Hidden Ground at Isandlwana

I think its a bit harsh to expect a five page testimony to be totally correct in all aspects concerning distances, times especially after being the most traumatic day of his life.

Facts are there is no hard evidence concerning the historical account, one issue that no one has answered to my satisfaction is if the whole army was discovered all at once in the same location why then the action around Mkwene and the right horn arrived 30 minutes before the rest totally impossible, and more unbelievable than the testimonies of those who where lucky to escape with their lives.

There are several sources that place Barker on Qwabe first thing in the morning one is Symons. I wonder if another of those videttes would have survived the battle and left us a detailed account how much of it would confirm Barkers account. 

Just my thoughts

Aussie
If you think that it is a tall order to expect Barker's testimony to be correct in all aspects after being the most traumatic day of his life, what chance is there of it being correct thirty years afterwards?
Your second paragraph you must have typed very quickly because it doesn't quite make sense so your meaning is lost.
As to the several sources placing Barker on Qwabe, could you list them please. Also, which Symons are you referring to? The Captain or the Trooper?

Julian to answer your first question do you think his testimony is fiction, all made up certainly there is mistakes concerning his distances but that can be explained.

When he describes the following as goes to the location of this army with his measurements he got that correct 100%  This I confirmed with my Panorama and was one of the clues that confirmed my theory so to say he got all his measurements wrong will be incorrect 
. Shortly afterwards, numbers of Zulus being seen on all the hills to the left and front, Trooper Swift and another were sent back to report. The Zulus then remained on the hills, and about two hundreds of them advanced to within three hundred yards of us, but on our advancing they retired out of sight, and a few of us went up to this hill where the Zulus had disappeared, and on a farther hill, at about six hundred yards’ distance, we saw a large army sitting down. 

Trooper Symons wrote up a map and he places
Barker and Hawkins on Qwabe
Whitelaw and his partner on Nyezi
Scott on Itusi

Remember Symons and his brother was at Mangeni on the morning of the 22nd

There is one other source I found that place Barker on Qwabe as well but I need to find it for you.

AUSSIE
Of course I don't think it's fiction - far from it.  I do think it is unreliable as a stand-alone for the reasons Kate has already explained and for the reasons I outlined yesterday at 9.40.  I think it is confused and that while he undoubtedly experienced the events he described, their order and timings cannot be relied upon.
Where is this Trooper Symons map?  The vedette positionings you mention are highly speculative, do not tally with Mansel's recollections, and have no source beyond Lock & Quantrill's suggestions in Zulu Victory.  If there is a Symons map it is of great importance.  Which archive did you find it in and what's its accession number?

Aussie
Thanks to Mike's helpfulness I'm now in possession of the 'Symons' map to which you refer taken from a print copy.  This is not by Symons at all but by the editor of the printed version of his account, created to accompany the narrative.*  
From the nomenclature of the map's geographical points and the handwriting it can be seen immediately that this is a late 20th-century interpretation!!  I think I could even tell from it which modern popular history book's map it's based on!
Pure Symons, no!  Pure invention, yes!

*The Talana Museum sells the booklet:
Anglo-Zulu War Diaries: Trooper Fred Symons, Natal Carbineers: Enthusiasm and Misgivings, 1879.
by Mark Coghlan.

That map was given to me, So what your saying a 20th century author copied it from hand. Did he actually copied it from his Dairy ? Of my understanding that's where the map came from, his Dairy directly not from a Booklet.

I will need to contact The Talana Museum and do some investigation.

You said the following
 I think I could even tell from it which modern popular history book's map it's based on!
So is the map a forgery ?

Mike post a copy of the map and lets see if its the same one in my possession.

Could this be the map in question?
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

This is a Stanley Evans Map that is remarkably similar, but which came first would be an interesting point?[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Frank, you beat me to posting this by literally one minute. This is the one I sent Julian. Note the myriad of fairly modern spellings. I wouldn't be comfortable using this as a source.

I must be blind were does it say the picket positions with the names

Do you have other maps Frank signifying the picket positions

Do you have the Thomas Anstey map?

