WWW.1879ZULUWAR.COM

Lt. Melvill: Well done, Sir! Did you see that Noggs? Deceived him with the up and took him with the down. Norris-Newman: Well well, this one's a grandfather at least. If he'd been a Zulu in his prime I'd have given odds against your lancer, Mr. Melvill.
 
HomeHome  CalendarCalendar  GalleryGallery  PublicationsPublications  FAQFAQ  SearchSearch  RegisterRegister  Log inLog in  
Latest topics
» The Camp at Isandula, on the Morning of January 22nd.
Today at 1:34 pm by xhosa2000

» St Quintin.
Today at 12:31 am by ADMIN

» An Old Zulu Warrior
Yesterday at 6:52 am by SRB1965

» Who is he & where is he !!!
Wed Jun 21, 2017 1:55 am by 90th

» iNtombi Drift
Wed Jun 21, 2017 1:44 am by 90th

» Talk about Henry Martin from Gurney Slade Somerset
Tue Jun 20, 2017 10:00 am by andysandersuk

» Francis Broadfoot Russell
Tue Jun 20, 2017 4:58 am by rai

» Has anyone ever made a Zulu battle shield?
Tue Jun 20, 2017 3:15 am by 90th

» WHY I JOINED THE ZULU CAMPAIGN by Orderley Room Sergeant Sam Priestly, Lonsdale's Horse
Tue Jun 20, 2017 3:12 am by 90th

» Richard Groves, Quartertmaster Sargeant, 3rd Buffs
Tue Jun 20, 2017 2:28 am by 90th

» Publications presentation
Mon Jun 19, 2017 11:36 pm by ADMIN

» Sad News Death of Rob Gerrard.
Mon Jun 19, 2017 10:32 pm by ADMIN

» Alan Baynham Jones
Mon Jun 19, 2017 7:27 pm by ADMIN

» RYLEY John Rutherford
Mon Jun 19, 2017 6:16 pm by littlehand

» Module "Publications"
Mon Jun 19, 2017 3:21 pm by ADMIN

Lt. (Captain) J.B. Carey, 98th, Ityotozi River--
(Isandula Collection)
Military Odyssey 2016 - Zulu War Era British Encampment
Search
 
 

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

Share | 
 

 Appendix 4, Neils Book

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
AuthorMessage
Frank Allewell

avatar

Posts : 6326
Join date : 2009-09-21
Age : 70
Location : Cape Town South Africa

PostSubject: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Wed Jan 18, 2017 6:52 am

Some time back I formulated a theory to explain the apparent discrepancies in accounts of the morning of the 23rd January 1879.
Neil published this in the form of an appendix to his book and was kind enough to endorse the possibility of it.
As it has drawn some comment I thought it required publishing to the forum again so here it is. happy to answer any questions.

Rorkes Drift and the end of the Battle.

The days of the 22nd and 23rd of January 1879 have over the years spawned a number of abnormalities. Isandlwana because of the lack of eye witnesses probably more than any other battle in history.
The defence of the mission station at Rorkes Drift again has generated its fair share but here we have an abundance of eye witnesses.
One issue in particular has been the circumstances behind the cessation of hostilities on the morning of the 23rd.
Chard records: “About 4 am. 23rd inst. The firing ceased and at daybreak the enemy were out of sight over the hill to the South West “ ( he actually could not have known that and is probably assuming, as it was from this direction the Zulus appeared at 7 o’clock)
And again: ‘We were removing the thatch from the roof of the stores when about 7am a large body of the enemy appeared on the hills to the SW…. About 8am the third column appeared in sight, the enemy who had been gradually advancing, falling back as they approached.

The defenders had a respite of some 4 hours from their exertions .

Captain Penn-Symonds, present with Lord Chelmsford’s column, recorded how the troops retiring from the battle field paused at the Manzimyama to refill their water bottles. They had marched only a little further when Symonds “perceived at short cannon range a large black mass of Zulus approaching directly towards us from our left front.”
Lt John Maxwell recorded that a lone warrior sprang from the Zulu mass rushing down the hillside towards the centre of the column and was shot dead at 30 yards.

The conundrum developing around the two instances above is that the Manzimyama valley is some 12 miles from Rorkes Drift and well out of sight. If this was the returning Zulu regiment that was attempting to attack at 8 am as described by John Chard how did they get to that valley in time to see Lord Chelmsford’s force?

As a second point to that, if they were indeed the regiment that was seen at Rorkes Drift at 8 o’clock how could their intentions have been thwarted by the sight of an imperial force when that force was many miles away and out of sight?

Fynn, present with Lord Chelmsford column recognised men in the Zulu force as belonging to the uThulwana regiment and that they were coming from the direction of Rorkes Drift.

If we accept all the evidence above we are left with the inescapable conclusion that the Zulu impi, by passing the imperial column was indeed the Rorkes Drift attackers. But then who was the impi that prepared to attack at 8am as recorded by Chard and many others.

When earlier the Fugitives had been chased and harassed to Sothondos Drift the iNdluyengwe crossed the river along with elements of the uThulwana iNdlondo and Udloko took a leisurely approach towards Rorkes Drift. They were observed from the top of Shiyane to stop and take snuff before commencing various exercises dividing into groups and reassembling. The column of men split into two sections, Prince Damulamanzi ka Mpande lead his iNdluyengwe towards Rorkes Drift and other regiments split of to raid the farmhouses of Natal.

