Arabs 600-700AD

Spartacus · Post by **Spartacus** » Sun Jan 18, 2009 4:45 pm

I have searched the Army lists and the forum for Arab Camelry and find only a few in the lists. I am about to rebase my WRG Arab Conquest but find I have no real place to use my 72 Camelry. As I don`t have a working knowledge of the rules atm would it be in order to use these as Jund cavalry as I can then field the 24 Bg`s that the Arab Conquest lists employs on page 32 of "Decline and Fall" this will fall in nicely for fodder against Thematic Byzantine.

Alternatively can anyone suggest an Islamic Army that can use the Arab Conquest figures that I have? Looking through the companion lists I see little reference to Camelry unless these old eyes missed them?

Cheers Terry.

david53 · Post by **david53** » Sun Jan 18, 2009 6:35 pm

Spartacus wrote:I have searched the Army lists and the forum for Arab Camelry and find only a few in the lists. I am about to rebase my WRG Arab Conquest but find I have no real place to use my 72 Camelry. As I don`t have a working knowledge of the rules atm would it be in order to use these as Jund cavalry as I can then field the 24 Bg`s that the Arab Conquest lists employs on page 32 of "Decline and Fall" this will fall in nicely for fodder against Thematic Byzantine.

Alternatively can anyone suggest an Islamic Army that can use the Arab Conquest figures that I have? Looking through the companion lists I see little reference to Camelry unless these old eyes missed them?

Cheers Terry.

There are very few places that Camelry can be used and IIRC the most bases you can have are 12. Camals just don't do it in FOG at the moment.
Dave

philqw78 · Post by **philqw78** » Sun Jan 18, 2009 7:26 pm

I think if you want to use that many camels you have to wait for the Tuareg list Terry. I also have too many camels now. I have mixed the odd one into Cav/LH units, (1 fig out of 8 ish). If I had more I would think about bulking out the number of conquest spearmen I had with them. They rode to battle on the camels and fought on foot. So again the odd double depth base with a camel and 4-6 infantry would look good. Also generals bases and BG command bases if you wanted to model them that way.

Spartacus · Post by **Spartacus** » Sun Jan 18, 2009 7:48 pm

Funnily enough Phil, This lot started life as Tuaregs in Black and White striped robes about 20 years ago but grew into Arab Conquest when I went to WRG book 2. Interestingly I think I used them as Mounted Infantry then. And a big thanks because I just looked at the old lists and finally realised why I had a few Elephants in it-------Disguised Camels!!!!!

philqw78 · Post by **philqw78** » Sun Jan 18, 2009 7:59 pm

Unfortunately, if you already have the figures, fortunately, if you don't have the figures, mounted infantry no longer exist in FoG. Apparently there may be some campaign rules in future that use them, maybe. And the disguised camels in the conquest list are now worse than normal camels. (which are normally poor anyway) I think Christian Nubian or something like that may have quite a few Light Spear armed camels. Not sure how many.

Spartacus · Post by **Spartacus** » Sun Jan 18, 2009 8:19 pm

Doh! And to make it worse they are mostly one piece castings

. Oh well, I will move on to next really old pile of fatigued metal.

OldenTired · Post by **OldenTired** » Mon Jan 19, 2009 1:33 am

Spartacus wrote: Alternatively can anyone suggest an Islamic Army that can use the Arab Conquest figures that I have? Looking through the companion lists I see little reference to Camelry unless these old eyes missed them?

Cheers Terry.

good luck. the arabs themselves didn't actually use camels for fighting. they used to ride their camels to the battlefield, thereby keeping their horses fresh, them leave them with the baggage.

the foot did the same, sans equine.

check out hugh kennedy, "the great arab conquests.". it's a great, well-researched, and most importantly reasonable, history of the arab conquests.

CrazyHarborc · Post by **CrazyHarborc** » Mon Jan 19, 2009 3:19 am

IF you have some known opponents you will be up against, why not see if you and him/them can work out a way to use the minies/camels you have. That would likely NOT work at/for a GD, an "official FoG event. It would allow you to get into FoG until you can come up with correct minies.

Spartacus · Post by **Spartacus** » Mon Jan 19, 2009 9:01 am

OldenTired,

Thanks for the book ref, I like a good Military read. I will check it out now.

CrazyHarborc,

Yes! I know I won`t have a problem with local players using them but it would have been nice to find an accurate list for them and be "List accurate" In case I ever wanted to use them in a Tourney.

Thanks for your interest folks.

Terry.

Update--Just picked up "The great Arab conquests" Looks a good read.

nikgaukroger · Post by **nikgaukroger** » Mon Jan 19, 2009 9:14 am

For a good military read on Arab armies I'd actually suggest Hugh Kennedy's "The Armies of the Caliphs; Military and Society in the Early Islamic State" - the other one is a good overview of the history though

hazelbark · Post by **hazelbark** » Tue Jan 20, 2009 5:19 am

Spartacus wrote: Alternatively can anyone suggest an Islamic Army that can use the Arab Conquest figures that I have? Looking through the companion lists I see little reference to Camelry unless these old eyes missed them?

Ummayyad and Abbassid both are possible depending on your figures. Or just take an Arab conquest army.

