I've decided to refurbish my 15mm Carthaginians. I have Duncan's book from first time round and that will once more be my guide. I've also bought some new Forged in Battle figures. The latter set me thinking. They are very nice figures and baring some bearded Spanish Generals look as I expected. Perhaps they are Carthaginian officers?
Anyhow, in terms of painting the army is there anything new I should be aware of?
Ah, there's a question... I have twice tried to write a book on Carthaginians and failed to complete it, partly because I now can't make up my mind about things like the development of heavy infantry equipment. You can see a few thoughts about Carthies in the preface to the revised 2016 AMPW, visible online here (https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=-7n8CwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false)for those who don't mind cheating. But not much of that affects painting.
The reference therein to Numidian goatskin tunics is expanded on in a short article I wrote about the appearance of Numidian cavalry in Ancient Warfare magazine, and is reflected in https://www.relicminiatures.com/product/numidian-cavalry/ though not as far as I know in any 15mm figures.
There is now a probably-Punic helmet from the Egadi Islands wrecks, though I have not seen a restored version and you can't make out too much from photos of the helmet as it was pulled out of the sea.
The Osprey book The Carthaginians (https://ospreypublishing.com/the-carthaginians-6th-2nd-century-bc) has some splendid colour plates, though I disagree with a lot of his interpretations (he puts far too much faith in Silius Italicus). Probably worth getting to inspire your painting.
Thanks Duncan that's all very helpful. Thirty years.. It makes you think. Red shoes for the Numidians too.
Well, one of the two Louvre terracottas has reddish boots, the one who may be a leader. The other one's barefoot. So bare feet are still OK for the bulk of your Numidians.
Quote from: Duncan Head on August 07, 2020, 05:17:26 PM
Well, one of the two Louvre terracottas has reddish boots, the one who may be a leader. The other one's barefoot. So bare feet are still OK for the bulk of your Numidians.
red shoes!
Toto, I have a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore
Dam more changes to the Carthaginians should have finished them 20 years ago when info still relevant, Anybody know where go get a good up to date range of 15mm Carthos from ?
Got it, don't overdo the red shoes.
I have just bought a fair few from Forged in Battle. I think they might be the best out there at the moment. In size they fit with Essex or QRF, smaller horses though. Some of the new QRF stuff is very good I'm thinking of their Gauls and Spanish. Corvus Belli are very nice too but I'm not sure if they have had their plastic incarnation yet.
PSC s CBs not out yet but I hope the Spanish and Libyan spears have separate shields so in with a fighting chance of getting close to new info.
Can you expand on the shields issue Shaun?
The new thinking is that the Libyan infantry may have had Scuta/thurois shields , before Hannibal,s upgrade poss. for the Spanish campain of Hasdrubal
Seem to recall that Duncan had said something about that idea being unlikely now as the evidence for it wasn't quite what was thought.
I think the idea is that the use of a 'rectangular' single grip shield demanded different techniques to the use of a round double grip shield like a hoplon
The argument being that the fact that the Africans at Cannae were identical to Romans (Polybius says "The armour of the Libyans was Roman, for Hannibal had armed them with a selection of the spoils taken in previous battles." Livy says, "You might fancy that the Africans were for the most part a body of Romans from the way they were armed, they were so completely equipped with the arms, some of which they had taken at the Trebia, but the most part at Trasumennus.") meant they had to be using 'Roman' shields (as the shield would be the most prominent thing you'd see)
There was a feeling that you wouldn't try to retrain your infantry in the middle of a campaign when they could be called upon to fight at any time.
Quote from: nikgaukroger on August 29, 2020, 02:35:04 PM
Seem to recall that Duncan had said something about that idea being unlikely now as the evidence for it wasn't quite what was thought.
More or less the opposite: there are now slight hints that the oval shield may have been in use before Hannibal invaded Italy, for instance the shields on shipboard in Punic Spanish coins.
Quote from: Duncan Head on August 29, 2020, 03:22:07 PM
Quote from: nikgaukroger on August 29, 2020, 02:35:04 PM
Seem to recall that Duncan had said something about that idea being unlikely now as the evidence for it wasn't quite what was thought.