There were therefore two separate columns of Zulus operating in Natal that day. One fought the British defenders nobly and bravely for twelve hours and then retired tired from chasing the British and Colonials from the overnight base on the Nyoni plateau towards iSandlwana and then pursuing the fugitives across the rough ground to the Mzinyathi River, marching onto Rorkes Drift and fighting a long protracted battle.
The second had spent the evening raiding the farms and houses along the river, a less arduace task and had probably settled down at some point to rest.

It is my contention that this second column of men after their rested evening returned to Rorkes Drift to discover that their comrades had left the scene to return to the staging area above iSandlwana. After settling down on the hill they had viewed the scene of devastation at Rorkes Drift, and most likely seen the number of fallen warriors then decided to move forward, either to investigate further or indeed launch an attack. At that time the British column had had enough time to make its way towards Rorkes Drift and would have become visible coming over the rise leading down the long slope to the drift.

In summation then I would say that the Zulu column under Dabulamanzi had given up their fight at 4 am and set out on their weary retreat and encountered lord Chelmsford in the Manzimyama valley. The Zulus poised to attack Rorkes Drift at 8 am was in fact a second column that had not been involved in the earlier fighting.

Hope that helps


Back to top Go down
rusteze

avatar

Posts : 2106
Join date : 2010-06-02

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Wed Jan 18, 2017 10:29 am

Here's what i said about it in another thread yesterday.

A useful way of approaching Frank's hypothesis set out in Appendix 4 of Neil's new book on Rorke's Drift is to read it alongside John Labands study "O! Let's go and have a fight at Jim's!" in Kingdom and Colony at War.

I think we would all agree that Laband is authoritative when it comes to the Zulu perspective of the AZW. Laband's account of the two Zulu forces crossing the Buffalo in two different places, their primary aim of harassing the border farms and the fact that they had begun to leave RD while Chelmsford was still at Isandhlwana fit Frank's hypothesis very well. It certainly strengthens the idea that a second Zulu force showed itself at RD some hours after those involved in the attack had begun to leave. It also fits with them meeting Chelmsford's force west of the Manzimyama.

Steve
Back to top Go down
xhosa2000

avatar

Posts : 768
Join date : 2015-11-24

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Wed Jan 18, 2017 11:56 am

So what was this ' second ' impi doing again?..so the first force fought from
late afternoon till the early hours of the following morning.. exhausted and
hungry and aware of the terrible losses inflicted they slowly retire and give
up! ( as was the custom..when they were defeated the Zulu ' threw the towel
in completely.) so who was this other mob we are led to believe went to the
drift? to do what? just stand there! looking down at the post till Chelmford's
relieving force hove into sight, and at which point decided to retire as well.. it
simply does not make any sense to me! i would have expected to see foot-
notes and primary source material..there was none! so its a theory.. not newly
established historical fact.
Back to top Go down
Frank Allewell

avatar

Posts : 6326
Join date : 2009-09-21
Age : 70
Location : Cape Town South Africa

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Wed Jan 18, 2017 11:57 am

Steve
Its become the norm to examine all accounts and dump any that don't fit. This has/is leading to some gross misrepresentation of the facts. Neil has corrected a few of those in his book. There are two other publications coming out this year that will be doing similar to a few 'established' facts.
Ive spent the last few years taking apart dissimilar accounts and looking at putting them together to make sense. App4 is one of them. Another 'Bee in my bonet' has always been the activity on the ridge, from the reserve to Cavayes position. The bugbear has always been Essex. IK and I exchanged correspondence on that some time ago as I did with KS and that testimony stood in the way on any attempt to rationalise the ridge activities. But closely examining ALL the ridge testimony and there isn't a lot has led to a pretty simple but startling conclusion on how to read Essex. Hopefully I can get something down on paper in the not to distant future.
Les
Sorry mate I didn't get paid for Appendix 4 or my contributions to various other books and publications, nor do I want to. So no Commercial aspirations Im afraid.

Cheers
Back to top Go down
ymob

avatar

Posts : 1907
Join date : 2010-10-22
Location : france

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Wed Jan 18, 2017 12:08 pm

Bonjour,
There are testimonies about raids carried by the Zulus in Natal the 22/23 January.
So, in my humble opinion this hypothesis seems plausible.

Just a question: who were the Zulus seen at Eland's kraal the 23 January ?

Cheers.

Frédéric
Back to top Go down
http://frbomy@hotmail.fr
ymob

avatar

Posts : 1907
Join date : 2010-10-22
Location : france

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Wed Jan 18, 2017 12:11 pm

Bonjour Frank,
Who are the authors t of the "two other publications coming out this year"?
Cheers
Back to top Go down
http://frbomy@hotmail.fr
ymob

avatar

Posts : 1907
Join date : 2010-10-22
Location : france

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Wed Jan 18, 2017 12:23 pm

The source about Eland's Kraal and the Zulus is quoted in "Zulu Rising" (Hard cover) p. 520 (Mr Dedekin)
Cheers
Frédéric
Back to top Go down
http://frbomy@hotmail.fr
ymob

avatar

Posts : 1907
Join date : 2010-10-22
Location : france

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Wed Jan 18, 2017 12:34 pm

Incidentally, I know that Frank, generously, brings his help for an article in progress and he is not paid.
Cheers
Fred
Back to top Go down
http://frbomy@hotmail.fr
Frank Allewell

avatar

Posts : 6326
Join date : 2009-09-21
Age : 70
Location : Cape Town South Africa

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Wed Jan 18, 2017 12:56 pm

Hi Frederic
The second 'column' of Zulus that crossed and didn't attack RD made their way along the river attacking farms along the way I have no doubt that it was that column that would have got as far as Elands Kraal ( By the way there is a local trading store there now that sells unbelievably good Bunny Chow--- half a loaf hollowed out and filled with meat and mealie. Also they do a roaring trade in Smileys and Walkie Talkies)
Sorry cant give you the names as yet.

