Marching and Footwear

[ParthianBow]

I've worn out a pair of Roman calcei/boots, made by the phenomenally talented Sarah Juniper. They're really well made, and hobnailed. I walked 300 miles plus in them, and I can still wear them, but the heel in one is leaning over like a drunk man, and the soles are both in a bad way. (If I didn't weigh 90 odd kilos, Sarah said, they'd have lasted longer.) But the idea of 3 months of hard use wearing them out is possible, IMO.

[agrimensor]

@ Ben Kane, you did really walk great distances on them as i recall so it can be that the miles used several pair of valligea per year. this naturally dependinf on work transport and duty's preformed. In modern times it is the same, if you use your shoes every day they won't last as lng too.

[ParthianBow]

@Agrimensor: Most of what I did was shorter training days for the Hadrian's Wall walk - so, three times a week for about 3.5 months, starting off with distances of 6-8 km per walk, but building up to 15-25 km per walk. So the use was gradual, until the wall itself. That was about 20-28 km per day, for 6 days.

[Bryan]

I am not so sure that the Roman soldiers did as much marching as we would like to think they did, for where we take frontier situations such as Hadrian's Wall for instance these were established posts where a unit was based for long periods of time.
There would be those who went off on detatchments of course but as far as this ten miles each day may not have been the case for the troops would have had all kinds of tasks and duties close to the frontier.

An active person walks about 10,000 steps a day, which comes out to about 5 miles (9 km), according to an article in NY Times. Since the Romans, even in garrison, were probably not sitting down most of the day, they might have equaled that or walked even more. Additionally, Vegetius says that they did bimonthly practice marches, of 25 miles. Monthly, that comes out 200 miles a month. And that doesn't count patrols, walking a post near the wall, having to walk from one garrison fort to another, etc. But what I was referring to was during active campaigning, when logistics would have been tested surely, such as the many wars of the late Republic, when the caligae were first created and issued out. Let's use the year of Vercengetorix's revolt in 52 BC:

- Caesar crosses the Alps from Italian Gaul into Further Gaul: 270 miles
- March to Vellaunodunum: 400 miles
- March to Gergovia: 241 miles
- March to Avaricum: 120 miles
- March to Alesia: 190 miles

Caesar's men marched over 1,200 miles during this campaign (not counting the rest of the year). This distance doesn't even count normal daily walking, patrols, foraging, or in battles. During this whole time, Caesar's men were nearly always in critical need of supplies so they plundered them from Gallic held oppidum, like Avaricum. Needless to say, these places probably did not contain large stores of spare shoes. Additionally, Caesar used utmost speed to crush Vercingetorix's revolt, so I also doubt he brought along a few thousand shoemakers to quickly knock out a pair of shoes a day in one of the few days off the soldiers had during this campaign. If a pair of caligae can only realistically last 200-400 miles, depending on their quality, then this means Caesar's men would have gone through at least 3-5 pairs just from marching, with another pair or more from wear and tear from daily walking, fatique duties, and battles.

I think if boots fall apart after about 300 miles (I use this as a frame of reference +/- 100 miles depending on quality and usage), it means that either the soldier brought with them multiple pairs of extra boots (2-4 pairs) or that the army provided them (logistically very complicated as they need to be sized to the wearer). Or the men didn't march with their boots and only used them during times when they needed to protect their feet (really rough ground, ice), needed traction with the hobnails, or in battle.

[Vindex]

I would have thought immediate repairs to boots would be part of a soldier's housekeeping at the end of the day?

[Mark Hygate]

.................Additionally, Vegetius says that they did bimonthly practice marches, of 25 miles. Monthly, that comes out 200 miles a month. .................

Which version of 'bi-monthly' does Vegetius mean I wonder? Is there any possibility of ambiguity from the translation?

- does it mean 'twice per month' - so a total of 50 miles per month - 600 per year; which could be excessive; or

- does it mean once every two months - for only 150 per year?

[PhilusEstilius]

Where Bryan mentions patrols walking posts from one fort to another I would not think so for each fort had its own garrison that would have covered half the milecastles between each fort, then the two turrets between each milecastle would be supplied by troops from each milecastle to the right and left so not a lot of tramping around.
However having said that and not so much marching there still has been evidence that there was a regular deduction from their pay for caligae renewals, so we must consider just how long under even tuff conditions did this kind of footwear last.

