WWW.1879ZULUWAR.COM

Film Zulu Dawn:Lt. Col. Pulleine: His Lordship is of the cetain opinion that it's far too difficult an approach to be chosen by the Zulu command.Col. Durnford: Yes, well... difficulty never deterred a Zulu commander.
 
HomeHome  CalendarCalendar  GalleryGallery  PublicationsPublications  FAQFAQ  SearchSearch  RegisterRegister  Log inLog in  
Latest topics
Colonel R.T. Glyn, 1/24th Regt. kwaSokhexe, Ulundi
[Mac and Shad](Isandula Collection)
Secrets Of The Dead The Mystery Of Zulu Dawn
Search
 
 

Display results as :
 
Rechercher Advanced Search
Top posters
90th
 
littlehand
 
Frank Allewell
 
ADMIN
 
Chelmsfordthescapegoat
 
John
 
Mr M. Cooper
 
1879graves
 
impi
 
rusteze
 
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.
Top posting users this month
Drummer Boy 14
 
Frank Allewell
 
90th
 
rusteze
 
ADMIN
 
SRB1965
 
Julian Whybra
 
ymob
 
1879graves
 
xhosa2000
 
Most active topics
Isandlwana, Last Stands
Pte David Jenkins. 'Forgotten' Survivor of Rorke's Drift Returned to Official Records
Durnford was he capable.5
Durnford was he capable.1
Durnford was he capable. 3
Durnford was he capable.2
Durnford was he capable. 4
The ammunition question
Pte David Jenkins. 'Forgotten' Survivor of Rorke's Drift Returned to Official Records
The missing five hours.

Share | 
 

 The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : 1, 2  Next
AuthorMessage
rusteze

avatar

Posts : 2218
Join date : 2010-06-02

PostSubject: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Sat Jul 04, 2015 6:57 pm

There is a rather good short essay on the "Welshness" of the 24th/SWB by Mike Snook over on the Victorian Wars site (scroll down a bit). Martin, you shouldn't read it! Very Happy

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

Steve
Back to top Go down
nthornton1979

avatar

Posts : 143
Join date : 2011-01-18
Age : 38
Location : Runcorn, Cheshire, UK

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Sat Jul 04, 2015 7:21 pm


The grenade has been tossed!

Neil
Back to top Go down
waterloo50

avatar

Posts : 600
Join date : 2013-09-18
Location : West Country

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Sat Jul 04, 2015 7:53 pm

Good post rusteze,

I don't think anyone can argue with Dr Mike Snook MBE. His reply to Brett, especially the second to last paragraph hit the nail on the head. 'The 24th was neither English nor Welsh. It was genuinely British'.

Waterloo
Back to top Go down
nthornton1979

avatar

Posts : 143
Join date : 2011-01-18
Age : 38
Location : Runcorn, Cheshire, UK

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:01 pm

'It was genuinely British'.

I made a similar point in my post above Mike's.

Neil
Back to top Go down
waterloo50

avatar

Posts : 600
Join date : 2013-09-18
Location : West Country

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:11 pm

Blackadder Have you ever been to Wales, Baldrick?
Baldrick: No, but I've often thought I'd like to.
Blackadder: Well don't. It's a ghastly place. Huge gangs of tough, sinewy men roam the Valleys, terrorizing people with their close-harmony singing. You need half a pint of phlegm in your throat just to pronounce the place names. Never ask for directions in Wales, Baldrick. You'll be washing spit out of your hair for a fortnight

Waterloo Very Happy
Back to top Go down
John

avatar

Posts : 2527
Join date : 2009-04-06
Age : 55
Location : UK

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Sun Jul 05, 2015 12:22 am

"Stanley Baker did what he did in that film and that's nothing to do with anything. He was an actor, that was a script, it was a film. (There are people who need to be reminded of that)."
Mike Snook.

Martin, something tells me he's been reading our forum?
Still it's good to see, he's see's the concept of the film Zulu. Perhaps you should stick to watching. " She wore a yellow ribbon" agree Rolling Eyes
Back to top Go down
Frank Allewell

avatar

Posts : 6470
Join date : 2009-09-21
Age : 70
Location : Cape Town South Africa

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Sun Jul 05, 2015 1:59 am

Ah but typical Snook he does make a point then attribute it in a rather underhand way. He writes of Degaucher praising his 'majority of Welshmen' and in the same breath/sentence attributes them to Rorkes Drift. The obverse is true unfortunately. Degaucher was not at Rorkes Drift with his 'majority' on the 22nd, he was later, but not the 22nd so for the good Doctor Snook to slyly infer he was is rather ................. add you own adjective. As in both his AZW books he does enjoy the power of the word.
Back in the days of the 11th Hussars we were a predominantly southern England regiment, I had a couple of Welsh friends in my troop and when we went out on the town, our group was predominantly therefore welsh. Would it be permissible for me therefore to catergorise the regiment during that minute time period as predominatly welsh?
The writer does acknowledge  that the regiment was heavily reinforced with a draft over the years, quite naturally, and very subtely infers because they were stationed in Brecon the draft would be welsh. That's a rather huge leap of judgement.
And finally Doctor Snook, I don't own a dog so am unable to throw it into the mix but I would comment that its really rather arrogant of you to suggest that because I am not Welsh, Springbok through and through old man, I didn't serve in the regiment, solid Cherry picker, and because I don't have a tie to the regiment Im not allowed to comment! That argument  Im afraid is rejected with........ again fill in your own word.
I really do await Martins rebuttal, wonder how he will enjoy the rather nasty way Snook refers to him as a Troll, as he does any one who has the temerity to disagree with him. One day I must get down to exploring his HCMDB in detail and exposing a few of the 'stretched 'points. Rather like shooting the proverbial fish in a barrel though.