Cheers
Back to top Go down
Frank Allewell

avatar

Posts : 6326
Join date : 2009-09-21
Age : 70
Location : Cape Town South Africa

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Wed Jan 18, 2017 1:07 pm

So what was this ' second ' impi doing again?.. Raiding the farms so the first force fought from
late afternoon till the early hours of the following morning.. exhausted and
hungry and aware of the terrible losses inflicted they slowly retire and give
up! ( as was the custom..when they were defeated the Zulu ' threw the towel
in completely.) Yes that's right, its historical fact that they gave up, why is that so difficult to absorbe so who was this other mob we are led to believe went to the
drift? to do what? just stand there! looking down at the post till Chelmford's
relieving force hove into sight, No They were out raiding the farms all night and at which point decided to retire as well.. it
simply does not make any sense to me! i would have expected to see foot-
notes and primary source material..there was none! There are many references to the doings of the night of the 22nd and 23rd, where it impacts I have mentioned them so its a theory Yes .. not newly
established historical fact.
Read the article put it into context try and come up with an alternate and engage in intelligent debate instead of being an irritating prat.

Cheers



_________________
Back to top Go down
ymob

avatar

Posts : 1907
Join date : 2010-10-22
Location : france

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Wed Jan 18, 2017 1:10 pm

Frank,
After reading your hypothesis, I had the same analysis about Eland's kraal and the Zulus (It's makes sense with your hypothesis / "the whole picture" ), but I wanted to know your opinion.
Thank you.

I.E: Don't worry about the "name", it's not important.

Cheers.
Frédéric
Back to top Go down
http://frbomy@hotmail.fr
Frank Allewell

avatar

Posts : 6326
Join date : 2009-09-21
Age : 70
Location : Cape Town South Africa

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Wed Jan 18, 2017 1:12 pm

e mail on the way
Back to top Go down
xhosa2000

avatar

Posts : 768
Join date : 2015-11-24

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Wed Jan 18, 2017 1:20 pm

No need for an apology Frank, but understand i was in no way
inferring your commercial involvements were in any connection
to Neil's excellent book, i was only referring to ' your ' timeline
re your app. that's it!. as for your theory regarding the ' second'
impi appearing to the defender's at the drift.. what would be the
purpose?.. they would be relatively fresh warrior's who had spent
the previous day raiding deserted farmstead's looking for loot in
the form of cattle or most likely food!.. so are you suggesting that
it was this fresh impi that passed his lordships relieving column and
not dab's exhausted warriors of who we have testimonies.. i would
again have liked to have seen any primary source plus footnotes, the
absence of any leads me to conclude that this is speculation, which is
not historical fact..

I say again.. i was not ever suggesting you had received any monetary
gain for your input in Neil's publication. i was referring to ' your '
time line as suggested by you, but not widely accepted by the AZW
community.. i believe that it is right to air this opinion, my only wish is
to stimulate discussion, which is wholly separate from Neil's work.
Back to top Go down
rusteze

avatar

Posts : 2106
Join date : 2010-06-02

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Wed Jan 18, 2017 2:05 pm

The second Impi arrives at RD in daylight, they have been raiding for many hours and travelled a distance, they see the slaughter that lays in front of the defences. Laband tells us that Chard later believed they could see Chelmsford's force approaching from the high ground south west of RD. Maybe that is why they do not attack?

Steve
Back to top Go down
xhosa2000

avatar

Posts : 768
Join date : 2015-11-24

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Wed Jan 18, 2017 2:23 pm


The second Impi arrives at RD in daylight, they have been raiding for many hours and travelled a distance, they see the slaughter that lays in front of the defences. Laband tells us that Chard later believed they could see Chelmsford's force approaching from the high ground south west of RD. Maybe that is why they do not attack?

Steve.

It's speculation!, which in the absence of primary sources cannot be accepted as
historical fact!. Frank wondered about the relevance of the page i posted in which
J.W.S. interview describes the exhaustion of the retreating impi. Saying ' maybe '
simply does not cut it!.. i believe Frank's piece to be speculation based on superposition's,
others i'm sure will hold differing view's.. i
Back to top Go down
xhosa2000

avatar

Posts : 768
Join date : 2015-11-24

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Wed Jan 18, 2017 2:29 pm

So are we to believe that its the second ' fresh ' impi that
passes LC's relieving column, despite testimony that clearly
state's that the warrior's who passed were exhausted!.and
not fresh and full of fight.
Back to top Go down
Frank Allewell

avatar

Posts : 6326
Join date : 2009-09-21
Age : 70
Location : Cape Town South Africa

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Wed Jan 18, 2017 2:51 pm

Steve
Theres no point, he hasn't read/digested the article and is being obstructive purely because I wrote. If he was at all interested he wouldn't be asking stupid questions.
Axes to grind Im afraid.
Back to top Go down
ymob

avatar

Posts : 1907
Join date : 2010-10-22
Location : france

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Wed Jan 18, 2017 3:14 pm

rusteze wrote:
The second Impi arrives at RD in daylight, they have been raiding for many hours and travelled a distance, they see the slaughter that lays in front of the defences. Laband tells us that Chard later believed they could see Chelmsford's force approaching from the high ground south west of RD. Maybe that is why they do not attack?

