Uniform Study Zulu Dawn

Posted with the kind permission of Xhosa2000, and help from Pete.

Never seen that before! Thanks for posting!! Some farmilar faces there.

Now that's a unique bit of footage!

The Drummer boy shown in this video, the one killed by a bullet from Birmingham! In Zulu Dawn. Who is he. Did he Growup to be a well known actor?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

thank you very much,littlehand;)  and
pete.Les.

just to say again a big thank you to
littlehand who has always been very gen-
erous with his time,and its much appreciated
All. i have lots more of this type of material
if anybody would like to see more,please say so.
cheers

xhosa2000 wrote:

just to say again a big thank you to
littlehand who has always been very gen-
erous with his time,and its much appreciated
All. i have lots  more of this type of material
if anybody would like to see more,please say so.
                                                   cheers

Yes please!

of interest maybe? just to see the pont in action..

Hi Les
This is the site of the movie. The steel post in the foreground centre is from the movie.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
The invasion was shot back to front with the troops entering the drift from the Zulu side and crossing to Natal. This is the area the camp was situated
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
The present day Rorkes Drift Hotel is on the site where Chelmsford has his chat with Noggs. The bend in the river on the left is the area of the crossing.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Cheers

Thank's Frank, brilliant! i can use those photo's and tie them in
with my Zulu Dawn material..34 years ago! where has it gone?
i think someone should give sheldon a heavy nudge, surely there
would be interest in a similar retrospective book on ZD! thanks man.   

xhosa2000 wrote:

of interest maybe? just to see the pont in action..

Yes, the ponts and conveyances for sure. Thank you for posting it Xhosa. I thought there was a great deal of visual interest in those scenes including details like the red flags (presumably) on the ammunition wagon. But what was that wagon that looked like a moving barn? It was also interesting to see more of Noggs engaging his lordship. I don't recall that scene being in the version of the movie I've seen. The dialogue would seem to establish Chelmsford's state of mind quite succinctly as they crossed. Was it left out or is my memory playing tricks?

Your very welcome 6pdr, yes the ' moving barn ' is interesting, i have not
the 1st clue what it is! maybe others will know.. i got to talking with a
producer type, upshot was i acquired a lot of cutting room footage from
ZD. most of what i post was never in the finished film. i will find a scene
of ' noggs and co being made up and post it later.

Aimed at Middle English School Children..and Premiered
on here by me.enjoy.

Brilliant Brilliant Brilliant.
  
Interestingly I know a few of those locations.

Cheers

Interestingly I know a few of those locations.....

Well you do get about a lot.   

I have been sitting on footage for years..i decided this
year to share and let others see! i have shed loads.

I'm getting around my new tab a treat, its mindblowing
the things it can do.. i downloaded your App. now that
my friend is Brilliant!.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Good stuff, glad you got there, RD is on the way and im working on Nyezane and Gin gin I love you

Cheers

For any new forum member that would like to down load the app, it is free and can be accessed through
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
The app is an iSandlwana focussed battle field tour with around 90 points of interest hundreds of photos and a full description of the battle.

Enjoy

springbok9 wrote:

For any new forum member that would like to down load the app, it is free and can be accessed through
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
The app is an iSandlwana focussed battle field tour with around 90 points of interest hundreds of photos and a full description of the battle.

Enjoy

Yes, and I must say it's absolutely invaluable for understanding distances, height, site lines, terrain and just brings the battlefield to one's fingertips. Absolutely outstanding! (And the price is right too!)

xhosa2000 wrote:

Aimed at Middle English School Children..and Premiered
on here by me.enjoy.

Excellent post Les!

Some time back on the forum, Pascal the Rascal suggested that some of the uniforms in ZD were not accurate. If I remember correctly, he was making some model figures and wanted info on the various styles and colours of the uniforms of the men of the NNC (or something like that). Anyway, it was the uniforms worn by people like Vereker and Raw etc, that Pascal was questioning, he was puzzled at the light blue colour of their uniforms.

It was through watching the clips kindly posted by Les that jolted my memory, and I think I suggested that the sun might have bleached the dark blue patrol jackets and turned them light blue, but I don't think that anybody could find any reference to any light blue uniforms worn by the men, which suggested that the researchers may have got the colour of the uniforms wrong. So just in case anyone is thinking of making some model figures, then check out the topic on here first before painting them.

