Isandlwana, Last Stands

Hi JW,

In answer;
1) I based that on what the NMP had, and as I know the Colonial regiments (ie NMP, NC etc ) were very much
equipped the same.
In this regard Tpr Clarke who was in Dartnell's column grumbled about the weight he had to carry around the
hills am on 22/01 chasing elements of the Zulu Impy with Dartnell, mentioning the cause of the problem
being : revolver and ammo, rifle and ammo, bayonet etc. I am however not sure which of the available
bayonets the NMP had, I seem to think the shorter one. There is a picture on the forum which was posted
fairly recently showing, if I am not mistaken, a fully armed NMP trooper of that era.
Later that day when Chelmsford descovered that the camp was lost, he addressed the men personally and
told them "You may have to retake the camp, at the point of the bayonet, if necessary"

2) No, I have little faith in the direct Zulu/English translations presented. One needs to cross question a Zulu
quite deeply to eastablish what he really means and I have no reason to believe that was always done. I
picked this up when questions were asked on the forum about daggers being used in the last stands. It is
quite possible that some troopers may have had private cutlery on their persons, but to have a whole body
of men producing daggers is somewhat unlikely. I think rather that the Zulu mentioned "mes", but actually
meant bayonets, which would have been more appropriate in any event.

regards

barry

Hi Barry
Thanks.
1) Both the NC and NMP had a very short bayonet for their Swinburn-Henry carbines, something akin to a Bowie knife, which wasn't popular and which they may have preferred to use as a knife. I'm wondering whether the description therefore may have been quite apt in the circumstances.
2) I suppose we should also look at which stand the Zulu was describing - probably that of the colonials with Durnford if I recall correctly.

Hi barry

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




Cheers

Hi DB,
Thanks for that, it is the one.
Because of the revolver being worn on the left hip, the bayonet in its frog was moved to the right hip. Normally without a revolver being carried the trooper would carry the bayonet on the left hip.

thanks,

barry

From Newman's Book. Regarding Blacks report.

"The greatest number counted lying together within a very small compass was sixty-eight,and these were in the left rear of the 1-24th, near the offices mess-tent. The majority were the 24th men, but there were some other arms as well. As regards the state of the bodies, a subject of morbid but painfull interest, they were in all conditions of horrible decay. Some were perfect skeletons; others that had not been stripped, or partially so, we're quite unapproachable, and the stench was sickening; with but a few exceptions, it was impossible to recognise any one, and the only officer that was seen was discovered by his clothes."

Julian Whybra wrote:

To Lonsdale's right was another half-company of NNC - the amaCunu coy, Pakade's men, under Capt Barry. These fled as the Zulus advanced - Erskine categorically states that he saw this.

Julian

Didn't Williams bring Barry and Verekar into the camp ?

Surly this shows that there men bolted ?





Cheers

When their men bolted, Barry and Vereker remained behind with Raw's men and were assisted back by Williams.

Wasn't "Vereker" going to bolt but gave the horse back to the owner..

No, that was later in the upper camp when all was lost.

Spent the evening reading this topic. Just one question.

Scotch carts, What happen to these carts, i can find nothing on them being at Isandlwana before or after the battle. The only account i can see, is the one made by Essex. Could be wrong, but would like to know please...

ray
I'm a bit involved in researching another area at the moment and am disinclined to rake through my archive for the specific references but carts were supposed to be standard issue to Imperial companies, engineers and artillery. The 24th had to buy some locally-made ones to supplement their own stock. Look on page 145 of the Narrative of Operations (Rothwell) where it is stated that the 3rd column had 82 carts.

Is it true, that it was thought that the Zulu king did tell his army to offer quarter to the British at Isandlwana, some quarter was offered to some, but because the British couldn't understand what was being said, they replied with sword cuts and blows, thus being killed thereafter.

No. The king told them to concentrate on the ones in red coats because they were the soldiers. Mercy didn't enter into it.
After the battle some Zulus said that some whites cried out for quarter but none was given; others said that they offered to spare some whites but they couldn't understand Zulu and fought to the end.

Ray. I to have spend a considerable time looking for a source that puts scotch carts as Isandlwana and like you Essex is the only one.

Quote :

Look on page 145 of the Narrative of Operations (Rothwell) where it is stated that the 3rd column had 82 carts.

If this is correct why we're not recovered, and in the famous photo of Isandlwana showing the waggons, there doesn't appear to be any scotch carts. Did Chelmsford take them all with him.

The Zulus took lots of them, a lot more were to smashed or damaged to be recovered, some were thrown into
donga.




Cheers

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

The KDG recover only 3 Scotch Carts. Page 2. So that leaves 79 un-accounted for.

Whether you account for them or not, they were there. The infantry could not have functioned properly without them. As DB says the Zulus used a lot of carts to move their dead - it took 50 men to move an ox-waggon, the carts would have been much more suitable for removing bodies.

Hi All.
There is no doubt that if the Scotch carts were in the camp the zulu army would have taken all of those that were still serviceable , as Julian said 50 men to move an ox wagon , wouldnt be anywhere near 50 to move one of them , not only
did they remove bodies but basically anything that they thought they could use also went with them . The path of their withdrawl was littered with Debris which obviously became to much of a burden and was discarded during their withdrawl .
Cheers 90th.

