Talk:Liburna

Problem with Morrison & Coates 1996 reference

The citation given as Morrison & Coates (1996) added in this edit of 10:11, 28 January 2020 by Blue Branson (talk · contribs) (indeffed sock), lists the title as "Greek and Roman Warships 399–30 B.C.". It is listed in the § Sources section this way:

• {{cite book|last1=Morrison|first1=J. S.|last2=Coates|first2=J. F.|year=1996|title=Greek and Roman Warships 399–30 B.C.|location=Oxford|publisher=Oxford University Press|ref=harv}}

but there is no book by Morrison & Coates by that name. Perhaps this refers to their 1996 book entitled, "Greek and Roman Oared Warships" (isbn=9781900188074, oclc=36238343; 403 pages), or perhaps their 2016 book entitled, "Greek and Roman Oared Warships 399-30BC", (isbn=9781785704017, oclc=8183635058; 420 pages). Given the longer title including the "399–30 B.C." in the citation in the article, it seems likely it's the 2016 book, and yet the citation date given is 1996. Maybe someone with access to these can resolve this, because in-line citations give page numbers which can only be correct for one of them, but not the other. Mathglot (talk) 23:42, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Speed of the liburnian relative to the Trireme. Conflicting sources

The article states that "remaining faster, lighter, and more agile than triremes". I believe the speed of the vessel relative to Triremes can be disputed. Notably, John Morrison in "Greek and Roman Oared Warships" states that the Trireme was faster than a Liburnian on page 323 and it states that "Threes are mentioned because they were the fastest cataphract ships the Romans had, and light as well" on page 114 .

This to me indicates reasonable doubt to the assertion the the vessel was in fact faster than the trireme at the minimum. Personally, I believe Morrison's interpretation as correct, notably because of the significant changes within the almost 5 decades of development within the field that has led to a greater understanding of the vessels. 84.66.235.3 (talk) 14:25, 17 October 2023 (UTC)