Calceology is the study of recovered archaeological leather footwear and is comprised of conservation, documentation and identification of leather shoe components and shoe styles. Recovered leather shoes are complex artefacts that present technical, stylistic and personal information about the culture and people that used them. The current method in calceological research for typology and chronology is by comparison with parallel examples, though its use poses problems by an absence of basic definitions and the lack of a taxonomic hierarchy. The research findings of the primary cutting patterns, used for making all leather footwear, are integrated with the named style method and the Goubitz notation, resulting in a combined methodology as a basis for typological organisation for recovered footwear and a chronology for named shoe styles.
The history of calceological research is examined in chapter two and is accompanied by a review of methodological problems as seen in the literature. Through the examination of various documentation and research techniques used during the history of calceological studies, the reasons why a standard typology and methodology failed to develop are investigated. The variety and continual invention of a new research method for each publication of a recovered leather assemblage hindered the development of a single standard methodology.
Chapter three covers the initial research with the database through which the primary cutting patterns were identified and the named styles were defined. The chronological span of each named style was established through iterative cross-site sedation and named style comparisons. The technical interpretation of the primary cutting patterns' consistent use is due to constraints imposed by the leather and the forms needed to cover the foot. Basic parts of the shoe patterns and the foot are defined, plus terms provided for identifying the key points for pattern making.
Chapter four presents the seventeen primary cutting patterns and their sub-types, these are divided into three main groups: six integral soled patterns, four hybrid soled patterns and seven separately soled patterns. Descriptions of the letter codes, pattern layout, construction principle, closing seam placement and list of sub-types are included in the descriptions of each primary cutting pattern.
The named shoe styles and their relative chronology are presented in chapter five. Nomenclature for the named styles is based on the find location of the first published example plus the primary cutting pattern code letter. The named styles are presented in chronological order from Prehistory through to the late 16th century. Short descriptions of the named styles are given and illustrated with examples of recovered archaeological leather footwear, reconstructions of archaeological shoes and iconographical sources.
Chapter six presents documentation of recovered archaeological leather using the Goubitz notation, an inventory and description of style elements and fastening methods used for defining named shoe styles, technical information about sole/upper constructions and the consequences created by the use of lasts and sewing forms for style identification and fastening placement in relation to the instep point. The chapter concludes with further technical information about the implications for researchers about shoemaking, pattern making and reconstructive archaeology.
The conclusion restates the original research question of why a group of primary cutting patterns appear to have been used consistently throughout the European archaeological record. The quantitative and qualitative results from the database show the use of these patterns but it is the properties of the leather that imposes the use of the primary cutting patterns. The combined methodology of primary pattern identification, named style and artefact registration provides a framework for calceological research.