The Queen's thourghts on Isandlwana

Posts : 2008 Join date : 2011-08-01 Age : 27

The Queen recored after meeting Lord Chelsmford

'Ld. Chelmsford said no doubt poor Col. Durnford had disobeyed orders, in leaving the camp as he did... Ld. Chelmsford knew nothing, Col. Durnford never having sent any message to say he was in danger... This much is clear to me: viz. that it was not his fault, but that of others, that this surprise at Sandlwana took place... I told Ld. Chelmsford he had been blamed by many, and even by the Government, for commencing the war without sufficient cause. He replied that he believed it to have been quite inevitable; that if we had not made war when we did, we should have been attacked and possibly overpowered.'

The Answer to this

Most of what Chelmsford told the Queen was a pack of lies. Durnford, as we have seen, did not disobey orders. And Chelmsford ignored at least two warnings to the effect the camp 'was in danger'. In addition, the war was not one of self defence but of conquest.

Cheers

Subject: Re: The Queen's thourghts on Isandlwana Fri Jan 20, 2012 7:30 pm

DB14. Please post the source.

Posts : 2008 Join date : 2011-08-01 Age : 27

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

Its in the book Zulu by Saul David as well.

Cheers

Subject: Re: The Queen's thourghts on Isandlwana Fri Jan 20, 2012 7:36 pm

Thank you. I was hoping for the original source.

Posts : 2008 Join date : 2011-08-01 Age : 27

Its states

From the Royal Archives 5. September 1879

Cheers

Guest

But all this is also explained in the TV documentary where we see David ...

Subject: Re: The Queen's thourghts on Isandlwana Sat Jan 21, 2012 8:38 am

DB14, Is the Royal Archives source referenced more completely in SD's book?

I think it is now very well established that Lord Chelmsford scapegoated Durnford DB14! (Makes you wonder how he slept at night). Any psychologically normal commander and man couldn't.

Posts : 2008 Join date : 2011-08-01 Age : 27

Hi

Well were else can a quote from the queen have come from??

And yes all all though the book it has quotes from the queen who showered Lord C with awrds and surport.

Why she did i don't know scratch

Cheers

Subject: Re: The Queen's thourghts on Isandlwana Sat Jan 21, 2012 8:50 am

DB14, a man like him could charm the birds out of the trees!

Guest

But all this is also explained in the TV documentary where we see David Saul ...

Posts : 2008 Join date : 2011-08-01 Age : 27

From Zulu By SD

The queen might have been equally disturbed if she had known the true discovery of Durnfords body at Isandlwana on the 21st of May. The Colonel had been posthumously charged with disobeying a direct order to take command of the camp prior to the battle, the order in question there for should still have been on his person. Yet Offy Shepstone always denied finding papers on Durnfords body, claiming that had there been any they would have gone to Francis with the knife and the rings. But a very different story would soon emerge from other witnesses.

Cheers

Guest

Hi all

The queen who loved her so Chelmsford has accepted his story without a fuss.

One could not expect less of such a woman, poor Durnford ...

Cheers

Pascal

Subject: The Queen's thoughts on Isandlwana Sun Jan 22, 2012 1:15 pm

Well, the Queen may well have been fooled by Chelmsford, but one person who started to have some doubts about Chelmsford was The Duke of Cambridge.

Guest

YES A GOOD MAN

Guest

On hearing the news of the diaster. She said

"Who are these Zulus and why are we fighting them?"

which is a sensible question being the Queen of England..

Guest

Hello Elizabeth

The problem is that after Queen Victoria was well supported Chelmsford, against the advice of his prime minister, which forced him to support Chelmsford and the Zululand does it have never recovered from being destroyed, we still see the result today, war has rarely been as unjust, poor Zulu ...

Cheers

Pascal

Subject: Re: The Queen's thourghts on Isandlwana Mon Jan 23, 2012 5:12 am

Durnford charged?????????????????????

when and by whom???????

Guest

Hi Springbok 9

Did you watch and like a documentary about the Zulu wars led by Ian Knight and Saul Davis on TV CHANNEL?

No? Well do it and you will know by whom ...

Cheers

Pascal

Subject: Re: The Queen's thourghts on Isandlwana Mon Jan 23, 2012 5:24 am

Very difficult to watch British/French TV in Africa.

Besides TV is not an original source.

Would appreciate Saul David naming his source.

Guest

On Google video, type "Zoulous,le defi guerrier"and you will see in 5 parts ... Salute

Subject: Re: The Queen's thourghts on Isandlwana Mon Jan 23, 2012 6:17 am

All in French?

Guest

Springbok9

This must exist in English language ...

It's amazing, the queen, brother and Chelmsford are despicable ...

Durnsfofd ,the British Prime Minister and the the Zulu people are poor victim , it's a very modern approach, you'll love ... Salute

Cheers

Pascal

Subject: Re: The Queen's thourghts on Isandlwana Mon Jan 23, 2012 11:26 am

Quote :: Springbok: Would appreciate Saul David naming his source.

Quote :: DB14 From the Royal Archives 5. September 1879

Just wondering if you saw DB14 Reply Springbok... Exclamation

Posts : 947 Join date : 2011-10-21 Location : Algoa Bay

Hi DB14,

Thanks for the excellent work vis-a-vis Col Durnford.
Col Durnford's lack of any level of guilt for the fiasco at isandlwana was common knowledge amongst the Natal colonial military families and their descendants.This is a fact whiich seems to have become lost in the mists of time.
As to the good Colonel Durnford being charged by Chelmsford on the afternoon of the rout, I think that what is being implied in the aforegoing posts is that papers concerning this impending issue may have already been in his pocket when he met his end ........?. I have not studied enough about that interesting angle to give comment.

regards

barry

Guest

Dear Barry

On google video type "ZOULOUS LE DEFI GUERRIER "
This must exist in French/English language ...with Ian Knight and David Saul

It's amazing, the queen, brother and Chelmsford are despicable ...

Durnsfofd ,the British Prime Minister and the the Zulu people are poor victim , it's a very modern approach, you'll love ... Salute

Cheers

Pascal

Posts : 2308 Join date : 2010-07-02 Age : 44

So Chelmsford, isn't say Durnford Disobayed the orders to reinforce or take command.

He is saying

"Ld. Chelmsford said no doubt poor

Quote :: Col. Durnford had disobeyed orders, in leaving the camp as he did"

Which is true.!

Posts : 2008 Join date : 2011-08-01 Age : 27

Lord C told the queen that Durnford had been specialy ordered to take command at Isandlwana, as the new camp
commander, he inherited the written orders to defend the camp. When he left he was disobaying orders.

The truth is Durnford was not told to " Take Command " so disobayed no orders. His orders from Chelmsford were unspecific in that there was no suggestion of taking command or re enforcing the camp.He was the commander of an independent column and so had the freeedom to make his own decisions. One of those decisions was to inform Pullein that he, Durnford, would retain his independant column status and seek to protect Lord Chelmsfords rear.

Cheers

Posts : 2308 Join date : 2010-07-02 Age : 44

Quote:
Col. Durnford had disobeyed orders, in leaving the camp as he did"

But that's not what you posted it relation to what Chelmsford said.

He doesn't mentioned "Commarnd or reinforce" in connection with Durnford disobeying orders. Leaving the camp is what he says. In black & white.

Posts : 2008 Join date : 2011-08-01 Age : 27

How is leaving the camp disobaying orders ??

What order did Durnford have that told him to remain at Isandlwana ??

Cheers

Posts : 2308 Join date : 2010-07-02 Age : 44

Which ever order it was, he wasn't ordered to leave the camp. Wether it be take Commarnd or reinforce, it wasn't leave the camp. Durnford left the camp so no matter how we look at it, Durnford was suppose to stay in the camp.

DB. Which order do you think was given to Durnford by Smith-Dorrient.

Posts : 2008 Join date : 2011-08-01 Age : 27

The one copied into Crealocks order book.

You can find the what it says in almost every book on Isandlwana

In Crealcoks own words

“You are to march to this Camp at once with all the force you have with you of No 2 column
Major Bengough battalion is to move to Rorke’s Drift – as ordered yesterday.

2/24: artillery & mounted men with the General I Colonel Glyn move off at once to attack a Zulu force about 10 miles distant

JNC.

if Bengoughs battalion has crossed the River at Hands Kraal it is to move up here (Naugwane valley)”

Cheers

Posts : 2308 Join date : 2010-07-02 Age : 44

Have you missed some out. scratch

Posts : 2008 Join date : 2011-08-01 Age : 27

What ?

I have a copy of Crealocks 1886 letter in front of me, thats all the order says.

Cheers

Posts : 2308 Join date : 2010-07-02 Age : 44

Where it orders Durnford to leave the camp.

Subject: The Queens thoughts on Isandlwana Mon Mar 05, 2012 8:33 pm

Hi Impi.
The orders to Durnford DO NOT tell him to take command of the camp , they also DO NOT tell him to leave the camp .
He arrived in the camp so protocol dictates he was in command , so he took it upon himself to see if L.C was about to be cut off
which I suppose was nothing wrong with that . Had he not gone out to seek L.C , who if by chance was cut off and destroyed , Durnford would have been held accountable for not making an effort to prevent that course of events . So as I see it , Durnford couldnt win in any case . I also assume once he left the camp to check on L.C , command again would have reverted back to Pulleine !. Happy to be corrected .
cheers 90th. Salute

Subject: Re: The Queen's thourghts on Isandlwana Tue Mar 06, 2012 11:42 am

Sorry just got around to seeing this.

DB 14. Not good enough to merely state Royal Archives. Its rubbish, Durnford was never ever charged. If you have seen it any place else apart from Saul David please show me Im wrong.

If Saul Davids reading this, please educate me as to that statement.

Subject: Re: The Queen's thourghts on Isandlwana Tue Mar 06, 2012 11:53 am

Had to stop that post because i started swearing at the computer.

I get really cross when so called historians calmly foist so called evidence onto the public. Historians check cross reference and check again. Evidence is tested to a higher degree than in a courtroom, reasonable doubt does not exist in history.
Historians through the ages have had a responsibility to the world at large to report on life and incidents. Not willy nilly throw rumour and conjecture about like confetti. Morris did it and has had his once magnificent opus ridiculed.

Saul David should be tarred and feathered.

DB 14
Somewhere on your book rack is probably a book from your childhood by Enid Blighton...................rather quote from her.

Still bloody cross. :evil:

Subject: Re: The Queen's thourghts on Isandlwana Tue Mar 06, 2012 4:33 pm

History is a fluid subject and evolves and revises itself (not revisionism) like any other subject.

Sometimes, when specific evidence is non-existent or lost, there is a place for reasoned conjecture based on balance of probabilities in order to complete the picture.

I am reminded of seeing fossilised skeletons of dinosaurs in the Natural History museum, built up from a few toe bones. the vast majority of many of these exhibits is based on reasoned conjecture.

PS - poor Saul

Posts : 2008 Join date : 2011-08-01 Age : 27

Sorry typo

It should say accused and not charged.

Cheers

» The Queens Colour Of The 24th
» Recovery of the Queens Colours of the 1-24th Regiment and who killed Melvill Coghill