Latest topics | » Colonialism: A Moral LegacyToday at 5:25 pm by Julian Whybra » Punch's view of Chelmsford's tactics!Today at 11:37 am by lydenburg » Writing adviceTue Mar 26, 2024 2:26 pm by Julian Whybra » Private John Scott 24th Regiment a fugitive at largeWed Mar 20, 2024 12:53 pm by Dash » Sergeant W E Warren RA - VeteranTue Mar 19, 2024 9:32 pm by Matthew Turl » Your favourite line from Zulu or Zulu DawnTue Mar 19, 2024 4:52 pm by Julian Whybra » 100,000 posts!Tue Mar 19, 2024 2:20 pm by Julian Whybra » Zulu Dawn/Zulu - New Immortals Film The Way Forward ?Sat Mar 16, 2024 2:34 pm by jgregory » Badge on 2/60th and 3/60th foreign service helmets Sat Mar 16, 2024 11:05 am by John Young » Corporal James Frowen Williams F Company. Fri Mar 15, 2024 9:08 am by Julian Whybra » British rations and moraleMon Mar 11, 2024 11:05 pm by Julian Whybra » Blue Plaque to James Egan, alias Private HaganMon Mar 11, 2024 9:16 pm by ADMIN» A few questions regarding Rorke's Drift and IsandlwanaWed Mar 06, 2024 9:16 pm by Julian Whybra » William J Hoare 24th Regiment??Sun Mar 03, 2024 7:08 pm by Dash » Swinburn Carbine issue in AZWThu Feb 29, 2024 12:53 pm by Rob D » Australians who went to Zululand and fought in the 1879 war.Thu Feb 29, 2024 8:39 am by John Young » Philip Price Thu Feb 29, 2024 7:55 am by Julian Whybra » Alfred Fairlie Henderson Thu Feb 29, 2024 7:47 am by RoryReynolds » August Hammar Letter Dated 6th Jan 1879Thu Feb 22, 2024 8:34 pm by Stefaan » Bearing The Cross by Ken Blakeson | BBC RADIO DRAMA: Ken Blakeson's play tells the story of the Battle of Rorke's Drift and the effect it had on three of the soldiers who fought in it.Wed Feb 21, 2024 10:57 am by Julian Whybra » Letter of officer during Zulu wars.Wed Feb 21, 2024 10:47 am by Julian Whybra » About the second invasionTue Feb 20, 2024 9:14 pm by 90th » Zulu Festival Brecon July 2024Sat Feb 17, 2024 7:35 pm by John Young » Watford band boys killed at iSandlwanaFri Feb 16, 2024 8:26 am by Julian Whybra » Private J. McCrudden 1/13 Foot Sun Feb 11, 2024 3:10 am by 90th » Death of Michael Jayson (Zulu Dawn)Thu Feb 08, 2024 9:55 pm by ADMIN» The anniversary of 22nd January in 2024Thu Feb 08, 2024 3:51 pm by luke1997 » What was the distance?Thu Feb 08, 2024 8:46 am by Stefaan » Mrs Henry HookTue Feb 06, 2024 3:14 pm by Kenny » "With 6 good riflemen"Mon Feb 05, 2024 2:30 pm by Mr M. Cooper » What was G company supposed to do?Sun Feb 04, 2024 9:31 pm by Julian Whybra » Private 1445 Charles Meates 17th Lancers and his brother William WylieFri Feb 02, 2024 10:07 pm by John Young » South Africa Medal With Clasp To Pvt J. Salter 3/60thFri Feb 02, 2024 3:12 pm by Foody » Weatherleys Border Horse FlagThu Feb 01, 2024 9:40 pm by Herbie » Edward Plantagenet Kemeys-TynteTue Jan 23, 2024 10:06 pm by Edjg |
March 2024 | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat | Sun |
---|
| | | | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | Calendar |
|
Top posting users this month | |
Zero tolerance to harassment and bullying. |
Due to recent events on this forum, we have now imposed a zero tolerance to harassment and bullying. All reports will be treated seriously, and will lead to a permanent ban of both membership and IP address.