Signed

Another Bloody Troll I suppose
Back to top Go down
old historian2

avatar

Posts : 1097
Join date : 2009-01-14
Location : East London

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Sun Jul 05, 2015 2:29 am

agree
Back to top Go down
timothylrose



Posts : 29
Join date : 2013-09-07

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Sun Jul 05, 2015 8:22 am

Having read this through I fail to see how you can infer Mike is stating that Degacher (or Degaucher according to Frank) was at Rorke's Drift on the day - sorry I also thought that authors dealt in words. The thing with internet forums is people do love to argue - have you done a bit of research and worked out the place of birth of the defenders which might give a reasonable tribal detail to back up assertions???? (and by the way I do own a dog as she is an English Springer Spaniel)

Atb - Tim
Back to top Go down
old historian2

avatar

Posts : 1097
Join date : 2009-01-14
Location : East London

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Sun Jul 05, 2015 10:59 am

agree
Back to top Go down
rusteze

avatar

Posts : 2218
Join date : 2010-06-02

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Sun Jul 05, 2015 12:26 pm

I did hesitate to post the link because Snook does rub people up the wrong way - me included. But he sets out an interesting and reasoned argument in more detail than usual. And he writes well, in my view, which is always welcome when so much of what we get is pretty impenetrable. He has his "Captain Mainwearing" moments which make me smile rather than grind my teeth. And he promotes proper debate. So, all in all, I think it is a worthwhile contribution.

I don't think it is about researching birth places. It's been done and an excellent detailed analysis is contained in Julian Whybra's "England's Sons" drawing together his own research with that of Norman Holmes and Kris Wheatley ( it is as accurate as we are going to get).

I look forward, Frank, to your analysis of Snooks book (that's not meant to be at all tongue in cheek because I know you will throw some fresh light).  I just hope you can find the time!

Martin, don't take it seriously my friend.

Steve
Back to top Go down
waterloo50

avatar

Posts : 600
Join date : 2013-09-18
Location : West Country

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Sun Jul 05, 2015 1:46 pm

I said it before and I will say it again, good post rusteze, anything that creates a debate is all good.


Waterloo
Back to top Go down
Mr M. Cooper

avatar

Posts : 2507
Join date : 2011-09-29
Location : Lancashire, England.

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Sun Jul 05, 2015 3:51 pm

The regiment was raised in Pluckley, Kent, ENGLAND.
It was raised for the defence of the ENGLISH Kingdom.
It was later designated the line number 24th regiment of foot.
It was later given the County title of Warwickshire, ENGLAND, making it the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment of foot.
The regiment was therefor an ENGLISH regiment.
The regiment had no connection whatsoever with wales (it being an ENGLISH regiment), yet it was stupidly moved (on paper only) to brecon.
By the start of the AZW NEITHER Battalion had EVER been to brecon.
At the defence of RD the vast majority of the men of the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment of foot that defended the post were indeed ENGLISH.
The regiment kept its ENGLISH County title and line number until the reforms of 1881.
The reforms ended ALL infantry line numbers and titles, and new titles were given to the regiments, making them virtually NEW regiments.
The NEW title given to the virtually NEW regiment was just the swb, with NO LINE NUMBER, thus meaning the last regiment to officially have the line number of 24 was the old 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment, the NEW regiment had no line number, it was just the swb, meaning that the swb was NEVER the 24th regiment of foot.
All battle honours prior to 1st July 1881, belong to the old regiment and NOT the swb or the other regiments that came after, and are therefor an ENGLISH regiments battle honours, but the later welsh regiments like to cover themselves in these honours and pretend that they are theirs, and they like to pretend that the old line number (24th) is also theirs, but without even mentioning or honouring the previous ENGLISH county title of the regiment that won those honours. In other words, they like to bask in the glory that was won by an ENGLISH regiment but yet want to call it their own.

Baker knew exactly what he was doing when he made the film, he deliberately avoided giving the REAL name of the regiment, he deliberately put so much false welshness in the film that you could cut it with a knife, he stole the glory from the mainly Englishmen and their regiment, and gave it and the credit to a welsh regiment that did NOT exist during the AZW, and all because he had an anti English chip on his shoulder, which, it appears, that Mr Snook also has on his.

No matter what tripe the welsh may say, or how much the welsh may WISH that the glory and honours of the old 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment were welsh, they NEVER were, and NEVER will be, the old 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment was ENGLISH and so were the vast majority of its men.

The welsh can glory hunt all they want, they will NEVER alter the historical fact that the regiment was raised in ENGLAND, for the defence of the ENGLISH kingdom, it had an ENGLISH county title, and the majority of its men were ENGLISH. They cannot alter the historical fact that it was the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment that fought in the AZW at both iSandlwana and RD and NOT some pretend welsh outfit that did NOT exist at the time.

It might also be of interest for some of you to know that the regiment called the royal welsh does NOT have any of its antecedent regiments that were actually raised in wales. The 23rd was raised in Shropshire, ENGLAND. The 24th was raised in Kent, ENGLAND. The 41st was raised in Chelsea, London, ENGLAND from invalids and Chelsea out patiants. And the 69th was the old second battalion of the 24th, redesignated the 69th and later given the ENGLISH county title of South Lincolnshire. So there you go, not much welsh about the royal welsh is there, not when all their regiments were raised in good old ENGLAND.
Back to top Go down
Frank Allewell

avatar

Posts : 6470
Join date : 2009-09-21
Age : 70
Location : Cape Town South Africa

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Sun Jul 05, 2015 4:49 pm

Hi Tim
Look closer, Im afraid there is a ban on cutting and pasting from that particular site. However, wont be the first time Ive broken a rule.
Quote
...the commanding officer of the men who held Rorke's Drift...'who are now mostly your countrymen'. That's conclusive. But it won't satiate the men with jingling bells and signboards around their neck and a deep seated prejudice against the Welsh.

That specifically states that the commanding officer of the men who held RD is bragging about the Welsh character of the company in question.