Steve

Bonjour Steve,
In my mind, highly probable and the Zulus seen by a witness at Eland's Kraal were also very tired.
Finally, the timing (daylight) corresponds to the departure of Lord Chelmsford's column from Isandhlanwana.
Cheers.
Frédéric
Back to top Go down
http://frbomy@hotmail.fr
xhosa2000

avatar

Posts : 768
Join date : 2015-11-24

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Wed Jan 18, 2017 3:31 pm

Unworthy Frank, i have totally read and digested the article,
i am of course entitled to my opinion!. to suggest i differ just because
you wrote the piece i find astonishing and incredibly childish!. it matter's
to me because the publication is in the public domain.. future readers
might accept it as truth.. you have not demonstrated that to my satis-
faction..again where are the footnotes citing primary sources please.
"axes to grind". not from me!.. it's simply your speculation backed up
with nothing. i will leave it there unless you have something further to add.



Back to top Go down
Frank Allewell

avatar

Posts : 6326
Join date : 2009-09-21
Age : 70
Location : Cape Town South Africa

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Wed Jan 18, 2017 3:45 pm

Fynn was adamant that the force he/Chemsford saw was the uThulwana coming from RD, that puts them as being the force that attacked through the night. IF they were then they could not have seen Chelmsford from RD and got to the Manzimyama valley, unless they had left RD much much earlier. At least 3 to 4 hours earlier. Ergo Uthulwana spent the night attacking, called of the attacks at around 4 rested for a while then decided to go home meeting Chelmsford on the way. IF that is factual then who was the force that approached RD at 8 oclock? The only answer can be the other half of the invading force that had spent the night raiding the farms.
Ive mentioned in the essay the three key sources, Fynn, Penn Symonds and Chard. I don't know an author that disputes there were two impis in Natal that night, Knight, Laband Lock and Quantrill they all concur.
Although Niel asked if he could use the essay I didn't know that it would be featured in the way it was. If I had I would have pointedly included my sources. As it is it remains an essay and as has been pointed out prior virtually everything about the war is speculative. I have by this essay attempted to give an explanation, Xhosa in his dream world has pushed that towards suggesting Im trying to promote historical fact. His motivation is simple, there is history between us and consequently he will decry anything I post, and does. His opinions therefore border on the pathetic in their content. In other words he lacks credibility because of his attitude.

Sorry Pete the pillock gets up my nose with the other detrimous.
Back to top Go down
ymob

avatar

Posts : 1907
Join date : 2010-10-22
Location : france

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Wed Jan 18, 2017 3:59 pm

Frank Allewell wrote:
Fynn was adamant that the force he/Chemsford saw was the uThulwana coming from RD, that puts them as being the force that attacked through the night. IF they were then they could not have seen Chelmsford from RD and got to the Manzimyama valley, unless they had left RD much much earlier. At least 3 to 4 hours earlier. Ergo Uthulwana spent the night attacking, called of the attacks at around 4 rested for a while then decided to go home meeting Chelmsford on the way. IF that is factual then who was the force that approached RD at 8 oclock? The only answer can be the other half of the invading force that had spent the night raiding the farms.
.

Frank,
After studying your hypothesis, I came to the same conclusion. That's why I asked the question about the Zulus and Eland's Kraal...
They are also many testimonies which told us that the Isandhlwana site could be (partially) observed from the Rorke's Drift area.
So, the Zulu impi was able to see the column of LC in move just after daylignt.
I have of course sought contrary arguments (advocate devil's), in vain...for the moment!

Well done, camarade.

Frédéric
Back to top Go down
http://frbomy@hotmail.fr
xhosa2000

avatar

Posts : 768
Join date : 2015-11-24

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Wed Jan 18, 2017 4:02 pm

Xhosa in his dream world has pushed that towards suggesting Im trying to promote historical fact. His motivation is simple, there is history between us and consequently he will decry anything I post, and does. His opinions therefore border on the pathetic in their content. In other words he lacks credibility because of his attitude... Said Frank..

To say i've struck a nerve is understatement|! your above is pathetic! but there is no need to invoke
pete! i take on board what you say above! i have a right to critique your piece, we do not have any
history, that is in you, i post to the matter in hand, i let go immediately any exchange we had on
other occasion's as totally irrelevant, please try to do the same!.. citing laband ect is all well and
good, nobody can explain what this ' other impi was doing '. my critique was perfectly fair, the fact
that you dont like it has nothing to do with anything! please stop your personal attack's, and feel
free to cite the sources that were unfortunately omitted from Neil's excellent work.
Back to top Go down
ymob

avatar

Posts : 1907
Join date : 2010-10-22
Location : france

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Wed Jan 18, 2017 4:34 pm

In conclusion, the "first" impi could not see LC's column before his departure from Rorke's Drift and took the road towards the Manzymyama valley.
The second impi saw the arrival of the LC' column and took another route (avoid fighting) and was seen later in the day at Eland's kraal.
Back to top Go down
http://frbomy@hotmail.fr
nthornton1979

avatar

Posts : 142
Join date : 2011-01-18
Age : 37
Location : Runcorn, Cheshire, UK

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Wed Jan 18, 2017 5:05 pm

'Although Niel asked if he could use the essay I didn't know it would be featured in the way it was. If I had I would have pointedly included my sources.'