Any member blatantly corresponding in a deliberate and provoking manner will be removed from the forum as quickly as possible after the event.
If any members are being harassed behind the scenes PM facility by any member/s here at 1879zuluwar.com please do not hesitate to forward the offending text.
We are all here to communicate and enjoy the various discussions and information on the Anglo Zulu War of 1879. Opinions will vary, you will agree and disagree with one another, we will have debates, and so it goes.
There is no excuse for harassment or bullying of anyone by another person on this site.
The above applies to the main frame areas of the forum.
The ring which is the last section on the forum, is available to those members who wish to partake in slagging matches. That section cannot be viewed by guests and only viewed by members that wish to do so. |
Fair Use Notice | Fair use notice.
This website may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorised by the copyright owner.
We are making such material and images are available in our efforts to advance the understanding of the “Anglo Zulu War of 1879. For educational & recreational purposes.
We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material, as provided for in UK copyright law. The information is purely for educational and research purposes only. No profit is made from any part of this website.
If you hold the copyright on any material on the site, or material refers to you, and you would like it to be removed, please let us know and we will work with you to reach a resolution. |
| | Who was most culpable for the defeat at the Battle Of Isandlwana: Was Lord Chelmsford , Col Glyn, Col Pulleine, or Col Durnford. | |
|
+18waterloo50 Julian Whybra Chard1879 Ray63 Dave barry Chelmsfordthescapegoat 90th ymob impi aussie inkosi Frank Allewell John rusteze Mr Greaves Mr M. Cooper sas1 ADMIN 22 posters | |
Author | Message |
---|
Martini-Henry
Posts : 148 Join date : 2015-06-19 Age : 65 Location : Scotland
| Subject: Re: Who was most culpable for the defeat at the Battle Of Isandlwana: Was Lord Chelmsford , Col Glyn, Col Pulleine, or Col Durnford. Fri Jun 26, 2015 12:41 pm | |
| I would never wish to stifle debate - hell I enjoy it & I appreciate this forum & regard highly the views expressed. I am still feeling my way, I came onto the forum with my mind firmly made up. Now I realise my assumptions were incorrect. As for cupability I think, ( & it is only an opinion), it must be shared to varying degrees. I have a lot of further reading to do. |
| | | Frank Allewell
Posts : 8572 Join date : 2009-09-21 Age : 77 Location : Cape Town South Africa
| Subject: Re: Who was most culpable for the defeat at the Battle Of Isandlwana: Was Lord Chelmsford , Col Glyn, Col Pulleine, or Col Durnford. Fri Jun 26, 2015 1:12 pm | |
| CTSG There is a concerted effort to try and denigrate and whitewash, scenarios. But really all that your Ex Member has communicated is just that, a potential scenario not based on any substantial and incontrovertible evidence. That whole concept is based on one line: "Durnford took command." And that's where it falls down Im afraid. Probably 40% of all the posts on this website, and others, has been devoted to exactly that discussion without resolve, and without new evidence it never will be. So yes its a scenario, a very plausible one as well, but no more and no less.
