ACW Gamer | 02 Apr 2015 9:54 a.m. PST |
Hi all, I am painting up some Celts to be Boudica's hordes. When I buy celts…..are there certain things that Boudica's Celts would NOT have – say certain helmets or armor? I am not a button counter….but I like to at least get the coat color right. : ) |
Dave Jackson | 02 Apr 2015 9:57 a.m. PST |
Probably still wearing red coats at the time as khaki hadn't come in then….oh, wait…. |
Dave Jackson | 02 Apr 2015 9:58 a.m. PST |
|
leidang | 02 Apr 2015 10:14 a.m. PST |
I ended up collecting one large barbarian army as opposed to Celts/Gauls/Germans. I know it means some of the small details might not be right but it mostly works and no one has ever called me on it during a game. I wouldn't worry too much about it. Plus all of the barbarian races would have captured Roman kit for their nobles. |
zippyfusenet | 02 Apr 2015 10:30 a.m. PST |
Caesar wrote that the Brittani were using chariots when he visited. His continental Gaul foes rode their horses. Chariots are what you do when you haven't yet bred a horse big and strong enough to carry an armored warrior into battle. Once you have a big, strong horse, cavalry is much more effective than chariotry. I think a British army would have mostly noble chariotry, not much cavalry at all. |
leidang | 02 Apr 2015 10:51 a.m. PST |
Agree with Zippy… for my overall barbarian army I collected Chariots, Cavalry, Slingers, Javelin armed lights, etc. in addition to the basic warbands. I then deploy only what makes sense for the army I am fielding. ie. Chariots for Celts. |
zippyfusenet | 02 Apr 2015 11:25 a.m. PST |
Further thought – most of Boudicca's tribal host was probably very poorly armed. Fine Celtic helmets, armor and offensive weapons are known, but these are only occasional finds from noble graves. Fine panoply was probably reserved for the nobles, with their hearth-guard bully-boys having functional weapons and the vast bulk of poor farmers having not much of anything beyond a utility knife. Roman sources report one group of Britons fighting with swords made out of iron so bad that they bent at every blow and had to be straightened out by stamping on them. Another group of Britons is supposed to have fought using torches because they had no swords at all. A tribal host like Boudicca's probably included lots of guys in their shirtsleeves with clubs or pointy sticks, maybe with improvised wicker shields instead of proper scutae with expensive metal umbos. Some other Celtic armies, like the professional raiders who sacked Rome or the mercenaries who served in Punic armies were probably much better armed. |
JezEger | 02 Apr 2015 11:54 a.m. PST |
link Good start for info. |
War In 15MM | 02 Apr 2015 12:42 p.m. PST |
Like leidang I built a barbarian army. You can see the results in my Pax Romana Gallery. Because that gallery is Imperial Rome vs. the Germanic tribes I did not include chariots but I have them in my collection. You can see this gallery at link |
ACW Gamer | 02 Apr 2015 1:39 p.m. PST |
"Another group of Britons is supposed to have fought using torches because they had no swords at all." No that is a unit that I would like to model!!!!!! |
ACW Gamer | 02 Apr 2015 1:57 p.m. PST |
Thank for the input everyone. Based on what you are saying: A unit of Nobles might have helms, etc. Other units, poorly armed, clothed. A couple of chariot units. It sounds like the "naked fanatic' packs might be appropriate. |
sumerandakkad | 02 Apr 2015 2:01 p.m. PST |
Zippy- I think the Persians, Seleucid and Chinese would disagree with you. |
Unlucky General | 02 Apr 2015 2:03 p.m. PST |
ACW Gamer, Most of my Celtic warbands are unarmoured but I have a sprinkle of mail wearers through the ranks – warband units as a whole do not count as armoured. I paint a lot of plaids as British Celts are known for their textiles more so than the Gauls appear to have been. I tend to go for slingers rather than archers. Light chariots are good for certain tribes and light cavalry – unarmoured once more. Everyone I have is armed with a shield and spear or sword – about half with helmets. |
Herkybird | 02 Apr 2015 2:55 p.m. PST |
There was a lot of trade/travel between the southern Britons and northern Gaul, so I would guess the differences in clothing etc would be small (except for the use of chariots and slingers in large-ish numbers as mentioned above) |
zippyfusenet | 02 Apr 2015 3:21 p.m. PST |
Zippy- I think the Persians, Seleucid and Chinese would disagree with you. About the chariots? I took those nations into account. It's my observation that chariots went out of use as a combat arm in favor of true cavalry pretty much everywhere, around 700 – 600 BC in most Mediterranean and Near Eastern countries, except for continued use of chariots as royal transports and sometimes as terror weapons (scythed chariots). And I think that was all about developing a strong horse. In areas where horse breeding lagged behind, like Britain, chariots hung on longer. But that's just my opinion, and I'll look at any evidence you bring to counter it. |
zippyfusenet | 02 Apr 2015 3:27 p.m. PST |
Everyone I have is armed with a shield and spear or sword – about half with helmets. That sounds reasonable to me. In spite of what I said about lots and lots of poor farmers. Boudicca raised a *huge* army, a horde. There was scope for the battle front to be composed of real warbands, each one a nobleman with his brothers and nephews and their hangers-on, reasonably well equipped. And then, behind them, masses and masses of swineherds with sharp sticks. |
Oh Bugger | 02 Apr 2015 4:50 p.m. PST |
"Roman sources report one group of Britons fighting with swords made out of iron so bad that they bent at every blow and had to be straightened out by stamping on them. Another group of Britons is supposed to have fought using torches because they had no swords at all." Naw, no Roman source says that. The swords thing is a Gallic reference. The flaming torches stuff is about women accompanying Druids. Nor had the Iceni been fully disarmed they were after all allies on the north eastern frontier. The Brigantes seem to have given the Romans a good go for a lengthy period. The Silures were terrors to the Romans. Not the sort of things you achieve with farmers armed with clubs. The freeman class in Celtic societies was large and expected to fight. Was it JC who said their main strength is in their infantry rushes? There were 5 Legions stationed in the province of Britannia no doubt for good reason. Cavalry seem to have been around in addition to the wealthier chariot owners. I doubt they were much different from the northern ones the Vindolanda Roman complained about. |
zippyfusenet | 02 Apr 2015 5:49 p.m. PST |
Right you are OB. I really should look these things up before I post them. |
Oh Bugger | 03 Apr 2015 5:54 a.m. PST |
Well there's acres of print about Roman Britain and it came as a suprise to me that the entire corpus of ancient texts dealing with Britain (pre the Vindolanda texts) consisted of iirc 87 references some of them very short indeed. We also have inscriptions and the interpetation of digs but there really is not as much as one would want. I think Mattingly is well worth a read. |