Hi Frank, to avoid any confusion and any potential readers of this thread getting an incorrect impression of the way I have behaved, perhaps you could confirm that after you explained your theory to me I then asked if you would write it up as an appendix for the book - which you did.

Cheers mate
Neil
Back to top Go down
Frank Allewell

avatar

Posts : 6326
Join date : 2009-09-21
Age : 70
Location : Cape Town South Africa

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Wed Jan 18, 2017 5:18 pm

Let me put this in the simplest form I can
4.00 The attacks finish finish at RD and don't recomense.
Dawn Chelmsfrod leaves iSandlwana
Chelmsfords column meets an impi in the Manzimyama valley some 12 miles from RD. That impi is identified by Fynn as uThulwana, the RD attackers. And to get to the valley for a tired war weary impi would take a minimum of 3 hours.

7.00 Chard sees an impi SW of RD
8.00 That impi sees Chelmsfords Column and retires. The maximum distance viewable from those hills is the first ridge leading down into the Mzinyati.

Its physically impossible for an impi to leave at 8.00 and be in the Manzimyama valley 12 miles away 3 to 4 hours earlier without bending time.

The question then is if, as identified by Fynn, what time did the uThulwana leave RD in order to be in the valley.
The second question posed would then be if the impi SW of RD at 8 oclock saw Chelmsfords column, some 2 miles away could they have been in the Manzimyama some ten miles behind.

Third question to you would then be were both those impis one and the same? If so how was the manouver performed.

The authors all mentioned agree that there were two impis operating in Natal hence the mention.

This is the last you will hear from be on this subject, its apparent that you are being obdurate in not thinking through your comments, and that goes back to the sarcastic 'attack launched at 1.56

You want credibility Xhosa answer the questions.
Back to top Go down
rusteze

avatar

Posts : 2106
Join date : 2010-06-02

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Wed Jan 18, 2017 6:04 pm

Ho hum. Time to pop a few more blood pressure tablets I think! My parting shot would be don't be dismissive of those that have walked the ground and who can bring a reality to the debate that many (like me) can never replicate. Keep up the speculation I say.

Steve
Back to top Go down
Frank Allewell

avatar

Posts : 6326
Join date : 2009-09-21
Age : 70
Location : Cape Town South Africa

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Wed Jan 18, 2017 6:06 pm

Clopidogrel and Warfarin are a good mix Steve, dissolved in a single malt of course.
Back to top Go down
xhosa2000

avatar

Posts : 768
Join date : 2015-11-24

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Wed Jan 18, 2017 7:36 pm

This is the last you will hear from be on this subject, its apparent that you are being obdurate in not thinking through your comments, and that goes back to the sarcastic 'attack launched at 1.56

You want credibility Xhosa answer the questions.............read through the thread Frank, the attack's
all came from you!.......because i had the temerity to question your piece, which i have every right
to do!. i am satisfied that my view's have been raised, they were not presented in a vindictive manner
but were raised in the spirit of honest debate, i found your responses very disappointing.. i know of no
other ' historian ' who would deal with an honest critique in such an hostile manner!. all are very
generous in their reply's. you might want to work on that aspect.. please don't openly insult me again as you have above, you should be above that.
Back to top Go down
ADMIN

avatar

Posts : 3529
Join date : 2008-11-01
Age : 58
Location : KENT

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Wed Jan 18, 2017 8:44 pm

Frank

Chard records: “About 4 am. 23rd inst. The firing ceased and at daybreak the enemy were out of sight over the hill to the South West “ ( he actually could not have known that and is probably assuming, as it was from this direction the Zulus appeared at 7 o’clock)
And again: ‘We were removing the thatch from the roof of the stores when about 7am a large body of the enemy appeared on the hills to the SW…. About 8am the third column appeared in sight, the enemy who had been gradually advancing, falling back as they approached.

Frank the force that appear at 8am was this not in fact Chelmsford's column. I'm sure i read somewhere chard mistakenly took Chelmsford vanguard as Zulu's. ?
Back to top Go down
http://www.1879zuluwar.com
Taff price



Posts : 37
Join date : 2015-02-14
Age : 43
Location : cardiff

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Wed Jan 18, 2017 10:31 pm

Frank

According to Google Earth the Manzimyama crossing is 1 mile away from the camp at Isandlwana and 6 miles away from Rorkes Drift as the crow flies??

"We were removing the thatch from the roof of the stores when about 7am a large body of the enemy appeared on the hills to the SW…. About 8am the third column appeared in sight, the enemy who had been gradually advancing, falling back as they approached".
If the Zulu's were on the hill for an hour, is it possible they could see the first impi approaching or passing LC Third column?



Back to top Go down
Chelmsfordthescapegoat

avatar

Posts : 2555
Join date : 2009-04-24

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Wed Jan 18, 2017 11:00 pm

Or it could have been some of those Zulu's that had fought at RD had gathered to have alook at The Good Lord Chelmsford force on route.

I recall reading the the Zulu's thought the men in LC column had risen from the dead and come to take revenge! So they had it away on their toes sharpest.
Back to top Go down
Frank Allewell

avatar

Posts : 6326
Join date : 2009-09-21
Age : 70
Location : Cape Town South Africa

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Thu Jan 19, 2017 4:48 am

TAff
The road takes a wide loop towards Mashitsheni then crosses the Bashe before dropping down into the Manzimyama valley.
The Valley is not visible from RD, from the South West side, somewhere in the region of the present day trading store, the view is very restricted the furthest distance one cam see is the ridge just above Mashitsheni.
Pete
Its a time and distance issue. When the impi saw Chelmsfords column approaching at 8 oclock the column had already seen the impi returning from RD, filled their water bottles in the stream and shot the loan charging Zulu. That was at least 3 hours earlier and some ten miles away. Im terms of the topography the approach from RD towards iSandlwana is a drop towards the river and then a long rise towards Masitssheni and from there a long looping road heading North then East. Its the opposite way to the South Western hills. Traveling times to iSandlwana are recorded on a number of occasions, from Smith Dorrien onwards.

