Dacian figures

[Hakonarson]

Master figures (http://www.hat.com/Prev/Mas8069.html) for HaTT's upcoming 1/72nd Dacian infantry set - Hatt make a large range of plastic figures for wargamers & modellers.

[BlackWatch McKenna]

Cool beans

I have a BAG of unpainted 15mm lead Dacians....someday I will paint em.

http://home.pacbell.net/ittybear/

Then I can add em to the page.

Plastic though - I would not want to war game with them for fear of the paint chipping at the rough handling.

Dice and Beer do not mix....well - they do if you try hard enough.

~BW

[Vlad The Impaler]

Good lookin' and interesting figures Hakonarson http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
But they ar good as stilized ones and not historically accurate.
Almost all dacians warriors wear lorica , they dont fight with the upside of the body nude http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[Tachikaze]

Damn you, Harkonarsen

I hate it when people post links to interesting websites like that one. I could spend all day there http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

Thanks. I love to peruse figurines, especially ancients. I also found the WWI Austrians interesting.

[Hakonarson]

Vlad I suspect that most Dacian warriors, like tribesmen the world over at the time, fought without armour - Trajan's column & The Adamliski monument IIRC both record almost no armour for Dacians except for chiefs, Kings and Sarmatian allies.

The problem of painting plastic is real, HOWEVER....there are ways around it http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

1/ Wash the figures in warm soapy water to remove the last of the mould release compounds.

2/ Coat the figures with a plastic coating of some sort. This can be an acrylic spray, or even PVA gule - which is what I use.

3/ Paint as usual but use light colours.

4/ Coat figures in a durable varnish - floor varnishes are good http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif In America MinWax is the product of choice, here in NZ & Aussie we can get Cabots Floor stain (http://www.geocities.com/dbplastic/plastic/cabots_stain.html)

I'm awaiting release of HaTT's Spanish Cavalry for the Carthaginian army I'm building....I wish it would move off that "9" it's on - it's been there for 4 or 5 months now grr......

[Hakonarson]

Quote[/b] (Tachikaze @ June 26 2003,17:57)]Damn you, Harkonarsen

I hate it when people post links to interesting websites like that one. I could spend all day there http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

Thanks. I love to peruse figurines, especially ancients. I also found the WWI Austrians interesting.
You'll be wanting to fly out to kill me personally when you go to this page then....

The plastic soldier review. (http://www.plasticsoldierreview.com/Index.html)

http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smokin.gif

[Tachikaze]

You bastard http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[Jagger]

It has been around 10 years or so since I painted miniatures. I did a lot of Napoleonics, ACW and medieval 15mm. I also did WW2 and modern. Unfortunately, I don't have the patience for it anymore.

By the way, how much do 15mm figures cost today? I remember prices of around 4 or 5 dollars for a pack of 24 Napoleonics figures.

[Nowake]

Quote[/b] (Vlad The Impaler @ June 26 2003,23:05)]Good lookin' and interesting figures Hakonarson http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
But they ar good as stilized ones and not historically accurate.
Almost all dacians warriors wear lorica , they dont fight with the upside of the body nude http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif
I must say that dacians were pretty different than most of the barbarian warriors of the age. Their intense contact with the greeks and their comercial relations with the polis from Pontus Euxinus, like Tomis, Callatis, Durostorum etc. later conquered by Burebista in his campaigns made their armament and armour stand out http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[Hakonarson]

Many peoples had intense contacts withthe Greeks - Thracians from Thrace (rather than the Thracian Dacians http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif)had more than Dacia did, as did those in Bithynia in Asia Minor, while Sarmatians around the Crimea also had a lot, even fielding Greek Mercenary peltasts and hoplites in some of their forces, as did the Illyrians.

Gauls, or course, had contacts through Massilia and with Rome, as well as as mercenaries with Carthaginian and Syracusan armies.

And so on it goes.

Dacia was NOT outstanding in that respect at all - indeed exactly the opposite

[Nowake]

Quote[/b] (Hakonarson @ June 28 2003,06:09)]Many peoples had intense contacts withthe Greeks - Thracians from Thrace (rather than the Thracian Dacians http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif)had more than Dacia did, as did those in Bithynia in Asia Minor, while Sarmatians around the Crimea also had a lot, even fielding Greek Mercenary peltasts and hoplites in some of their forces, as did the Illyrians.

Gauls, or course, had contacts through Massilia and with Rome, as well as as mercenaries with Carthaginian and Syracusan armies.

And so on it goes.

Dacia was NOT outstanding in that respect at all - indeed exactly the opposite
really not true ... the dacians had iron, gold and other agricultural products that greeks apreciated a lot. this is historically accurate. they united in confederations or kindoms, and that centralized politic made them stand out in same periods. Look for info about their system of fortifications in Orastia mountains, superd line of defence


but to be clear: I dont think that Dacia was a major power, rivalising Rome. But it was a big danger in the area, and the gauls were not much more powerfull. depends of the era. also, the dacians had as enemyes the bastarnae, roxolani, boii, tauriscii, iazygii, powerfull tribes that raided along their borders. This constant "skirmishing" impeded the dacians to consolidate their realms. They had to stick to huge pillage raids, but still ... just raids http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[Hakonarson]

Sigh - gold, iron and other comodities were desired by everyone - Britain was known as hte "Tin Isles" because much of hte ancient supply of Tin came from there - tin being the alloy that makes copper into bronze, and kindof necessary for a Bronze age http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

Everyone who didn't have a commodoty had to get it from somewhere - that doesnt' make the supplier any more important than any other supplier.