I take the mickey out of Martin for his obsession on a regular basis because I really don't give a damn about the movie as a historical document or where the B Company men came from ( twelve were Welsh by the way ) What I do strongly object to is the high handed insulting approach from a man who didn't dare provide footnotes/references to his missives and passed of a solid mass of innuendo and miss information as fact.

Sorry Pete

Cheers
Back to top Go down
Frank Allewell

avatar

Posts : 6470
Join date : 2009-09-21
Age : 70
Location : Cape Town South Africa

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Sun Jul 05, 2015 4:57 pm

Sorry should have added that yes ive done a couple of hours research here and there. For one minute my heart leapt when I thought I saw a springbok setter then realised it was a springer, Oh well....... Very Happy Very Happy
Back to top Go down
timothylrose



Posts : 29
Join date : 2013-09-07

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Sun Jul 05, 2015 5:22 pm

Post deleted


Last edited by timothylrose on Sun Jul 05, 2015 6:28 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
Mr M. Cooper

avatar

Posts : 2507
Join date : 2011-09-29
Location : Lancashire, England.

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Sun Jul 05, 2015 5:31 pm

Just to add that Julian (some years back), once posted the nationalities of the men of the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment that defended RD, and if my memory serves me right I seem to recall that there were just about 14 that came from wales, and a similar number from Ireland, there was just one Scot, the rest being from England.

I have to agree with you Springy mate, Snook does not provide any footnotes/references for his claims, and a lot of his theories are just his own interpretation of events and some guesswork.

You are right Frank, it does look like an obsession on my part, however, I just will not allow the memory of those mainly Englishmen of the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment to be dumped and forgotten along with their honour and glory and the name of their regiment, and be substituted by a fictional welsh outfit that did not exist at the time of the AZW, why should the welsh steal this honour, glory and history from the English and be allowed to get away with it just because of Baker and the anti English chip he had on his shoulder.

Hey Springy mate, I've never seen one of them Springbok Springer Spaniels, are they rare scratch
Back to top Go down
Mr M. Cooper

avatar

Posts : 2507
Join date : 2011-09-29
Location : Lancashire, England.

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Sun Jul 05, 2015 5:49 pm

The welsh/zulu war scratch

A quick search of the regiments that fought in the AZW will show that there was NOT ONE welsh regiment that took part in the AZW.

Just shows what this twonk from the rrw believed to be real doesn't it, makes you wonder if these blokes from the time of the swb right up to todays outfit really do believe that it was a welsh outfit that fought in the AZW.

Do they not teach them the regimental history these days scratch or do they just cut out anything that is English and substitute it for welsh propaganda nonsense Suspect scratch
Back to top Go down
waterloo50

avatar

Posts : 600
Join date : 2013-09-18
Location : West Country

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Sun Jul 05, 2015 6:28 pm

In 2007 The Royal Green Jackets and the LI were merged to form The Rifles, my old regiment (Light Infantry) had their fair share of battle honours as did the Royal Green Jackets (56 VCs)  both regiments had a proud heritage. In 2005 when the idea of a merger was announced there was a lot of concern that the history of the LI and the RGJ would disappear, fortunately the newly formed Rifles keep the memory of the regiments alive through the traditions and battle honours bestowed upon both regiments, the Rifles wear the (LI Cap Badge and the RGJ Belt Badge.)

It would have been quite wrong for a newly formed regiment with no clear lineage to either the LI or RGJ regiments to lay claim to the battle honours and traditions of either of those regiments. My point is that the formation of the Rifles is clear with clear lineage, Its difficult to see the same kind of connection between the SWB and the 24th, and before Mike Snook calls me a retard o a Slathering Idiot,  I had better state that I'm not anti-Welsh.

Waterloo
Back to top Go down
timothylrose



Posts : 29
Join date : 2013-09-07

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Sun Jul 05, 2015 6:31 pm

I have deleted my offending post - regardless of your views I don't think that calling a serving officer of any Regiment a "twonk" was anything to do with the point I made - my point was all about what happened to me personally - and wasn't intended to be a launch pad for other comments having a go at British Army Officers. Not my style - atb Tim
Back to top Go down
rusteze

avatar

Posts : 2218
Join date : 2010-06-02

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Sun Jul 05, 2015 7:32 pm

To my mind there is a very clear and irrefutable connection between the SWB and the 24th (2nd Warwickshire).

Many men of the SWB wore the 1879 Zulu War medal.  All that happened was that on a particular day in 1881 the powers that be decided they would change the names of the regiments. You can argue about whether those names were sensible or not, but the men who the day before were proud members of the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) were now South Wales Borderers. Those men, and subsequent recruits to the SWB, have the absolute right to display and celebrate the honours of the old 24th.

Surely the same thing happens whenever there is an amalgamation or change - the men at the time of the change are the same but will die out. The recruit, by definition, could not have been present when those honours were earned. But on what grounds can you deprive them of their regimental heritage?

Steve
Back to top Go down
waterloo50

avatar

Posts : 600
Join date : 2013-09-18
Location : West Country

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Sun Jul 05, 2015 8:57 pm

rusteze,


Many Thanks

I had wrongly assumed that the 24th had ended and the SWB were created. I hadn't realised that the men of the 24th carried their battle honours and traditions over to the SWB, my mistake, please except my apologies. I have just found some info about the Childers Reforms of 1881. The SWB were indeed the old 24th.

Just out of interest I found this bit of info and thought it was interesting.

The Regiment was first formed in 1689 by Sir Edward Dering in Ireland as ‘Sir Edward Dering’s Regiment of Foot’ (named after the colonel as was the tradition of the time). It saw its first action during the War of Spanish Succession (1701–1714) fighting at the Battles of Blenheim and Ramilles then under the command of John Churchill who went on to become the Duke of Marlborough. It also served during the War of Jenkins’s Ear (1739-41) at the disastrous British defeat at the Battle of Cartagena de Indias.

In 1751 the Regimental naming system was simplified with all British Regiments assign a number of the order of precedence instead of the current colonel, therefore the Regiment became the 24th Regiment of Foot.