From the testimonies of Fynn Maxwell etc we know the earlier encounter was with the uThulwana. Its proved beyond doubt that the attacking force at RD was the uThulwana. So I would gather it was the same force, really beyond dispute.

That being a known fact then who was the impi witnessed at RD some 3 hours later?

Hope that helps.



Back to top Go down
Frank Allewell

avatar

Posts : 6326
Join date : 2009-09-21
Age : 70
Location : Cape Town South Africa

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Thu Jan 19, 2017 11:45 am

Possibly this may help.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
The panorama has 'bent' the view a tad but essentially the photo was taken from the back wall. The hospital is to the left and the hill behind it is the South West hill that the 7 oclock sighting took place on.
To the righ of the photot the line of stones shows the biscuit box wall. To the right of that is the church, built in approx. the position of the Store. Just in front of that is the kraal. There are two thinnish trees above that kraal, just below the trees is the faint outline of the current road to iSandlwana. The ridge line is the furthest view from the hill or ground level. Standing on the top of the Storeroom wall the view would be slightly longer but still not as far as the Bashe or Manzimyama Valleys.
Out of interest that small area from the hospital to the ridge line just in front and from the kraal to the line of stones was the final defended area, a tad bigger than a tennis court. Probably one of the smallest battlefields in history.

Cheers

Hope that helps
Back to top Go down
Taff price



Posts : 37
Join date : 2015-02-14
Age : 43
Location : cardiff

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Thu Jan 19, 2017 7:24 pm

Frank

Thanks for the pic, but I'm a little confused.
The back wall is the South wall? The wall in front is the North wall? So why is the South West hill in front of the North wall? It's probably a stupid question but I'm sure there's a logical answer.

Is there any chance that Chard was right?
Chard records: “About 4 am. 23rd inst. The firing ceased and at daybreak the enemy were out of sight over the hill.
If LC's third column saw an Impi 3 hrs before 8 am at the Manzimyama river, it only leaves the exhausted, injured and hungry uThulwana 1 hour to cross the Buffalo river and walk ten miles to get to the Manzimyama for 5 am.

I still think your theory is right but the other way around. Could it be possible that; The Third Column saw the second raiding Impi at the Manzimyama. I'm not sure what there numbers were but, maybe they didn't attack because they felt there numbers were to small so, decided to carry on to Ulundi.

The first Impi (uThulwana) moved around the back of the South West hill for rest and recuperation and even light fires out of sight of Rorkes Drift. Then turned back up on the top of the hills at 7 am to survey the battle site. Then decided to move back into Zululand when LC come into view.

Just a thought Thanks

Geraint

Back to top Go down
xhosa2000

avatar

Posts : 768
Join date : 2015-11-24

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Thu Jan 19, 2017 7:32 pm

So at what time did the attackers leave Rorkes |Drift and more
more importantly.. how long did it take!. did they assemble, light
fires take snuff and then decide to withdraw.. was it decided to leave
a vanguard to deal with the dead and wounded, there could of been
up to 3700 warrior's moving off back into Zululand stretched over a
considerable distance, and who were the second impi who were
' poised ' to attack, how do we know their intentions. were they simply
having a butcher's to see what had happened? i find no sense to that.
Back to top Go down
impi

avatar

Posts : 2312
Join date : 2010-07-02
Age : 37

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Thu Jan 19, 2017 8:20 pm

xhosa2000 wrote:
This is the last you will hear from be on this subject, its apparent that you are being obdurate in not thinking through your comments, and that goes back to the sarcastic 'attack launched at 1.56

You want credibility Xhosa answer the questions.............read through the thread Frank, the attack's
all came from you!.......because i had the temerity to question your piece, which i have every right
to do!. i am satisfied that my view's have been raised, they were not presented in a vindictive manner
but were raised in the spirit of honest debate, i found your responses very disappointing.. i know of no
other ' historian ' who would deal with an honest critique in such an hostile manner!. all are very
generous in their reply's. you might want to work on that aspect.. please don't openly insult me again as you have above, you should be above that.

Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy
Back to top Go down
xhosa2000

avatar

Posts : 768
Join date : 2015-11-24

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Thu Jan 19, 2017 8:24 pm

Big Picture..impi.. not the feuding crap. agree
Back to top Go down
rusteze

avatar

Posts : 2106
Join date : 2010-06-02

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Thu Jan 19, 2017 8:39 pm

As I understand it, the hypothesis is based on the time taken for the retiring Zulu Impi and Chelmsford's forces to meet.

Chelmsford leaves Isandhlwana just before dawn (5.00am?) - how long does it take him to reach the point on the road to RD where he sees the Impi emerging from the Batshee Valley?

The Impi at RD disappears at 4.00 am and they (or a second Impi) re-appear at 7.00 am and remain for an hour. What time must the Impi leave RD to meet Chelmsford at that same point on the road?

Forget what they saw, what they did and why they did it - we don't know.