No   I do not have the Thomas Anstey Map I guess Thomas and Edgar were brothers

The Stanley Evans maps by the way were produced in 1973, the Mark Coghlan is un dated. I have sent a message to the holders of the original diary asking if the maps were part of the original or were produced by Coghlan. There is a further copy at the Killie Campbell in Durban that I do know has been extensivly reworked. The version at Talana is not the original but a typed copy.

90th I know has a copy perhaps you could check Gary to see if there is a date in your copy?

Cheers

Here's the Anstey map. They were brothers, Thomas was in the R.E.

Yes I have the above map Mike I used it to show what I believe the videttes where first light on the 22nd

On my website I have mark Barker on Itusi 

It does not give names though

And it does not have either Qwabi or Nyezi with a picket on it

Morning Aussie
I have quite a few maps, the piquets positions are pretty varied.
One thing I caution on, there is a difference between a Piquet and a Vedette. Aussie im pretty sure your referring to Vedettes. In my humble opinion the Vedettes were never confind to a single spot but tended to roam around, exploring, chatting to mates, relieving boredom, looking for shade etc. they were a pretty independent bunch.
I personally dont believe Barker was on Qwabe but thats only my opinion. A case can be made placing him at a variety of positions, depends on how you read him, but and this is the key, one needs to look at other sources to corroborate any of those variants.
Mehlokazulu is an important source that places a vedette firmly on the ridge line and, possibly coincidence, Barker places a group of mounted Zulus at the same/similar time. That tends to corroborate a position.
I dont know if the Fred Symonds maps are his originals or not, I do know he wasnt there so if they are his maps they are produced from second hand sources and we dont know who those sources are.

Aussie for your interest this is an excerpt from a letter Barker wrote to his father in 1879 and really shows even then the confusion in his mind.
"Saw some men go into a hut, when about 20 mounted Zulus skirmished up, trying to surround us. However, we all got back to camp, which we had to defend. We were fighting hard for about four hours, when the Zulus advanced about 20,000 strong, if not more, and we were all obliged to retire. The Carbineers were about the last to retire from camp."

Cheers

I think this is the one your referring to Aussie.[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Morning Frank

I originally had Barker on Qwabi until I made my discovery which confirms he was on Itusi of which I will only change until some first hand testimony comes to light.

That letter to his father is very brief I interpret the above sighting to his first sighting in his testimony

This copy in the Killie Campbell might shed some light ? Can you obtain it Mike ?

Did Mark Coghlan draw up some other maps with vedette locations with names ?

Hi Inky
That was just a quote from his letter to show the inconsistances he was prone to.
I fully agree he was in the iThusi area.
The key diary is the original. Its held at the Royal Carbineers Trust Museum in PMB, Ive written to the curator to try and get some clarity.

Cheers

Hi Frank

I fully understand Barkers shortcomings, as goes with distances.

I guess you had no feedback concerning Royal Carbineers Trust Museum ?   I guess its fingers cross

THEN THE ORIGINAL DIARY IS KEY well then it comes down to  if Mark Coghlan copied it accurately

As goes to Symons not being first hand knowledge thas true but he had access to Barker and others which he could of easily told him.

Hi Inky
Yep Symons could have got his info from chatting to others, but it would have had to have been a diverse group to get all the info on those maps.
I only wrote to the Trust this morning so hopefully I will get a response during the week, its going to be interesting.Once I have feed back I will let you know.
Cheers

Thanks Frank

I am hoping they will send you a PDF copy of the Diary  or copy's of the original maps

Fingers cross  thanks

Aussie
Look at the names used on the 'Symons' map. The Spur, The Saddle, etc., these are nomenclatures promulgated in the C20. Look at the routes and naming of the Zulu regiments - taken straight from a modern text. How would Symons have known which route the uNdi took??? In fact the route shown is the one it was believed only from the mid-C20 they had taken. Look at the handwriting - people didn't form letters like that then. It even looks as though it was done with a black felt tip!
Symons did not write in his narrative where the vedettes were located, neither did he name the hills on which they appeared (I doubt if he even knew the Zulu names), why on earth would he have put these on a map when he didn't put them in the text?
Someone has drawn the map in the diary (if that's where it is) and tried to make sense of Symons's narrative by 'overlaying' the information on to a modern interpretation of the battle (myself, I'd plump for the one on p. 152 of L&Q's Zulu Victory).