The 24th started out as an Irish Regiment, spent some time being English and finished up being Welsh.

Kind Regards

Waterloo
Back to top Go down
Chelmsfordthescapegoat

avatar

Posts : 2549
Join date : 2009-04-24

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Sun Jul 05, 2015 9:19 pm

I totally agree with Mike Snook! He doesn't need to present foot notes, he firing from the hip in a cool calm manor, highlighting his point excellently. Martin I doubt very much he was referring to you directly. But there is somewhat a total lack of respect, towards someone who post was posted on another forum.

Back to top Go down
rusteze

avatar

Posts : 2218
Join date : 2010-06-02

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Sun Jul 05, 2015 10:29 pm

Waterloo

Thank you, but you have no reason to apologise. I think the army has always gone to great lengths to preserve regimental honours and traditions and hence a sense of pride and continuity. There is no dastardly welsh conspiracy to  erase the achievements of history even though we won't convince Martin of that, but that's fine.

Steve
Back to top Go down
Mr M. Cooper

avatar

Posts : 2507
Join date : 2011-09-29
Location : Lancashire, England.

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Sun Jul 05, 2015 11:38 pm

Waterloo.

The regiment was raised in 1689 in Pluckley, Kent, England. It was raised as Colonel Sir Edward Derings regiment as part of William III's defence of the English Kingdom and served in Ireland under William III.
It was NOT raised in Ireland, and it was NEVER an Irish regiment. From 1751 until 1782 (just 31 years), it was known as the 24th regiment of foot, from 1782 until 1881 (the best part of 100 years), it was known as the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment of foot. After the 1st July 1881, all line numbers and titles were ended due to the 1881 reforms, and the regiment became a virtually NEW regiment with the NEW title of the swb (no line numbers), meaning that the swb were NEVER the 24th foot. The last British infantry regiment to have the honour of being the 24th, was indeed the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment.

I have no problem with regiments carrying on the traditions of their predecessors, however, I do have a problem when a regiment totally ignores the matter of fact that their predecessors were English, and try to cover up the fact by pretending that they weren't, and ignoring the fact that from 1689 until 1881 the regiment was an English regiment of the British Army.

The regiment had NO connection whatsoever with wales until it was stupidly moved ON PAPER ONLY to brecon in 1873, however, by the time of the AZW in 1879 NEITHER battalion of the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment had EVER been to brecon.

What gets my goat is the fact that since the Baker film the welsh have cloaked themselves in the achievements of their glorious English predecessors and claimed the honours as being theirs, they don't even mention that the regiment was English, nor do they mention the English county title of Warwickshire that it carried for the best part of 100 years, they even go as far as claiming that the Duke of Marlborough was the swb's colonel, there were NO welsh regiments that took part in the AZW, yet any mention of the zulu war or RD and they come out of the woodwork to claim the honours, what a nerve.

If they want to honour their predecessors, then they should do it properly, and not half heartedly, and give the credit back to where it rightly belongs, and stop the pretence that the regiment that fought at both iSandlwana and RD was welsh when it was NOT.

Everyone is proud of where they come from, but with the welshman Baker stealing England's glory in order for the welsh to be able to stick their chests out, is not really anything to be proud of is it.
Back to top Go down
Frank Allewell

avatar

Posts : 6470
Join date : 2009-09-21
Age : 70
Location : Cape Town South Africa

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Mon Jul 06, 2015 5:52 am

CTSG
If an author purporting to 'reveal the secrets at last' publishes in a semi fictitional manner he should advertise as such.
The concept of footnotes etc is to prove a point. Snook doesn't do that, I have sais in the past and stick to my guns, the battle breakdown is brilliant, to a degree. He has however clouded that breakdown by his addition of scenarios, conversations and incidents that cannot be proven, all in the paragraphs. This tends to lead the reader along Snooks imaginary path as being historical fact. Much the same as the film Zulu has done over the years.
That's why you need footnotes, to separate fiction, conjecture and fact.

Cheers
Back to top Go down
Frank Allewell

avatar

Posts : 6470
Join date : 2009-09-21
Age : 70
Location : Cape Town South Africa

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Mon Jul 06, 2015 5:53 am

Tim
I personaly don't have any problem with your post and welcome your view as honest debate.

Cheers
Back to top Go down
old historian2

avatar

Posts : 1097
Join date : 2009-01-14
Location : East London

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Mon Jul 06, 2015 8:48 am

Martin your last post reads, as though your blaming the Welsh. I would like to evidence of this other than the film Zulu.
Back to top Go down
waterloo50

avatar

Posts : 600
Join date : 2013-09-18
Location : West Country

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Mon Jul 06, 2015 9:18 am

From the Regimental Museum of The Royal Welsh.

The Royal Welsh is Wales's infantry regiment. It has inherited a distinguished military tradition from its predecessors: The Royal Welch Fusiliers (23rd Foot) and The Royal Regiment of Wales (formerly the 24th, 41st and 69th Foot - and later the South Wales Borderers, Welch Regiment and Monmouthshire Regiment). Although, in some respects, the story only began on 1st March 2006 when The Royal Welsh was formed, its history reaches back to the year 1689 when the 23rd and 24th Regiments of Foot were first raised.

I think that this is what people object to, this write up from the museum gives a false impression, it doesn't claim that the 24th were Welsh but if you didn't know better you would assume that they were.
Back to top Go down
old historian2

avatar

Posts : 1097
Join date : 2009-01-14
Location : East London

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Mon Jul 06, 2015 10:08 am

Waterloo, those that visit the museum will see all the artifacts from the Zulu war relate to the 24th regiment of foot. Facts about the Zulu war are there in the web, nothing is being hidden from anyone.
The film Zulu has no hidden agenda. One needs to look at the bigger picture and the concept of the film.
As someone pointed out Baker himself portraits John Chard who happens to be British. Cain Portraits Bromhead, another English men.
Back to top Go down
Mr M. Cooper

avatar

Posts : 2507
Join date : 2011-09-29
Location : Lancashire, England.