[Bryan]

.................Additionally, Vegetius says that they did bimonthly practice marches, of 25 miles. Monthly, that comes out 200 miles a month. .................

Which version of 'bi-monthly' does Vegetius mean I wonder? Is there any possibility of ambiguity from the translation?

- does it mean 'twice per month' - so a total of 50 miles per month - 600 per year; which could be excessive; or

- does it mean once every two months - for only 150 per year?

I meant twice monthly but going back through Vegetius it appears its actually thrice monthly. So for garrison soldiers, 75 miles a month of just practice endurance marches, not counting everything else.

Vindex wrote:
I would have thought immediate repairs to boots would be part of a soldier's housekeeping at the end of the day?

But how much could a soldier actually repair? Oil the leather, replace a lost or damaged hobnail, sure. But could they restitch a ripped thong, which requires special leather working needles, or could they mend the thick sole? A cobbler's job was specialized and required specific tools so my guess is that a soldier could perform the most basic of preventative maintenance and upkeep on their boots but any substantial repair would be done by a specialist skilled in leathercrafting and bootmaking.

PhilusEstilius wrote:
Where Bryan mentions patrols walking posts from one fort to another I would not think so for each fort had its own garrison that would have covered half the milecastles between each fort, then the two turrets between each milecastle would be supplied by troops from each milecastle to the right and left so not a lot of tramping around.
However having said that and not so much marching there still has been evidence that there was a regular deduction from their pay for caligae renewals, so we must consider just how long under even tuff conditions did this kind of footwear last.

I was mainly referring to duties such as escorting a supply wagon or something of that nature. I'm sure there were lots of different reasons a soldier might get put on a fatigue duty that would require them to march to another outpost.

[Scipio Second]

Ah, the mysteries of life.

I was a soldier for 28 years. I admit that I did not do much marching, but was affiliated with infantry units that did. The estimate of 3 months for boot replacement after intensive wear/use is as close an estimate as feasible. Issued boots tend to wear out more quickly than some commercially available boots. Of course, this depends upon the style and manufacturer. It is a simple matter of usage. Soldiers are allowed to purchase and wear commercial boots as long as such boots otherwise meet regulations.

For the average Roman soldier, caligae would probably need repair after 3 months, perhaps sooner again depending upon usage. In many cases the boots would need to be replaced.. This relates well to current conditions. So I am unsure why this is treated as an obscure question. The experience of soldiers throughout the ages is ironically quite similar on such issues.

Publius Quinctius Petrus Augustinus
(aka Pierre A. Kleff, Jr.)

[A_Volpe]

In a similar vein to heel-plates on 19th century and some modern footwear, the metal acts as a protection for the sole of the [boot], the hobnails are not just there for traction.

There is a reference to a petition by soldiers to their commander (I believe Vindolanda but do not remember the source), demanding an increase in pay, or at least a purchase for [more] hobnails to shod up their caligae, as they apparently were falling apart faster than they could have been otherwise normally repaired/replaced.

So yes, there is some pieces of evidence that suggests the caligae were used & abused, but it may not have been universal of all the Legions/Auxiliary all of the time - It might have been from a particularly long march over terrain that was wearing down the shoes, or, just being worn until they fell apart.

Archaeologically, as best I've seen it and understand it, the majority of Roman shoes/boots found have worn-down hobnails, so it appears they wore the things until they nearly literally fell off their feet.

There was a theory some years ago that suggested Roman soldiers may have had an "indoor" and "outdoor" pair of shoes, as you don't really want to be walking around indoors on a hard stone floor or whatnot, in hobnails, very dangerous. And we know the potential danger of this from the infamous account from Josephus about a Centurion leading troops during the 69 Jewish War, but did so on a marble floor, fell down, and was eventually killed while on his back. There is another anecdote of a soldier, off-duty apparently, going down a downhill cobblestoned street but sliding down on the hobnails.

Also from the archaeological survivors and their reconstructions, it appears the leather straps were sort of 'designed' that when they did break, the whole shoe did not unravel. Of my particular pair of Danyial Steelcrafts' Castleford type caligae, they sport on the very top, thin "dangly" strips, which I can easily imagine originating from broken straps (or that Romans were so far into "dangly things" on their belts, fringed trim on cloaks, danglies on shield covers and commachio-type bags, it apparently showed up on shoes, too!)