More or less the opposite: there are now slight hints that the oval shield may have been in use before Hannibal invaded Italy, for instance the shields on shipboard in Punic Spanish coins.
On a quick search of the auction sites I found two, one from Gades and one from Cathago Nova
Quote from: Duncan Head on August 29, 2020, 03:22:07 PM
Quote from: nikgaukroger on August 29, 2020, 02:35:04 PM
Seem to recall that Duncan had said something about that idea being unlikely now as the evidence for it wasn't quite what was thought.
More or less the opposite: there are now slight hints that the oval shield may have been in use before Hannibal invaded Italy, for instance the shields on shipboard in Punic Spanish coins.
I'm obviously confusing it with something else - I even just remember asking you about this a while back and your answer clearly says oval shield use is possible before Italy :o
So, just to get clear in my head
They start of in hoplite style with Aspis, Greek Style armour and long spear. Sometime prior to second punic war, they adopt thureos. Do they ditch long spears and go for throwing/thrusting (lonkhe) types at this point? Armour still Greek influenced? Hannibals early battles are fought with the Mk II types but, because he can, he re-equips them as legionary types because he now has lots of Roman gear. They get a sturdier shield and probably access to mail armour at this point? Do they adopt the pilum and the Roman sword?
Quote from: Erpingham on August 29, 2020, 05:47:06 PMThey start of in hoplite style with Aspis, Greek Style armour and long spear.
Perhaps not "start off". Are the huge
aspides they carry at Crimisus actually large hoplite shields, or does the adjective imply they are something different? But at some stage they adopt hoplite equipment, yes.
QuoteSometime prior to second punic war, they adopt thureos. Do they ditch long spears and go for throwing/thrusting (lonkhe) types at this point? Armour still Greek influenced?
Spears unknown, though the arguments that made me think that they carried thrusting-spears even after adopting Roman armour (chiefly the "spears held in the hand" in Plut.
Marcellus 12) still stand.
QuoteHannibals early battles are fought with the Mk II types but, because he can, he re-equips them as legionary types because he now has lots of Roman gear. They get a sturdier shield and probably access to mail armour at this point? Do they adopt the pilum and the Roman sword?
I suspect not the pilum, but I'm not sure. Since the Romans don't adopt the "Spanish" sword until after the Second Punic War (according to that Polybius fragment) it might be truer to say that the Romans adopt the Carthaginian sword.
Quote from: Jim Webster on August 29, 2020, 02:44:27 PM
I think the idea is that the use of a 'rectangular' single grip shield demanded different techniques to the use of a round double grip shield like a hoplon
The argument being that the fact that the Africans at Cannae were identical to Romans (Polybius says "The armour of the Libyans was Roman, for Hannibal had armed them with a selection of the spoils taken in previous battles." Livy says, "You might fancy that the Africans were for the most part a body of Romans from the way they were armed, they were so completely equipped with the arms, some of which they had taken at the Trebia, but the most part at Trasumennus.") meant they had to be using 'Roman' shields (as the shield would be the most prominent thing you'd see)
There was a feeling that you wouldn't try to retrain your infantry in the middle of a campaign when they could be called upon to fight at any time.
I must admit I have always wondered about the legitimacy of this proposition. I should have thought the use of either single or double grip shields would be largely instinctive. For example, public order riot shields for the police and military have come in both flavours over the years, and I am not aware of this causing any great traumas to their users. Put another way, whether you regard Hannibal's chaps as "soldiers" (trained professionals) or "warriors" (bred to the use of arms by their elders since infancy), these are blokes who are going to be carrying their shields (and weapons more generally) day in, day out. There might be doctrinal issues - as with Greek city state hoplites - but is that so much a case of training specifically to use a shield in a prescribed manner, or rather just a question of discipline - keep close to your neighbours, shelter partly behind his shield, and give the chap on the other side room to close up behind the edge of your own? I suspect Hannibal would have expected the core of his army to be as proficient with spear, sword and shield in close order and in loose order, just as Alexander's lads could fight in the phalanx or assault a hilltop or breach in the walls in a different manner. Are we too influenced, say, by re-enactors who, whatever their enthusiasm, are not doing this for a living?