Liars in the Zulu War?

Littlehand. This is exactly what you have been talking about. The stories of brave deeds, it's unfortunate that in 1879 this is how the public precived the stories about the Battle of Isandlwana. I doubt if they knew better back then, Over the years the true events have slowly been revealed not that effects those persons living back then. Perhaps for the sake of his children, and British moral it was told like that..

Rev Witt. He never witnessed any battles. Still he made £20.


PS. It does add weight to the fact he never left with Coghill.

Hi Tasker .
Read any book ( Referance ) on Isandlwana and it will mention the fact that the tents werent struck .
It was one of the things that should have been done , very early in the piece .
cheers 90th.

Hi all

The tents were not removed because the defenders had no idea that the Zulu would come in the camp.

Someone could have ordered civilians to do it ... after 12.00 am.



Pascal

90th wrote:

Hi Tasker .
Read any book ( Referance ) on Isandlwana and it will mention the fact that the tents werent struck .
It was one of the things that should have been done , very early in the piece .
cheers 90th.

Agreed.
What did Pulleine do? Anything?

Because when the firing began and companies had been sent out to their various positions, the tents believe it or not were being used by the cilvilians, and bandsmans , cooks ect that were with the coloumn. And by all accounts they wasn't overly concerned about the reports and rifle fire.

I think he sent more mounted men 30 or so to reinforce Lt Scott's pickets.

Apart from that he obayed his written orders up till Durnford's arrival.

Fight compact if you are attacked, act strictly on the defencive

HIs orders were to defend the camp.
HOW he carried out those orders were his responsibility, his calls and at his discretion.
Only the senior commander on the ground in a situation can judge how best to carry out his orders.

Whatever it was, Durnford took over commard wether he was ordered to or not. He was the senior officer on the day. And there are witnessed to say he took over commard. End Off.

Hi Littlehand .
In regard to your question '' Why wasnt this mentioned at the Court of Enquiry '' From Ian Knights ' Zulu Rising ' ; 27 Jan , the inquest into the disaster had begun . At C'ford's request a court of Inquiry had been convened from the senior officers at Helpmekaar . It's brief was to '' Inquire '' into the loss of the camp . The purpose of this court has been much MISUNDERSTOOD ; IT WAS NOT AN IMPARTIAL BODY LOOKING INTO THE CONDUCT OF THE ISANDLWANA CAMPAIGN AS A WHOLE , but rather an INTELLIGENCE - GATHERING EXERCISE ON C'FORD'S BEHALF , intended to shed light on the crucial decisions which had occurred at Isandlwana DURING HIS ABSENCE . By definition C'ford's own role fell outside it's remit ,
NOR DID IT ATTEMPT TO APPORTION BLAME . My use of capitals to emphasise certain points . As the statement says there wasnt any finger pointing or name and blame . Hope this helps .
cheers 90th.

Hi CTSG.
Glad to see you are back , not sure you can say Durnford was in command of the camp for the simple reason he wasnt there !.
He rode off trying to gather information on the whereabouts of the impi and also seeing that the Good Lord wasnt in the process of being cut off from the camp . Once Durnford left the camp , command would have again reverted to Pulleine .
cheers 90th.

DB 14
As a 'youngish' person you probably cannot as yet sence when your being wound up, Littlehand ( :joker: )is notorious for his humour. read between the lines, his last few threads have all been contesting well established points...............should tell you a lot, so dont fall for it.

Hi all

Gary, Durnford is not in the camp also is no longer responsible for anything ?

Without Durnford , no battle of Isandhlwana



Pascal

Chelmsfordthescapegoat wrote:

Whatever it was, Durnford took over commard wether he was ordered to or not. He was the senior officer on the day. And there are witnessed to say he took over commard. End Off.

Pulleine, Durnford, Durnford, Pulleine.
It really does not matter who the nominal i/c of the camp was. By the time Durnford turned up on the morning of the 22nd, the battle of iSandlwana was already lost, by virtue of the fact that in between Chelmsford leaving and Durnford arriving, Pulleine had taken no action to avert the danger that was manifesting itself around him and the camp that morning.
At least Durnford saw the need to take action and he recognised the seriousness of the gravity of the situation that was developing around the camp.
Whether Durnfors made the right tactical decisions is questionable and is another debate entirely, but unlike Pulleine, he saw the impending danger and DID something. It was desperate and futile, but if he hadn't turned up, one wonders if the camp would have just been massacred without having put up a fight.

Agreed.