Cheers |
| | | waterloo50
Posts : 600 Join date : 2013-09-18 Location : West Country
| Subject: Re: Who was most culpable for the defeat at the Battle Of Isandlwana: Was Lord Chelmsford , Col Glyn, Col Pulleine, or Col Durnford. Fri Jun 26, 2015 4:23 pm | |
| In an earlier post CTSG stated 'A good argument can be made about how much difference his troopers would have made to the overall defense of the camp, and whether or not they would have made enough difference to change the situation. Considering the overwhelming Zulu forces, I have my doubts the final outcome would have been much different, but I think the Zulus would have suffered many more casualties had Durnford's troopers taken a defensive posture from the start."'This statement aroused my curiosity, if I understood your comment correctly you do not feel that Durnford and his men would have made any difference to the outcome except for a higher number of casualties amongst the Zulus. So here is my question, why hold Durnford accountable at all? from my understanding and given the scenario that Durnford remained at the camp and took command from the outset, would Lord Chelmsfords orders have made any difference at all (If indeed you feel that Durnford disobeyed an order or Queens Regulations) and left camp and that his leaving the camp made little or no difference then you have to look at the individual in overall command and realise that his orders/plans fell well short of what was required to defend the camp. So does this make LC Culpable? With respect Waterloo |
| | | Chelmsfordthescapegoat
Posts : 2593 Join date : 2009-04-24
| Subject: Re: Who was most culpable for the defeat at the Battle Of Isandlwana: Was Lord Chelmsford , Col Glyn, Col Pulleine, or Col Durnford. Fri Jun 26, 2015 7:08 pm | |
| - rusteze wrote:
- I think the problem with answering PQ's post is that, despite the arguments put forward, there is no consensus here on who was most culpable, which is the question asked. Undoubtedly Pulleine carries blame for not taking defensive action sooner and in a more positive way - all agree that. But some take the view that the greater blame still rests with Chelmsford for leaving him in an impossible situation. If I leave you with an inadequate force and bugger off elsewhere you can hardly be held entirely to blame for the result can you?
Then there is the camp which says Durnford is most responsible and they are unlikely to change their view unless fresh primary evidence emerges. And I would bet some wouldn't change their view even then.
To my mind PQ did not really offer any fresh evidence to support his conclusion even though it was an interesting evaluation of what was already known about Pulleine's failings.
As Frank so rightly says, it is the enigma of Isandhlwana.
Steve Come on now, it's getting really stupid. The force at Isandlwana was more than adequate, it was the way the force was used by those in command that was the downfall. If the men had been poistioned correctly with enought ammuntion the out come of Isandlwana would have been different. So don't let's start going down the road of looking for more excuses to blame Lord Chelmsford.. |
| | | Martini-Henry
Posts : 148 Join date : 2015-06-19 Age : 65 Location : Scotland
| Subject: Re: Who was most culpable for the defeat at the Battle Of Isandlwana: Was Lord Chelmsford , Col Glyn, Col Pulleine, or Col Durnford. Fri Jun 26, 2015 7:33 pm | |
| CTSG I think our friend Waterloo was asking if it made Lord C culpable that the camp was so woefully ill-prepared. I don't think it should be taken personally. I don't blame anyone for my ancestors death, I celebrate his meeting his death as a brave man & a soldier. |
| | | Chelmsfordthescapegoat
Posts : 2593 Join date : 2009-04-24
| Subject: Re: Who was most culpable for the defeat at the Battle Of Isandlwana: Was Lord Chelmsford , Col Glyn, Col Pulleine, or Col Durnford. Fri Jun 26, 2015 7:44 pm | |
| I was replying to Steves post, or am I missing something.
|
| | | Martini-Henry
Posts : 148 Join date : 2015-06-19 Age : 65 Location : Scotland
| Subject: Re: Who was most culpable for the defeat at the Battle Of Isandlwana: Was Lord Chelmsford , Col Glyn, Col Pulleine, or Col Durnford. Fri Jun 26, 2015 7:46 pm | |
| |
| | | rusteze
Posts : 2871 Join date : 2010-06-02
| Subject: Re: Who was most culpable for the defeat at the Battle Of Isandlwana: Was Lord Chelmsford , Col Glyn, Col Pulleine, or Col Durnford. Fri Jun 26, 2015 8:04 pm | |
| CTSG
Talk to Waterloo, he asked you a question. I have no interest in your views on my posts or your manner of responding to them.
