Thursday, July 19, 2018

Crusader - Census

First Crusade - Bohemond of Taranto

  • 6 Stands of Armored Spearmen
  • 6 Stands of Armored Spearmen (unpainted)
  • 4 Stands of Armored Knights
  • 4 Stands of Armored Knights (unpainted)
  • 6 Stands of Protected Crossbowmen

Third Crusade - Principality of Antioch

  • 6 Stands of Armored Knights - Livery of Antioch
  • 4 Stands of Armored Knights - Livery of Sanone
  • 5 Stands of Armored Military Order Knights - Knights Templar
  • 6 Stands of Armored Military Order Spearmen - Knights Templar (unpainted)
  • 6 Stands of Protected Military Order Crossbowmen - Knights Templar (unpainted)
  • 6 Stands of Protected Spearmen - Livery of Antioch (unpainted)

First Crusade - Fatimid Caliphate - Al-Afdal Shahansha

  • 6 Stands Unprotected Spearmen - Sudanese Spearmen
    • 3 Stands Unprotected Bowmen - Light Infantry - Sudanese Bowmen
  • 6 Stands Unprotected Bowmen - Sudenese Bowmen
  • 5 Stands Unprotected Light Cavalry - Bedouin 

Third Crusade - Artuquids of Allepo - Ilghazi of Mardin

  • 5 Stands Protected Knights - Ghilman
  • 5 Stands Armored Knights - Syrian Lancers
  • 6 Stands Protected Light Cavalry - Turcoman
  • 4 Stands Protected Light Cavalry - Turcoman
  • 6 Stands Unprotected Spearmen - Syrian Militia
    • 3 Stands Unprotected Bowmen - Syrian Militia

Thursday, February 1, 2018

Census - Crusader States

25mm - Field of Glory - WRG 7 Standard Basing


City State of Aleppo 

Inspired Commander
Troop Commander - Mounted
Troop Commander - Foot

10 Ghilman (Heavy Cavalry)
10 Syrian Lancers
10 Syrian Lancers
24 Militia Spearmen | 6 Militia Bowmen
18 Militia Bowmen

10 Bedouin Light Cavalry
32 Slave Spearmen


Principality of Antioch 

Inspired Commander
Troop Commander
Troop Comander

10 Mounted Knights - Antioch 
10 Mounted Knights
10 Mounted Military Order Knights - Knights Templar
10 Mounted Military Order Knights - Knights Hospitaller 
32 Protected Spearmen
24 Armored Spearmen | 6 Crossbowmen
18 Crossbowmen

updated 2018 Jan 31

What about your other projects?

I can hear the question now what about your other projects?

I am focusing on three projects to get them to a playable state.   I have owned the figures for the Wars of the First Triumvirate since the release of Warhammer Ancient Battles in 1998, the majority of figures for the Crusades since 2000 and I have a massive collection of Colonial American Figures that just need to be properly organized.

Other projects will still get worked on, probably on somewhat of a regular basis, they just won't be a focus of what I am working on.



15mm - Field of Glory - Successor States Army
25mm - Field of Glory - Wars of the First Triumvirate - Julius Caesar
25mm - Field of Glory - Wars of the First Triumvirate - Pompey
25mm - Field of Glory - Wars of the First Triumvirate - Gaul
25mm - To be determined - Fall of the West - Roman Army

25mm - Field of Glory - Crusader States - Aleppo
25mm - Field of Glory - Crusader States - Antioch
25mm - Field of Glory - Henry Tudor (War of the Roses)
25mm - Killer Katanas - Samurai Army of Tokagawa Ieyasu

18th Century
25mm - Rank and File - War of Spanish Succession - French
15mm - Konieg Krieg - Seven Years' War - Swedish Army
15mm - Konieg Krieg - Seven Years' War - Prussian Army 
15mm - Konieg Krieg - Seven Years' War - Mechlenburg
25mm - Batailles de l'Ancien Régime - Seven Years' War - Swedish
25mm - Batailles de l'Ancien Régime - Seven Years' War - Saxon in French Service
25mm - Batailles de l'Ancien Régime - French and Indian War - British
25mm - Batailles de l'Ancien Régime - French and Indian War - French
25mm - Batailles de l'Ancien Régime - American War of Independence - British
25mm - Batailles de l'Ancien Régime - American War of Independence - British Allied
25mm - Batailles de l'Ancien Régime - American War of Independence - Continental