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Mon Jul 06, 2015 10:59 am

old historian2 wrote:
Martin your last post reads, as though your blaming the Welsh. I would like to evidence of this other than the film Zulu.

OH2.

You only need to visit the army web site and look at the regimental history of the RW.

You can see for yourself that there is no English history of any of the regiments mentioned, but just read what it says about the swb, if that is not a load of twaddle, then I don't know what is.

There is no mention at all about the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment, yet it was that regiment that served in the AZW and NOT the swb, but the way it is worded, it gives the impression that it was the swb, and it also gives the impression that Marlborough was the swb's colonel, what a load of nonsense, talk about throwing flowers at themselves, jeez!

There is no mention that all of the old line regiments that make up the RW were all in fact raised in England and were therefor English regiments NOT welsh.

23rd raised in Shropshire, England. 24th raised in Kent, England. 41st raised as an invalid regiment in Chelsea, London, England. The 69th was the old second battalion of the 24th (and if memory serves, I am almost sure it was raised in Warwickshire), it was later redesignated as the 69th and later given the English county title of the 69th (South Lincolnshire) regiment. So there you have it OH, there is not one of the predecessors of the RW that are actually welsh, they were all raised in England.

So if it's evidence you want that the welsh are covering up facts, then just take a look at the army web site for a starter. There are also more sites that you can find that also give the false impression that the regiment as always been welsh when it never was.

The 24th regiment of foot was the title of the regiment from 1751-1782, after that it became the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment, so by them just saying the 24th foot, they are infering the regiment from 1751-1782, and deliberately leaving out the English county title of Warwickshire, so that the gullible public will just assume it was welsh.

The film is almost one big agenda OH, Baker knew axactly what he wanted to convey to the gullible public, and the bigger picture and concept of the film was to give the false impression that the regiment and most of its men were welsh (with a few foreigners from England), when in actual fact it was the other way round, most of the men were English, and the few foreigners were a mixture of welsh, Irish and one Scot.

Yes, ironic isn't it, that Baker (who had an anti English chip on his shoulder), should play an Englishman, mind you, there wasn't a welsh officer hero for him to play was there, and he wanted to be the hero didn't he, so he had not much choice if he wanted to be 'The Hero', he had to play at being an Englishman (I bet that hurt his welsh pride a bit).


Back to top Go down
Mr M. Cooper

avatar

Posts : 2507
Join date : 2011-09-29
Location : Lancashire, England.

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Mon Jul 06, 2015 11:14 am

waterloo50 wrote:
From the Regimental Museum of The Royal Welsh.

The Royal Welsh is Wales's infantry regiment. It has inherited a distinguished military tradition from its predecessors: The Royal Welch Fusiliers (23rd Foot) and The Royal Regiment of Wales (formerly the 24th, 41st and 69th Foot - and later the South Wales Borderers, Welch Regiment and Monmouthshire Regiment). Although, in some respects, the story only began on 1st March 2006 when The Royal Welsh was formed, its history reaches back to the year 1689 when the 23rd and 24th Regiments of Foot were first raised.

I think that this is what people object to, this write up from the museum gives a false impression, it doesn't claim that the 24th were Welsh but if you didn't know better you would assume that they were.

Spot on waterloo, that is exactly my point. Never any mention of the English origins of the regiment, never no honour given to their predecessors who were mostly Englishmen or their regiment that was raised in England, never no mention of the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment being the REAL name of the regiment that fought in the AZW at both iSandlwana and RD.

As I said in my post above to OH, take a look at the army web site for the RW, just read the twaddle they write about the history regarding the swb, all totally and deliberately misleading, and written in such a way as to convince the gullible public that the regiment was always welsh, I don't think I ever read as much nonsense in my life, and if that is not trying to con the public then I don't know what is.
Back to top Go down
waterloo50

avatar

Posts : 600
Join date : 2013-09-18
Location : West Country

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Mon Jul 06, 2015 12:09 pm

This is the view of Bill Cainan, curator of the Regimental Museum of The Royal Welsh, based at Brecon, Powys.

That is where the soldiers were based and in the film were portrayed as a fundamentally Welsh regiment, with Rhondda Valley-born actor Stanley Baker in the leading role. Except that they weren't, says Mr Cainan, who himself served in the army for 37 years. Although the regiment had been based in Wales for six years by the battle of Rorke's Drift, they were still titled as the 24th Regiment of Foot (2nd Warwickshire Regiment).

For generations the regiment had recruited from the big strong farmhands working in the fields of Warwickshire and neighbouring counties.

But because it is such a well-crafted film, many people treat it as a documentary, When you start to say 'that's not quite right' the eyebrows start to raise and people say 'but I've seen the film!' But in the wake of the rapid industrialisation of Wales, and the south Wales valleys in particular, the Army had moved the regiment's base to Brecon to recruit from unskilled industrial labourers. Yet even then no more than a third of the men in the regiment at that time would have considered themselves Welsh, says Mr Cainan.

It is the sort of occasion where he comes up against the many myths perpetuated by Zulu, he says.

He said: "Stanley Baker just wanted to put some Welshness into it. He played the regiment as being the South Wales Borderers whereas it was still the 2nd Warwickshire Regiment.

"Mind you, it took the Army nine years - two years after Zulu war - to rename it, to reflect its geographical location
Back to top Go down
rusteze

avatar

Posts : 2218
Join date : 2010-06-02

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Mon Jul 06, 2015 12:36 pm

I go along with most of what Bill said, but I think he is using a bit of poetic licence when he talks about generations of recruiting strong farmhands from the "fields of Warwickshire and neighbouring counties".

The regimental history (Atkinson) says "A Royal Warrant of 1782 conferred county titles on all regiments not already possessed of special designations..........The 24th, who became the 2nd Warwickshire, were ordered to send a recruiting party to Tamworth. No special link with the county militia was however established nor were any depots or permanent recruiting centres set up."