A point that will indicate the feeling of Pulleine is that when the companies on the ridge opened fire on the right horn they were seen to withdraw ( actually carried on moving to the west ). Pulleine was heard to comment that," what fools we are we should have stayed quiet and let them come on to us so we could give them a sound thrashing." Words to that effect at least.

So even at that latish stage there was no feeling that they were in any danger, therefore why lager or take any other precautions. Puts things into perspective and lays the blame at the very single point it should be laid: a total lack of intelligence as to what was hapening outside the camp perimeter.

To that degree Durnford has to be classified as being more astute in that he sent Raw, Shepstone etc onto the ridge to try and find out what was happening. Unfortunatly the old story of to little to late.

Regards

Quote :

Pulleine was heard to comment that," what fools we are we should have stayed quiet and let them come on to us so we could give them a sound thrashing."

Who supposedly heard this ?

Its quoted in a letter written by George Banister.

When Pulleine said "we" was it the Royal we?

Having given the "missing Five Hours" a re-read last night, it does make me wonder why the multitude of reports from the vedettes (primary sources) of Zulu movements between the hours of 0530 and 1030 were not acted upon by Pulleine.

Pulleine must have chosen to disbelieve, or at least assume the reports were exaggerated, vague, untrue etc, so did very little in the way of planning defensive measures. If this was so, the very least he could have done, as camp commander, was to get his breakfast finished early, get on his horse and go and check on the Zulu movements for himself.
But it was somewhere between the hours of 0530 and 1030 that he should have been ordering the striking of tents, planning where to situate the square etc.
Only when the more astute Durnford arrived at around 1030 was there any urgency shown around the camp.

Quote :

Having given the "missing Five Hours" a re-read last night, it does make me wonder why the multitude of reports from the vedettes (primary sources) of Zulu movements between the hours of 0530 and 1030 were not acted upon by Pulleine.

Or anyone else for that matter. Why didn't Durnford send a messages after Chelmsford to acquaint him with the information that " Chard" had told him regarding what he saw on his way back to RD. or at least send someone forward to Pulliene to make sure he was aware and that precautions were being made. Ie draw in the camp.. Or setting up ammunition stations, maybe start to form a laggar.

Good points Chard. With hindsight, Durnford could have and even should have sent these messages.
But again, this is assuming that Durnford was in control of the camp, which he wasn't.
Pulleine was in charge of the camp, Pulleine held the rank of Colonel.
Sorry, but as camp i/c in such a senior rank, Pulleine should have performed better.

Chard1879

How an earth could Pulliene laager ??

The waggons were being packed en masse in the waggon park for the camp move. Were is it mentioned that Ammo stations should be set up ? Surly the normal thing is to go to the ammo waggons

Pulliene had lots of reports coming in, but could see nothing. Were where these thousands of Zulus ?
People were joking and welcoming an attack on the camp. He couldn't form a square, he had to defend the camp.

The main Zulu army was 8 miles away being thrashed by the General, firing heard in the morning had confirmed that.

With hindsight its clear mistakes were made, but you need to be realistic.


Cheers

What it all boils down to DB14, is that the 3rd column and its officers to be precise, were complacent and over-confident.

As I mentioned earlier, the army has, to be fair, learned from iSandlwana and we hope will not be making those same mistakes, ever again. I can't think of a similar disaster to iSandlwana caused by such complacency.

You rightly say that much was based on assumption. Pulleine assumed that Chelmsford was right, Durnford assumed that Chelmsford was right, Chelmsford assumed that Chelmsford was right and that HE KNEW where the main Zulu impi were.
But Chelmsford was WRONG. He had been out smarted and out manouevered by the Zulu.

And when we ASSUME, we make an ASS out of U and ME.

:lol:

Hi all

Tasker ecrit :" At least Durnford saw the need to take action and he recognised the seriousness of the gravity of the situation that was developing around the camp."


Not true, if he had believed that the situation was dangerous, he would have remained in the camp to organize the defense.yes or no !

Out he felt that it was LC that was in danger.yes or no !

He did not even ask Pulleine defensive measures during his abscence ...While he was the highest ranking , yes or no !

In fact he did not think the camp in danger, he thought that the Zulu would go after LC.yes or no !

Pulleine be would have done better if Durnford had remained in Natal.yes or no !

There would not even have to battle, if the orders of Durnford had not caused ...yes or no !

The Zulu had no intention of attacking the 22 ,yes or no !

If Durford had not sent the NNH in "mop", there would be no Zulu attack and massacre.yes or no !

