Camoflauge

[boltgun71]

To what extent was camouflage used during the Revolutionary War?  I know camo like we know it now wasn't common, but they were common folk just like all of us and must have known the elements of camouflage could be a great possible life saver.  I'm guessing those, probably militia and maybe some of Morgan's Riflemen, who used it used primarily shades of brown and green for possible camo in there clothing.  Maybe even attached some vegetation to themselves or equipment.  Are there any historical examples you fellas could give me of camouflage being used in the Revolutionary War?  I appreciate any information you all can provide.  Thanks in advance.

[Mitch]

good luck finding early mentions of "camo"....it really wasn't a concept at the time(in my researching anyway)...

[Loyalist Dave]

The problem with camo is that it appears in two places.  First, it appears in wide open rolling moors in Scotland, as a man on the moor would possibly be seen at a good distance.  So the game keepers, called ghillies would wear clothing suited to help them blend into the countryside so that poachers would approach quite close and could be caught.  Hence the name ghillie suit for the modern sniper's garb.

The idea doesn't get applied outside of Scotland until the invention and wide spread use of telescopic sights on rifles that use smokeless powder (WWI), allowing snipers to hunt each other.  Until that time, the sniper could just stand off and shoot with peep sights or standard sights at formations of men, until they spotted the puffs of smoke and all shot back at the sniper.  

In the AWI no telescopic sights, and no rolling moors so no cammo.  Chances were in North America that when you saw the enemy..., you were well within rifle range, and probably within musket range.    

Morgan's rifle corps wore white hunting frocks.  Indians used lots of red in their body paint.  YET..., they tended to go unnoticed in the woods.  

Having spent probably a couple thousand hours on this very subject in my first profession, and been amazed many times, it comes down to this...,

The human eye sees things in specific order.  That order can be less than one second, but it does see in order..., movement, outline, color.  IF you don't move fast, and if the outline is marred by natural foliage, differing light levels (shade and light), then the color doesn't matter all that much.  We placed a man in blue jeans and red flannel shirt in the woods in heavy foliage, but he could be seen 100 yards away..., he didn't move and folks didn't see him, even when they walked within about ten yards... I have seen similar stuff time and time again.

The other thing is the face.  A nice, white face, is a good way to get spotted and shot.  Indians painted their faces red/black other colors, and most frontier guys had hats with brims (shaded the face).  Again, when you do spot somebody, you are very very close.  Remember the tactics then too, as they did and they applied them..., a man with a single shot weapon and a 'hawk does not want to get real close to an approaching enemy group, so will move (or get caught and be dead).  A group of men with single shot weapons can stay put.  When the firing starts camo would be a moot point as the smoke gives the shooter's position away.

LD

[riverrat]

I think the modern longhunter and common person is too hung up on bland colors.  Unless you are portraying a bland Englishman, color, wild and bright would be saught after by everyone else.  Remember, people had little more than what they had on their backs and wild and bright colors, like those that were imported from the far east was the prize.  Animals don't care what color you wear, most are color blind, and like was mentioned before, your firearm smoke would give you away.  You have to get out of today's mindset, like only weirdo's would be seen in flamboyant colors.

[Sir Michael]

Roger's Rangers wore Green uniforms in an attempt to blend in the back ground.  This proved effective enough that in 1800 when the British Army formed the Experimental Corps of Riflemen (95th Regt. Foot) was formed they were uniformed in Green specifically because of the experience in the American War.  

[54ball]

You will see camouflage in the tactics rather than the dress.  A good example of this is the evacuation of New York by Washington in 1776.  The crossing of the Delaware to attack Trenton later that year with muffled oars.  And the greatest example in my opinion, Morgan using the lay of the land to hide Lee's cavalry at the battle of Cowpens.
  Morgans riflemen at Saratoga in the trees and at the flanks is a good example of traditional camouflage.  Hamilton's nighttime bayonet attack on the British redoubt at Yorktown is probably the best example of camo as we know it by the Continental regulars.  His men attacked with blackened faces and unloaded muskets.

[Loyalist Dave]

wild and bright would be sought after by everyone else.