My bet would be that Snook is right about the make up of the regiment and that it did not change much over time. It was like any other with English, Scots, Irish and Welsh whatever its title was at the time. As with all regiments, you would see a move from recruiting out of work agricultural labourers to out of work urban factory workers as the industrial revolution progressed. That new recruitment pool in the South Wales industrial towns was what lay behind the move to Brecon.

Steve
Back to top Go down
waterloo50

avatar

Posts : 600
Join date : 2013-09-18
Location : West Country

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Mon Jul 06, 2015 3:15 pm

The interesting point here is that the statement was made by the curator of the museum, I agree that his description of 'strong farmhands from the 'fields of Warwickshire and neighbouring counties' is poetic licence, a bit of Catherine Cookson.

It would make sense to recruit from areas where there was high unemployment but the period we are interested in appears to have had a bit of a boom in industry, Plenty of industries grew alongside mining. For much of the Victorian period Wales was the world’s most important producer of slate, non-ferrous metals, iron and tinplate, and was a significant steelmaking country. Supporting industries such as brick and tile manufacturing, engineering, transport and brewing also flourished. Industrialists, merchants and landowners ploughed much of their wealth back into the infrastructure of railways, docks and towns.' its hard to see how unemployment could have been a factor in the move to Brecon but I suppose the Army did offer a better standard of living compared to that of a miner for example. Having said all that some rural areas began to suffer because most of the big industries were in the city and the result was that many people abandoned the rural areas. If unemployment was a factor then why didn't the Army look closer to the regiments home. I suspect this had more to do with Politics than anything. We have to remember that during this period there were a number of harsh report on education and the people in Wales. The Welsh were painted as ‘ill-educated, poor, dirty, unchaste, and potentially rebellious’. although these reports were written some years before 1879, the attitudes of the Victorian English towards the Welsh hadn't altered a great deal, some people still hold with some of these views today.  It wasn't really until the end of the 19th Century that things began to improve for the Welsh. I wonder if there was some political gain to be had from placing the regiment in Wales.

Waterloo
Back to top Go down
Mr M. Cooper

avatar

Posts : 2507
Join date : 2011-09-29
Location : Lancashire, England.

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Mon Jul 06, 2015 3:32 pm

Ah! it looks like my old sparring partner Bill has finally come around to my way of thinking.

What he omits to say is that although the regiment had been based at Brecon since 1873, that this was on paper only, as by the start of the AZW in 1879 NEITHER of the battalions of the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment had EVER been to Brecon.

He also says that Baker wanted to put 'some' welshness in it, SOME? scratch
Hell! Baker practically filled it with false welshness.

Wales has never raised a line regiment of its own, maybe the 23rd was as near to being a welsh regiment as it could get with it recruiting not only in England but also in the welsh border counties, however, the regiment was raised in Ludlow, Shropshire, England, so it was not actually a welsh regiment even though it was later given the title RWF. The 24th, 41st and 69th, were all raised in England, and although they are now part of the RW, they were not actually raised in wales, so in that respect, the Royal 'Welsh' are not actually all that 'Welsh' after all are they because their pre 1881 history is not welsh at all, but English.

I hope they are taking good care of OUR regiments for us, as if, or when, the break up of the UK comes about, and England can be free of looking after the rest of the UK (and others), we can claim OUR regiments back and bring them back home to England.
Back to top Go down
Mr M. Cooper

avatar

Posts : 2507
Join date : 2011-09-29
Location : Lancashire, England.

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Mon Jul 06, 2015 3:58 pm

waterloo.

There was already a regiment on the borders of south wales, this was the 43rd (Monmouthshire) regiment, so why move the 24th to the borders of south wales and move the 43rd from the borders of south wales into England, it doesn't make sense. The only reason I can think of is that Monmouth at the time was classed as being part of England, and the 43rd had become a light regiment, whilst the 24th was still a line regiment, and later the 43rd became amalgamated with the 52nd, and through various other amalgamations over the years, they are now part of the rifles. But it still seems odd to move an established English regiment of the British Army into a place that it had no connection with whatsoever, maybe some jobsworth in an office just drew lots out of a hat, and unfortunately for the poor old 24th, they copped for the short straw, so to speak.
Back to top Go down
rusteze

avatar

Posts : 2218
Join date : 2010-06-02

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Mon Jul 06, 2015 4:01 pm

Martin

Where did the new drafts come from to fill up the battalions when they were overseas? Could that be Brecon by any chance?. Whether or not either battalion is in residence in Wales is neither here nor there. Brecon was the home depot. If you asked the soldiers at the time where their home base was what would they say?

Waterloo

You put your finger on an interesting point. Soldiers marched from Brecon to put down the Merthyr riots. Not just a recruiting area but also a control on the rebellious poor.

Steve
Back to top Go down
Mr M. Cooper

avatar

Posts : 2507
Join date : 2011-09-29
Location : Lancashire, England.

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Mon Jul 06, 2015 4:24 pm

Hi Steve.

I think you are forgetting that there was also the local militias based at Brecon, and these would most likely have been used locally, don't forget that by the start of the AZW, both battalions of the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment had never been to Brecon, so it could not have been them.

OK, men might have been signed on there to eventually be moved on to the battalions, but because they signed on there, it does not automatically mean that they were welsh. And after the disaster at iSandlwana, trained men were 'volunteered' from other regiments to make up for the losses, very few replacements were 'raw recruits', as most of them were already vet's from other regiments that made up the losses at iSandlwana.
Back to top Go down
Frank Allewell

avatar

Posts : 6470
Join date : 2009-09-21
Age : 70
Location : Cape Town South Africa

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Mon Jul 06, 2015 6:43 pm

To add petrol to the fire Ive just spent a really nice 2 hours 12 minutes and 39 seconds watching 'Zulu'. I did it with a note pad and a stop watch so to just to put at rest some issues.
Every single main character from Chard to John Williams VC was represented as English.
Welsh referals.
Private Owen to Chard" Every Welsh regiment has a choir"
Private Owen sings a few bars just before going up the hill on sentry duty, that with an unnamed soldier.
Chard as the Zulus are chanting to Private Owen 'Do you think the Welsh could do better than that Owen."
Men of Harlech is sung
End of the movie Men of Harlech is sung by a choir as the credits roll.

