John Bredenbach Burgher Force

Natal Witness 1st February 1879
The action of the 25th January 1879 with Wood's column
John Bredenbach, contusion on the right elbow from raeocheting ball.

Shown in Duttons as one of Uys's men
Bridenbach Hans not in medal roll wounded Kambula Hill 10/2/1879

Kate,

I don’t if he was unlucky or what, but Friday 24th January, near to Hlobane Mountain the following casualties were sustained by the Burgher Force:
Privates: Budenbeck [sic] & Jelleome. Extent of wounds not given.  Presumably the former is Bridenbach.
See below, where they are referred to as the Dutch Con.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Further Correspondence respecting the Affairs of South Africa.

Then on Monday 10th February 1879, during a cattle raid on Hlobane, Private H. Bridenbach of the Burgher Force was wounded. Again the extent of his wound is not given.

JY

Further to the above the late Huw Jones identifies the man as Barend H Breytenbach.

JY

There seem to be at least 6 different spelling of this name in various reports then:

(1) Badenbach (Sole) listed as a separate man to:
(2) Hans Bridenbach (Sole) noted as wounded at Kambula Hill 10.2.79.
(3) Hans Briedenbach (Natal Mercury article in Sole) noted wounded 10.2.79 bullet through r.arm 6” below shoulder at Hlobane. Horse killed as well during withdrawal. Further report wound that progressing well on 11.2.79.
(4) John Bredenbach (Natal Witness 1.2.79 as above) wounded in r.elbow from ricochet on 25.1.79 with Woods column.
(5) Budenback (Bellairs casualty report above) wounded 24.1.79 at Zuukem Nek. Many spelling mistakes in report though just look at the Rorkes Drift casualties.
(6) Barend H Breytenbach (Huw Jones battlefieldsroute.co.za) lots of other interesting articles here.
.
Clearly every possibility that these are all the same man. John and Hans both being derivatives of Johannes I believe. Not the easiest name to spell (for a Brit)!

On the other hand it would take a quick recovery from being shot through the arm on 10th Jan to being fit to ride out again only 14 days later. The indications are that they are separate wounds although very close to each other.

I wonder if Terry Sole is correct that there were 2 different men here? Maybe 2, 3 and 6 one man and 1, 4 and 5 another?

Just throwing this out there for thought.

Regards. Phil.