Julian you may well be correct lets see what Frank can get from the Royal Carbineers Trust Museum it seems these are all copies of the original =.

We need to see the original.

Do we know when the Symons brothers died ? If I remember correctly the Major said one of them drowned, What about Burial places ?

After all since my discovery I have placed Barker on Itusi this just adds to the Mystery of Isandlwana

I think it was L&Q that first placed vedettes that far out east and first tried to allocate names to locations: Itusi, Nyezi, Qwabe.
The second map from the booklet is pure Morris.

I have the typed version of the diary from Talana and also the serialised version from the local papers. There is no mentions of any maps. But will hope that a copy of the original comes down from Durban.

I also have both and can confirm that there are no maps nor any mention of them. Honestly I find it ludicrous that we're pursuing this in this way when the maps are so OBVIOUSLY 20th-century even to the untrained eye. If I tried this on at a university peer review I wouldn't be able to show my face there again for months. Correction: years.

I think Julian we are pursuing this as it is important to Inky who is a valued member of the forum and has spent a lot of time and effort putting his theory together.
At great expense he has been to the battlefield many times and taken a lot of photos and panoramas to try and help us all get to the bottom of this.
He is not putting his theory forward to gain a masters degree and this is not a school or university just a forum.

A forum where the above topic may be of interest to those not as knowledgeable as you.
The map may be a dead end and if it is the corner stone to his theory will cause him to rethink, though from talking to him he is using other information as well.
A bonus will be if this discussion brings to light something none of us have seen before.
You never know.
The truth is out there.
Kate

I think perhaps a better teaching point would be to go over what indicates this map is inauthentic. The spellings and terminology are obvious to me, but I'm sure there are other tells.

Kate
It is the consequences of such an error that perturbs me.

Errare humanum est, ignoscere est fragilitatem humanam agnoscere.

Kate
I don't disagree with anything you say.  It just seems such a waste, that's all.
Frank the scholar
Labor omnia vincit (including me a long time ago).

Indeed

gardner1879 wrote:

I think Julian we are pursuing this as it is important to Inky who is a valued member of the forum and has spent a lot of time and effort putting his theory together.
At great expense he has been to the battlefield many times and taken a lot of photos and panoramas to try and help us all get to the bottom of this.
He is not putting his theory forward to gain a masters degree and this is not a school or university just a forum.

A forum where the above topic may be of interest to those not as knowledgeable as you.
The map may be a dead end and if it is the corner stone to his theory will cause him to rethink, though from talking to him he is using other information as well.
A bonus will be if this discussion brings to light something none of us have seen before.
You never know.
The truth is out there.
Kate

Well Thank you Kate

Yes your correct about putting in a lot of time and effort and expense, I am certainly not after any master degree but I strongly believe in what my research has discovered and your correct it rests on Barker and his discovery around one hour before the actual discovery.

I was always of the belief that map was from the Symons brothers if they did not do it why then does Mark Coghlan name come up is he the author of the Map and not Symons ?

Weather Barker was on Qwabe, Itusi or some were else at first light on that morning it will not affect my theory because I believe he was some were between Amatushane and Itusi when he comes across this screen which lead him to this army between 10:30 and 11am that morning.

The wait continues

Hi Aussie
Sorry Mate, dump this one from your theory list. There are no maps attached to the diary. Sounds as though Coghlan has just added them into the booklet to show the scope of the area Fred was working in.
In the booklet there seems to be a number of different maps. so definitly later add ins. As it is your theory has moved on from the Qwabe hill anyway.

Cheers

Hi Frank

So it is a Mark Coghlan creation, what a surprise. It just goes to show you dig dig dig and you will find something, Thanks for the answer Frank.

Qwabe is old news concerning Barker. Itusi is our location Frank and the center of my theory rest on his location moments before his discovery. This confirms my findings.

