what does kurdish cavalry look like

[BlackPrince]

I want to use Kurdish cavalry with an Ilkhanid Mongol army what would they look like? Could I get a way with using a mixture of Georgian and Armenian cavalry or would Turcopoles be better?

[tadamson]

I want to use Kurdish cavalry with an Ilkhanid Mongol army what would they look like? Could I get a way with using a mixture of Georgian and Armenian cavalry or would Turcopoles be better?

By that time they are more or less standard Islamic cavalry. Think irregular ghilman/mamluk. It's more an ethnic/tribal thing than any actual difference in appearance.

Tom..

[BlackPrince]

thanks tom,

I am think of going with Alain Touller figures but he does not make any irregular ghilman/mamluk figures. Which other manufacturers look good along side Alain Touller figures and I will see if they do any suitable Kurdish looking figures?

Keith

[madaxeman]

The Touller ranges are generally considered standard sized figures, so "essex-compatible", so Id suggest most of the ranges on this page:

http://www.madaxeman.com/wiki2/tiki-ind ... hwarazmian

Tim

[marcoPBEM2]

what a bad day...

first time i disgree with tim porter...sorry

the touller are great figure
foot are essex compatible
not horse
they are real steppe horse

[Delbruck]

The Kurds (who are lance-armed armored cavalry in FoG) are more likely to resemble Arabs than Turks. Ghilmen and Mamluks are primarily horse archers, and are unlikely to be appropriate for Kurds. In fact, they were probably indistinguishable from the Arabs of northern Iraq and Syria. Perhaps a few Byzantines or lance armed (crusader) Turcopoles could be added to the mix for variety.

[tadamson]

The Kurds (who are lance-armed armored cavalry in FoG) are more likely to resemble Arabs than Turks. Ghilmen and Mamluks are primarily horse archers, and are unlikely to be appropriate for Kurds. In fact, they were probably indistinguishable from the Arabs of northern Iraq and Syria. Perhaps a few Byzantines or lance armed (crusader) Turcopoles could be added to the mix for variety.

The question related to Kurds in Ilkhanid armies. Such illustrations and descriptions as we have for them are of armoured horse archers. They also fought in the same way as their Mongol, Persian, Khurrisani, Georgian etc contemporaries.

I'm assuming from the "resemble Arabs" you are perhaps thinking of much earlier Kurds (eg Salladin) who assimilated into Syrian city lifestyles?

Tom..

[Delbruck]

The question related to Kurds in Ilkhanid armies. Such illustrations and descriptions as we have for them are of armoured horse archers. They also fought in the same way as their Mongol, Persian, Khurrisani, Georgian etc contemporaries.

I agree, all armored horse archers in Ilkhanid armies would wear similiar equipment, whatever their original national origin - which would be a mixture of Turkish, Iranian and Mongol influences.

I believe there are also Kurdish armored lancers in the Ilkhanid list. I suppose these could be called "unreformed" Kurds. Presumably, if these Kurds (or Arabs) retained a more traditional style of fighting with lance - then they would have also retained some traditional equipment. I think it is more interesting to make these more Arab in appearance than the normal Ilkhanid horse archer.

By the way, Essex has also come out with a couple of new packs of Ilkhanid horse archers, one armored and one unarmored.

[BlackPrince]

Hans nice figures. The FoG Ilkhanid Mongol army does list the Kurdish cavalry as armoured lancers hence the interest is only one of two BGs that are lance armed and therefore have some hitting power.

[tadamson]

Hans nice figures. The FoG Ilkhanid Mongol army does list the Kurdish cavalry as armoured lancers hence the interest is only one of two BGs that are lance armed and therefore have some hitting power.

That is, unfortunately, an error in the list

Possibly stemming from the two optional bases of 'Kurdish Cv(o)' in the DBM list ???

[Delbruck]

BlackPrince wrote:
Hans nice figures. The FoG Ilkhanid Mongol army does list the Kurdish cavalry as armoured lancers hence the interest is only one of two BGs that are lance armed and therefore have some hitting power.

Tadamson wrote:
That is, unfortunately, an error in the list

Possibly stemming from the two optional bases of 'Kurdish Cv(o)' in the DBM list ???

