|
|
Post by goragrad on Sept 5, 2017 7:06:37 GMT
Having more Han figures than needed for a BBDBA army for either list, I decided to use some for a Three Kingdoms army (I saw that Duncan Head has opined that the most appropriate figures would be Northern and Southern Dynasty, but although I have a number of those as well, the Han are mostly painted and my rationale is that in the period following the collapse of the Han that armor and equipment would not have evolved that much. Besides, many of my Han are older figures based on Greer and therefore moot even for the Han. And on a final note, the Essex Han are equipped in Ch'in armo...). At any rate, in looking at the Essex pre-made DBA 3.0 army list there is no Three Kingdoms army. There is however a Southern Dynasty army available and the Southern Dynsaty list also has WWgs (two in fact). Amusingly the Essex list provides these for their WWg -  As I already have those two, I am set for the equipment. Of note in the pre-made Essex list there are not any additional figures to crew the WWg... I happen to have a pair of the Essex Asian baggage carts and thought at one point of doing something like this for my elements -  However, in looking at the rulebook on WWg elements and in researching on the web (with mixed results) I am thinking this -  May go ahead and put the mules at the back of the base for amusement and of course I had to get the solid wheeled carts. Although I personally find that that adds to their charm I this deployment. I may also add a few archer/crossbow figures to the bases down the line when I find where I put my Northern and Southern box. One of the sources on line states that these carts had a crew of 27!!! Has anyone else looked into doing these or actually put some together and have alternative ides as to how to do them? One final note - a couple of sources note that the use of baggage carts in this fashion started in campaigns against the steppe tribes under the Ch'in - anyone have any thoughts on that? |
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on Sept 10, 2017 20:33:04 GMT
I like your depiction of the wagons goragrad and am tempted to follow your example.I've been hovering between doing a Former Chin II/21c army or a Southern Dynasty II/71 army.Both have simular make up but the latter has 2 war wagons.I looked at Orientalising other war wagons but I really like what you have shown.
In the battle description you mentioned of each wagon having 27 crew, it also mentioned large shields placed on the shafts of the wagons and lances used combined with the crossbow to defeat their enemy.I thought this could be represented by placing pavis at the front of each wagon and mixing spearmen and crossbowmen as defenders.
|
|
|
|
Post by goragrad on Sept 10, 2017 21:12:42 GMT
I actually didn't see that battle description - the 27 men was from a discussion of Han warwagons on another forum.
Appreciate the extra info - will have to dig up something for the shields/pavises. Currently was just mulling on what to use for quivers of arrows to put in and around the cart.
I also was looking at a few more figures, including some halberds - at the moment I've mislaid my Northern and Southern Dynasty packs where I have some figures that will be excess to the required elements and the figures shown were spares.
|
|
|
|
Post by felixs on Sept 11, 2017 9:34:43 GMT
The Chinese internet yields little help on how the Han carts might have looked. My books also do not help much - battle carts are mentioned, but the look of those seems unclear. Some 1500 years too late, but maybe still interesting are these (I assume) reconstructions of Ming era battle carts: jd.cang.com/478841.htmlAnd another reconstruction, down the page: jiaguwen111.blog.sohu.com/162350609.htmlPlus here is a breakdown of two kinds of organizations as give in military manuals of the Ming general Qi Jiguang (1528-1588), the Lianbing shiji, the text in which these formations are described is from around 1580. The concept would be very similar to that used by the Han, except that the Han would not have firearms, of course ^^ baike.baidu.com/pic/%E8%BD%A6%E8%90%A5/10702845/21017262/7e3e6709c93d70cf75a6f715f1dcd100baa12b4d?fr=lemma#aid=21017262&pic=7e3e6709c93d70cf75a6f715f1dcd100baa12b4dbaike.baidu.com/pic/%E8%BD%A6%E8%90%A5/10702845/0/8326cffc1e178a8237a521b8ff03738da977e809?fr=lemma#aid=0&pic=8326cffc1e178a8237a521b8ff03738da977e809I would imagine that such carts would be drawn by oxen, rather than horses. But horses might have been used if in ample supply. Availability of horses varied greatly between the different campaigns of the Han. Assuming that there are no illustrations or descriptions of how these carts looked, I would scratch-build something based on supply wagons. It seems likely that those war wagons were improvised anyway, so something that looks a bit scratch-build, even awkward would not be out-of-place. I would take my inspiration from the pictures I linked above and from Hussite war wagons, of which many pictures are easily found. |
|
|
|
Post by goragrad on Sept 14, 2017 8:34:08 GMT
Felixs - saw some of those later links.
Considering the significant time lapse I was not sure development for these would be that minor. There was considerable evolution in other areas such as armor and weaponry.
One of the Chinese posters in one of those discussions noted that the ancient historians could well have used the same character when referring to chariots and carts. He was countering a point that in a particular description of a battle all of the vehicles have been assumed to be chariots. His point was that the character was more generic in usage and could be applied to different wheeled conveyances, thus some of the vehicles could have been war wagons.
At any rate it would be of interest to see what the writer(s) of the army lists in question based their description on - in current usage cart and wagon fairly distinct.
And some of the examples I saw were somewhat larger carts with higher sides. Not large enough to justify a 27 man crew at any rate.
|
|
|
|
Post by felixs on Sept 14, 2017 9:20:26 GMT
Yes, terminology is a bit of a problem. It is not possible to know from the Chinese texts whether they are referring to "chariots" or to "war wagons" (in our terminology). It is simply 車 ("che", you can also use the more archaic reading "ju") in most cases.
I am also not sure whether development would be so minor. I am rather saying that we simply cannot know from the sources that I am aware of. I have looked into most of the relevant Chinese works on Chinese military history and there is nothing that is particularly helpful.
Interestingly, using baggage wagons for field fortifications seems to go back much further than the Han. Records from the Chunqiu era (-722 to -481, give or take a few decades as you see fit) suggest that this was done. So the Han concept of war wagons might well be an extensions of that: Equipping baggage wagons (supply wagons) with some kind of fortifications materials and then using that for defense.
Sources are so scarce and unclear that I would suggest using your imagination.
|
|
