Ghillie brogues, yes or no?

[beloitpiper]

Well first off, remember that these are "bespoke." That means that they would be made to your foot and your specifications. The fact that they are narrow looking and pointy is simply....first, the maker has chosen the narrow ones to display. That's a common enough practice when photographing shoes or boots. Something about the proportions of a narrow shoe always looks better than a wide shoe. And second, the fashion in Europe these days, in haute couture, is the long narrow square toe. That too will pass. You need to look past those minor and variable details to the workmanship and the styling. Finally, these are more continental in styling than would be found at a West End London maker such as John Lobb, St. James Place. http://www.johnlobbltd.co.uk/main/main.htm

http://www.johnlobbltd.co.uk/catalog...s/ghillies.htm





ooOOOOooo! Pretty!

[DWFII]

http://www.johnlobbltd.co.uk/catalog...s/ghillies.htm





ooOOOOooo! Pretty!

Wow! I missed those...haven't been on Lobbs site for a year or so.

But hey! There you go...for all those folks with wide, Celtic feet. Looks like they might even have a tongue --I go back and forth, one minute I think there's a tongue, next time I look I think it's just the tree I'm seeing.

[Thunderbolt]

It's so nice to see plaids used! We need to do this more in the States! (In cooler weather of course!)

Looks like they've even got a tongue.

I think you're seeing the wooden tree on the inside.

T.

[Bugbear]

Oh good, you don't have to wear pointy shoes... I think part of the problem is that I have narrow feet to begin with, and the wingtip shoes didn't look right. The rest of the brogueing and all of that wasn't an issue.

[Bugbear]

I thought the buckle on the "mary janes" was up on the instep nearer to the ankle... But I can't look at the pictures. For some reason, I thought the main difference between those and other buckle shoes is that there isn't a tongue or piece of leather over the instep area. Guess the ghillie brogues don't have the tongue either...

Although, I seem to remember the "Quaker" and "Pilgrem" shoes being depicted as having the instep covered, but with the buckle in the same area.

I remember the depictions of the pipers on the short bread tins usually having on the "mary janes," as well as, some kind of doublet and so on...

Just saying what I have to go by...

[Nighthawk]

I wore mine for several hours this weekend. They looked great (I thought) but the things don't come in wide sizes, so my pinkie toes got a little sore after a while.

[DWFII]

I thought the buckle on the "mary janes" was up on the instep nearer to the ankle... But I can't look at the pictures. For some reason, I thought the main difference between those and other buckle shoes is that there isn't a tongue or piece of leather over the instep area. Guess the ghillie brogues don't have the tongue either...

Although, I seem to remember the "Quaker" and "Pilgrem" shoes being depicted as having the instep covered, but with the buckle in the same area.

I remember the depictions of the pipers on the short bread tins usually having on the "mary janes," as well as, some kind of doublet and so on...

Just saying what I have to go by...

Since you cannot see the illustrations...allow me to offer a description: There are two buckles on a each shoe of a pair of buckle brogues...one small functional buckle high on the side of the instep and another larger, purely ornamental, one over the ball joint area.

On a buckle shoe such as might have been worn by any man (sometimes women) during the 18th to 19th century, the buckle is centered over the middle cuniform...somewhere near the pronounced bone ridge that may be felt on top of the instep. There is only one buckle per shoe and it may range from and inch and a half square, to two and a half inches long by almost two inches wide..

[Bugbear]

Since you cannot see the illustrations...allow me to offer a description: There are two buckles on a each shoe of a pair of buckle brogues...one small functional buckle high on the side of the instep and another larger, purely ornamental, one over the ball joint area.

On a buckle shoe such as might have been worn by any man (sometimes women) during the 18th to 19th century, the buckle is centered over the middle cuniform...somewhere near the pronounced bone ridge that may be felt on top of the instep. There is only one buckle per shoe and it may range from and inch and a half square, to two and a half inches long by almost two inches wide..

Oh! Thanks for clearing that up for me, DWFII.

I didn't even know there was a lower, ornamental buckle, and I thought we were talking about the functional buckle.

I think I would rather not have the lower, ornamental buckle on my own shoes. It's kind of stuck that way in my mind's eye for what ever reason...

Although, I would tend to prefer the functional buckle to be a large buckle; just seems to be better looking to me...

[Bugbear]

I did some poking around in the formal (black tie/white tie) threads. It would seem that something on the line of black patent leather or shineyness would be the main requirement for any formal dress shoe. Not too much on the style of shoe though; at least in the black tie realm.