Lead Adventure Forum

Miniatures Adventure => Colonial Adventures => Topic started by: VonAkers on October 25, 2021, 05:44:55 AM

Title: Mahdist Basing
Post by: VonAkers on October 25, 2021, 05:44:55 AM
Hi Guys
I got a ton of new Fuzzy Wuzzys the other day.
Im not sure how to base them .
I have seen lots ranked up on square bases looking like  French Imperial Guard .. and I think they look unrealistic and horrific ..  lol
Any ideas or suggestions on what looks good ?( not singles )
Unit size aprox 40 /50 figures .
Let me know when you have a moment .
Cheers
Title: Re: Mahdist Basing
Post by: Atheling on October 25, 2021, 07:59:16 AM
I'm using Kevin Calder's Up the Nile Rules and have the Beja bases as be,ow on 50mm round bases:

(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-37BRECGyDog/X0KCWEJhJsI/AAAAAAABESM/T6Q6VBZvtUMiou5t8ountV_S2hp-D9ciwCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/A%2BBEJA%2B1F.jpg)
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-5TCCcxjOigI/X0KCb19Cb3I/AAAAAAABESY/ayZZB1s-K04gF-8YYecSygs7NTkFqQM5QCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/A%2BBEJA%2B1C.jpg)

I used to have them based as below but they just look a far too regimented on rectangular bases for my taste:

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-IhOHBQJ4Y6U/VO4cqpWLN6I/AAAAAAAASE8/OJz0EuFEZZA/s1600/BEJA%2B1B-001.jpg)

I much prefer them on round bases and will doing the same for the Cavalry units too.

There's a quite a few posts on the Beja and why I decided on using Kevin Calder's Up the Nile Rules on by blog here:
http://justaddwater-bedford.blogspot.com/search?q=Beja%23 (http://justaddwater-bedford.blogspot.com/search?q=Beja%23)

Title: Re: Mahdist Basing
Post by: sultanbev on October 25, 2021, 09:34:50 AM
We base them on 2p coins and use Warbases irregular shaped bases that have 4 holes in, well I think they were Warbases, might be someone else:
(https://i.postimg.cc/KjnqGDTC/28mm-ethiopian-spears.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/5Q2qpvnm)pic hosting (https://postimages.org/)

This is a half-regiment of Ethiopian spear and javelinmen from my 19th Century Ethiopian army - we use 1:30 figure ratio so this represents a 500 man battalion.
Title: Re: Mahdist Basing
Post by: TacticalPainter on October 26, 2021, 12:32:53 AM
I think to some degree it depends what rules you intend to use and whether they require figure removal for casualties. I have Men Who Would Be Kings and Sharp Practice in mind, so largish skirmish games where individual figure removal is required (or at least desirable). Like you I didn't want the appearance of drilled ranks of regular troops, so while I use sabot bases for my British, who are based individually on 25mm rounds, the same regimentation wasn't going to work for the Mahdists. However I like the convenience of sabot bases or bases of multiple troops for the convenience of moving large units around the tabletop. So I settled on a compromise of basing in 3,s, 2s and 1s, that way I had a compromise that would work for single figure removal but the convenience of moving multiple figures on single bases.

I decided against a standard base size for the 3s and 2s, instead I bought a large piece of MDF basing board and cut it into smaller pieces and then made up natural edges by sanding with my Dremel. I still wanted to create the slightly chaotic look of a large tribal group and avoid any standard sizes or shapes. Anyhow, just my preference but thought I'd give you the thinking behind it.

(https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1024x768q90/922/zAI64g.jpg) (https://imageshack.com/i/pmzAI64gj)

(https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1024x768q90/922/DZ1ixe.jpg) (https://imageshack.com/i/pmDZ1ixej)

(https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1024x768q90/922/rqYo8c.jpg) (https://imageshack.com/i/pmrqYo8cj)

(https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1024x768q90/922/pbLdz5.jpg) (https://imageshack.com/i/pmpbLdz5j)
Title: Re: Mahdist Basing
Post by: Eric the Shed on October 26, 2021, 07:51:26 AM
I am going to base mine on 10 x 10cm coasters like my Zulus - 8-9 figures per base - 4 bases per unit...