As for political unity - again so what?? You've just described a fairly normal active ancient political situation - everyone made alliances, confederations were common, kingships sprang up and fell.

Fortifications? Yes...and....so??? I'm sorry - but there's nothing remarkable about fortifications

What makes any people or civilisatoin stand out was consistancy and generlaly an ability to enforce their own structures upon others - hence the Assyrians, Persians, Hittites, Macedonians (NOT Greeks in general&#33http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif, Romans, Carthaginians.

But NOT: Gauls, Galatians, Illyrians, Thracians, Dacians, Numidians, Bithynians, Early Germans, Sarmatians, Skythians, Sudanese, Jews, Arameans (Arabs), Elamites (well not after about 2000BC anyway), Zagros Highlanders, Republican Indians, Hsiung Nu.

All of these peoples were powerful in their own areas, had levels of civilisation that most moderns would be surprised at, were skilled craftsmen and traders and so-on. Some are identifiable as peoples over 1000 years or more - some Sarmatian peoples for almost 2000 - particularly the Alans, first mentioned 1-200 BC, last about 1500 BC.

All should probably be playable, but the game won't really suffer if any of htem aren't.

[Nowake]

DOn't put the dacians in the same ... bin. They had contacts with the greeks and celts, and their culture was far more advanced than the thracian (Haemus located) one. The thracians were a power only betwee 500-350 http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif , after that they were only a handfull of rebel tribes. The odrysii were the only ones that lasted longer.

Read a bit more about the dacian civilisation and your opinion will change, I'm sure. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[deejayvee]

Quote[/b] (Hakonarson @ June 29 2003,00:20)]What makes any people or civilisatoin stand out was consistancy and generlaly an ability to enforce their own structures upon others - hence the Assyrians, Persians, Hittites, Macedonians (NOT Greeks in general&#33http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif, Romans, Carthaginians.
Not Greeks in General?

What about Sicily and Italy? What about the Greek colonies in Spain and at Marseilles? Greece colonised and Hellenised places all over the Mediterranean while the Macedonians were still up in the hills.

Also, you'd be more accurate saying the Phoenicians were able to do this, rather than the Carthaginians as they were a Phoenician colony.

[Hakonarson]

Yep - but syracuse, Marseilles, etc, remained relatively small outposts of Greek culture. The colonies largely remained individual city states, and never developed into empires.

Certainly Carthage was a Phonecian colony - but it became an empire, as did Macedonia. there were other Phonecian settlements too - Cyprus for example, but they don't rate quite the same as Carthage IMO.

Hence in each case (Greece, Phonecia), one colony/sub-state became an empire, not the culture itself or the myriad other colonies and outposts.

[deejayvee]

But the Greek city states DO stand out in history for their major achievements. Also the Macedonians, Romans and Carthaginians were, to a varying extent, hellenized. So while the Greek city states did not have massive empires (they did have empires though), I would argue they had as much impact on other civilisations as any of the others you mentioned.

[Nowake]

Quote[/b] (deejayvee @ July 04 2003,07:21)]But the Greek city states DO stand out in history for their major achievements. Also the Macedonians, Romans and Carthaginians were, to a varying extent, hellenized. So while the Greek city states did not have massive empires (they did have empires though), I would argue they had as much impact on other civilisations as any of the others you mentioned.
Much more than others. We still pay tribute to their thinkers in what concerns philosophy, no matter of the french and german thinkers of the XVII-XIXth century.

[deejayvee]

Quote[/b] (pr Fire @ July 04 2003,11:49)]Much more than others. We still pay tribute to their thinkers in what concerns philosophy, no matter of the french and german thinkers of the XVII-XIXth century.
And we're still using some of their words today: for example, Philosophy.

[Hakonarson]

I don't think they stand out that much - it's jsut that we don't have the literature from China, India & Persia.

The Great King's Road in Persia was a technical achievement well in advance of anything the Greeks maanged - as was his post system (the Great King's that is), while China was always as advanced and as innovative as anywhere in the rest of the world until at least 1500 AD.

but none of "our" (ie european) languages are descended from them, nor any of our institutions - our parents and grandparents were raised learning Latin and Greek rather than Farsi or Mandarin.

I suspect that if you ask around in Shanghei you'll find that the achievements of Greece are held as being non-existant http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[deejayvee]

I'm not saying they stand out over every nation on Earth. You originally said the Macedonians stand out and specifically said "Not Greeks in general". If Greece had not been the culture it was, we would not have some of the other civilisations that you mentioned, in particular Macedon and Rome.