Can anyone remember this topic cropping up some while back, and did Pascal find his answer?

Thanks LH   

xhosa2000 wrote:

Aimed at Middle English School Children..and Premiered
on here by me.enjoy.

Considering when it was done this wasn't bad at all. In fact it was mostly a pleasant surprise. The rocket battery discussion was off target I thought but that stuck out because most of the rest was reasonably accurate and not in the least bellicose.

Some time back on the forum, Pascal the Rascal suggested that some of the uniforms in ZD were not accurate. If I remember correctly, he was making some model figures and wanted info on the various styles and colours of the uniforms of the men of the NNC (or something like that). Anyway, it was the uniforms worn by people like Vereker and Raw etc, that Pascal was questioning, he was puzzled at the light blue colour of their uniforms.

It was through watching the clips kindly posted by Les that jolted my memory, and I think I suggested that the sun might have bleached the dark blue patrol jackets and turned them light blue, but I don't think that anybody could find any reference to any light blue uniforms worn by the men, which suggested that the researchers may have got the colour of the uniforms wrong. So just in case anyone is thinking of making some model figures, then check out the topic on here first before painting them.
From Martin.

Hmmm, that really got me thinking..Raw, Vereker, Hamilton-Browne and Harford, all NNC.
i'm thinking how would patrol jackets fair after several years on active service..

Soz about appearance of text..artificially aged for scrapbook   

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

In the schools programme i posted, Faulkner stressed how accurate
the research was for the uniforms, i always thought that uniform
looked dodgy! we need a uniform expert! and i can only think of one
to hand..when i think NNC i think Buff/ Beige.

Les,

My understanding - having spoken to the artist and the costumier who were involved in Zulu Dawn - that when they were looking for a uniform for the Natal Native Mounted Contingent the only example they could find was Angus McBride's in his work The Zulu War published by Osprey in 1976, Plate G Figure 2. I believe that McBride lightened the patrol jacket to show the braiding and they took this to be representative of the uniform.

When the pair tried to verify the uniform further the only example they found was the photograph of Lieutenant J. A. Roberts, killed at iSandlwana, which seemed to confirm McBride's choice of colour. I have my own opinion on this and I believe despite their best endeavours that they got it wrong, but at least they tried!

John Y.

Thank you JY i believe you are bang on the money there!
your tentacles reach everywhere, i thought if anybody....
i am just so puzzled at myself for not even questioning it
before..we have all seen the movie a squillion times! and
thank you Pascal and Martin. i am scanning the plate next!.

John Young wrote:

Les,

When the pair tried to verify the uniform further the only example they found was the photograph of Lieutenant J. A. Roberts, killed at iSandlwana, which seemed to confirm McBride's choice of colour.  I have my own opinion on this and I believe despite their best endeavours that they got it wrong, but at least they tried!

John Y.

Bonsoir Mister Young,
The photograph of Lieutenant J.A. ROBERTS was known before 1979???
It seems to me that this photograph was discovered after 1979...
Regard

Frédéric

I.E: Can we know your opinion on the uniform ?

John Young wrote:

Les,



When the pair tried to verify the uniform further the only example they found was the photograph of Lieutenant J. A. Roberts, killed at iSandlwana, which seemed to confirm McBride's choice of colour.  I have my own opinion on this and I believe despite their best endeavours that they got it wrong, but at least they tried!

John Y.

Bonsoir Mister Young,
The only photograph of Lt J.A ROBERTS that i know is a carte de visite taken by Kisch Bros, Photographers and Artists, Natal.
Written in ink on the original is "Lieut. Roberts, Natal Native Contingent. Killed at Isandhlwana Jan 22ndnd 1879". On the front is written "Taken Dec 1878".

Source "Lieutenant JA ROBERTS- Natal Native Horse 1878-1879" by J.J. HULME (The south african military history society" / Military history journal vol 8 n°4 - December 1990

Cheers

Frédéric

Bonne soirée à vous Frédéric

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

xhosa2000 wrote:

Bonne soirée à vous Frédéric

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Bonsoir cher ami,  

Exactly, it is this article!!!
I don't know how to post articles and photos on this site!!!   (Nevertheless i have read many time the "FAQ"...)

Bonne nuit.

Amitiés.

