First US Roman Marine Re-enactment Unit founded.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

And if it only works at dawn and dusk, why bother...well there is a reason for dawn raids.... mile:

[Gaius Colletti]

During the age of sail, did you see any English ships of the line painted blue camo? No...usually they were black with a nice big yellow stripe down the middle.

No I don't recall British ships wearing blue camo, but then again I don't recall them even trying, like those flashy red jackets you used to wear in the late 1770s

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Sorry that was a quote from Magnus..lol

[Nathan Ross]

Why are we still reinventing the wheel?
That is the zillion dollar question Nathan.

I dunno - fifty quid maybe... :wink: Good point about the undersides of fighter aircraft though.

I must stress Byron's point again: camouflage is not a Romulan cloaking device providing invisibility.

Yes, I never suggested it was (did anybody?). My point was derived solely from the quote about these ships 'remaining unseen while scouting' - not becoming invisible when in clear view.

from my experience, the argument “if x was so good why did not y use it” is not fruitful at all

As an historical comparison, sure. But in this case we have a contrast between the Roman British fleet doing something, and other fleets (by implication) not doing it. Why should this be? Surely there must have been something particular about the British fleet and their activities that made this sort of strategy effective.

They were the only fleet, I think, not based in the Mediterranean, so weather conditions may have been a factor. Also, perhaps their role was rather different: the Misenum and Ravenna fleets (for example) protected established seaways between established ports and harbours. Their vessels would be highly visible, as a deterrent to pirates and as symbols of Roman power.

The 'scouting' of the British vessels would be along a barbarian and potentially hostile coastline, where keeping as much of a low profile as possible and spying out what was happening on shore would be an advantage. The ability to move inshore and mount raids without alerting the locals too far in advance would also be vital. A different type of fleet, in other words, with its own particular tactics.

Anyway, my point in all this has been that while this blue-ing of sails and men may indeed have been done by one fleet at one point in Roman history, it probably wasn't routine in Roman navies generally.

At the risk of further wheel-reinvention, I'll leave it at that! mile:

[Kai]

Byron,

True! In fact, half the German fighter force today uses blues and greys in their Norm 90J-camo, the other half uses greys only. Norm 95-camo for fighter bombers, currently sported by AG 51 Tornados in A-Stan e.g., also uses blue-grey for their camo. The naval aviation, until it existed, had the Norm 87 with blue-grey and green-grey dominant for their Tornados.
Oh, and the underbelly colour of most German fighters before the 90ies was called Lichtblau, light-blue. I could go on, but I guess you all get the point


Nathan,

I somewhat got the impression that Vegetius information on the camouflage is dismissed because the described measures are imperfect by modern standards. Much of Matt's argument seems to point that way.
I actually agree with much of your arguments saying that some fleets would prefer a high profile appearance for various reasons. I would like to emphasize that the fleets for guarding coasts and rivers and always watching for enemy incursions were of utmost importance, at least in late Antiquity. These were probably also the most numerous.
As far as historical comparisons are concerned I again agree in principle but disagree in specific. Few people know how to properly compare in an historical subject. Most people not even know of the complex methodology that needs to be applied, and I am also rather skeptical if there are naval experts here who can say educated things on two periods, much less the whole naval history! There are just so many factors coming in...
http://www.ancient-warfare.org/rat.html?...699#285764
I myself freely admit that I am not capable of this in most cases. But I know there is more to it than saying "hey the Brits did not use camo on their fleet ships".




Matt,

My point was that if there was such a strong connection with the navy wearing it (based on the less-than handfull of evidence), why was it worn in the Legions?

Because it was not exclusively worn by navy personnel, but imho just preferred by it.

Anyone, and in fact it seems epidemic here sometimes, can take one or two pieces of evidence about any given topic, and all of a sudden become a crusader for some idea they have.

I really did not expect coming across as “crusading”.

You have presented nothing to firmly state that the navy preferred blue, only some officers and their boats (from Vegetius)

…and the personnel aboard these boats, sailors and marines alike.

However, as you mention, generic is using Vegetius as evidence for something specific.

I have used Vegetius saying that tactical reasoning contributed to the preference of blues that I assume, and that Vegetius wrote sailors and marines wore blue. Both are very specific statements in my book.

Again, if you can tell me what period in Roman history, and also the context that he is referring to...please do! Otherwise, that in itself is unconvincing.

If you feel like that, I will accept that, but please do not expect I would follow that reasoning just because you say so.

You need another written source to corroborate.

This is always preferable but not always possible. By any means I am believe having only a single source on a subject does not invalidate that source a priori.

Again, the only evidence I have seen has been for higher ranking officers, not the rank and file.

… after having dismissed Vegetius, that is. And you seem to have decided that the higher ranking officers are singular in their appearance within the navy personnel.

I know for a fact it does not work, otherwise every military naval vessel in recorded history would have done it.

Again the “if x was so good, then why did y not use it”. Sorry I will not bother with that, especially not after having said that I do not advocate anthropological constants.