15mm - Regimental Fire and Fury - 1799 Russian Army - Suvorov in the Alps
15mm - Napoleon's Battles - 1809 Austrian Army
15mm - Regimental Napoleon's Battles - 1815 British Army
15mm - Regimental Napoleon's Battles - 1815 French Army

American Civil War
25mm - Skirmish - 1861 Confederate
25mm - Skirmish - 1861 Union
15mm - Regimental Fire and Fury - Peninsula Campaign - Confederate
15mm - Regimental Fire and Fury - Peninsula Campaign - Union
25mm - Rank and File | Fire and Fury - Gettysburg Campaign - Confederate
25mm - Rank and File | Fire and Fury - Gettysburg Campaign - Union

19th Century
15mm - Fire and Fury - Franco Prussian - 1871 French
15mm - Fire and Fury - Franco Prussian - 1871 Prussian
25mm - To Be Determined - Scramble for Africa - French

World War II
15mm - Spearhead- North Africa
15mm - Spearhead - Sicily Campaign
15mm - Spearhead - Northwest Europe (Operation Market Garden)
15mm - Spearhead - Russian Front (Kursk)
15mm - WWII Battlefront - Pacific Island Campaigns - Japanese
15mm - WWII Battlefront - Pacific Island Campaigns - US Marine
1/2400 - Seakreig - Pacific Campaign - American
1/2400 - Seakreig - Pacific Campaign - Japanese

Microarmor - Modern Spearhead - Red Storm Rising (1988) - French

Census - Wars of the First Triumvirate

All Figures in 25mm based using Wargames Research Group standards and organized for Fields of Glory.

Julius Caesar

Late Republican Roman

1 Field Commander
2 Troop Commanders

24 Roman Legion - Red Legion
16 Roman Legion - Blue Legion
16 Roman Legion - Light Green Legion
16 Roman Legion - Orange Legion
10 Medium Cavalry
4 Ballista
2 Onagers
2 Elephants


Late Republican Roman

16 Roman Legions - Red Trim
16 Roman Legions - Blue Trim
16 Roman Legions - Orange Trim


Post 49 BCE

1 Inspired Commander
2 Troop Commanders

10 Heavy Cavalry
32 Heavy Foot
24 Medium Foot
24 Medium Foot
24 Medium Foot
12 Javelin
12 Slingers

3 Chariots

updated 2018 Jan 31

Tuesday, January 30, 2018

Why Ohio? Prelude to the French and Indian War

Author's Note: This is the first in a series of posts that I plan on making taking an in-depth look at the Economic, Political, Religious, and Social factors that lead up to the start of the French and Indian War in North America. 

Historic Background
Conflict in the Ohio Valley
In the Ohio valley, the Ohio Hopewellian Native American society and culture was phased out over a period of several centuries as the agrarian culture of the succeeding Fort Ancient[1] Native American society took hold around 1,000 CE.  Growing maize and living in semi-permanent villages the Fort Ancient Native American society flourished until the mid to late 17th Century.   

Further to the east the Monongahela Native American[2] society took root in the late 11th century in what is modern Western Pennsylvania.   An agrarian society based around Maize the Monongahela culture they built smaller, less organized, temporary villages and built less permanent structures than their western neighbors.    Not as numerous as the Fort Ancient Native Americans the Monongahela Society thrived until the late 17th and early 18th centuries.

Scholars believe both the Fort Ancient and the Monongahela societies were decimated by waves of infectious diseases brought by European Settlers and Traders.   The first noted decline for the Fort Ancient society begins in roughly 1625 CE, most likely through their contact and trade with the Mississippian Hopewell Native Americans who were trading with both French and Spanish traders alike.    The more isolated Monongahela culture did not start seeing declines until the turn of the 18th century after the arrival of European Traders from Canada and New England.

