Found these wonderful vintage shoes

I got some great clothing and hats too! Great estate sale! Anyway....these are in a shoe box that was made by Hoague-Sprague. Price tag on box indicates they were purchased at Famous Barr for the whopping price of $4.49. There is no brand name inside the shoe. Only a label that says "Vanity Boot Shop", 805 Locust St., St. Louis. I'm only guessing, but I'm saying late 40's or early 50's? Is that about right? I'd appreciate some descriptive words too. Thanks!

 

Hi,

I love those, they look to be very well made. Jonathan will know better than I, but they have a 1930's look to me.

 

I agree with Barbara - I see '30s too, in the toe shape and heel, although the thin bows suggest a more modern time (early '50s?). I look forward to Jonathan's input if he's available.

 

I'm feeling a bit earlier here too, and looking forward to Jonathan's take.

I was going to suggest that the box is not the one that the shoes came in originally.

 

Oh duh! You're right. Why would the shoes be in a Famous Barr box when they have a label that says Vanity Boot Shop! Sometimes I wonder about myself.

 

I switch my shoes around too. That will probably cause confusion for someone down the line someday!

I miss Famous...

 

Definitely 1930s, somewhere between 1932 and 1938

 

Hurrah! Thank you, Jonathan.

 

Thanks, Jonathan!

 

I can't determine what size they are. All I can find is a handwritten 37-0 and then underneath is a 50787.

 

If you'll give us the measurements, we can approximate the size range/width.
My grandmother had these very shoes in her closet, I'd swear to it.

 

Okay, the inside measurement is 9 1/2 inches. 2 5/8 inches across the widest part. The box that I thought was the right box, but turned out to be the wrong box says 6.5

 

That sounds like american size 7 to 7.5, but very narrow!! British size 4.5 to 5.

Also, it could be that the shoes were a 6.5, I have found that vintage shoes sizes run much smaller than modern sizes. Best to go by measurements!

 

I have a similar shaped and height pair of shoes with those measurements and they are marked a US 5 B/AA which is a UK 3.5 Your shoes appear to have been well worn in so will probably fit wider than the physical measurement of the insole width, as this doesn't allow for 'give' in the uppers over time. Could you add a picture of the inside numbers? I can usually identify the size from it's placement but not always.

Tabby they would be that size if the shoe's insole were flat, however with high heels the measurement will be longer than usual for the size.

Most discrepencies in vintage shoe sizing here in the UK come from the fact that many British shoemakers used US sizing from manufacture to retail and it is often wrongly assumed to be the UK size today. The standard coversion around the 40's/50's was US sizes were +1.5 on UK sizes.

 

Here's a pic of the numbers. They look tiny to me, but then when you wear size 10's, it's to be expected.

 

Could the 37 be a year dating?

 

Yeah me too! None of those jump out at me as being the size (which is also usually stamped on the soles, if they're not covered with new ones) if you find one a zero after a number always seems to indicate a whole size rather than 5 for half size. The bottom number in your picture is likely to be the style code. I would safely go with a US5 based on the measurements alone.

Interesting thought Tabby, though I've only seen uniform style post war brogues and oxfords dated inside before, and they included the whole year e.g. 1951

 

Could they have been made for someone and therefore not needed a size?

 

The custom made shoes I've had before do not include a shop name or shoe maker's brand, and still had a size. See this pair here.
I don't think they had an numbers on the inside either, because they would normally relate to the design and a custom make is unique.