Mahdist Basing

[Atheling]

Atheling.
Oh Dear...talk about a thread Hi Jack ...

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.

[VonAkers]

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

[sultanbev]

"Secondly the Platoon Organisation put forward by By Sultan Bev, and gleefully endorsed by you  is non sence  at best .. Mahdist Platoons ..  please .. "

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.

[Atheling]

"Secondly the Platoon Organisation put forward by By Sultan Bev, and gleefully endorsed by you  is non sence  at best .. Mahdist Platoons ..  please .. "

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.

[VonAkers]

Hi
Were the Platoons Motorised ..??
 

[Ranthony]

Hi
Were the Platoons Motorised ..??
 

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'

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

[VonAkers]

Ranthony
Sorry there were no  Roman influenced Zulu Impis ...

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 ..
Cheers
.


 

 

[FierceKitty]

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.