Mentions of the 24th
In the initial commentary by Richard Burton the regiment is given its full and correct title.
Bromhead when he first meets with Chard introduces himself as the 24th.

In comparison with all the known characters portrayed, Chard, Bromhead, Borne, Windridge, Hook, Hitch, Cpl Allan, Reynolds, Dalton etc al are English
There are only three Welsh portrayed. Private Owen, the duet partner before going up the hill on sentry and his companion on sentry duty.

The movie is 2 hours 12 seconds and 39 seconds long.
Welsh accented english is spoken for 1 minute and 23 seconds.

I have no agenda just putting out the exact situation about the movie.

Cheers
Back to top Go down
John

avatar

Posts : 2527
Join date : 2009-04-06
Age : 55
Location : UK

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Mon Jul 06, 2015 8:39 pm

Martin wrote:
You only need to visit the army web site and look at the regimental history of the RW.

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Links that mentioned the 24th Warwickshires.


Video by Admin.
Back to top Go down
waterloo50

avatar

Posts : 600
Join date : 2013-09-18
Location : West Country

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Mon Jul 06, 2015 10:33 pm

On the second link I found this statement in the FAQ about John Chard, I have cut and pasted direct from source.

John Chard was the senior officer at Rorke's Drift and naturally took command. He was a Royal Engineer. The Regimental Museum in Brecon commemorates the history and soldiers of the 24th Regiment, South Wales Borderers.

Again, the above statement is a bit misleading. Now, the Museum isn't stating that the 24th and the SWB are the same but in the context of Rorkes Drift it is easy to see how this could be interpreted by the general public.

I think it should read 'The Regimental Museum in Brecon commemorates the history and soldiers of the 24th Regiment (and the later) history of the South Wales Borderers.

I understand that this may look incredibly picky of me to raise this point, but when you consider that there are a number of similar statements within the Museum website, it then becomes easy to understand how the general public would go away with the impression that the 24th was a Welsh regiment.

Out of curiosity, I asked my better half to read the statement and then I asked her what she thought it meant, (she is Welsh herself) she read it as the 24th and the SWB were one and the same, but then I guess she would.

Regards

Waterloo.
Back to top Go down
rusteze

avatar

Posts : 2218
Join date : 2010-06-02

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Mon Jul 06, 2015 10:50 pm

I know what you mean, but in what way are they not the same? It is the same group of people - they just got called something different didn't they? I could understand this better if some other regiment had been shipped in and then proceeded to steal the achievements of the 24th. But that is not what happened. The SWB even had 24 as their collar tabs and on their Colours through to at least the 60s.

Steve
Back to top Go down
Ulundi

avatar

Posts : 554
Join date : 2012-05-05

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Tue Jul 07, 2015 12:14 am

Waterloo wrote:
history of the South Wales Borderers

The 24th Warwickshire are part of the History South Wales Borderers. The latter stemming from the 24th.
Back to top Go down
waterloo50

avatar

Posts : 600
Join date : 2013-09-18
Location : West Country

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Tue Jul 07, 2015 12:39 am

Ulundi

I said 'the later history' of the South Wales Borderers'

rusteze

SWB wearing the 24 on their tabs, do you know if they were worn in 'Honour/Memory of the 24th' or was it 'We are the 24th ? The SWB did wear a belt badge in Roman Numerals XXIV. Regiments of today still wear a belt badge when there is an affiliation between two regiments or in honour of a regiment.

With regards to your question about 'but in what way are they not the same?'

I want to answer your question as honestly as I can but its difficult to debate the history of the 24th and SWB without being viewed as suffering from ethnocentrism. You say that 'its the same group of people- they just got called something different didn't they' and to a certain extent your right, but that's not really the issue for me; what bothers me is that the 24th is viewed by many as a Welsh regiment, the reason that bothers me isn't because I dislike the Welsh, its because I am a great believer in 'credit where credit is due'. I think I would be happier if the general public were correctly informed by the Museum in Brecon that the 24th was a British regiment rather than hinting that it was Welsh.

I also suspect that one of the reasons that the 24th was changed to the SWB was because it would have been difficult to recruit men to a regiment that had suffered so badly. (Just a thought)

Regards

Waterloo
Back to top Go down
old historian2

avatar

Posts : 1097
Join date : 2009-01-14
Location : East London

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Tue Jul 07, 2015 1:14 am

You say the 24th is viewed by many as a Welsh regiment.
There's only two. You and Martin. Anyone who has an ounce of interest in the Zulu War, is more than capable of finding all the facts and history of the 24th.
Back to top Go down
Mr M. Cooper

avatar

Posts : 2507
Join date : 2011-09-29
Location : Lancashire, England.