Guys like Custer or Durnford are exactly the kind of temperament that causes this type of massacre.yes or no !

I will defend Pulleine to my last breath...



Pascal

We will need to agree to disagree here Pascal.

If it had been left to Pulleine, the entire camp personnel would have been slaughtered where they sat. IMO.

Quote :

Not true, if he had believed that the situation was dangerous, he would have remained in the camp to organize the defense.yes or no !

He had no time to do anything of subsequent, it had all be left to late. Durnford & Pulliene were like two fish left floundering on a beach with no water.

Pascal

You always seem to miss the point. You say that if Col Durnford had believed that the situation was dangerous, he would have remained in the camp to organise the defences. Well Pascal, sorry my friend, but this should have already been done long before the good Colonel Durnford arrived at isandlwana. Pulleine had been recieving reports of zulu activity in the area since the early hours of the morning, he could and should have arranged his defences a lot better than those he had set out to the orders of Chelmsford. Lets have it right, even Chelmsford said that he would expect his orders to be disobeyed if the situation called for it, and let's face it, the situation had changed a lot since Chelmsford left the camp, and was changing by the minute, yet Pulleine could not see the wood for the trees. Pulleine may well have been 'in two minds', but he was in command of the camp, and should have acted upon the reports coming in to the camp about large bodies of zulu's in the area. If only he hadn't gone into the dilly-dally mode, and been more positive rather than negative, he might well have become the hero of the day, instead of looking like a foolish fellow for not organising a better defensive position.

The zulu's saw Col Durnford arrive, they knew that if they didn't get him away from the camp, and quickly, that he would start to get things organised at the camp, which would make their task of destroying the camp harder for them, so they had to get him away before that happened. They knew that Durnford would be duty bound to defend his general if they moved towards Chelmsford, and that is just what they did, they made Durnford believe that the situation was indeed dangerous (towards Chelmsford), to draw him away from the camp and stop him from reorganising the defences, a very clever, and well thought out tactic, and one that worked before when they convinced Dartnell that he was taking on a very large force, and Chelmsford went off with over half of No3 column to confront them, leaving the rest of No3 column behind, just where the zulu's wanted them.

Martin.

Tasker : "If it had been left to Pulleine, the entire camp personnel would have been slaughtered where they sat. IMO."

Pascal : Not because the Zulu had no intention of attacking the 22 is still the thesis of the missing five hours that comes up ...

Tasker : "Not true, if he had believed that the situation was dangerous, he would have remained in the camp to organize the defense.yes or no !"

Pascal : He did not have to prepare the defense of a camp he had to leave ...

Little Hand : " He had no time to do anything of subsequent, it had all be left to late. Durnford & Pulliene were like two fish left floundering on a beach with no water."

Pascal :This is not their fault ...

Martin : "You always seem to miss the point. You say that if Col Durnford had believed that the situation was dangerous, he would have remained in the camp to organise the defences. Well Pascal, sorry my friend, but this should have already been done long before the good Colonel Durnford arrived at isandlwana. Pulleine had been recieving reports of zulu activity in the area since the early hours of the morning, he could and should have arranged his defences a lot better than those he had set out to the orders of Chelmsford. Lets have it right, even Chelmsford said that he would expect his orders to be disobeyed if the situation called for it, and let's face it, the situation had changed a lot since Chelmsford left the camp, and was changing by the minute, yet Pulleine could not see the wood for the trees. Pulleine may well have been 'in two minds', but he was in command of the camp, and should have acted upon the reports coming in to the camp about large bodies of zulu's in the area. If only he hadn't gone into the dilly-dally mode, and been more positive rather than negative, he might well have become the hero of the day, instead of looking like a foolish fellow for not organising a better defensive position."

Pascal : Well if Durnford is so genial and clever than that, having seen the report on the Zulu activitée from 5.30 am to you why did not he fortified the camp or in this brave Pulleine ordered before 11.00 am?.



Martin : " The zulu's saw Col Durnford arrive, they knew that if they didn't get him away from the camp, and quickly, that he would start to get things organised at the camp, which would make their task of destroying the camp harder for them, so they had to get him away before that happened. They knew that Durnford would be duty bound to defend his general if they moved towards Chelmsford, and that is just what they did, they made Durnford believe that the situation was indeed dangerous (towards Chelmsford), to draw him away from the camp and stop him from reorganising the defences, a very clever, and well thought out tactic, and one that worked before when they convinced Dartnell that he was taking on a very large force, and Chelmsford went off with over half of No3 column to confront them, leaving the rest of No3 column behind, just where the zulu's wanted them"

Pascal: The Zulu have rolled Dartnell and LC at the same time, but they never wanted to ride Durnford, they would deploy their army for the next day. Durnford thought they wanted to go after LC ..