(https://i.imgur.com/olGmhbY.jpg)

Title: Re: Mahdist Basing
Post by: VonAkers on October 26, 2021, 11:19:47 PM
Hi Guys
Thankyou for the prompt replies and feed back , most appreciated.
TP i do like the way you have based yours . i Ihink I shall move towards that direction.
I really like the "Swarm "look .
Having followed the TV coverage of the arab spring ... my mate and i were quite engrossed , mostly an overhead view of the riots .. lol
I liked how the swarm moved around , it is the look , that is the look you have captured, well done .
Cheers.
Title: Re: Mahdist Basing
Post by: Atheling on October 27, 2021, 07:28:47 AM
Having followed the TV coverage of the arab spring ... my mate and i were quite engrossed , mostly an overhead view of the riots .. lol
I liked how the swarm moved around , it is the look , that is the look you have captured, well done .

I'm not so sure the Beja/Ansar were as disorganised as a group of rioters. There seems to be something wrong with that analogy, possibly on a few different levels. It is a mistake to see a lot of African armies as rabble. For example, one of the most successful African armies I know of was the Zulu. Could that highly disciplined and organised force be called a rabble in the same way as rioters? The forces of the followers of the Mahdi were not far behind, if not better disciplined than the forces of the Zulu.

The followers of the Mahdi were quite a disciplined force. How else could they have broken the (at the time) stoic British square at Battle of Abu Klea?
Title: Re: Mahdist Basing
Post by: TacticalPainter on October 27, 2021, 07:36:41 AM
I don’t disagree. I think the aim is to avoid the more rigid look of European, drilled armies. There’s definitely a contrasting style of fighting with groups focused very much around charismatic leaders and in the Mahdists case a bravery that comes with a belief in the righteousness of your cause.

Wasn’t part of the success at Abu Klea the short distance they charged having surprised the British with their concealed movement prior to the charge? Clearly sound tactics given the lethality of charging a long distance in the face of modern weapons, amply demonstrated at Omdurman.
Title: Re: Mahdist Basing
Post by: Atheling on October 27, 2021, 07:49:15 AM
I don’t disagree. I think the aim is to avoid the more rigid look of European, drilled armies. There’s definitely a contrasting style of fighting with groups focused very much around charismatic leaders and in the Mahdists case a bravery that comes with a belief in the righteousness of your cause.

Wasn’t part of the success at Abu Klea the short distance they charged having surprised the British with their concealed movement prior to the charge?

Yes, there were other factors in play at Abu Klea but an unorganised, indisciplined army could not have made that charge and broken the square.

Clearly sound tactics given the lethality of charging a long distance in the face of modern weapons, amply demonstrated at Omdurman.

Well, the Maxim Gun made all the difference at Omdurman. Military tech had moved on quickly from the time of Abu Klea to Omdurman.
Title: Re: Mahdist Basing
Post by: sultanbev on October 27, 2021, 10:49:40 AM
Mahdists, and Zulus and Abyssinnians for that matter, did have actual organisation.

A Mahdist Rub, being roughly equivalent to a European regiment had:
Rub HQ: 1 mounted Amir
2 "battalions"@ 1-5 companies@ 100 men in 4 platoons, sword and spears
1 "battalion": 1 or more companies@ 100 rifle men in 4 platoons
1 "battalion": 1 or more companies@ 100 cavalry or camelry with spears, some with rifles

They certainly weren't "rioting mobs".
See MicroMark lists AF2N to AF5N over on the Wargames Vault for actual known unit sizes for Mahdists during 1895-1898.


Title: Re: Mahdist Basing
Post by: Atheling on October 27, 2021, 10:56:11 AM
Mahdists, and Zulus and Abyssinnians for that matter, did have actual organisation.

A Mahdist Rub, being roughly equivalent to a European regiment had:
Rub HQ: 1 mounted Amir
2 "battalions"@ 1-5 companies@ 100 men in 4 platoons, sword and spears
1 "battalion": 1 or more companies@ 100 rifle men in 4 platoons
1 "battalion": 1 or more companies@ 100 cavalry or camelry with spears, some with rifles

100%

They certainly weren't "rioting mobs".
See MicroMark lists AF2N to AF5N over on the Wargames Vault for actual known unit sizes for Mahdists during 1895-1898.