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Tue Jul 07, 2015 2:28 am

Springy mate, are you sure that you are watching the right film scratch

Richard Burton does NOT give the full and correct title of the regiment, he gives the title of the regiment between 1751 and 1782 (ie; the 24th regiment of foot), the full and correct title of the regiment from 1782 until 1881 was the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment of foot. Near the start of the film, Bromhead is out shooting, a soldier leans out of the 'hospital' window and asks CS Bourne what the shooting is, Bourne calls him 'Hughes', there was no 'Hughes' at RD, this was added because of the 'welsh' sounding name 'Hughes'. We then have Bromhead returning to the post, he says who he is and then says the 24th, no mention of 2nd Warwickshire regiment. There is a soldier sat on a rock, Chard asks who he is, he replies that he is Owen, and says that Chard has got Williams (his solo tenor) in the water, and that he (Owen), is a baritone, this of course is to lead up to the false statement that 'every welsh regiment has a chior'. Well, for a kick off, there was no Owen, and the regiment was NOT welsh, however, it was added to give the impression to the gullible public that it was a welsh regiment. Then there is the false welsh Owen's mate Pte Thomas (Tommy with the calf), he speaks with a welsh accent, however, Pte Thomas came from Lancashire, so he would not have had a welsh accent, more likely he would have had a scouse accent coming from Liverpool, so again, more false welshness to add to the welsh flavour of the film. Now we come to the false welsh 'Owen' singing MoH to himself, again added for more false welshness, he is then told to go up the hill and keep look out with his mate the false welsh 'Tommy', as they are leaving Sgt Windridge throws the false welsh 'Owen' his rifle and calls him a stupid welshman, again more false welshness, and the false welsh 'Owen' could not have gone up the hill with the false welsh 'Tommy', as there was no 'Owen' there. Now we come to a real stinker of false welshness, in the hospital there are two 'Jones's', one of them says 'this is a welsh regiment man, though there are some foreigners from England mind', now if this was not added to give the viewer the false impression that it was a welsh regiment, then I don't know what is. He then goes on to say where both 'Jones's' are from, however, he is not right is he? Both the 'Jones's were awarded the VC, and both 'Jones's' came from England, one from Bristol the other from Monmouth (which was then part of England). Later we see the false welsh 'Owen' speaking with the false welsh 'Tommy', Tommy tells Owen that 470 Davies got it in the throat, Owen says that Davies was a great bass baritone, again, this is to give the impression that Davies was a singer in the false welsh chior. When they are bayoneting their way through the wall, a figure comes through the hole, one of the English Jones's says 'you bloody Englishman', surely, he would not call his fellow countryman a bloody Englishman would he? No, this was added to give more false welshness and make it appear that there were only a few Englishmen there and that most of the men were welsh. Now we come to another stinker of false welshness, the 'sing off'. This of course never happened, however it was added, again to give even more false welshness to the film. Chard askes the false welsh 'Owen' if 'the welsh can do better', and of course they break into MoH, it never happened, it was just added so that the viewer would get the false impression of the regiment being a welsh outfit when it wasn't, and even if they had sung a song, surely they would have sung their own regimental song which was 'The Warwickshire Lad' and not bloody MoH. Then comes the roll call, and the false welsh 'Hughes' is mentioned again, and now Burton reads out those awarded the VC, the way he read them out (making them sound more welsh than they actually were), and the way the camera pans around, it gives the impression that these men were mostly welsh, when in actual fact all 7 VC's awarded to the men of the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment were all Englishmen, even though some of them had welsh sounding names. Now when he comes to read out Bromheads name, he says 24th foot the south wales borderers, now come on mate, that is totally bloody wrong, the swb did not exist during the AZW, so this must have been added deliberately to give the impression to the public that the regiment was welsh and called the swb, and there is never ever one mention of the REAL name of the regiment that fought at RD, the mostly Englishmen and their regiment have been slung out and replaced by a fictional welsh outfit that did not exist during the AZW.

Steve.

All line numbers were abolished on the 1st July 1881, the regiments titles were changed and there were no line numbers included in the new titles. The swb were NEVER the 24th foot, that honour belongs to the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment. The collar badge you speak of, if I remember correctly, had to be applied for special permission for the swb to wear as it was not theirs, they were just the swb (no line numbers, and therefor not the 24th). Also the colours of the old regiment would still be carried until replaced later by new colours. The old line numbers sometimes given in brackets after the regiments title, are only added to show the seniority of the amalgamated regiments, they not officially part of the title, just a reference to show the old line regiments order of seniority.

waterloo.

You are correct, the way that things are worded is all done deliberately to confuse the reader and give them the false impression and make them believe that the regiment has always been welsh, it's an old trick that is used by many other organisations, it's not actually telling a lie, but then again, it's not actually telling the truth, it is however, a very unfair way of disguising and covering up certain things that they would rather keep from the public, it's all smoke and mirrors to disguise certain things and make them appear as something different from what they actually are. Glad that you can see through it all.
Back to top Go down
Frank Allewell

avatar

Posts : 6470
Join date : 2009-09-21
Age : 70
Location : Cape Town South Africa

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Tue Jul 07, 2015 5:26 am

Actually Martin read my summary correctly and you will see Ive picked up on virtually all of your points. My point on Burton speaking is that the regiment was refered to as the 24th, an acceptable form of mention as was Bromheads. Again an analogy, my own regiment was always refered to as the 11th Hussars, very very seldom was the full title off Prince Alberts Own added.

Sorry mate but your over the top. Don't really know whats driving the paranoia and frankly Im out of this debate, its travelled more than its share of distance.

Cheers
Back to top Go down
waterloo50

avatar

Posts : 600
Join date : 2013-09-18
Location : West Country

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Tue Jul 07, 2015 9:06 am

OH

Sorry, I'm not going to take the bait. I'm entitled to an opinion the same as your good self.

I agree with Frank, 'its travelled more than its share of distance.

Regards

Waterloo
Back to top Go down
littlehand

avatar

Posts : 7050
Join date : 2009-04-24
Age : 49
Location : Down South.

PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   Tue Jul 07, 2015 9:12 am

A vast majority of people appreciates that while not 100% accurate it is hardly the gross misrepresentation of the past that so many other films are guilty of.
The points Martin raise are nothing new. The film was made for entertainment, not as a factual documentary. And do we really think, the men fighting at RD really gave a dam what regiment they were in, everyone that day was wishing he was some where else.
Back to top Go down
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.   

Back to top Go down
 
The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) and the Welsh.
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 2Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
WWW.1879ZULUWAR.COM  :: BRITISH REGIMENTS WHICH SERVED IN THE ZULU WAR OF 1879-
Jump to: