Lead Adventure Forum
Miniatures Adventure => Colonial Adventures => Topic started by: princeman on 29 September 2020, 10:00:37 PM
-
Thanks in advance but I am certain that there are members who can save me time and answer this question.
Did the Pathans use artillery and if so what kind?
Thanks,
Greg
-
Thanks in advance but I am certain that there are members who can save me time and answer this question.
Did the Pathans use artillery and if so what kind?
Thanks,
Greg
Well, Perry do a set and Foundry (used to do a gun which I can't find now) but do a set too:
Perry Afghan Tribesmen Gun:
https://www.perry-miniatures.com/product_info.php?cPath=23_96&products_id=3519 (https://www.perry-miniatures.com/product_info.php?cPath=23_96&products_id=3519)
(https://www.perry-miniatures.com/images/VLW%208.jpg)
Wargames Foundry:
https://www.wargamesfoundry.com/collections/the-north-west-frontier-1880-1908?page=2 (https://www.wargamesfoundry.com/collections/the-north-west-frontier-1880-1908?page=2)
(https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/1505/0474/products/IND235b_1024x1024.jpg?v=1476461916)
Hope that's of some help?
-
Well Pathan is the Urdu word for Pashtun, which loosely can be interpreted as "Afghan", and we know the Afghan state had a regular army. So technically the answer is very much yes they did. As for the hill tribesmen, it's not in my area of knowledge, I have no idea. But Atheling, the Perry brothers and Foundry sure seem to think so. Don't recall much if any mention of artillery in the various accounts I've read, though.
-
The short answer is, yes, but only on rare occasions.
As just mentioned by Plynkes, artillery was more often employed by the enemy across the border during the three Anglo-Afghan wars of 1839-1842, 1878-1880, and 1919. But there were rare occasions when Anglo-Indian forces on the North-West Frontier encountered an old canon of questionable operational value, in the hands of Tribal foes. Re: what kind... they could be old Mughal, Persian, or British or Russian or the odd other European gun. Surplus European arms were sometimes imported into Afghanistan, often through Turkey. These old cannon are occasionally mentioned being used to help defend a village or fort, or to help attack a British fort or outpost. The Afghan Regular Army's Artillery included a wide variety of ordnance, much of it surplus British Army pieces delivered when relations were going well. During the Second Afghan War they also had at least one battery's worth of commercially purchased Armstrong 12 pdr Rifled Breech Loaders, which at the time were cutting-edge military technology, and which played a big part in the Afghan victory at the July 1880 battle of Maiwand. But for Pathan tribesmen, outside a very special scenario, I'd go with the occasional antique gun to help defend a built-up area, or attack a British fort or outpost.
EDIT: Atheling has posted a pic of the Perry's awesome Tribal mountain gun. It's small caliber makes it practical for use in the mountains and rocky terrain, and can also keep it from completely dominating the battlefield. I think the they also make an Armstrong 12 pdr RBL with Afghan Regular Artillery crew.
-
I was just wondering how you guys pronounce the word 'Pathan' in your heads?
British officers with neat moustaches tended to say 'the wiley Pay-than' (with the second syllable rhyming with 'man') or Pay-thun (rhyming with 'Nathan'), I think. Interestingly, in India they pronounce it sort of like P'taan (rhymes with Bataan in the Philippines). I know that because there were a couple of cricketing brothers (Irfan and Yusuf Pathan) of Pashtun heritage who played for India.
Yeah, I probably watch too much cricket. :)
-
I was just wondering how you guys pronounce the word 'Pathan' in your heads?
Pay-thahn (I thin that's the phonetic spelling lol)
-
But Atheling, the Perry brothers and Foundry sure seem to think so. Don't recall much if any mention of artillery in the various accounts I've read, though.
Hey! I'm just going on the mini's lol
Certainly the Afghan Army during the Second Anglo Afghan War outgunned the British at Maiwand with their comparatively modern Armstrong guns vs the British 9 pounders. The Armstrong's firing a heavier shell than that of the British guns. I have to admit that apart from info sent to me by a certain author of all things "Victorian Little Wars" re: RBL 40 Pounders that is the full extent of my knowledge at this stage. :)
Again from the Perry miniatures Victoria's Little Wars range; Afghan artillery with 12pdr Armstrong:
(https://www.perry-miniatures.com/images/IMG_1759.JPG)
-
I've read lots about the NW Frontier between 1860 and 1900 and Pathan artillery is very rare. I don't recall a single mention in the accounts of the Great Pathan Revolt of 1897 (the biggest one of all) , for example. But as others have pointed out, operations in Afghanistan are somewhat different, possibly due to the greater prevalence of fighting on the plains where artillery can be more dominant? (That's just a wild guess on my part, nothing more)
Regarding pronunciation, I always thought it was Puh-taan...??
-
The Sikhs developed their version of the 9/12pdr Obusier de Montagne de modele 1828 in the late 1830s. The Perry cannon looks like a 3pdr battalion gun or the 9pdr SB predecessor to the Mule portable screw gun. The lack of artillery among the Pushtun tribes compared to the Sikhs and later the NWFF was a major factor in restricting their activities. It is more likely they had access to matchlock or percussion wallguns and possibly their mobile cousins the zamburaks(camel guns) from the arsenals of local forts or warlord strongholds. These were much like the jingalls used by the Chinese in the 1860s and were far more man-portable.
As has been stated elsewhere, the regular Afghan forces had access to conventional artillery but they had attendant logistical and transport problems which confined their activities to the plains or close to roads.
-
Thanks to everyone! Outstanding information as usual from the members here.
Greg
-
Not accurate.
Its ph-tarn
Pay-thahn (I thin that's the phonetic spelling lol)
-
Not accurate.
Its ph-tarn
I know it’s not accurate but the question I was answering was how I pronounce it in my head.
-
Not accurate.
Its ph-tarn
Are you sure?
From Collins it sounds like it begins with a “pe” as in the beginning of “pear”.
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/pathan (https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/pathan)
-
I was just wondering how you guys pronounce the word 'Pathan' in your heads?
British officers with neat moustaches tended to say 'the wiley Pay-than' (with the second syllable rhyming with 'man') or Pay-thun (rhyming with 'Nathan'), I think. Interestingly, in India they pronounce it sort of like P'taan (rhymes with Bataan in the Philippines). I know that because there were a couple of cricketing brothers (Irfan and Yusuf Pathan) of Pashtun heritage who played for India.
Yeah, I probably watch too much cricket. :)
I've always pronounced it "path'n", with the stress and pronounciation of a midwest american. Probably all wrong, I must have picked it up on a Historicon convention.
-
Just to confuse things further: an old India hand once told me, emphatically, that the word is pronounced "pah-TAWN" or "pah-TARN." Take that for what it's worth!
-
And judging by the likes of Hobson Jobson and the widespread respelling of modern Indian placenames the British have been getting it wrong for centuries! I'm sure the locals nodded sagely and politely and then when the English had left muttered something along the lines of "bloody firanghis!"