Pascal

Pascal

Durnford had only just been informed of zulu activity around the camp by Chard when he was on his way to Isandlwana, Pulleine had been getting reports of this activity since the early hours of the day. Pulleine was in command at the camp, it was his duty to organise better defences, and Durnford would have expected this to have already been done by the time he got there. Col Durnford was very surprised to find that Pulleine had not organised better defences before he arrived, and this, no doubt, is what the row in the tent was about between Pulleine and Durnford. Col Durnford had no written orders to take command of the camp, and in the little time that he had been there, there was very little that he could do before the attack came. The zulu's knew that the longer Col Durnford remained at the camp, then it was possible that he might advise Pulleine about organising better defences, so they had to draw him away from the camp to stop him from doing this. They now played their ace card to draw Durnford away, they make a move towards Chelmsford knowing that Durnford would have to follow them in order to protect Chelmsford flank, they have now got what they wanted. They have led Chelmsford on a wild goose chase to relieve Dartnell, and have now used a similar trick to get Durnford away from the camp, and thanks to the inept Pulleine, the camp is theirs for the taking.

Martin.

Hi all

Martin

The brave Pulleine did what all morning between 5.30 and 11.30 am ?

He still had things to do ...?

What time, the Zulu army was ready to attack her if she had wanted that day ?

What day was it agreed that the camp is abandoned by Pulleine Isandhlwana and his troops ?

The 22 or 23 and what time ? There is no order writed to that effect ...



Pascal

Pascal

I don't think it's a case of what Pulleine did between 05.30 and 11.30, he had done next to nothing since Chelmsford had left, even after many reports of zulu's in the area he hadn't arranged for better defences to be put into place, so you are right, he had things to do, but he hadn't done them.

The zulu army had been getting themselves into position ready to attack the camp, however, the arrival of Col Durnford set back their plans, so they had to draw Durnford away from the camp before he could advise the inept Pulleine to arrange better defences, and what better way of doing this than by pretending to be moving towards Chelmsford. They knew that Durnford would have to protect his general from being outflanked, and so they cunningly made the move towards Chelmsford in order to draw Durnford away from the camp. Once they had done this, they were now in a position to attack the camp, and they made their move, which roughly coincided with Raw discovering them in their concealed position. So there was no set time for the attack, it was a matter of drawing Durnford away from the camp before he could advise Pulleine about better defences, then attacking it before any better defences could be put into place.

Pulleine would not know when Chelmsford would require him to follow on with the remainder of No3 column, he would be awaiting orders for that, and this, IMO, was the reason why Pulleine dillied and dallied, instead of using his head and arranging better defences after getting all the reports of zulu activity, even Col Durnford was shocked that Pulleine had done nothing to improve the defence of the camp.

I can't see a vast army of zulu's gathering to attack the camp, then waiting for another day to do it. They had drawn Chelmsford off with over half of No3 column so that they could attack the remainder of the camp, however, Col Durnford had arrived which set back their plans, so they cunningly tricked him into leaving the camp by moving towards Chelmsford, they knew that he would have to try to protect his generals flank, and the trick worked.

Martin.

Hi
Where is your evidence (source) on Durnford being 'tricked' away from the camp?

Hi Mr Cooper

Durnford posted some NNC at the top of Isandlwana, they were asked to report, as they couldn't see anything, they
reported that the Zulus had gone, a report that came down to durnford pharsed that the Zulus were retiring everywhere.

No Zulu decoy i'm afraid.


Cheers

Hi
Just wondering where Mr Cooper got this FALSE information from.

'Zulu the heroism and tragedy of the Zulu war of 1879' by Saul David.

Page 123 will give you the information you require.

If this is FALSE then I suggest that you take the matter up with Mr David.

Hi
Oh, yes. The same author who wrote the "FICTIONAL" 'Zulu Hart'!!!

warrior3 wrote:

Hi
Where is your evidence (source) on Durnford being 'tricked' away from the camp?

We will probably never find any primary source statements from colonial survivors to say "we were tricked away from the camp."
However, it is quite likely that this was a deliberate ploy by the Zulu commanders at iSandlwana. Cetshwayo is known to have ordered that his commanders try it again, the following month at Khambula:

"Cetshwayo’s instructions being not to repeat the mistake of Rorke’s Drift but to threaten the Natal border and try to lure Wood’s force into the open. "

Reference:
Zulu War by Ian Knight (Pan Grand Strategy). Check the book for the primary source which Ian will have of course refernced carefully.

