Quote Originally Posted by OC Richard View Post
The evidence does not support this.

In 18th century Highland portraits simple laced shoes are common.


Of course there were other styles...there were also boots such as jack boots, etc. Latchet shoes were common at all levels of society from the time of Charles II to George the III.

Interestingly enough, both Charles II and George I were painted wearing buckle shoes of the style I mentioned.

But Dame June Swann, former curator of the Shoe Collection at the Northhampton Shoe Museum, and widely considered the leading authority on shoe history, says in her book Shoes (speaking about the 18th century)

With the wars, the growing empire, and the beginnings of the Industrial Revolution, men's shoes suddenly became staid, in practical dark colours, the only flamboyance being buckles.
There are two other aspects of this: when a buckle was lost...and they were often lost...the latchets could be cut short and eyelets punched into the ends, thus converting a buckle shoe into a lace shoe. Parenthetically, it might also be noted that shoes were a lot like swords in some respects--they were all handmade and relatively expensive. Buckles no less so. Shoes could not be tossed aside even if they were out of fashion (or the buckles lost). So we see lots of paintings where common folk are wearing older styles of shoes in the same scene as more prominent individuals wearing newer fashions.

So perhaps my remark about barefoot or buckles at Culloden is a bit of a stretch but it remains true that buckles shoes were the fashion on both sides of the pond. Whether soldiers would have worn their best shoes to battle is questionable, I concede it.
And Ms. Swann says...

The cost of a pair of shoes was high in proportion to a week's wages. Nonetheless, though there are many illustrations of poverty, few show the English barefoot, other than children who naturally prefer that condition. where different conditions prevail underfoot, i.e. Scotland, Wales, Ireland, there are more barefoot adults, but anyone who has walked through bogs in wet shoes will understand.
One of the things I would look at in all these paintings, however (and this has been mentioned before on XMS) is the date of the representation. No few non-portraiture paintings are done at some remove from the actual scene being depicted. Often the artist imposes his own costume on people of an earlier age.

In passing, I note upon further re-reading of Shoes that buckles placed low on the the shoe (typically more in the style of a pump) began to appear in the 18th century for formal events, the drawing room, etc., in order to expose more hose. Suggesting that the genesis of the Mary Jane is there in the 18th century, as well.