by MacKenzie
I've mostly seen ankle-high boots called chukkas or chukka boots.
Chukkas are a bit different in the way that they are constructed. I'm actually wearing a pair right now (at work, with trousers, not a kilt). In my mind, what differentiates a chukka from other ankle-height boots is the very top of the closure. It's usually cut at a larger radius and the lacing doesn't go up to the very top. They are a looser fit above the ankle, and actually just barely clear the ankle. Sort of a compromise between a shoe and an ankle boot, but falling well short of a bona fide ankle boot, IMHO.
-
The Following 3 Users say 'Aye' to Tobus For This Useful Post:
-
7th January 21, 03:55 PM
#18
I agree with you, Tobus. But I think over the years chukka has been genericized like Xerox, Thermos & Kleenex.
Tulach Ard
-
-
8th January 21, 04:17 PM
#19
Chukka boots have 3 pairs of eyelets at most and always have open lacing. They are usually unlined I believe. Put crepe soles on a pair made of suede and you have good old desert boots
"Humanity is an aspiration, not a fact of everyday life."
-
The Following 2 Users say 'Aye' to Micrographia For This Useful Post:
-
9th January 21, 12:28 PM
#20
Originally Posted by Micrographia
Chukka boots have 3 pairs of eyelets at most and always have open lacing.
Indeed. For reference, here are the chukka boots I wear to the office several times a week. To me, they're more of a shoe than a boot. Mine are lined, and the exterior leather is just a soft oil-tanned (or similar) finish. That said, they are very comfortable! I've never worn them with a kilt, but I suppose there's no reason they wouldn't work just fine. I wouldn't call them dressy by any stretch, as they fit more in line with a moderately casual outdoorsy daywear look (especially since these have a mild lugged sole). Perhaps I shall experiment a bit with wearing them with various kilt outfits and see how I like them. I generally don't care for footwear that is loose at the top when wearing kilt hose, but we'll see.
-
The Following 2 Users say 'Aye' to Tobus For This Useful Post:
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|
Bookmarks