Frédéric

Yes Frédéric, dear friend, i was the same!
JY spoke, it clicked! it will for you..      

Frédéric,

Frédéric wrote:

The photograph of Lieutenant J.A. ROBERTS was known before 1979???
It seems to me that this photograph was discovered after 1979...

The official artist to Zulu Dawn moved in a small clique of military enthusiasts at the time, I think it is safe to assume he knew Commandant Hulme, as they worked together on another project during 1978.

I appreciate you haven't got the book, but in Terry Sole's book the photograph is reproduced in full on page 324.  Roberts is wearing what is more like a hussar jacket rather than British patrol jacket. My theory is that Roberts may have served in a local-raised unit prior to the Natal Native Mounted Contingent and it is the uniform of that unit that he is wearing, rather than a pattern of jacket which was worn through the N.N.M.C.

More of the photograph is visible in Zulu Victory where it has been reproduced in reverse.

Les,

The McBride image of the infantry officer you reproduced above is not a good example, as it is wrong.  One too many rows of frogging for an infantry-pattern patrol jacket and shoulder straps which were not introduced until 1881.  I know it was one of the earliest books on uniform in the campaign but it is seriously flawed as far as the British and Colonial uniforms go.

John Y.

Well JY, if anybody would know that would be you!
my concern was the bogus light blue representing
any element of the NNC.

John Young wrote:

in Terry Sole's book the photograph is reproduced in full on page 324.  Roberts is wearing what is more like a hussar jacket rather than British patrol jacket. My theory is that Roberts may have served in a local-raised unit prior to the Natal Native Mounted Contingent and it is the uniform of that unit that he is wearing, rather than a pattern of jacket which was worn through the N.N.M.C.
John Y.

Bonjour Mister Young,
Very interesting (and plausible) explanation...as usual.

I have (maybe) a point of disagreement with you...
ROBERTS of the Natal Native Horse or of the Natal Native Mounted Contingent?   
It's just a teasing...as for Martin COOPER with the 24th "South Wales Borderers".
Many thanks for your answer.
With my respect
Frédéric

Frédéric,

Don't get me started or I will tell you what my pet hate is amongst designations in the British force in campaign!

John Y.

John Young wrote:

Frédéric,

Don't get me started or I will tell you what my pet hate is amongst designations in the British force in campaign!

John Y.

  

Now now Frederic.   

The swb were NEVER the 24th, they were just the swb.  

They might like to THINK they were, and they might have even called themselves the 24th, but however, the numbers were OFFICIALLY ABOLISHED on the 1st July 1881 along with the old title of 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment of foot, and a 'NEW' name was given, making them a virtually 'NEW' regiment. The 'NEW' name for the virtual 'NEW' regiment was just the swb with 'NO NUMBERS', meaning that the swb were NEVER the 24th regiment of foot, and any reference made by the virtual 'NEW' regiment to the 24th regiment, or 24th foot after July 1st 1881 is totally unofficial and purely wishful thinking.   

The swb NEVER fought at iSandlwana and NEVER defended Rorke's Drift, the swb NEVER were, NEVER have been, and certainly NEVER will be 'THE NOBLE 24th'.   

 

Mr M. Cooper wrote:

Now now Frederic.   

The swb were NEVER the 24th, they were just the swb.  

They might like to THINK they were, and they might have even called themselves the 24th, but however, the numbers were OFFICIALLY ABOLISHED on the 1st July 1881 along with the old title of 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment of foot, and a 'NEW' name was given, making them a virtually 'NEW' regiment. The 'NEW' name for the virtual 'NEW' regiment was just the swb with 'NO NUMBERS', meaning that the swb were NEVER the 24th regiment of foot, and any reference made by the virtual 'NEW' regiment to the 24th regiment, or 24th foot after July 1st 1881 is totally unofficial and purely wishful thinking.   

The swb NEVER fought at iSandlwana and NEVER defended Rorke's Drift, the swb NEVER were, NEVER have been, and certainly NEVER will be 'THE NOBLE 24th'.   

 

Bonsoir Mister Martin COOPER,

Thank you for your knowledge on the subject.
As i had said previously, it was a teasing / a joke (I.E: 24th: the South Wales Borderers).
One other, specially for you: the 24th (2nd Warwickshire Regiment): a Welsh Regiment.
Do you understand?