IK says in Zulu Rising "quite possibly they were the men who had split off before the attack to scour the countryside"

If you are looking for certainties in all this you are never going to be satisfied. Ground knowledge is all we have.

Steve
Back to top Go down
xhosa2000

avatar

Posts : 768
Join date : 2015-11-24

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Thu Jan 19, 2017 9:17 pm

IK says in Zulu Rising "quite possibly they were the men who had split off before the attack to scour the countryside"

If you are looking for certainties in all this you are never going to be satisfied. Ground knowledge is all we have.

Steve...

Like i tried to say... speculation.. nothing definitive..then the roof caved in!. No
Back to top Go down
rusteze

avatar

Posts : 2106
Join date : 2010-06-02

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Thu Jan 19, 2017 10:01 pm

It surely illustrates that speculation is the lifeblood of the subject. Every author, including the most eminent, indulge in it quite a lot and it is foolish to try and banish it from this forum or any other historical discussion group. Informed speculation sparks ideas and prompts people to think. Nobody has to accept it, but to dismiss it as worthless without providing an argument as to why, is simply destructive of debate. What I cannot bring to this particular discussion is a direct knowledge of that route between RD and Isandhlwana. Frank, and a few others certainly can. That is what adds value to the hypothesis and makes it interesting. I am not aware it has been done before, which is no doubt why Neil included it in his book.

Steve
Back to top Go down
xhosa2000

avatar

Posts : 768
Join date : 2015-11-24

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Thu Jan 19, 2017 10:16 pm

It surely illustrates that speculation is the lifeblood of the subject. Every author, including the most eminent, indulge in it quite a lot and it is foolish to try and banish it from this forum or any other historical discussion group. Informed speculation sparks ideas and prompts people to think. Nobody has to accept it, but to dismiss it as worthless without providing an argument as to why, is simply destructive of debate. What I cannot bring to this particular discussion is a direct knowledge of that route between RD and Isandhlwana. Frank, and a few others certainly can. That is what adds value to the hypothesis and makes it interesting. I am not aware it has been done before, which is no doubt why Neil included it in his book.

Steve.....

Yeah i completely understand the above, but i simply cannot agree.. it should have fully stated that
it was speculative and not authoritative.. future generation's could take it on face value without the
benefit of seeing these discussion's.. ask any worthwhile researcher/ historian if speculation will do
in the absence of fact!. i think you know the answer to that!.. i have not or intended to banish theory's or even speculation in this place, but when the musing's run there course we are left with the known fact's..until other sources turn up. i think it right that i opened this discussion, i hope it
can remain civil.
Back to top Go down
rusteze

avatar

Posts : 2106
Join date : 2010-06-02

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Fri Jan 20, 2017 12:46 am

I have no wish to be anything but civil. But you really cannot say that the appendix was described as anything other than speculative. In the short opening paragraph Neil uses the word "hypothesis" twice and invites discussion. Nowhere is it described as authoritative.

Steve
Back to top Go down
barry

avatar

Posts : 813
Join date : 2011-10-21
Location : Kempton Park, Z.A.

PostSubject: Appendix 4   Fri Jan 20, 2017 6:35 am

Hi Frank,
I largely concur with what is written in App 4.
I can however see that much of the disquiet in the minds of the nay- sayers stems from the 8 o'clock timings of the sighting of a second Impi.  However throughout the many writings on these AZW battles timings are very disparate and have caused disagreement amongst historians.

So, how did the battlefield witness judge his time in the day , as he probably did not have a watch , there was no BBC or SABC time signal as there were no radios, neither was there a noon day gun. Neither have I seen any reports of officers synchronising their watches prior to going in.

He probably checked time like most bushwise visitors to Africa, ie by judging the  elevation of the sun ( Crocodile Dundee style) above the horizon, not accurate, only approximate, particularly if one has had a long sleepless night at Rorke's Drift. 1-3  hour error in this method is common.

So, the question is begged;  what time did the sun rise at Isandlwana ( 28deg 21.42'6 / 30deg39.356E ) on 23/01/1879?. According to my copy of the sunrisre/sunset tables taken from the SA Almanac on that date it was 03h15. First light would have been 15 mins before that when the first rays from the golden orb were seen in the east.

The implication was that Chelmsford left the battlefield at about 03h00 in semi darkness and would quite easily have travelled the 14kms or so to RD, via the road at the top of the Bashee valley, in the three hours, ie till 05h15. That is when Tpr Lugg reported that the relief force arrived. He said (p 21,) the last Zulu was killed at the parapets at about 05h00.

On the way down to RD, NMP Tpr Clarke was part of the NMP rearguard to Chelmsford's column and reported  in his unpublished war diaries ( Vol 1 page 29) quote ;
" At the top of the Bashee valley we saw the  Zulu army ( about 5000) returning from Rorke's Drift and although the Zulus came within 400 yards ( short canon range) of us , Lord Chelmsford would not let us fire at them because he needed all the ammunition to retake RD, if it had fallen". Unquote

Further, taken from Brig John Dartnell's History of the Mounted Police of Natal, p67, referring to the Zulu Army passed at the head of the Bashee valley early in the morning on 23/01/79, referred to above, quote ;
 "It was afterwards found  that there had been fighting at Rorke's Drift, where a gallant stand had been made by the British Force, and.... these.... were the Zulus who had been repulsed" Unquote.

Finally , neither Dartnell, Lugg nor Clarke, who were all present at RD at 05h30, reported on any further sightings of the Zulu Impi after their relief force had arrived. Rather these men focused on eating all the could find at RD as they had not been fed for the past 60 hours.