The agrarian methods of both tribes of clearing fields and moving villages and clearing more fields created large swaths of unused pristine farmland in the Ohio Valley.   This was noted by the European traders and explores began mapping the Ohio Valley in the 1730’s and 1740’s.

The Changing Native America Tribes
With pressure from European Settlers along the Saint Lawrence Seaway and in New England a few Eastern Woodland Tribes began migrating west into the Western Pennsylvania and the Ohio Valley.    The Wyandots, Erie, Seneca and Delaware tribes are examples of the tribes or offshoot of tribes that migrated into the region.  The decimated tribes in the region began to coalesce into new tribes.  The Miami and Shawnee tribes are two such tribes that formed during this period.

In comparison to other localized regions in North America even with the formation of new tribes and the migrations into the Ohio Valley the region was vastly under populated.    Pristine farmlands, large swaths of untamed wilderness could easily have supported four or five times the population of the Native American Tribes that were living in the Ohio Valley and Western Pennsylvania in the mid-18th Century.

Trading Partners
In the Ohio Valley, the Native American Indian tribes of the western Haudenosaunee[3] and the smaller satellite tribes under their protection changed their preference from supporting and trading with the French to the English over the course of the several years in the mid 1740’s.   In theory, the Haudenosaunee[4] were neutral coalition of tribes.   Prior to this period of transition, the western Haudenosaunee tribes including the Seneca and Onondagas, the smaller satellite tribes of the Mingos and Wyandots, along with independent tribes of the Shawnee and Miami had favored trade with the French through a series of agreements dating back nearly fifty years.  

French participation in the War of Austrian Succession, including King George’s War (1740-1748) in North America had depleted France’s ability to provide the necessary trade goods to the Native American Indian Tribes in the Ohio Valley.   This failure can be linked to the lack of the essential Infrastructure, traders, and manufacturing in New France (Canada and Louisiana) as well as the supply of finished goods from Metropolitan France. 

The void in the trade between the French and Native North America tribes provided an opening for the British Colonies, specifically Pennsylvania and Virginia, to expand their trade with the Native Indian Tribes.   Enterprising men like George Croghan and Peter Tustee became accredited and licensed traders by 1747 with large trading networks in the Ohio Valley.   After beginning their careers as agents for Edward Shippen’s company out of Philadelphia these men forged successful trading corporations within the Ohio Valley in the late 1740’s.

George Croghan’s company built six fortified trading posts in the Ohio Valley in the later stages of the 1740’s.   Built along the Miami, Monongahela, Sandusky, Ohio, Walsh and Cuyahoga rivers these fortified trading posts represented the largest threat and continued disruption of French Claims in the Ohio Valley.

European Policy
The push for trade with the Native American tribes in the Ohio Valley was one small piece of the Mercantilism economic policies of both Britain and France.   The Mercantilism economic policies placed in ever increasing value upon the Ohio Valley for very different reasons.   

Mercantilism was a regulated economic system that promoted the accumulation of monetary reserves by the central government by partnering with corporations to limit trade and manufacturing in the colonial areas of the respective empires.    Mercantilism goes beyond taxation and tariffs but makes the Crown a majority partner in many or most corporations involved in trade throughout the Colonies.

Mercantilism has many tenants, for the American Colonies of Britain and France two of the more important tenants include agrarian centric society and self-sufficiency.   

The congregation of potential workers in urban centers drives down the cost of employment under the auspices of supply and demand of the work force.   In this scenario when the potential work force is larger than the required or needed positions than employee salaries decrease.   These lower salaries lead to companies lowering the cost of their finish products.   Under Mercantilism, this phenomenon is addressed two-fold.    In the American Colonies both Britain and France put into place strict manufacturing laws limiting the ability of the Colonies from manufacturing the finish product as well as agrarian centric policies that place a premium on numerous smaller villages and towns over larger urban centers.  

The Governments of England and France expected that their colonies in North America would be self-sufficient.    Under this view the individual colonies would be required to provide enough food, clothing and shelter to keep the colonists feed, clothed and housed which are the basic tenants or foundation of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs.    Higher levels of Maslow’s Hierarchy would be provided central governments and corporations in metropolitan Europe. 

The Ohio Company of Virginia
The population of the British Colonies in New England exploded from 100,000 in 1700 to 300,000 in 1750.   This population growth swelled the populations of the Urban Centers in New England.  The stress on the agrarian centric policies in this colonial world forced the frontier of the Atlantic Coast Colonies further inland.    These policies of expansion conflicted with the Native American Indian Tribes view of property.    In 1744 the Treaty of Lancaster was signed between the Haudenosaunee and the Colonies of Virginia and Maryland paving the way for settlement Shenandoah Valley in exchange for protecting the hunting grounds in the Ohio Valley.

Between 1744 and 1750 the population of New England alone increased by 50,000 with much of that growth centered on the Region between Boston, New York and Philadelphia.   To the Governors of Pennsylvania, New York and Massachusetts Bay it was not about relocating the new settlers somewhere else in the American Colonies but somewhere else in their colony.   Massachusetts Bay pushed north into their claims in Maine and Acadia, New York up the Hudson Valley and Pennsylvania west across the Appalachian Mountains into the Ohio Valley.

In 1749 the Ohio Company of Virginia was granted a land claim of 200,000 acres of land between the Ohio, Kanawha and the Monongahela Rivers southwest of modern-day Pittsburg.  This land grant was contingent on the Ohio Company settling 100 Families in the land grant over the next seven years.   An additional 300,000 acres would be granted upon successful completion of the first grant.  
The Ohio Company of Virginia hired Thomas Cresap, a successful frontier trader to identify locations for settlement.   Under his supervision forts were constructed at Willis Creek (Cumberland Maryland) and Redstone (Brownsville Pennsylvania) in 1750.    Later that year the Ohio Company of Virginia also hired Christopher Gist, another successful frontier tradesman to select additional locations.   Christopher Gist would become more widely known as the guide who accompanied George Washington in 1753.   

The Loyal Company of Virginia was another land speculation company also seeking a Land Grant from the Crown in 1749.   The company’s expedition in 1750 established a claim in what is modern Kentucky I Barbourville.

Construction of settlements west of the Allegany Mountains, specifically at Redstone put the Ohio Company of Virginia in “violation” of the Lancaster Treaty of 1744.   Tensions between the Native America tribes and the settlers were extremely high at the time.    The Shawnee Indian Tribe most notably changed it preference back to France as it sought French aid in driving out the English settlers.

The Breadbasket of New France
The rugged terrain and climate of Eastern Canada did not make for easy farming in the early eighteenth century.   In this wooded and rocky terrain, it took a team of four able bodied men one year to clear an acre of land for farming.  This difficultly of clearing and preparing farmland made the entire process of raising enough food for even the minimal population of French Settlements in Canada problematic.   A single bad year of crops could devastate the population.

In the mid to late 1740’s the Colonial Government of New France and that of France concluded that methods of preparing land in Canada for farming would never meet the demands of the growing population.   A new location for growing crops, primarily wheat, would need to be found.     By 1747 the Colonial Government in Canada and Imperial Government in Paris had settled on Pays des Illinois or Upper Louisiana.    It was estimated that four able bodied men would be able to clear four to six acres of usable farmland per year in Pays de Illinois.   The commandant of Fort De Chartes, Major Jean-Gaspard de Bertet de la Clue, nominally the Military Governor of Pays des Illinois was ordered to pursue agricultural interests rather than mining interests that had been central to settlement of Pays des Illinois[i].    

The challenge in 1747 would be moving the grains from Pays de Illinois to Montreal or other locations in Canada.     Much to the irritation of the Government of Canada it was determined in Metropolitan France the easiest solution was an “over land” transit of the farm goods from Fort de Chartes to the Shores of Lake Erie near modern day Buffalo, New York, through the Ohio Valley as opposed to moving the product over land to Detroit than via ship to ports on the eastern shores.  