Based on what information??
Perhaps, but with natural dyes, you have the option of very expensive scarlet, or bright yellow (impe).  Otherwise you find very few "bright" colors of any sort when it comes to clothing.  Their notion of "white" would include our gray and manila-folder biege.

Roger's Rangers wore Green uniforms in an attempt to blend in the back ground. This proved effective enough that in 1800 when the British Army formed the Experimental Corps of Riflemen (95th Regt. Foot) was formed they were uniformed in Green specifically because of the experience in the American War

I know that's the accepted idea, but I'd like to see some documentation on that (meaning they chose that color for that reason, and didn't default into it and later found it to be advantageous).  There were other ranger units that did not adopt green that were operational and successful at the same time as Roger's Rangers.  

The Brits routinely clothed provincials in green in the AWI and it had nothing to do with woodland tactics as these were line infantry units as well as cavalry.  Some Continental Dragoons were also clothed in green.  

The first regulars equipped to follow Roger's Rangers example was Gage's Light Infantry, the 80th Regiment of Light Armed Foote, which were in brown not green, and that may have been economics with walnut being one of the cheapest dyes available to a unit raised in North America.  Before being disbanded they were changed to redcoats.  

The 95th did a lot of open terrain combat in Europe, and the shakos they wore were not suited to woodland tactics.  The German Jaegers were mostly dressed in Green in the AWI as well as other wars, BUT they were also military police when not deployed on a battlefield, and there is a question as to the color choice being not one of camouflage but to distinguish them from other soldiers for both the sharpshooting and MP duties.

The first real deliberate evidence of the idea of using color as concealment in Western warfare comes in the latter half of the 19th century, and the first widespread adoption really doesn't appear until WWI, where the telescopic sight came into its own coupled with smokeless powder.

(AND before somebody flames me for not mentioning scopes in the CW, and the Sepot Mutiny, as well as later wars..., there is evidence that they were much rarer items than previously supposed until WWI)

LD

[Sir Michael]

LD, in response to your post I have dug out the following.  

This comes from "History and Campaigns of the Rifle Brigade 1800-1813" by Willloughby Verner published in 1912.

Extract from "History of the British Army" published 1801

The buttons of the dress were dull, all ornaments of bright metal were discarded and the barrel of the rifle was brown, so as to make the men as little conspicuous as possible.

Extract from "The English Military Library, No. xxix, February 1801 Vol. ii Art. clxxx p. 564.  Account of the Rifle Corps commanded by Colonel Coote Maniningham..."

... riflemen has long constituted a part of the military establishments on the Continent, and during the disastrous war with the colonies...

Verner also states that many of the early pictures of riflemen showed them wearing tall (18") plumes on their shakos may of which had been altered by their riflemen owners by scratching out the top of the plume and making it more properly 6" or so tall.  He goes on to say, "The absurdity of dressing a man i green so as to avoid observation and then surmounting his head-dress with some eighteen inches of stiff plume, so as to indicate his position when taking cover, need not be dwelt upon."

Philip Haythonrnthwite's book British Riflemen 1797-1815 pub 2002 states, "The dark green rifle uniform was certainly of significance on the battlefield as a form of camouflage, although it may not have been the most effective colour.  In 1800 Colonel Hamilton Smith employed the 6/66th rifle company in an experiment involving shooting at targets or red, dark green, and iron grey (the latter worn by the Austrian Jagers" at a range of up to  150 yds.  The red target was destroyed, the green one badly damaged, but the grey proved the most difficult to hit, and thus the superior colour for camouflage."

Somewhere I seem to remember more about the selection of Green for the 95th but I just can't put my hand on it right now.

[Loyalist Dave]

Removal of bright shiny bits on the uniforms was SOP for many armies, Wolfe did it in the F&I, the previously mentioned 80th had white metal buttons painted black.  In the AWI, German regular officers were told to remove gold lace.  British junior officers (standing in the line) removed gorgets in combat, and Sergeants discarded halberds, and both sergeants and officers started carrying fusils.  We're talking about cloth color, not accents or equipment, that would have a strobe effect in the woods.  