This has been an interesting discussion and, correct me if I am wrong, but it seems that every one agrees that the Impi had already left the ngwebini valley and that Raw's contact point was forward of Mabaso at or about the area "x"?
I've walked that area and there is certainly large areas of dead ground in which thousands of Zulus could hide.
However, Inky, I'm struggling to understand what, exactly, your "discovery" is? It may help if you could use a map and a timeline to demonstrate your theory? I'm not saying that you are wrong in anything you say and it may be that I have missed something in this and earlier threads?
Cheers
Mel

Hi Mel

Up to this time, all the history books placed the discovery at the Ngbweni vallley, What I have discovered after looking into the testimony of Trooper Barker he discovers a large army less than 1 kilomenter from his Vidette post, We all believe its Itusi so by going by his directions I have discovered its the same location as the missing 5 hours.

Here is Barkers testimony
Shortly afterwards, numbers of Zulus being seen on all the hills to the left and front, Trooper Swift and another were sent back to report. The Zulus then remained on the hills, and about two hundreds of them advanced to within three hundred yards of us, but on our advancing they retired out of sight, and a few of us went up to this hill where the Zulus had disappeared, and on a farther hill, at about six hundred yards’ distance, we saw a large army sitting down. We returned to Lieut. Scott, who was then about three miles The officer decided to proceed up this hill, and the battery was, half an hour afterwards, cut up to a man, just as they arrived, I believe, on the top of the hill in question. (We, the videttes, were at this time in a donga firing at the Zulus, and witnessed the cutting up of this battery without their having time to fire a single shot). from camp, and reported what we had seen. Hawkins and I were then sent back to camp to report a large army to the left front of the camp. On our way back we noticed the Zulus advancing slowly, and when about a mile and a half from the camp we met the rocket battery, who enquired the enemy’s whereabouts. We advised the officer to proceed to where Lieut. Scott was stationed, but he asked if he could get up a hill to his left. We informed him that the Zulus were advancing towards that hill, and most probably would be seen on it within half an hour. 


 It is important we put a time line on it, So he discovers the army notice the distances he gives then reports his find to his commanding officer and then is told to report it to camp on his way back he bumps into the rocket battery, notice Barker said Russel wanted to go up their and Barker said not to that's because he new the army was hidden on the other side  moments after that after he climbs the notch Barker witnesses the discovery.
. As Hawkins and I were returning to the vidette outpost we noticed the mounted Basutos to the extreme left of the camp in skirmishing order, and masses of the Zulus on all the hills. Firing was then heard for the first time, as although we had been within two hundred yards of the Zulus, we had strict orders not to fire the first shot, and no shot, up to then, had been fired on either side. We reported ourselves to our officer, who immediately advanced us (the videttes having all retired to where Lieut. Scott was stationed) against some Zulus who were coming on slowly. Heavy firing was then heard on our left, and being fired on we returned the fire, posting ourselves in a donga. (It was from this donga we saw the rocket battery cut up).


 Notice the Zulu screen are still screening the army and then the discovery takes place to his extreme left this is confirmed by the first shots until then no shots have been fired. Barker sights the Basutos moments before discovery. In fact those Zulu screens 200 meters from Barker destroys the rocket battery in around 15 minutes this is also confirmed by Trooper Barker 



That in a nut shell is my discovery why it took 140 years I will never know.

Hi Mel
I am still not convinced about part of the Zulu army being out of the valley that morning.
This idea seems to stem from the 'X' marks the spot theory based on Wood's map; the validity of which I am also not convinced by and Barker and Higginson's accounts (also dubious and discussed in a previous post)

Looking at Wood's map first:-
Depending on when those maps were annotated I don't think Wood had been to that spot. They were almost certainly prepared for Durnford's brother - who in one of his pamphlets mentions 'information supplied by a greatly experienced soldier in colonial warfare who had been to the spot' (roughly).
But when did Wood go? I suspect  he went with Eugenie after visiting the PI donga in June 1880. He certainly interviewed people on that occasion. They camped south-east of the mountain, visited the camp area, and went down the trail.
But ...in fact there is nothing to suggest he actually went to the X spot, and why would he as Eugenie wanted to visit the highlights, not the peripheral area? So he was probably working it out on a map - which is presumably why he stresses that it's only a rough estimate. I BELIEVE it was ABOUT here...' etc.
He goes out of his way to stress his uncertainty with different wording on two maps - he's saying 'look, don't quote me on this, but I think this is roughly the area'.