Absolutely not. They were very organised and knew how to fight efficiently their way. Just look at how they swept the Egyptian expedition not to mention Hicks's Pasha's debacle.
Title: Re: Mahdist Basing
Post by: Deedles on October 27, 2021, 11:12:18 PM
Mine are in a whole range of shapes abs sizes

My larger size ones use Big Red Bat bases
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-opUg9QvRfdE/XWuYO6BGUkI/AAAAAAAAsys/iLsqeaNj4Egm-1w5EDk8s4eNZnjTDWQigCLcBGAs/s1600/C1F03A72-8F84-4376-80AD-54E4CB3950E5.jpeg)

(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-N8nZOsAsXK4/WH9dqkdA1oI/AAAAAAAAb24/qv8lXCnqzcgs_hIJh7rdlkq58Rjun-57ACLcB/s1600/IMG_2640.JPG)

They are used to make up large units along with a range of smaller bases and other shaped bases
Title: Re: Mahdist Basing
Post by: bollix on October 28, 2021, 12:18:01 AM
Really like those Big Red Bat bases for massed units, very nice idea that I hadn't taken notice of before.

Cary
Title: Re: Mahdist Basing
Post by: Jack Jones on October 31, 2021, 01:01:01 PM
Nicely done.

I prefer to reserve round bases for scenic elements, with all my figures based on rectangular or square bases. I like the diagrammatic look of it.

Cheers
JJ
Title: Re: Mahdist Basing
Post by: VonAkers on November 10, 2021, 11:28:10 PM
Atheling.
Oh Dear...talk about a thread Hi Jack ... lol lol
Clearly this thread was Only about the Basing / look of the Miniatures.
This was for me to get the Correct "Look "to the 600 Fuzzies I have.
I have seen them based in ranks which to me always looked wrong .
I want them to look like a surging swarm ,units yes for gaming sake  ,but overall a mass moving like a swarm taking advantage of Cover, wadis, hills etc  and not confined by basing,  most replies get that ..

However  I did not compare the Hadendawa to a Rioting Mob ,you did .

They were obviously not , a rioting mob, even if they "looked"like it .. lol

However nor were they an Organised Army in a European  in any way shape or form , they were Clans & Tribal groups .. , any other suggestion is well..mostly barking up the wrong Palm tree... lol...
I think you may be confusing being Very Brave and Fanatical , with being Organised.
 
Secondly the Platoon Organisation put forward by By Sultan Bev, and gleefully endorsed by you  is non sence  at best .. Mahdist Platoons ..???  please .. lol lol lol lol
.
Thirdly  the Hadendawa where not the forces that fought at Abu Klea and broke the square , that was a contingent of "Mahdist Main force"from Omdurman ( a collection of Tribes )
As Tp  points out there was multiple reasons for the Square being broken, not the least being how brave and numerous & fanatically  motivated the Mahdists were , none of these reasons  would ever include .. "being Organised"
Lastly your quote  that
Absolutely not. They were very organised and knew how to fight efficiently their way. Just look at how they swept the Egyptian expedition not to mention Hicks's Pasha's debacle.
 .

Once again your  opinion that they were organised because they beat Hicks Pasha ?? , well this is does not stack up .. sorry..and especially so with an Early Mahdist force.
 
The army that Hicks Pasha Led was Universally accepeted as being very Poorly motivated , dispirited and terribly badly led , effectively they were beaten and knew it before they left , some of the Fellaheen battalions had not been paid in 25 months.. , and were "Soldiers""  in name only .

Time for some reading , May I recommend  the excellent book by Lt Colonel Mike Snook, "Go Strong into the Desert "as a excellent current view.
Cheers

 
Title: Re: Mahdist Basing
Post by: Atheling on November 11, 2021, 09:35:34 AM
Atheling.
Oh Dear...talk about a thread Hi Jack ... lol lol

How come? You asked about basing and I presented you with images of how I decided to base my miniatures. Is this not the information you were asking about?

Clearly this thread was Only about the Basing / look of the Miniatures.

See my reply above please.

Time for some reading , May I recommend  the excellent book by Lt Colonel Mike Snook, "Go Strong into the Desert "as a excellent current view.

I have read it at least a dozen times and quite agree, it is the best book on the Mahdist "uprising"/Mahdist Egyptian War and Anglo Mahdist War.
Title: Re: Mahdist Basing
Post by: VonAkers on November 11, 2021, 11:44:19 AM
Atheling
No worries , we are indeed on the same page as far as the look goes , and did value your imput and pics of your guys very much .
 