The Ilkhanids ruled an empire that stretched from present day Eastern Turkey to Afghanistan, including Iraq. They also fought the Mamluks for control of Syria. Although Georgians, Iranians, Turks, and Mongols fought as horse archers Arabs never gave up the lance as their primary weapon. I don't think it unlikely that Ilkhanids employed auxiliary armored cavalry who could be defined as lancers in FoG. One can choose to regard "Kurds" as a troop type rather than a nationality. The transition of fighing style (as from bow to lance) is never as clear cut as made out by wargame rules. This is especially difficult because of the ambigous nature of Kurdistan's independence.

[tadamson]

BlackPrince wrote:
Hans nice figures. The FoG Ilkhanid Mongol army does list the Kurdish cavalry as armoured lancers hence the interest is only one of two BGs that are lance armed and therefore have some hitting power.

Tadamson wrote:
That is, unfortunately, an error in the list

Possibly stemming from the two optional bases of 'Kurdish Cv(o)' in the DBM list ???

The Ilkhanids ruled an empire that stretched from present day Eastern Turkey to Afghanistan, including Iraq. They also fought the Mamluks for control of Syria. Although Georgians, Iranians, Turks, and Mongols fought as horse archers Arabs never gave up the lance as their primary weapon. I don't think it unlikely that Ilkhanids employed auxiliary armored cavalry who could be defined as lancers in FoG. One can choose to regard "Kurds" as a troop type rather than a nationality. The transition of fighing style (as from bow to lance) is never as clear cut as made out by wargame rules. This is especially difficult because of the ambigous nature of Kurdistan's independence.

#1 Kurds aren't arabs

#2 'Arab' lancers are 500 years earlier

#3 Kurdistan independence ???????


We are talking about 13th C Ilkhanids..............

Tom..

[Delbruck]

#1 Kurds aren't arabs

Kurds and Arabs were often brigaded together in Moslem armies, presumably because their style of fighting was similiar.

#2 'Arab' lancers are 500 years earlier

Arabs continued to use the lance thru the renaissance period and well beyond. Most of these, however, would be Bedouins classed as LH, unprotected, lance, swordsmen in FoG.


The solution is very simple. For those who believe the Ilkhanid list should not contain armored lancers - don't use them. Others who choose to use the list as written will probably use "Arab style" lancers as Kurds. Whether or not one agrees, if the sample of the many AAR's on this site is any indication - people are very flexible in what they use to represent troops.

[tadamson]

[
The solution is very simple. For those who believe the Ilkhanid list should not contain armored lancers - don't use them. Others who choose to use the list as written will probably use "Arab style" lancers as Kurds. Whether or not one agrees, if the sample of the many AAR's on this site is any indication - people are very flexible in what they use to represent troops.

???

Black Prince asked what they looked like. (this is the modelling section)

I told him.

The list has them as armoured lancers, so his initial "can I use my Georgians and Armenians" was a good suggestion .

The list is wrong but RBS can go off and mull that one.

If someone came against me with some Bedu/Arab stands and said "these are my Kurds" I would be mellow (or sarcastic if it's a friend ) its only a game.

Tom..

[BlackPrince]

Thank you both of you for the robust discussion it very interesting to read - I note authors have stayed out of the issue of were Kurds Lancers or horse archers.

I will make my Kurdish BG out of mixture of Ghilmen and Arabs figures with mixed weapons so I can use them as lancers and if the army list revised then I will able use the Kurds as horse archers.

[tadamson]

Thank you both of you for the robust discussion it very interesting to read - I note authors have stayed out of the issue of were Kurds Lancers or horse archers.

I will make my Kurdish BG out of mixture of Ghilmen and Arabs figures with mixed weapons so I can use them as lancers and if the army list revised then I will able use the Kurds as horse archers.

To clarify

11th c Kurds are shown and described in the same dress and equipment as Syrian cavalry.
armour, helmet, robes, light lance (a 2 handed weapon), sometimes sword and shield, sometimes bow.

13th c Kurds are shown and described in the same dress and equipment as Georgians, Armenians and Persians (and Iraq arabs).
armour, bow, light lance, sometimes 2-h mace or 'sword and shield' replace the lance as melee weapons.

'Wild' Kurdsh tribes, seem to successfully avoid fighting their more powerful overlords (they are an ethnic group rather than a state). Though banditry was widespread.

Kurdish infantry are harder to pin down. They occur in various armies at different times but are never mentioned as visibly different from other infantry.

Tom..