There is no mention of Zulus using the Carts, Waggons yes. Did Chelmsford take carts with him.

Old H

A cart is basically a small waggon




Cheers

But with 2 Wheels, and doesn't need 50 men to move one. JW points out via a book there was 84 carts with the 3rd column.

And ?

There were over 120 waggons with the 3rd column, and only 36 could be salvged. Waggons last longer
than carts.

But only Essex mentions a scotch cart.

I think that when the survivors were giving their reports on the disaster at Isandhlwana they court of inquiry were more concerned with the dramatic loss of life rather than the number of scotch carts they had left.
The survivors' testimonies were not provided for the benefit of we happy band of brothers 130 years later. I doubt if anyone gave a fig for the scotch carts.
They didn't mention how many goats they has with them, but they had them.

Quote :

One needs to get these things absolutely right

Quote :

The survivors' testimonies were not provided for the benefit of we happy band of brothers 130 years later

It's a 133 years to be exact.

133 years 163 days actually.

:lol: Nice..

It's not nice actually. It's pedantic. Being precise in history is not the same as being pedantic in the real world and I don't go in for it.

Where do you get these words from.

Interesting discussion, but we seem to be going off topic.

Admin
I agree, though this subject has veered far away from the original posting on last stands. To bring it back to that topic I'd like to suggest forum members read or re-read Henry Hallam Parr's A Sketch of the Kafir and Zulu Wars which has a large section devoted to the endgame of Isandhlwana and would provoke more serious and informed discussion. I've just re-read it searching for my 'silent carbineer' and note that it's available on-line, free, in its entirety. Parr was of course out with Chelmsford on the 22nd, saw the battlefield, spoke with survivors, and his book was published in 1880, so is contemporary - I'd forgotten how good the book is.
Littlehand
From our language - which we have in common.
All
Thank you! I don't get wound up but some contributors' comments (even if they are barbed) are useful in reminding me that not everyone on the forum will be as well-versed in the AZW as others and will require a lot more in the way of explanation and justification.

Julian.

Quote :

"I'd like to suggest forum members read or re-read Henry Hallam Parr's A Sketch of the Kafir and Zulu Wars which has a large section devoted to the endgame of Isandhlwana and would provoke more serious and informed discussion."

Click Here:

Nothing we don't already know.

littlehand
You did not read my posting carefully enough. You have provided a link to a biography of Parr by Fortescue-Brickdale, NOT the book I was referring to viz., Parr's own history of the SA campaign with one chapter containing much detail about final positions and last stands, with map.
So, everything you don't yet know!

Lord Chelmsford view.

"What he had in his mind at the time he wrote that paragraph was that the men of the 24th Regiment, finding that the Zulus had worked round their flank, and that it was hopeless to remain where they were, had retired hastily with the view of taking up the stronger position which they should never have left. In his opinion, under the circumstances, it would have been better for them to have remained where they were, and to have fought it out on the spot without attempting to retire. They had been fighting an enemy outside their camp,and it was hopeless for the poor fellows to expect to get back"

He probably right. With all that ammuntion coming down the supply line. The firin lines could have held.

The Zulus in front of them had closed to 100 yards, they were outflanked on the right by 4,000 Zulus and
another 5,000 were about to charge over the Saddle from the rear, no way on earth the firing line could
have held.

Of course it wouldn't hold. But they would have been better off remaining where they were. Either way they were going to lose their lives.

Anstey nearly made it to safety, Younghusband had a good position,

Agree, but they run out of ammuntion. Unable to remain at there first position.

Looking at a image I found of Isandlwana, it shows Anstey last stand as not being to far from Rorkes Drift. Just to verify where did his last stand take place.

Ulundi here's link to a previous discussion.

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

Thanks John, it's shows the "Manzinyama" on the image I have, and it's look very close to RD. but that's just my looking at it , there is not scale on this image. It's look like a Google Earth image with labels inserted by someone.

Admin. I have emailed you the image, would you be able to post it for me.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Photo supplied by forum member Ulundi

Thanks Admin..

Can anyone confirm if the labels on the map are correct?

Hi Ulundi.
I'm not sure if it is correct , I remember a little while back a photo like this was posted and I think my mate Springbok pointed out that it was incorrectly labeled . I may be wrong .
Cheers 90th.

Hi 90th.

You are right my friend, Springbok corrected this in an earlier thread, actually, not all that long ago. Things are marked wrongly on the google earth image, I can tell you that iSandlwana Hill is the dark blob with the light top to the left of what is shown on the image as Conical Kop, as for the rest of the incorrectly labeled places, well, maybe springy will come to your assistance, and correct the google earth image again.

Springbok correcting map.

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

Thanks Pete.

I thought it wasn't all that long back since springy corrected the image.

Is the Manzinyama in the wrong place..

Ulundi
To the right of the word iSandlwana is a line running vertically down the map, that is the Manzimyama stream

Cheers