Steve |
| | | waterloo50
Posts : 600 Join date : 2013-09-18 Location : West Country
| Subject: Re: Who was most culpable for the defeat at the Battle Of Isandlwana: Was Lord Chelmsford , Col Glyn, Col Pulleine, or Col Durnford. Fri Jun 26, 2015 8:25 pm | |
| The force at Isandlwana was more than adequate, I think not. Look at the outcome. Regardless of how the men were positioned. A better line of defence could have caused higher casualties to the Zulu but I honestly believe that the speed and numbers of the Zulus and the tenacity in which they fell upon the line would have overwhelmed even a well entrenched army. The subject of ammunition supply has been covered on the forum before but its worth mentioning Ian Knights take on this myth, 'the expenditure of rounds by font line companies in battles of the Victorian era is suprisingly low . During the battle of Khambula three months later, the imperial infantry expended in four hours an average of 33 rounds a man. The fighting at Khambula was no less intense than isandlwana.' The doctrine of the day was a slow and steady rate of fire. Each man in the 24th started the battle with seventy rounds each.' Somehow CTSG I don't think that there is anything that I could say that would alter your thinking on the situation, however, I respect your opinion and enjoy debating with you. Regards Waterloo |
| | | Chelmsfordthescapegoat
Posts : 2593 Join date : 2009-04-24
| Subject: Re: Who was most culpable for the defeat at the Battle Of Isandlwana: Was Lord Chelmsford , Col Glyn, Col Pulleine, or Col Durnford. Fri Jun 26, 2015 9:16 pm | |
| Martini-Henry. At Isandlwana Who was first to fire on who! |
| | | Chelmsfordthescapegoat
Posts : 2593 Join date : 2009-04-24
| Subject: Re: Who was most culpable for the defeat at the Battle Of Isandlwana: Was Lord Chelmsford , Col Glyn, Col Pulleine, or Col Durnford. Fri Jun 26, 2015 9:18 pm | |
| - waterloo50 wrote:
- The force at Isandlwana was more than adequate, I think not. Look at the outcome. Regardless of how the men were positioned. A better line of defence could have caused higher casualties to the Zulu but I honestly believe that the speed and numbers of the Zulus and the tenacity in which they fell upon the line would have overwhelmed even a well entrenched army.
The subject of ammunition supply has been covered on the forum before but its worth mentioning Ian Knights take on this myth, 'the expenditure of rounds by font line companies in battles of the Victorian era is suprisingly low . During the battle of Khambula three months later, the imperial infantry expended in four hours an average of 33 rounds a man. The fighting at Khambula was no less intense than isandlwana.' The doctrine of the day was a slow and steady rate of fire. Each man in the 24th started the battle with seventy rounds each.'
Somehow CTSG I don't think that there is anything that I could say that would alter your thinking on the situation, however, I respect your opinion and enjoy debating with you.
Regards
Waterloo I'm hoping there will be others on here apart from Steve that will disagree with you. Waterloo, not sure if you have already done so, but if not look at the "ammunition question" thread. |
| | | Chelmsfordthescapegoat
Posts : 2593 Join date : 2009-04-24
| Subject: Re: Who was most culpable for the defeat at the Battle Of Isandlwana: Was Lord Chelmsford , Col Glyn, Col Pulleine, or Col Durnford. Fri Jun 26, 2015 9:46 pm | |
| This from forum member John.
"Subject: Re: The ammunition question Sun Jul 22, 2012 1:32 am I have based this on 1100 men with rifles at Isandlwana. I'm not sure how many rounds the Coloinal regiments carried with them ( per person)
So this calculations is only taking into account 900 British soldiers who we know we're allocated 70 rounds each.
70 x 900 = 63,000 rounds between them, without resupply.
900 men firing 6 rounds each = 5,400 per minuite.
Based on 1 man firing for 60 minuites he would require 6 x 60 =360 rounds
Based on 900 men firing for 60 minuites. 360 x 900 = 324,000 with resupply
So 324.000 take away the original 63,000 = 261,000 addional rounds would be required to keep the men supplied with ammuntion per hour.