There is also this assumption that Roman roads had bare stones on the surface….There's an interesting suggestion out there that perhaps the roads were covered with a [thin] layer of turf for traction, not just for carts but for soldiers, as well. Although I've also heard of the theory that soldiers marches on the turf alongside the paved roads. Having marched in parades and whatnot in flat-soled caligae and other period shoes (medieval-Reniassance, 17th century, etc), on a hard flat surface gets really old, really fast. I suspect Romans tried to march on non-hard surfaces when they were able to, but also had some sort of provision for repairing shoes.

[Vindex]

Question: If one is not marching on hard surfaces, why does one need hobnails in the first place?

Supplementary question; If one is not walking on hard surfaces, why does the archaeological record provide worn hob nails?

[Crispianus]

Did the Roman Army march on Roman style roads outside of established Roman territory during campaigns of conquest such as in Gaul, Germany and Britain?
What type of hobnail patterns were used for military shoes and what size were the Hobnails during these campaigns?

[Mark Hygate]

Question: If one is not marching on hard surfaces, why does one need hobnails in the first place?

Supplementary question; If one is not walking on hard surfaces, why does the archaeological record provide worn hob nails?

It's just for that reason that I suggested that they might not wear them always.

Roman roads, but also road-ways and even pavements, let alone the stone parapets of forts and, if not all of a fort paved, then at least some of it - all likely for caligae wear both to protect the feet, but also keep the feet warmer in cold weather, let alone keep the feet away from any mud and other, more noisome, dirt.

However, if dry and especially if warm and/or if the ground is suitable - or if more traction is needed - then off come the boots.

I think, certainly for the last few hundred years, we have come to think of footwear all the time - it quite possibly wasn't as prevalent, nor even considered as necessary.

In addition, when it comes to the soldiers use of actual roads - we should remember that campaigning was often restricted to the warmer (and drier) months. I can certainly therefore see, even if using roads to travel (and I'm minded to also think of military usage in both the Napoleonic (+/-) and all the way to WWII) that keeping the baggage trains to the roads, whilst the soldiers march either side - is considered entirely normal. When they can wear boots, or not.

[Robert Vermaat]

Actually I quite like my hobnails when NOT walking on a paved road. Of course the hobnails protct my soles when on a hard surface, but they provide grip when on grass, sand and mud! Especially with a heavy load to carry, I prefer hobnailed shoes.

[Graham Sumner]

Question: If one is not marching on hard surfaces, why does one need hobnails in the first place?


On grass the hobnails act like the studs of a football boot (soccer for our American cousins).

Hobnails are worse on most modern surfaces. Once I remember taking part in a Guard of honour for Crown Princess Victoria at Stockholm Museum with the Ermine Street Guard. This involved marching and standing in and around the museum which had, polished black marble floors, polished wooden floors, smooth cobbled surface, flights of stairs with smooth polished surfaces, outside stairs worn smooth and sloped, metal grids and smooth tarmac. Add the fact I was not wearing my glasses and the potential for disaster lurked at every step. It was a tortuous experience but thankfully I got through the day without any embarrassment.

The life span of the boots used in my Guard days seemed to be about 2-3 seasons. Considering the society only displayed in the summer mostly on grass and really did not do any long marches, this seems to imply the boots were only lasting a matter of months. Like Ben I also had at the end a new pair of boots made by Sarah Juniper. They were the Vindolanda 'fell' boot type but even though I only wore them the one weekend for a display, appropriately at Vindolanda, they showed visible signs of wear. Consequently I could not imagine them lasting too long either.

In General J.F.C Fuller's book 'Caesar: man soldier tyrant', he frequently criticises Caesar for his lack of logistical ability. He says Caesars men were often short of food because of this and his campaigns often descended into chaotic hunts for supplies. As far as I can recall there is no mention of footwear. Under normal circumstances we do know that soldiers pay was deducted for clothing and boot supplies on a regular basis this again suggests boots needing replacing every few months even in cases for cavalry, unless the money was taken whether the items needed replacing or not.

Some footwear at Vindolanda and Mons Claudianus seems to have been used until they were very worn and the hobnails completely flat. This has been seen as evidence for a shortage of supplies on occasion.

I used to find with the flat heels that I was always walking on the heel and sliding over onto the leather upper at the back, so that was getting worn as well with the stitching coming away. Presumably Romans who were not used to heeled shoes did not have this problem. Nevertheless the worn example of a Roman boot from Qasr Ibrim on display in the British Museum looked very like my own after a few displays!

Graham.