Those are so 1776.

Unfortunately there are so few surviving examples of shoes compared to what there truly was and most portraits don't show the feet clearly. But, every once in a while, there's enough of a trend visible that even we can notice it today. Take for example this particular style of ladies shoes. There are numerous surviving examples, some even are dated because of weddings, and at least a couple of portraits! I'm hoping to continue finding dated extants and imagery of this style so the others can be given much more specific dating than the decade or two cushion usually afforded.
The consistencies I noticed were not only the bouquet embroidery on the toe, but both figured silk and contrasting straps/heels seemed very popular around this time as well. While those by themselves are posts for another day, they do tie in this style to a more specific time period.
You'll notice that the two portraits and the pair that mentions being from a wedding are 1775, 1776, and 1777. Some are dated later, and perhaps could be remnants of a popular style, but I believe that the concrete dating could provide major evidence to move that estimated date slightly earlier. Also, notice the major discrepancies in dates of similar styles from the same museum. I'm still looking for more extants and more portraits, but at the moment I'd feel safe putting any of these as 1775-81. Honestly, if going by heel and toe shape, if that dating does hold correct, these might even be brought down to a  two or three year range.

Powerhouse Museum, 1775-1785

Met Museum, 1776

Russian Shoe Museum, 1777 (Wedding shoes)

Met Museum, 1775-89

Russian Shoe Museum, (1750)

I'm definitely disagreeing with that date.

Russian Shoe Museum, 1780s

Met Museum, 1770-89

MFA Boston, 1780-85

MFA Boston, 1770s

V&A, 1770-85

John Singleton Copley and his family, 1776

Johan Joseph Zoffany, The Gore Family, 1775

Interestingly enough (and muddying the easy dating) the embroidery on the toe of the vamp continues through the 1780s and perhaps is part of what starts the 1790s trend for the cut-out work on the toe in leather. I can't say with consistency yet, but both of these pairs have a much more laddered style of embroidery compared to the bouquets of the 1770s. Perhaps changing with the toe shape? Or perhaps this particular pattern change is mirrored in fabric as well?

Manchester City Galleries

LACMA, 1785

Timeline of Shoes

I've been working on this for a couple of months now (including the post disappearing before I sketched all of the shoes and having to find them again). I wanted to have a timeline that showed the changes in style in a very coherent and gradual way. I tried to pick out styles that were not only very typical of their time (for English or American), but could show change from one style to another. And, above all else, be sure to reference what museum the images came from!

Met Museum 1984.141
1700-1710


Met Museum 2009.300.1480
1700-1720


Russian Shoe Museum id 1723
1710-20


Russian Shoe Museum id 1411
1720-30


Russian Shoe Museum id 1574
1720-40

Russian Shoe Museum, id 1322
1735

Russian Shoe Museum, id 1030

1736*

Met Museum 2009.300.4743

1730-59

Russian Shoe Museum, id 1412
1740


Russian Shoe Museum id 945
1750-60


Met Museum 2009.300.1406
1750-70

Russian Shoe Museum id 990
1750-70


Met Museum 13.49.30
1776


Russian Shoe Museum id 949
1777*


Russian Shoe Museum id 973
1775-85


Russian Shoe Museum id 1134
1780s


Russian Shoe Museum id 1037
1790


Met Museum C.I.43.65.3
1790

Russian Shoe Museum id 1587
1795-1800

Colonial Revival

In the late 19th and early 20th centuries there was a revival of 18th century styles. Shoes were certainly not exempt from this. There are dozens of pairs out there clearly based in those earlier fashions. Some was just due to the mode of the time, others were created during a time when shoemakers were desperately trying to prove how much finer hand-work was than machines. They not only harkened back to the detail stitching, but the shape and style as well. While it's all wonderfully fascinating, it seems to have created a problem. I've seen many examples on auction sites and even in museums labelled as "18th century", while they're clearly of a much later origin. And sometimes, they sadly get sold for high prices to unknowing bidders.

So, here's a celebration of the distinct Colonial revival shoes as well as a description of how to tell the difference from the originals!

1870, Shoe Icons Museum

1775-85, Les Arts Decoratifs         1790, Shoe Icons Museum

1880s-90s, Shoe Icons Museum

1770, Nasjonalmuseet      1760s, Bata Shoe Museum

I chose the two pairs above as good examples since they have such close original sister shoes.

What you can't see in these images is the easiest way to spot a revival shoe (or a misdated one). Right/left lasting. Yes, straight shoes become right/left, but their soles will never look anything but symmetrical. If it's right/left, it's probably after 1860.

The slight toe spring seen in late 19th century shoes is also a good give away. Originals tend to have a straighter line going from the back of the heel to the toe and don't lift very far from the ground in front.

1886, Shoe Icons Museum

Sometimes it's matching up the fabric to the style. By the time buckles and straps fall from fashion, so does brocade fabric.

1885-99, Met Museum

Outside of the obvious buttoned strap, the tongue shape and embellishment is a good clue.

1900-1906, Shoe Icons Museum

Modern brocade fabric, seaming, lack of straps, and a very shallow heel (under the arch).

1911 Hellstern & Sons

1913-18 Pietro Yantorny


1914-19 Pietro Yantorny


1925-30 Pietro Yantorny


Late 19th/ early 20th century

Mens shoes, particularly red heeled "court shoes", are seemingly more subject to misdating than anything else I've seen.  You can't look to the fabric for clues, being always out of black leather. However, some of the previous notes will help. Right/left lasting is still valid. Oversized tongues and other artistic exaggerations (like these straps) are a huge giveaway. Those massive tongues are not accurate to the 17th or 18th centuries. They were large, but not that big!

And while this square toe shape is "period accurate", many court shoes from the 19th century have wider and less tall square toes with rounded corners. 

MACHINE STITCHING. It wasn't invented until 1846 for regular sewing.

If you can see the bottom of the soles, look for the attachment method. Pegging on the sole is done later, while stitching (often hidden in a cut channel) is earlier. Some of the exhibition shoes are stitched, however. Metal tacks on the heels or glued on soles are much the same.

1890-1900 Revival Shoes

1761 Court shoes in 1728 style, Powerhouse Museum

Stitched sole and pegged heel construction when you look underneath. Dog-legged seams and randed construction. Even the insect holes in the leather covered heel (apparently these moths are only found on Continental Europe and their larvae eat into the wood and leather). This is one of the only pairs of court shoes I feel confident pointing to the online images and saying 18th century. Many of the others have...issues...I'd like to address in person. The only pair I've handled so far ended up having a 19th century label and bottle green leather insole. Dead give aways you often can't see online.