So in 1800, the year the "experimental rifle corps" was formed they knew that green didn't work so well, but gray did, YET..., they dressed them in green.  So IF they gained an advantage..., it was as I pointed out, by default.  

Still waiting on the reference that says they dressed them in green due to the lessons learned by Roger's Rangers in the F&I.      The 80th was disbanded and there were no green or brown uniforms in the British Army when the AWI started, and as the war progressed only provincial units and cavalry got green, so they were slow learners if they didn't institute the green for concealment until Napoleonic combat.

LD

[Sir Michael]

LD, sorry it took so long to get back to you.  Too many books and I don't tend to mark them up so research is slow.

1st.  in regards to the color of the uniform.  A Green dot placed on a white background makes a real good target.  A Green dot hanging from a tree limb in the summer is invisible (depending on the green - in this case "dark bottle green")  A Gray dot placed on a white background is almost invisible at 150 yds.  (No wonder it scored so well.  the same dot hanging from a tree limb is very visible - which is why we use white/gray to paint the targets we hang for woods walks.  Paint one green other than florescent and no one will see it much less hit it.)  

2nd.  I have finally found what I think is the reference that has insinuated its self into memory resulting in the mistaken (yes I believe now I was wrong don't nobody keel over and die now) belief that there was a connection between the green worn by Rogers Rangers and that worn by the rifle regiments of the British Army.

JCF Fuller in his history of the British Army makes a passing reference to RR as an early example of Light Infantry which was exemplified by the 95th or Rifle Brigade.  He makes no mention of the color of their uniforms.  (The connection is only this RR and RB are LI.  RR and RB both wear green.  AH HA there is a connection - WRONG only by happenstance.)

In piecing together the tangled web of uniform colors, it now appears that in 1795 two companies of the North York Militia designated as "light armed marksmen" were uniformed in Green, as a result of Green cloth being available since the unit it was to go to never got formed (Fencible Cavalry).  In 1799, the 5th Bn of the 60th Rgt. which was comprised almost entirely of Germans and Austrians who were equipped with rifles they brought with them from home adopted the color along with Red collars, cuffs, and facings since the rest of the 60th wore red.  In 1800 when the RB was being formed the uniform color selected for it was the same Green and in 1801 one of the first "Uniform Regulations" published for the Army stated that all Rifle units were to wear the same Green uniform except for cuffs, collars, facings, and lace.  The RB picked black for the officers and a basic uniform style similar to Hussars and white trim for the other ranks to set them apart.  

Having provided this information, I also found references to Lt.Col. Stewart having recently been in Europe observing the LI and Jagers there were they were generally uniformed in Green and upon his return to England and starting the preparations for the training and instruction of the RB (Experimental Corps of Riflemen) he may have been responsible for the selection of Green as the uniform color.

There are also references to the Jagers in Europe being maned by men that were experienced hunters and their experiences with concealment for hunting may have lead to their use of Green.

3rd.  In 1830 the Rifle units in the British Army were ordered to replace their "white" metal buttons with "Black".  This was done to reduce their visibility in combat.  However, I have a letter written by Col. Johnathon Leach Ret. of the Rifle Brigade to the editor of The Englishman paper Calcutta, India on January 29, 1841.  In this letter he is very emphatic that replacing the white buttons with black serves no purpose and significantly reduces the appearance of the uniform making it look dull, somber, and heavy.  He also states that no rifleman was ever seen and shot because of his shiny buttons.  Before you dismiss him remember that he was the company commander of No. 2 Company, 1st Bn. 95th Rgt. through the entire Peninsular War receiving 12 campaign bars on this GSM (the maximum anyone received was 14 by one man and three men got 13).

[Loyalist Dave]

One must remember that green was quite expensive, as it was a double dye bath to produce, until after the Napoleonic conflict.  The use of green was either it's availability (you mentioned the surplus fabric for a unit that did not claim it) or for elite units.

  Roger's Rangers had five companies, and not all of the companies were outfitted with green, and those that were did not begin in green.

