Zulu Dawn/Zulu - New Immortals Film The Way Forward ?

Julian Whybra wrote:

Kate
250, 2473, 200 are not my statistics.  you provided them and they are irrelevent to
the argument.

GCameron
If one is going to set out an argument, then one has to give the text more than a "brief read through".
I suggest this is done.  The post can then be edited.

Why… I’ve listed the salient points, the primary one being you are trying to prove a point illustrating people
starved to a point where they are approaching half their ideal body weight and secondly the photos from the time clearly illustrate they where noosed and hung with rope. It’s a laughable comparison to people being hooked through the chin and suspended to be totally blunt.

So Julian as you've decided to pull up a chair can you answer these three questions.
1/ How many survivors were there from the battle of iSandlwana?
2/ How many men were in Lord Chelmsfords column when it returned to the camp?
3/ How many men were in the various burial parties?

An approximate number will suffice as we don't know exact numbers.
And saying that the number of people who could have witnessed such events and thus either prove or disprove the theory is irrelevant is frankly bizarre.

Plus I don't think I would try and argue anatomy with a highly trained, experienced paramedic who is used to seeing horrific injuries as well as dead bodies on almost a daily basis.
I've worked with plenty of them over the years and they certainly know their onions.
Oh and also it seems you are now doubting this witnessess evidence by saying it wasn't the chin but behind the ear. How do you know this?
Are you suggesting perhaps the witness was confused or got it wrong?
Kate

gardner1879 wrote:

So Julian as you've decided to pull up a chair can you answer these three questions.
1/ How many survivors were there from the battle of iSandlwana?
2/ How many men were in Lord Chelmsfords column when it returned to the camp?
3/ How many men were in the various burial parties?

An approximate number will suffice as we don't know exact numbers.
And saying that the number of people who could have witnessed such events and thus either prove or disprove the theory is irrelevant is frankly bizarre.

Plus I don't think I would try and argue anatomy with a highly trained, experienced paramedic who is used to seeing horrific injuries as well as dead bodies on almost a daily basis.
I've worked with plenty of them over the years and they certainly know their onions.
Oh and also it seems you are now doubting this witnessess evidence by saying it wasn't the chin but behind the ear. How do you know this?
Are you suggesting perhaps the witness was confused or got it wrong?
Kate

Oh we are now talking hooked into the skull and essentially the spinal column… yes that would hold, heck you wouldn’t even need to be feather weight… essentially you are talking the dynamics of a bulk standard hanging.in which to give balance, a number with any type of drop have resulted in decapitation to illustrate the forces in play.

But…. That’s got fudge all to do with hanging someone from their chin though. And that’s the point… it’s a ridiculous notion.

Just for clarity Julian, are you actually of the belief that drummer boys were hooked up in the camp or are you just playing devils advocate?

To be honest, out of the survivors of the battle, I would not expect too many to report much at all except what was immediately to their front and the speed of their horses....apart from occasional glimpses.

Plus I doubt they would have hung around to witness any potential acts of torture or whatever.

SRB1965 wrote:

To be honest, out of the survivors of the battle, I would not expect too many to report much at all except what was immediately to their front and the speed of their horses....apart from occasional glimpses.

Plus I doubt they would have hung around to witness any potential acts of torture or whatever.

Bravo, a post that hints at somebody who has either done active service or just has a very good grasp of adrenaline and fears effect.

Couldn’t agree more

Neither....I come from a long line of cowards

SRB1965 wrote:

Neither....I come from a long line of cowards

Perhaps well qualified to understand the focus on some
may say coward, others may say intelligent man fleeing the field on horseback!

Either way it is bang on, I’m sure Kate has had the same in the past but on occasions when documenting stressful situations and then viewing body camera footage one does wonder if it’s the same event!

:)

Zulu dawn

I received a barrage of questions on the 7th by the Kate-Gavin double act (despite being a little ’over-rehearsed) and several members have asked me if I would be willing to respond. So this is for the benefit of the other participants in this thread who’ve made contributions to the discussion. I’ll take teach point in the order in which it appears on the 7th. Some questions were duplicated on another thread and I have answered on that thread where more appropriate.

1) The question was also asked why on Earth would Zulus commit such an act when it was not part of their tradition? This is answered on the ‘No Torture of Little Drummer boys’ thread today at 9.35 a.m.

2) Gavin affirmed, using his medical knowledge, the impossibility of suspending a body via a hook through the lower jaw or chin was expressed and correctly so. This is also answered on the ‘No Torture of Little Drummer boys’ thread today as above.

3) The question was asked whether I believed that drummer boys were hooked up in the camp or was I just playing Devil’s advocate. I’m assuming that the essays by Frederic Bomy and myself could not have been read (a pity because it means that the argument had been conducted blind) and the writer could not have been in possession of all the facts.

4) The rhetorical question was then asked why then did the soldiers of the day who wrote these reports about mutilated ‘drummer boys’ use the term? Could it have been…to tug at the heartstrings…and emphasize how diabolical and savage the Zulu people were? This is also answered on the ‘No Torture of Little Drummer boys’ thread today as above.

Mr M. Cooper wrote:

Hi 90th

Thanks for backing me up on this.

I think that films are a lot better done in the 'normal way', rather than the brown/sepia look with people that look like they are computer generated, as in 300, but I suppose that it's up to individual taste, or as we used to say 'each to his own'.

I still enjoy the good old black and white films, there were some classics done in B&W, but the sepia look just doesn't appear right somehow.

Regards

Martin.

Mr. Cooper 100% with you, if there were re-makes certainly not in sepia or CGI. Life in 1879 was in colour not in brown/sepia and it would look stupid. Lets have real actors and locations.