The Governor of Canada in 1747, Roland-Michel Barrin de La Galissonière, began the process of planning the route through the Ohio Valley.   As part of the preparations de La Galissonière ordered Captain Pierre Joseph Céloron de Blainville to strengthen France’s claim to the Ohio Valley with a military expedition.    The ‘Lead Plate’ Expedition left Montreal in June 1749 traveling through the Ohio Valley for five months before returning to Montreal.

During the period of time between 1749 and 1751 the Governor of Canada, Jacques-Pierre de Taffanel de la Jonquière, chose the terminus of Ohio Valley route in modern-day Erie Pennsylvania.  The route into the central Ohio Valley from Erie would coincide with the Venango Path used by the Native American Indians.    Plans were put into place to begin construction of a series of French Forts from Erie to Pittsburg along the Venango Trail and down the Ohio River to its conjunction with the Mississippi. 

Fort Sandoské
The exact date of the attack of Fort Sandoske’[5]  is not known.  At some point between the Autumn of 1749 and the Spring of 1750 French Forces including soldiers from the Compagnies Franches de la Marine stationed in Detroit along with Canadian Militia and Native America Indians from modern day Michigan attacked and destroyed George Croghan’s trading forton Lake Erie.     The destroyed trading post was rebuilt by the French Forces and officially named Fort Sandoské.

The attack marked the beginning of low intensity conflict between the two empires in the Ohio Valley which escalates into the series of international wars generally referred to as the Seven Years’ War.

Father le Loutre’s War
In Acadia and Nova Scotia another low intensity conflict was occurring between Britain and France in 1749.    The French Jesuit Missionary Father le Loutre lead a guerilla war against the British forces in the region.   The French Forces included Acadian Militia, Mi’Kmaq Indians and a Few French soldiers.  

[1] The Fort Ancient society is named for the archeological site at Fort Ancient, Ohio.
[2] The Monongahela society is named for archeological sites initially found along the Monongahela River in Pennsylvania.
[3] The Haudenosaunee were known to the English world as the Iroquois Confederation.
[4] The eastern Haudenosaunee tribes of upstate New York and New England, particularly the Mohawk, unlike the western tribes, had fought alongside of the English forces against France in New England and Acadia and generally supported the English during this period.   

[5] There is not consensus on the name of George Croghan’s Trading Post it is generally referred to by the later French name of Fort Sandoske’.

[i] Lives of Fort de Chartres: Commandants, Soldiers, and Civilians in French Illinois, 1720–1770 (Shawnee Books)

Focus of Projects for 2018

As January comes to a close, holy cow we are already a month into 2018, it is time to look at the projects I will be working on for the rest of the year.

Wars of the First Triumvirate

The First Triumvirate was composed of Julius Caesar, Pompeius Magnus (Pompey the Great) and Marcus Licinius Crassus. When Crassus died after the battle of Carrhae civil war broke out between Caesar and Pompey for control of Rome. In 49 the senate, backing Pompey, ordered Caesar to disband his army and give up his province of Gaul. Instead of giving up, Caesar crossed the Rubicon river setting off a civil war. After a five year struggle accross many battlefields, Caesar defeated his enemies and was sole ruler of Rome.

The Crusader States in the Era of the Third Crusade

After the failure of the Second Crusade Zengid dynasty controlled a unified Syria and engaged in a conflict with the Fatimid rulers of Egypt. The Egyptian and Syrian forces were ultimately unified under Saladin, who employed them to reduce the Christian states and recapture Jerusalem in 1187. Spurred by religious zeal, King Henry II of England, King Philip II of France (known as Philip Augustus) ended their conflict with each other to lead a new crusade. The death of Henry in 1189, however, meant the English contingent came under the command of his successor, King Richard I of England (known as Richard the Lionheart, in French;Cœur de Lion). The elderly German Emperor Frederick Barbarossa also responded to the call to arms, leading a massive army across, but he drowned in a river in Asia Minor on 10 June 1190 before reaching the Holy Land. His death caused tremendous grief among the German Crusaders, and most of his troops returned home.