I pointed out the MP duties of the German Jaegers, and they carried elite status being all volunteer, another reason why some (not all) were in green uniforms.

Daniel Morgan's riflemen wore white..., and the unit was disbanded during the AWI.

Ferguson's unit was in red during the AWI.

Tarleton's legion was cavalry, and they were in green in the AWI.

The Company of Select Marksmen wore red in the AWI.
 
The 95th regiment was hand picked, and had an elaborate, hussar like, regimental coat, with different disciplinary standards.  All this points to an elite unit, with an elite style of clothing to set themselves apart.  Again, once the firing began, the "signature" from a Baker rifle or any BP gun will often give the shooter away.

Again, the first real use of camouflage as a military tactic when it comes to clothing, came about just prior to WWI, and was instituted for snipers in WWI as a military standard.  

LD

[Mike R]

I wish I had my references cataloged as to topic, but alas!  I have seen several period writings that indicate that the concept of camouflage was understood and at least locally practiced. One quote specifically mentions dying shirts the color of dry leaves to blend in.  Another mentions indians painting leaves on their shirts to hide in the woods. In New England's King Phillips War indians covered themselves with shrubbery to sneak up on colonials.  It was not the common military practice of the day to camouflage,as has been noted, but backwoods people knew about it and more often practiced it. You don't have to have blotty clothes like moderrn camo to blend in--I have seen that for myself on many occasions--just dull natural colors.

[Mike R]

P.S.  an anecdote:  when I was in the Infantry (USArmy) back in the 60s, we had a field demo on camouflage--this was the days before Blotchy camo clothes--we wore solid olive drab fatigues.  The instructor stood in front of us talking in a field with scattered bushes, a woods was behind us.  After the talk he asked if we had spotted anyone camouflaged around us.  I had been staring at the bush next to him all the time, but saw nothing special about it.  Then a soldier extricated himself from the bush, rifle in hand and said he had us in his sights the whole time.  It was broad daylight on a sunny clear day. He wore only green fatigues.  I think our early indians knew these principles and thatsome pioneers learned them too...

[Loyalist Dave]

Part of the reason is terrain (imho).  The idea of camo doesn't get widespread attention on this continent, especially in the Eastern Woodlands, not per se.  I know of the two references you mentioned, but the first (iirc) is questioned as was the color intended to be that of "dry leaves" for blending purposes, or was it a quote describing the color using a reference to "dry leaves"?  The second reference was (iirc) to Indians painting leaves on their blankets..., and I have seen many folks reference it , but nobody was ever able to direct me to the actual document's location.  I wonder about somebody years ago claiming to have found the reference, and folks merely quoting the claim, not the actual reference.

Sorta like the reenactor ranger units posting the WWII ranger's rules thinking they were indeed the original standing orders from Robert Rogers, when in fact they are paraphrased.
Here is a current example of such inaccuracy that creeps into historic teaching, although this is a modern military ranger site:
  http://i-kirk.info/tales/vnr17.html

And here is a site with the correct historic reference:
http://www.rogersrangers.org/rules/index.html

The places that it really starts to be studied are the Highland moors of Scotland, and the battlefields of WWI.  Huge open terrain in both cases, and in the second case, the use of telescopic sights had seriously come onto the battlefield.

In the 18th century you're talking for most of Eastern North America, primeval, old-growth forest.  It's bloody DARK under that tripple canopy, and dull clothing does very well.  Military officers on the British side in the AWI were warned to remove shiny parts of their uniforms, not because they were being picked off in the woods, but because at a distance across a field, in the bright sunlight, Continental riflemen were using the easily seen shiny bits to chose their targets.

LD

[Mike R]

The text I read [I'll have to search for it] was specifically a reference to dry leaf color shirts helping one to blend into the woods.  The painted leaf reference was to shirts that I read, not blankets. The King Phillips War reference to Indians camo'ing themselves with brush can be found in a number of works of history on that war--and was so common knowledge back when Amer history was really taught well in public schools that comedians of the 50s used that as a sight gag--ever see the old TV shows where the settler is standing around and "trees" are advancing on him?  Or the even earlier [30s-40s]cartoons that show same?