Talk:Calceus

Proposed merge

This article is one of several would-be "definitive" articles on types of Roman footwear. We also have Caligae and Soccus, and a general article on Sandal, to which Solea redirects from a disambiguation page. As ever, the definitions and categories seldom accommodate the objects themselves: Caligae are indeed "typically military" but were worn also worn by civilians, and many different patterns were in use. There's tremendous variation in Roman contemporary terminology for footwear, whether military, or civilian, or in some cases both. In many cases we've not a clue what was meant by a particular Latin term for an article of footwear. And curators and scholars acknowledge the tremendous, inventive variety in the footwear itself, notwithstanding the tendency to simplify and standardise in statuary and other artistic renditions. Just to take a couple of examples; where might the "Hellenistic-style high-laced, soft-topped but rather military-looking high-boot shown on some statuary and paintings" be dealt with? Not quite a Caligus, not quite a sandal. When does a calceus or a Caligus become an enclosed "shoe-boot"? Modern scholarship addresses these issues with increasing caution, and I suggest we acknowledge this by having a nicely capacious and broad new article, which would absorb all separate articles on Roman footwear. It would probably be titled Footwear in ancient Rome, based on a sub-section I'm currently working on; Clothing in ancient Rome#Footwear. The new article would be split into subsections, providing targets for linkage. Any objections? Haploidavey (talk) 15:40, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

This isn't the right forum and it's definitely a mistake to have just separately reposted this without crosslinking on several articles.

In any case, the same oppose here as there and for the same reasons. All of the separate subclasses of calceus except for the unrelated calceus repandus can stay here until there's enough content to deserve a further split, though, sure. — LlywelynII 06:46, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Seven or so years on, I can't object to your objections. Failure to crosslink acknowledged; and thanks for the feedback. Haploidavey (talk) 07:15, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Medicalized art

No, the emperor's official statuary isn't revealing hidden diagnosable "hammer toes". It's displaying standard human toes in tightly bound leather, done up by an artist. You can try it at home with a plastic bag or malleable enough tote. — LlywelynII 06:50, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Lunula

This source is old and nonspecialist but it makes the lunula go on the front of the calceus mulleus instead of the back of the calceus senatorius. It does note its probable relationship with the female amulet though, something our article currently doesn't do xD.

Ryan, meanwhile, follows Isidore in calling it a luna and making it the mark of the calceus patricius, not the c. senatorius. — LlywelynII 13:38, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Venn diagrams

The provided Ryan source has a rundown of the disputes between Alföldi, Dossin, Mau, Mommsen, and Mau over the overlapping footwear. Based on their research, those scholars all felt the calceus patricius and senatorius were somehow or other completely separate categories. They mostly felt the mulleus was somehow or other a synonym for one of them and then disagreed over which one it was. — LlywelynII 13:34, 29 June 2023 (UTC)