But if we stick with the 63, 000 rounds which they had beween them at commencement of battle. And it is said approximately 3000 Zulu were killed at the battle, that leaves approximately 60,000 rounds unaccounted for. Not to mentioned those Zulus killed by artillery fire.
This is just a rough calculation as I have not included the Coloinal units.
So in a nut shell did they need a resupply. 900 seasoned men 70 rounds each. 63,000 rounds between them, 20,000 zulus."
Hope you see my point, when I say had the men been position correctly and ammo available.
|
| | | waterloo50
Posts : 600 Join date : 2013-09-18 Location : West Country
| Subject: Re: Who was most culpable for the defeat at the Battle Of Isandlwana: Was Lord Chelmsford , Col Glyn, Col Pulleine, or Col Durnford. Fri Jun 26, 2015 9:51 pm | |
| CTSG
I'm sure a lot of people will not agree with me, its just my opinion but I'm here to learn.
Ulundi posted this sometime ago
'The recoil was perhaps a factor behind John Dunn’s remarks about the shooting of the British infantrymen at Gingindlovu explaining that ‘they were firing wildly in any direction.’ He goes further;
"I was much disappointed at the shooting of the soldiers. Their sole object seemed to be to get rid of ammunition or firing so many rounds a minute at anything, it didn’t matter what."
Just wondering if you think this was a factor at Isandlwana which would kind of support what I was saying about there being enough ammunition. In the heat of battle and with the ferocity of the attack it would make sense that ammunition was used rapidly. I recall Ian Knight saying the same thing about rates of fire and the reason for a slower rate of fire was so that men could pick their targets. It would have to be a very calm and experienced soldier to hold it together considering the size of the force that they were up against
Regards
Waterloo. |
| | | Chelmsfordthescapegoat
Posts : 2593 Join date : 2009-04-24
| Subject: Re: Who was most culpable for the defeat at the Battle Of Isandlwana: Was Lord Chelmsford , Col Glyn, Col Pulleine, or Col Durnford. Fri Jun 26, 2015 10:18 pm | |
| The Soldiers John Dunn speaks about, we're raw recruits, the troops at Isandlwana were old well seasoned solders, lots of exprience. Not that, that can be said about the two commanding officers.
|
| | | waterloo50
Posts : 600 Join date : 2013-09-18 Location : West Country
| Subject: Re: Who was most culpable for the defeat at the Battle Of Isandlwana: Was Lord Chelmsford , Col Glyn, Col Pulleine, or Col Durnford. Fri Jun 26, 2015 11:11 pm | |
| Ouch, somehow I knew that you would respond with that. My point was that regardless of experience these men whom we must remember were fighting overwhelming odds would have shot at anything that moved. Maybe the firing was very controlled in the early stages of the attack, but as the enemy closed and men were withdrawing the rate of fire and the chances of hitting a target every time greatly diminished. A controlled rate of fire would not be maintained for very long. If this was the case then ammunition would have been used at a greater rate. I also thought that it was now an established fact that ammunition was indeed reaching the front line. If this was the case then with controlled rates of fire the amount of ammunition used should have been enough. Unfortunately as we all know the men were not fighting shoulder to shoulder. Regards Waterloo I have no wish to take this post any further off topic so I will call it a day on this matter. |
| | | Chelmsfordthescapegoat
Posts : 2593 Join date : 2009-04-24
| Subject: Re: Who was most culpable for the defeat at the Battle Of Isandlwana: Was Lord Chelmsford , Col Glyn, Col Pulleine, or Col Durnford. Fri Jun 26, 2015 11:48 pm | |
| - waterloo50 wrote:
- Ouch,
somehow I knew that you would respond with that.