Wink
Bonne soirée.
Cheers.
Frédéric

Bonsoir Frederic

The way it works is this. On 30 June 1881 Gonville Bromhead VC was a member of the Noble 24th. On the 1 July 1881 he was a member of the South Wales Borderers, and he had NEVER been a member of the Noble 24th.  C'est simple, logique Anglais  

Martin   

Steve

Bad Men! hold onto your hats.   

rusteze wrote:

Bonsoir Frederic

The way it works is this. On 30 June 1881 Gonville Bromhead VC was a member of the Noble 24th. On the 1 July 1881 he was a member of the South Wales Borderers, and he had NEVER been a member of the Noble 24th.  C'est simple, logique Anglais  

Martin   

Steve

Bonjour Steve,
Thanks for your kindness
Nevertheless, with the many many many posts on this subject by Mister Martin COOPER, i think that i have finally understood with the years his reasonning...
In particular:
-the South Wales Borderers is not the 24th Regiment;
-the 24th (2nd Warwickshire Regiment) is not a Welsh Regiment
As i said previously I was not serious, it was just a teasing, a kindness provocation, a bad joke against Mister John Young (I.E: NNH or NNMC ? as The South Wales Borderers is it the 24th? as the 24th a Welsh Regiment?)

Mister COOPER:    

I.E: The "logique Anglaise"...i confess that i do not still understand the Bristish monetary system: £, Shilling, Pounds... It's a mystery for me, indeed!!!!
Cheers
Frédéric

Frederic

I too was not serious.

4 Farthings make a Penny, 12 Pennies make a Shilling, 2 Shillings make a Florin, 2 Shillings and 6 Pennies make a Half Crown, 20 Shillings make a Pound, 1 Pound and 1 Shilling make a Guinea. But its all gone!

Now 100 pennies make a pound. Ennuyeux.

Steve

Bonjour Frederic.

Yes my friend, I now understand, sorry, I must have misread or misunderstood what you had written, however, I am glad that you have understood my reasoning about all this.   

Steve.

I think you should read my post again, I said the regiment not its individuals.

Gonville Bromhead fought at and was awarded the VC for his action at RD, his regiment at the time was the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment, NOT the swb. On the 30th June 1881 he was an officer in the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment, on the 1st July he was an officer in the swb, his former regiment was the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment (The Noble 24th), which he HAD formally been a member of.

Put it this way, the day before she married she was known as Miss X, the day that she married she was NO LONGER Miss X, she is NOW Mrs Y, and NOT Miss X anymore because she now has a new name. She now calls herself by this new name (Mrs Y), and no longer refers to herself as Miss X because she isn't Miss X anymore.

Some years ago I lived in Manchester, but I no longer live there, if I still used my old address in Manchester do you think that the post man would understand anyway, and deliver my mail here?

Hope you understand my reasoning.  

Martin

I don't really understand your reasoning at all I'm afraid.

On the day preceding the change of name every individual in the regiment was a member of the 24th and entitled to claim its heritage. On the day after, they were all SWB and, according to your logic, no longer entitled to claim that heritage. Nothing had happened other than someone (wisely or not) had changed their name. They had not got married, or moved house, or taken any action themselves. They had no say in it.

You cannot deny the SWB the heritage of the achievements of the 24th.

But I do hope you don't agree, because that would mean we could no longer argue about it!

Steve

Steve.

Read the following and maybe you will see my point about all this.

(Quote).

The South Wales Borderers are perhaps best remembered for Marlborough's campaigns when the Duke was their Colonel, the American war of independence, in the Peninsula at Talavera, and in the Sikh wars at Chillianwallah. Its involvement in the Zulu campaign was both tragic and glorious, Isandlwana and Rorke's Drift are likely to be remembered for a long time.

Now, don't tell me that you can't see anything wrong with the statement above, and where is the recognition for the actual regiment that was involved, as I cannot see its name anywhere, can you?