And who supplied him with the info?
1/ Hlubi and his men? Out with Durnford, not with Raw.
2/ The NMP men? Either on picquet or in the donga and camp - not with Raw.
3/ Brickhill? In camp.
4/ Mehlokazulu? He says he'd just got back to the bivouac after scouting, and went to join his regiment at the furthest end of the valley. He wasn't facing Raw.
5/Mehlokazulu's brother? Well, given that Mehlokazulu was the senior son, whoever it was was probably a similar age or younger - so iNgobamakhosi or uVe. Not facing Raw.

There is an intriguing reference to foragers from the Nokhenke in mealie gardens - but that is placed much closer to the Ngwebeni. So in short, Wood didn't go there himself, admitted he only had a rough idea, and spoke to a bunch of men who also weren't there themselves. They tried to work it out on a map - much as we are doing now.

We must not forget or disregard  the Zulu accounts, (and I am aware they were taken by colonial/English interpreters) stating they were not going to attack on that day and if negotiations had been undertaken as Mhoti claims there would have been no reason for the army to deploy.
Mehlokazulu states that after his scouting he reports to Tsingwayo who says "All right we shall see what they are going to do". This does not sound like the army has done anything at this point.

Also worth noting that Higginson said that he was riding up some way behind Raw, and saw the Zulus emerge 'from round the side of a rocky hill'. Well, Mabaso is the rockiest hill in the area and to the side of it is the Ngwebini Valley.
To make the 'X' spot map work you have to take the piquets off Mkwene and the videttes off the Inyoni ridge and allow the Zulus free movement across the Nqutu plateau that morning which is clearly not the case.

I still believe the army was sitting tight that morning in the Ngwebini, hidden and near a good supply of water.
Kate

Kate
I have already said elsewhere on the forum that the X-marks-the-spot-maps from Chatham are initialled by Henderson.  The notation is in (now) faint pencil and has for the most part been overwritten in ink (allegedly) by Wood.  The pencil and the ink are in different hands and the pencil is still clearly visible as the inked writing does not directly overlay the original writing.  
The R.E. Museum's index recorded the maps as being by Henderson.  L&Q believed the ink overwriting was Wood's handwriting (I cannot say whether this is so).  If it is, then it is written over Henderson's pencilled original.
The maps were found with a copy of Brickhill's account which was annotated and initialled by Henderson.  I know this because FWDJ and I FOUND the two together and they have adjacent numbers in the RE Museum's index.  They are inextricably linked in my mind.  Too many people separate the maps physically and mentally from the account in order to try to fulfil fanciful theories of their own devising which relate exclusively to the maps.
Looking at the content of the map specifically, it can be seen that it is all about how far Davies and Henderson's troops got, their line of retreat and stand in the donga.  Only if Henderson is the creator of the map does its content make sense.  Who else, apart from Davies, would have had that information?  I would suggest that Henderson created the map in order to illustrate his annotations to the Brickhill account.  Look at the two together and they make sense.
The ONLY thing on the map with which Henderson would have had no direct personal knowledge is the X.  That can only have been gleaned from Henderson's fellow NNH troop commander Raw (because Roberts and Shepstone were dead) or possibly Hamer.  They must have compared notes afterwards and Henderson included the X as a significant point, although of course he could not possibly have known whether it was marked with any accuracy unless Raw was present at the map's drawing (and there is no evidence to support that at all).  Curiously the X is pencilled but not inked.

AUSSIE - re your 7.36 and 11.59 posts:
I don't quite see how Barker's location on 'Itusi' confirms your findings that "it's the same location as the missing 5 hours". I'm not quite sure that that 'confirms' anything.
Scott was on Itusi for most of the time. What Scott saw, Barker saw, what was reported to Scott, Barker would have known about. From Itusi there is a fine view northwards. Are you really suggesting that the Zulu army was lying unseen and unknown, just "one kilometre from his vedette post " on Itusi?