Thank you
Cheers
Title: Re: Mahdist Basing
Post by: sultanbev on November 11, 2021, 04:39:07 PM
"Secondly the Platoon Organisation put forward by By Sultan Bev, and gleefully endorsed by you  is non sence  at best .. Mahdist Platoons ..???  please .. lol lol lol "

They wouldn't have been called platoons and companies, but certainly 4 groups of 25 men in a 100 man unit, that is how contemporary sources describe their organisation. It may have been administrative more than combat, or it may not, but you have to have some kind of organisation to be able to issue orders on the battlefield. There will be ranks that translate to "commander of 100" and "commander of 25" and "commander of 500".

If you've ever had to feed an army, oriental or otherwise, you'll know that you have to have some kind of organisation, just to you can work out how many people to water and feed.

I haven't seen a study of the logistics of Sudanese armies, but it must have been substantial, it's not like the warriors could just nip over the fence and pinch some apples and bananas from the gardens whilst in the middle of the desert.
Title: Re: Mahdist Basing
Post by: Atheling on November 11, 2021, 05:21:08 PM
"Secondly the Platoon Organisation put forward by By Sultan Bev, and gleefully endorsed by you  is non sence  at best .. Mahdist Platoons ..???  please .. lol lol lol "

They wouldn't have been called platoons and companies, but certainly 4 groups of 25 men in a 100 man unit, that is how contemporary sources describe their organisation. It may have been administrative more than combat, or it may not, but you have to have some kind of organisation to be able to issue orders on the battlefield. There will be ranks that translate to "commander of 100" and "commander of 25" and "commander of 500".

If you've ever had to feed an army, oriental or otherwise, you'll know that you have to have some kind of organisation, just to you can work out how many people to water and feed.

I haven't seen a study of the logistics of Sudanese armies, but it must have been substantial, it's not like the warriors could just nip over the fence and pinch some apples and bananas from the gardens whilst in the middle of the desert.

Here, here! Well put.
Title: Re: Mahdist Basing
Post by: VonAkers on November 13, 2021, 11:48:04 AM
Hi
Were the Platoons Motorised ..??
 o_o
Title: Re: Mahdist Basing
Post by: Ranthony on November 13, 2021, 01:42:01 PM
Hi
Were the Platoons Motorised ..??
 o_o

If you consider the already there fanaticism, coupled with hours of chewing the stimulating leaf khat, probably.
I've seen a few local somali chaps on the stuff and it does make them go 'brooom brooom' lol

On a more serious note, the Zulu's are a good example of the seldom acknowledged organisation, quite common to African armies of the time.

They would field units very similar to roman legions, with an impi of 4000, you might expect 4 sub commanders managing a battalion sized unit.
Under them, smaller units of approximately 100 men with a senior warrior and his assistant (centurion to optio if you will).

The British said of the Zulu's that there were few who were so well adapted skirmishing as they, the management of small numbers of men, in so orderly a fashion came as quite a shock.

It is theorised that as the Zulu were descended from the bantu of East Africa, it is not out of the question to suggest that the influence of the Romans in North East Africa had carried down over time and followed their trail south.

The Zulu had words for units as we do with regiment/company etc, so I would suggest that it would be at least possible that other African peoples managed the same level of organisational competence.

Maybe not but I thought it worth throwing it into the ring.

Cheers

Ry
Title: Re: Mahdist Basing
Post by: VonAkers on January 17, 2022, 11:20:36 AM
Ranthony
Sorry there were no  Roman influenced Zulu Impis ... lol

In regards the Organization of the Mahdists .
 
Here is a direct quote from Slatin Pasha on the Mahdist force .

"Whilst Zeki Tummal was in Omdurman, the Khalifa carried out a series of manœuvres between his forces and those quartered in Omdurman, and personally took the command; but as he had absolutely no idea of military science, and as the thirty thousand troops of whom he disposed were entirely without discipline, the manœuvres resulted in the most hopeless confusion and disorder;"
 
So not quite as organised as thought ..I could go on .. but wont .

The early Mahdist Army had its successes , entirely based on their Temporary Medieval Like  Fanaticism  & Superior Numbers , which were enough when combined to defeat a Pathetically weak poorly lead  adversary.

The later Mahdist forces after the Mahdis death were more a Internal Police force , able to repress the Local population , thats it .
The Mahdists had lost all their Fanaticism by Omdurman , the "Maxim gun" had nothing to do with their defeat  ..well not much ..lol
Cheers
.


 

 

Title: Re: Mahdist Basing
Post by: FierceKitty on January 18, 2022, 01:54:13 AM
It's worth learning some basic Zulu military terminology. Please repeat the following:

iCenturion

iPilum

uTriplex Acies

isiLegionary

Should settle the matter once and for all.