The day after the other is NOT the same day, is it? Likewise, the day after the 30th June 1881 was no longer the 30th June 1881, it was the 1st July 1881, a new day, a new era for a virtually new regiment called the swb. The reforms of 1881 altered everything about the British Army, and the old regiments should have been allowed to retire with all their honours, awards, and dignity intact, but this did not happen, and regiments found themselves all over the place and with new titles due to the new reforms. The old regiment ended on the 30th June, the new regiment began on the 1st July. All honours and awards acheived by the old regiment are theirs and theirs alone, they do not belong to the new regiment as they were not awarded to them, however, the new regiment inherit and take care of them on behalf of the old regiment. The new regiments (swb, rrw, rw) should not 'lay claim' to these acheivements as they are not theirs by default they belong to the old regiment, you have said it yourself that they are the acheivements of the 24th, and one only has to look at the name on the colours to see that the regiment that acheived the honours is different from the one purporting to have acheived them.

If the post 1881 regiments (swb, rrw, rw) want to honour the old 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment and its acheivements, then they should do it properly and give the public its proper title and stop trying to fool the public into believing that the swb 'did the business' when they didn't (as implied in the swb statement above).

Not very keen on the word 'argue', it implies unfriendliness, 'debate' is a much better term.

Cheers.

Martin

Your right, debate is a much better term old friend.

For me, I don't much care what they are called, the people who made the history remain the same and they are honoured by their successors. There has to be continuity, which is what the spirit of the regiment is all about. I think it would be terrible if the old regiments had been retired and all was started over again in 1881.

Now what I agree with you is wrong, is when people are misled because authors and commentators get the original titles wrong, or don't bother to mention them at all.  

I think though you are much more concerned with the "Welsh" in the regimental title than anything else,  because of the "make believe" of the film.

As far as your quote is concerned, had Marlborough been described as Colonel of, lets say, "The Midlands Regiment"(ie it had never come to be called the SWB), I think you would have been less exercised, even though it would still have been wrong (but English).  And even though the film raises your hackles I guess we would probably not have a forum on which to be debating now had it not been made.

It was the British Army that was involved and it was the 24th that was honoured. Those self same men carried on the tradition when they became the SWB, and their counterparts have done so ever since.

The sins of Baker should not lead to the baby getting thrown out with the bathwater!  

Your turn.

Steve

Hi Steve.

The statement I posted is from the web page for the history of the RW. Now I wouldn't say that in  the statement the pre old 1881 regiment was being honoured by their successors, and that the continuity only seems to start with the SWB, who, it appears, are being credited with the campaings of Marlborough (and to say that he was the SWB's colonel is rather a bit of a blatant piece of bluff). Also the SWB are getting the credit for fighting in the American war of independence, the Peninsula war at Talavera, the Sikh war at Chillianwallah, and the AZW at both iSandlwana and Rorke's Drift, now if that is not a blatant form of misrepresentation then I don't know what is. The SWB did not come into existance until the 1st July 1881, so how on god's earth could they have possibly fought alongside Marlborough, and how could he have been their colonel. Also how could they have fought in the war of independence, Talavera, Chillianwallah and the AZW at both iSandlwana and Rorke's Drift when they did not even exist at the time. Why wasn't the correct history of the regiment given in the statement, and why wasn't the real name of the regiment mentioned in the statement, is it to make it appear that the SWB had been around for longer than they actually were, or could it be to hide the regiments English origins and also to hide the title that it held the longest in its entire history, ie; The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment of foot.

I am glad that you agree that it is wrong for people to be mislead, and that it is wrong for the old regiment not to get even a mention, and the way that the statement is worded it appears that it was done that way to deliberately cover up the regiments pre 1881 English history and name. So with that in mind, I wouldn't say that their traditions were being carried on by their counterparts, especially when their name or English origin is never mentioned.  

Yes, it does annoy me that the regiment always seems to get called a 'Welsh' regiment when it was not. It was raised in 1689 in England, it was raised for the defence of England and it was later given an English county title, now in my book, that makes it an English regiment (the date being a very good clue). It was an English regiment for far longer than it has ever been a 'Welsh' one, yet the way it has been portrayed is nearly always as being 'Welsh', especially its portrayal in Bakers big Welsh hoax film, and later in Ken Griffiths doco. And this is still going on today in statements like the above, and by others who cover up, disguise, hide, leave out, misrepresent or otherwise do not mention the English origin or the real title of the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment, it is as though it never existed, however, its past glory and honours are mentioned and seem to be credited to the then none existant SWB, who, it would seem, liked to call themselves 'the 24th', what a farce.

Cheers.