OldenTired · Post by **OldenTired** » Tue Jan 20, 2009 7:29 am

nikgaukroger wrote:For a good military read on Arab armies I'd actually suggest Hugh Kennedy's "The Armies of the Caliphs; Military and Society in the Early Islamic State" - the other one is a good overview of the history though

!!

would have to be good. the description of why the arabs were able to defeat the byzantines *and* the persians was pretty interesting, and as i say, reasonable - luck and opportunism.

otoh, i also read, rodney collomb - the rise and fall of the arab empire - please excuse my language - fcking awful... DO NOT read this rubbish.

(and i'll look for the armies title as well)

Redpossum · Post by **Redpossum** » Tue Jan 20, 2009 5:04 pm

OldenTired wrote: !!

would have to be good. the description of why the arabs were able to defeat the byzantines *and* the persians was pretty interesting, and as i say, reasonable - luck and opportunism.

No, no, the sons of the Prophet (PBUH) swept all before them because it was the will of God. And, of course, all things are accomplished according to the will of God.

(Brushing up on doctrine for my Arab Conquest army)

"Paradise is under the shadow of our swords. Forward!"

Scrumpy · Post by **Scrumpy** » Tue Jan 20, 2009 5:17 pm

I thought he just rolled a lot of 6s ?

nikgaukroger · Post by **nikgaukroger** » Tue Jan 20, 2009 6:57 pm

possum wrote: No, no, the sons of the Prophet (PBUH) swept all before them because it was the will of God. And, of course, all things are accomplished according to the will of God.

(Brushing up on doctrine for my Arab Conquest army)

"Paradise is under the shadow of our swords. Forward!"

Remember to refer to any base/BG loses as martyrs - you don't lose a base but martyrs attain paradise

Redpossum · Post by **Redpossum** » Tue Jan 20, 2009 7:59 pm

nikgaukroger wrote:
possum wrote: No, no, the sons of the Prophet (PBUH) swept all before them because it was the will of God. And, of course, all things are accomplished according to the will of God.

(Brushing up on doctrine for my Arab Conquest army)

"Paradise is under the shadow of our swords. Forward!"

Remember to refer to any base/BG loses as martyrs - you don't lose a base but martyrs attain paradise

Funny you should say that. I was just reading up on Qadisiyah, and what a bloodbath! Just an incredible 4-day slugging match with all the bells & whistles - elephants, disguised camels, dead officers/leaders in droves, and a crucial flank march, as I suppose one would call the arrival of the Islamic veterans under Hashim ibn Utbah as reinforcements on the 2nd day.

The Islamic drive through middle on the 4th day, by Qa’qa ibn Amr and his men, which killed Rostam and began the panic in the Sassanid army, was reminiscent of Alexander.

jcmedhurst · Post by **jcmedhurst** » Tue Jan 20, 2009 10:27 pm

possum wrote

No, no, the sons of the Prophet (PBUH) swept all before them because it was the will of God. And, of course, all things are accomplished according to the will of God.

(Brushing up on doctrine for my Arab Conquest army)

"Paradise is under the shadow of our swords. Forward!"

The ultimate Inspired Commander maybe

Spartacus · Post by **Spartacus** » Tue Jan 20, 2009 11:46 pm

My thread has been hijacked. I must report this to the Mods

Anyway as I thought this had been finished I have sent the Camels to the great melting pot in the sky and skimmed off the burned paint and wood and served it to the Jackals.

So please nobody come up with an answer, NOT NOW.

OldenTired · Post by **OldenTired** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 4:41 am

possum wrote:[

Funny you should say that. I was just reading up on Qadisiyah, and what a bloodbath! Just an incredible 4-day slugging match with all the bells & whistles - elephants, disguised camels, dead officers/leaders in droves, and a crucial flank march, as I suppose one would call the arrival of the Islamic veterans under Hashim ibn Utbah as reinforcements on the 2nd day.

The Islamic drive through middle on the 4th day, by Qa’qa ibn Amr and his men, which killed Rostam and began the panic in the Sassanid army, was reminiscent of Alexander.

hey, i didn't say the arabs we're extremely tough fighters.

just that an army of the size of the conquest would never have made it had the two big players not already slugged it out.

Redpossum · Post by **Redpossum** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:51 pm

Oh, NP, Olden, I wasn't thinking you had said anything of the sort. And to be honest, the Sassanids were every bit as tenacious.

I don't know much at all about this Rostam, but he must have been one hell of a charismatic leader to hold his forces together like that. I was particularly impressed that he actually managed to get his elephants back into action again on the 3rd day, and panicked the Arab cavalry a second time.

There is no doubt that the sons of the Prophet (PBUH) expanded into a power vacuum, just as the Byzantines under Belisarius and Narses had done in North Africa a few decades earlier. Still, were it not for Charles the Hammer stopping them at the battle of Tours, there is no telling how far that expansion might have run.

Honestly it is my suspicion that the Arab Conquest was almost out of steam by that point. The differences between Sunni and Shi'ia were already manifesting themselves. The Umayyad and Abassid were at each other's throats, or more often embracing in "friendship" while preparing the dagger in the back.

And this lack of solidarity sadly continues to the present day...

Arabs 600-700AD

Arabs 600-700AD

Re: Arabs 600-700AD

Re: Arabs 600-700AD

Re: Arabs 600-700AD