During the age of sail, did you see any English ships of the line painted blue camo?

How many English authors claimed these ships were to be camouflaged like Vegetius does for the Romans? I better do not ask how many of these ships of the line were used for scouting, to which Vegetius refers.

unless you just want to paint it blue cuz Neptune likes it lol.

Why am I quoting this?

No no no...single colour camo is uselss.

Whether or not someone tries to camouflage is hardly dependent on what you deem useful. You may note that up to day single colour camo uniforms are used by militaries, Austria e.g. And I am positively certainly they wanted to camouflage. Just like Vegetius said they wanted to camouflage.

I chose not to comment on the other statements, especially not on modern camouflage…

[Magnus]

Magnus.
I know for a fact it does work....
Hazy conditions, when viewed from the shore, as well as dawn and dusk, overcast days, hazy days....I've spent half my adult life at sea...
It is an advantage.
And there are fighter craft painted blue...especially underbellies

When viewed from the cliff tops, a dark colour will be hard to spot...
you only need to close the gap, not sneak right up on them....

So what then...the roman navy, or any other military force only goes out when the paint scheme matches their surrounding environment? That is assinine.

[Magnus]

Kai, if you are not crusading for the sake of blue uniforms in the Roman Navy, then I don't live in Canada.

Again, this is just another case of someone muckling onto an idea that they prefer based on what they have read, and trying to convince others that it is so, based on very little evidence.

Have fun arguing semantics and what ifs! lol

[M. Demetrius]

For us, the color of blue started at last year's Lafe, and whether it's provable or not, that's the color we've chosen. Like a group that chooses red or white, or whatever other color, we picked it and we like it. I don't think we'll change colors, unless there is some definitive new find that says it is NOT allowed.

FTR, the US Navy uses blue on blue camo for their uniforms in some environments. My daughter (USN) was telling me that, when I replied, "If I'm overboard, I want neon lighted bright orange colored clothing. I want to get out of the water and be rescued." Of course, they have their reasons, but wet cloth just looks like wet cloth pretty much. I don't see the camo working very well to hide anybody at sea.

[PhilusEstilius]

David.

I don't wish to be critical of the footwear you show earlier but there is a way to make them so much more comfortable to wear.
This is where you need to go to the centre rear of the boot and and cut 2 lines that are around half an inch apart and go down to just above the Archillies then bring these lines in to a taper point.
Take out that piece of leather and now create small punched holes opposite one another all the way down to the point then just butt the 2 edges together and use a cross stitch to sew the edges together, in fact even a double cross stitch back on itself.
Then glue a very thin material on the inside over the stitching and you will find the boot more secure against the tendon and the heel.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

No, but to think they wouldn't use every trick in the book is....assinine. :wink:

[M. Demetrius]

Brian, I know exactly what you're talking about. The shoes in this picture, however are very comfortable, since the uppers are soft as deerskin. With a stiffer upper, cutting that slice out above the heel ball is a good idea. And sewing straight through, so the seam is on the outside (like the toe of the Deurne shoe, e.g.) keeps the scratchiness away from the foot, too. Good observation.

GJC, I'll bet they used any and every trick they could. And if you have to paint a war/scout ship, any drab color is a good choice. With the sail down, they present a fairly low profile, so unless you saw them near the horizon line, they would perhaps be harder to see in blues, greys, etc. But if the light is behind, they will appear black in contrast to the water anyway, being in shadow. Basically, camo for ships is not very effective. Navies pretty much quit using it quite some time ago.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Dave, if you have ever been to sea, or even on the coast, certain colours are practically invisible in the right conditons.

What I am saying is it is not unfeasible.
You would hope for surprise, before the engagement started...
Once you are into it, it doesn't really matter any more, because if they
haven't noticed you before your ram is in their side, you might as well paint it bright orange with flashing lights on it....

To rule it out is not looking at the possibliities.
Like I said, I have spent half my adult life from the time I have been 19
at sea, so I think I will go with my own judgement on this one.
Feel free to go with your own.

If that sounds arrogant, so be it.

[Vindex]

Is now a good time to say that the colour blue was a VERY expensive dye to produce and hardly likely to be used in uniforms for the run of the mill marine?

No?

Okay...I'll shut up...

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Woad was expensive?

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Magnus.
I know for a fact it does work....
Hazy conditions, when viewed from the shore, as well as dawn and dusk, overcast days, hazy days....I've spent half my adult life at sea...
It is an advantage.
And there are fighter craft painted blue...especially underbellies

When viewed from the cliff tops, a dark colour will be hard to spot...
you only need to close the gap, not sneak right up on them....

So what then...the roman navy, or any other military force only goes out when the paint scheme matches their surrounding environment? That is assinine.

If that is what you think, yes I agree it's assinine..but that is not what I said.

I am getting tired of having to over complicate a simple point.
The house is on fire, if someone doesn't understand that, maybe it's a good thing, but I am leaving.