Inky,

Is it a X or a Maltese Cross?  

JY

John
In reality it always struck me as being a strange shape. It's actually shaped a bit like two hockey sticks crossed, facing away from one another.

Julian, what makes you believe Scott's command post was on Ithusi? I had suspected Amatutshane, at least from Davies who stated the position was the conical Koppie.

Kate Many years ago Ken Gillings and I stood on the plateau and for the first time I heard the concept of the impi being (partially) in front of Ngwebini. I have some e mails from a number of eminent guides and knowledgable people where this matter was discused in length. This is long before Ron and Peter published TMFHT. Unless Im mistaken they did actually give credit to Ken. Hopefully that should disabuse you of the notion it all started with Ron and Peter and the X marks the spot theory.
I have shown with photos that there is more than enough cover in exactly the positions indicated on those old maps. As Ive said ad nauseum to any one that would listen, it was an inherent part of the Zulu Psychologycal warfare. 'Look guys the bogeymans coming'. They were more than happy to be seen, as evidenced by the number of sightings reported down from the plateau since the early morning. There is every possibility that when the plan of action was first agreed with Mavumenga and Ntshingwayo that the concept of only attacking after the 'day of the dead moon', and word of thta spread down the ranks. "Hey guys day of tomorrow, grab some reast and we can sort out the poms on Thursday". Hence the number of reports to that effect. But were they scared of attacking that day? Not a chance, have a word with the blokes from the coast, they didnt hesitate when they had been discovered, day of the dead moon wasnt even on the agenda so why would Ntshingwayo be worried about it? Every general or Commanding officer since time immorial has had a change of mind, Mehokazulu had reported what was happening in the camp, Ntshingwayo's comments were quite apt. "Ok lets see what they are up to and get ready just in case." And thats quite possibly what they did. They werent to know that Raw et all was set to bugger up the plan and stick the proverbial stick into the wasp nest and get exactly that same reaction. Mehlokazulu himself reports that Ntshingwayo instructed the regiments to move forward.
In terms of the Scott/Barker positions I shall reserve comments untill the idiots presently screwing up my launch dates extract their combined digits from their nether regions.
See what youve started Inky

Cheersall

Julian
I appreciate it was not made by Wood.
I merely referred to it as 'Wood's map' to distinguish it from the others made that year not annotated by him.

The discussion is the positioning of the Zulus that morning and that 'X' or a location near by, keeps rearing its ugly head as a possible location.
Whoever made that cross, it is still, in my opinion, in the wrong place for the placement of some of the Zulu Army that morning.

If it was Henderson, well he wasn't on the plateau. Raw's collaboration can in my opinion be ruled out. Bearing in mind what happened to him up there that morning, for him to then look at a map several months later and accurately pinpoint where he found the Zulus is a bit far fetched.

If it was Wood, well see above for my reasoning.
The original Penrose and Anstey Map 13/11/79 titled 'Military Survey of the Country around Isandlwana' pin points the Zulu armys location (aaaa). This is where I believe they were discovered on the morning of the 22nd.

We may never know but placing them anywhere else but the Ngwebini seems to mean bending facts to fit theories.
Roberts and Raw galloping after Zulu herdsmen and seeing the army in the valley isn't perfect (Pope, Chard and Higginson) but it, to me,  seems to 'flow' with the survivors accounts the most satisfactorily and, in my opinion, is the least fact twisting theory out there.
Kate

John Young wrote:

Inky,

Is it a X or a Maltese Cross?  

JY

The Major has placed a X on it So that is what it is.

Aaaah so it was the Major that drew it on there!!!
Now we know. Well done Inky

Sorry Kate but whats good for the goose etc....
the original Penrose and Anstey Map 13/11/79 titled 'Military Survey of the Country around Isandlwana' pin points the Zulu armys location (aaaa). This is where I believe they were discovered on the morning of the 22nd.
They werent there, as in..........If it was Henderson, well he wasn't on the plateau.
So Penrose and Anstey would only have got their information from Raw, etc. As would Henderson.
Cheers