My point was that regardless of experience these men whom we must remember were fighting overwhelming odds would have shot at anything that moved. Maybe the firing was very controlled in the early stages of the attack, but as the enemy closed and men were withdrawing the rate of fire and the chances of hitting a target every time greatly diminished. A controlled rate of fire would not be maintained for very long. If this was the case then ammunition would have been used at a greater rate. I also thought that it was now an established fact that ammunition was indeed reaching the front line. If this was the case then with controlled rates of fire the amount of ammunition used should have been enough. Unfortunately as we all know the men were not fighting shoulder to shoulder.
Regards
Waterloo
I have no wish to take this post any further off topic so I will call it a day on this matter. If you read eyewitness accounts, the men at Isandlwana remained disciplined, it was only when the fire slacken off, did the problems start. At one point during the Battle the Zulu were stopped with the amount of fire being poured into them. I did read somewhere that some of the men in various Compaines were laughing and becking the Zulu's to come on. |
| | | ADMIN
Posts : 4349 Join date : 2008-11-01 Age : 64 Location : KENT
| Subject: Re: Who was most culpable for the defeat at the Battle Of Isandlwana: Was Lord Chelmsford , Col Glyn, Col Pulleine, or Col Durnford. Mon Jun 29, 2015 10:07 pm | |
| From Peter Quantrill.
"Well, the topic has had a good run and I would like to thank those who contributed for their interesting and informative views. The bottom line remains that the battle commander was Pulleine and, as such, all battle decisions were within his control and command structure. He failed to adequately respond tactically to Zulu movements, and no matter the mitigating circumstances, was in my view culpable. I appreciate that this is not a view shared by all. Best wishes, Peter" |
| | | rusteze
Posts : 2871 Join date : 2010-06-02
| Subject: Re: Who was most culpable for the defeat at the Battle Of Isandlwana: Was Lord Chelmsford , Col Glyn, Col Pulleine, or Col Durnford. Mon Jun 29, 2015 10:25 pm | |
| Thank you Peter for an interesting topic. Now, how about another!
Steve |
| | | waterloo50
Posts : 600 Join date : 2013-09-18 Location : West Country
| Subject: Re: Who was most culpable for the defeat at the Battle Of Isandlwana: Was Lord Chelmsford , Col Glyn, Col Pulleine, or Col Durnford. Tue Jun 30, 2015 11:53 am | |
| It made for a great discussion.
Many Thanks.
Waterloo |
| | | waterloo50
Posts : 600 Join date : 2013-09-18 Location : West Country
| Subject: Re: Who was most culpable for the defeat at the Battle Of Isandlwana: Was Lord Chelmsford , Col Glyn, Col Pulleine, or Col Durnford. Tue Jun 30, 2015 11:54 am | |
| It made for a great discussion.
Many Thanks.
Waterloo |
| | | Chelmsfordthescapegoat
Posts : 2593 Join date : 2009-04-24
| Subject: Re: Who was most culpable for the defeat at the Battle Of Isandlwana: Was Lord Chelmsford , Col Glyn, Col Pulleine, or Col Durnford. Wed Jul 01, 2015 10:44 pm | |
| - Admin wrote:
- From Peter Quantrill.
"Well, the topic has had a good run and I would like to thank those who contributed for their interesting and informative views. The bottom line remains that the battle commander was Pulleine and, as such, all battle decisions were within his control and command structure. He failed to adequately respond tactically to Zulu movements, and no matter the mitigating circumstances, was in my view culpable. I appreciate that this is not a view shared by all. Best wishes, Peter" Peter great topic, it's a pity the Lord Chelmsford bashers didn't take it more seriously. For me I think your correct when you say "Pulleine failed adequately to respond tactically to Zulu movements" possibly along with failing to cooperate with Col Durnford. |
| | | | Who was most culpable for the defeat at the Battle Of Isandlwana: Was Lord Chelmsford , Col Glyn, Col Pulleine, or Col Durnford. | |
|
Similar topics | |
|
| Permissions in this forum: | You cannot reply to topics in this forum
| |
| |
| |