Indeed, the Zulu Impi passed at the head of the Bashee valley were somewhat fearful of the redcoated force they saw approaching on their left front as they supposed that these were those troops killed the day before at Isandlwana and had risen from the dead, ie an immortal army, and they were in absolutely no mood, being the ultra superstious people that they were, to take on spirits from the afterlife, never mind a whole army of them. The sheer number of troops in the column perplexed them too as many of the NNC also wore red jackets and at a distance could not be seperated from the Colonial and Imperial troops

Now, the sources quoted here, ie Dartnell, Lugg and Clarke are very first hand, and their authoritative experiences have been  documented  many times.
Bang on Neil and Frank.

regards

barry


Last edited by barry on Sat Jan 21, 2017 4:29 pm; edited 5 times in total
Back to top Go down
Frank Allewell

avatar

Posts : 6326
Join date : 2009-09-21
Age : 70
Location : Cape Town South Africa

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Fri Jan 20, 2017 6:42 am

Taff
Thanks for the thinking response.
There very little doubt that the impi seen in the manzimyama was the uThulwana. They were positively identified by Fynn and by subsequent Zulu statements. So pretty convincing that they were the 'boys from Rorkes Drift.
There was a discussion some time ago on the forum that the road to iSandlwana, generally refered to as the 'Military Road' wasn't the only route. Probably for vehicles, wagons etc, yes, but on foot there was a more direct route that intersects the road between just above the Bashe.
Its a possibility that this could have been the route taken. Ive travelled that route and its more of a direct line and a lot quicker than the long looping Military Road. I don't know if that was used but its certainly a possibility.
The track is there, its marked on old maps and local folklore talks of it. Somewhere on the forum Ive posted pics of the trail, if I cant find them I will re post.
Doesn't it make sense that people used to traveling on foot would take the shortest and easiest route?
Just a thought.
As I pointed out in the opening sentence of this thread, its a theory open for logical discussion and with theories anything is possible.
In terms of the direction, have look at Google Earth, the back wall is a South East wall. The front then the North West. The photo is a panoramic shot so tends to bend reality. I posted it to really try and show which areas we were discussing.

Cheers
Back to top Go down
Frank Allewell

avatar

Posts : 6326
Join date : 2009-09-21
Age : 70
Location : Cape Town South Africa

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Fri Jan 20, 2017 7:00 am

Sorry Barry posts crossed. Im possible in Jburg in March, could be fun to hook up.
Back to top Go down
Frank Allewell

avatar

Posts : 6326
Join date : 2009-09-21
Age : 70
Location : Cape Town South Africa

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Fri Jan 20, 2017 7:38 am

Taff this the start of the trail from the Zulu side of the Mzinyathi
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
direct line from RD to isandlwana
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Crossing the Bashee well below the military Road
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Just out of interest
Cheers
Back to top Go down
barry

avatar

Posts : 813
Join date : 2011-10-21
Location : Kempton Park, Z.A.

PostSubject: Appendix 4   Fri Jan 20, 2017 2:45 pm

Hi Frank,

Grand.
See my pm.

Regards

barry
Back to top Go down
xhosa2000

avatar

Posts : 768
Join date : 2015-11-24

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Fri Jan 20, 2017 5:09 pm

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

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


Some interesting posts.. which include the following word's.hypothesis, speculation,
none of these word's are applied to fact! they cannot be... the above extract's explain
what the attacker's were doing.. Rorkes Drift by Greaves and Kingdom in crisis by
Laband.. i have been accused of shutting down debate by excluding any or all attempts
to introduce speculation as historical fact.. the above extract's are well documented and
have been in the public domain for many year's.. my main problem with franks article is
the absence of footnotes leading to primary sources..and the final straw was the phrase
that the reemerging impi was ' poised to strike '.. that led to my original post opposing
appendix four.. but i have read nothing from forum members to change my view.. which
i am entitled to hold and express. xhosa
Back to top Go down
rusteze

avatar

Posts : 2106
Join date : 2010-06-02

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Fri Jan 20, 2017 7:53 pm

I don't think you have offered anything that rules out Frank's hypothesis let alone a primary source. Laband reports that Chard was "fairly certain that the Zulus were in no state to attack again", that is as much speculation on Chard's part (he did not know there was a second impi in Natal) as Frank's "they were poised to attack" when referring to the hypothesised second impi. Greaves simply says "the Zulus had lost the will to fight" without any source reference. Neither is established fact.

Steve
Back to top Go down
Taff price



Posts : 37
Join date : 2015-02-14
Age : 43
Location : cardiff

PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   Fri Jan 20, 2017 8:19 pm

Frank

There was a discussion some time ago on the forum that the road to iSandlwana, generally refered to as the 'Military Road' wasn't the only route. Probably for vehicles, wagons etc, yes, but on foot there was a more direct route that intersects the road between just above the Bashe. This is what I was trying to get at with my first response, now it makes sense to me.

Thanks for the pics
Would there be a map on here that shows the Military Road and the more direct route? Or how about a guided tour around Isandlwana and Fugatives Drift in July? I'll buy you a pint or two. Very Happy

Thanks again

Geraint
Back to top Go down
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Appendix 4, Neils Book   

Back to top Go down
 
Appendix 4, Neils Book
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 4Go to page : 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
WWW.1879ZULUWAR.COM  :: GENERAL DISCUSSION AREA-
Jump to: