Was Cetshwayo really a threat!

Would the Zulu problem really have got out hand, if the British hadn't got involved. Could the Boers have not solved the problem themselves? They beat the Zulus at Blood river, with lessor superior weapons than what was available in 1879. 
 

Ray wrote:

Could the Boers have not solved the problem themselves?

That's a good question for our colonial cousins!

The military forces of Transvaal Republic were hard pressed keeping the baPedi in check, the first British attempt fared little better.

I would hate to think how they might have fought a war on two fronts.

John Y.

Ray63 wrote:

Would the Zulu problem really have got out hand, if the British hadn't got involved.

I don't know what you mean by "got out of hand" but Cetshwayo was trying to remain on the good side of the British by limiting the aggression up there as best he could.

Quote :

Could the Boers have not solved the problem themselves?

By leaving, yes.

Quote :

They beat the Zulus at Blood river, with lessor superior weapons than what was available in 1879. 

Right. And the British had the Colonial forces, the Martini-Henry and cannon available to them at Isandlwana and what good did it do them? Besides, one battle does not a war make, as the Zulu were to learn the hard way. Without the British as a counterbalance it would have been a very one-sided boundary dispute.

Err,hello,Kimberley, the black flag rebellion.
the gold,the diamonds,the black labour,the
blood.us.yes.shame.yes.reconciliation.of
course.South Africa today is a world apart
from the continuing effects of that fatal
policy of ' confederation ' ' subjugation '.
long live the whole people of RSA. xhosa

The Zulu were blocking the transport of labour from Mozambique to the mines, therefore in the way of big business, just one of the reasons , aprt from the ones mentioned by xhosa, then look at the Russian threat. All in all the war had nothing at all to do with a potential Zulu threat. That is of course in my humble opinion.

Cheers