After the Crusaders had driven the Muslims from Acre, Philip in company with Frederick's successor, Leopold V, Duke of Austria (known as Leopold the Virtuous), left the Holy Land in August 1191. On 2 September 1192, Richard and Saladin finalized a treaty granting Muslim control over Jerusalem but allowing unarmed Christian pilgrims and merchants to visit the city. Richard departed the Holy Land on 9 October. The successes of the Third Crusade allowed the Crusaders to maintain considerable states in Cyprus and on the Syrian coast. However, the failure to recapture Jerusalem would lead to the Fourth Crusade.

Colonial Conflict in the Ohio Valley - 1750

Although struggles for supremacy had been going on for many decades between France and England in the New World, hostilities intensified in the early 1750’s as both English and French settlers had attempted to colonize land in the Ohio River Valley, near present day Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. The English settlers, who had moved northwest from Virginia, and French settlers, who had moved east from the Great Lakes, or south from Canada, each thought they owned the rights to the land. 

In 1754, English forces under George Washington had begun their march to Fort Duquesne for the purposes of ousting the French from the region by force. On the way, they encountered a French scouting party near present-day Uniontown, Pennsylvania. Washington’s men massacred the party in what came to be known as The Battle of Jumonville Glen. Washington soon took camp at Great Meadows, a large natural clearing, and ordered the construction of Fort Necessity in anticipation of a French response. The French did respond, as 600 soldiers forced Washington to surrender the fort. The French and Indian War had begun.

Tuesday, November 7, 2017

Where or Where (and when) to start a campaign.

Battle of Signal Hill - September 15, 1762
Last Engagement in North America of the Seven Years' War
Over the years our little gaming group has talked intermittently on running a campaign for our miniature gaming.   These discussions spring up in part because of the older members fond memories of old campaigns run years (decades) ago and new members who have never really been a part of a campaign. 

Due to the availability of figures and my personal interest I am seriously considering running a campaign based on the French and Indian War in North America. 

The biggest principal of the campaign is to create realistic scenarios for our games which effect the course of the war.   In looking at possible solutions for this I have chosen a Tree Campaign system in which each game has 5 potential outcomes which in turn dictates the scenario for the next game in the campaign. 

The Result of Each Game can be French major victory – French minor victory – Draw – British minor victory – British major victory.   These “results” are regardless of the forces involved, a battle between the Mingo and Chippewa would still be either French or British victory or a Draw.

Further breaking down the results each of the Six major blocks are effected by the outcome.    Britain, British Colonies, British Native American Allies, France, French Colonies, French Native American Allies.   AN example is a Victory by one side might strengthen the resolve of the Native American Allies and thus in the next game more Native American Allies are provided.   Or a defeat results in the loss of resolve and enough losses and the Native American Allies are lessened in an upcoming game.

Certain events also have outcome changing dynamics.   The first time a Provincial Forces is defeated in a battle the British Army will send to North America.    An example of this is battle of Great Meadows (Fort Necessity); the colonial government in Virginia thought this was no big deal, the British Government sent Braddock on an Expedition to Fort Duquesne.     

Where would you start such a campaign? 
  • French destruction of George Croghan’s trading post in modern day Erie PN, 1750
  • French Raid on Pickawillany, 1752
  • Jumonville Glen 1754
  • Fort Necessity 1754
  • Braddock’s Expedition 1755
  • or some other point?  
There are pros and cons to each of these potential starting points.   To me the answer resides in where does a result “change” history.
I personally like the Raid on Pickawillany as a good starting point, even though it kind of violates the tenant of most results will not change the course of the war, unless I get a little “unrealistic” in what scenario’s it generates.   It was debated if Major British Victory would result in an Expedition against Fort Vincennes in Indiana.     

What do other people think?