So whether it was a deliberate ploy at iSandlwana or a fortunate piece of luck that befell the attacking Zulus, either way, Durnford was drawn away from the camp, when his forces would have been better deployed at the camp.
If it were the former, then the Zulus "tricked" Durnford away from the camp. If it were the latter, Cetshwayo obviously analysed and learned from this piece of good luck as he had hoped to successfully re-apply it at Khambula; less successfully this time!

Hi all

Yes, also in Lock and Quantrill's book 'Zulu Victory the epic of Isandlwana and the cover-up', there is much mention of Ntshingwayo's use of decoys and deception being used as tactics to lure mounted troops away from the camp. This is also mentioned in Saul David's book, where it says that a carbineer scout caught up with Durnford to tell him that it was a ruse on the part of the zulu's, and that Durnford was furious at the turn of events, and had to make a fighting retreat back towards the camp.

And let us not forget that Saul David is an outstanding historian, as well as an author of fiction.

Let us not forget also, that the battle tactics of the Zulu, first developed by King Shaka, some 60 years before iSandlwana were highly sophisticated and effective as LC found out. (I don't think everyone who comes onto this forum quite appreciates that).

Hi tasker

Yes, I agree with you there, good post.

Martin.

Tasker
With all due respect, Saul David is not an outstanding historian, he is really only second to Morris in the make it up game. There are far to many instances where he uses fiction to bolster an argument.

Personaly Id rather not use him as a reference source.

Regards

Springbok. Your having a bath.

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

Fair point perhaps, Springbok, but I would put him a little higher up the pecking order than warrior3, DB14 or Pascal, no disrespect intended.

Hi All.
I doubt we will ever know if it was a zulu ruse to lure Durnford from the camp , or it was a case of more luck than good management !. I'm happy to be corrected but I dont remember reading any zulu accounts from Isandlwana where it was said by them that they set out to lure Durnford , or anyone for that matter from the camp .
cheers 90th.

Impi
All that knowledge spread through multiple wars and ages?? Nothing like being focused.
If I need my car fixed it doesnt go to plumber, skilled men though they are.
Hes a popularist, read his books.

Ask CTSG, SD,s biggest fan.

Tasker

hmmmmmmm............marginal.

90th
Would agree 100%.

Regards

Hi all

The Zulu may have wanted to lure LC, but not Durnford, who has lured himself ...

Ok, It is out of the camp to rescue LC, after having read the reports on the Zulu activitée since 5:30, but the Zulu maneuvers were just a setting up of their army to attack the 23, not to attract Durnford in outside the camp, especially the latter, left the camp with 240 men maximum, as well say nothing at all ...



Pascal

Ntshingwayo and the zulus, used quite a few cunning tactics, ploys and deception to draw mounted troops away from the camp, and these are mentioned in Lock and Quantrills book 'Zulu Victory'. Also Saul David mentions the use of this, with a ruse used by the zulus to lure Durnford away from the camp.

They had already used these tactics before when they had convinced Dartnell that he was up against a large body of zulus (which no doubt he was at first). Dartnell sent word to Chelmsford, who then assumed that it was the main zulu army, and set off to confront them, the zulus saw Chelmsford move out of the camp, and also saw that it was not properly defended. The large body of zulus that were near Dartnell, now leave a smaller group behind (to make Dartnell think that they are still there), while the rest of them head to Isandlwana to join up with the main army and prepare for attack.

When they see Durnford arrive, they again use their deception to lure him away from the camp before he can advise Pulleine about better defences (even if Durnford had advised him, Pulleine would have most likely been stubborn enough to ignore him and stick to the defence plans set out by Chelmsford). With their deceptive move towards Chelmsford, they trick Durnford into thinking that they are trying to cut Chelmsford off, which gives Durnford no choice but to try to protect his generals flank, and so he sets off to do this.

The zulus have got what they wanted, Chelmsford has gone off on a wild goose chase with over half of No3 column, they have drawn Durnford out of the camp, and thanks to the inept Pulleine, they can now take the camp because of the lack of proper defences.

Martin.

Good points Martin.
I agree with everyone of those points, except one, which I am still undecided about.
Did the Zulus lure Durnford away, or did Durnford take it upon himself to launch an aggressive patrol against a seen body of Zulu? - happy to be persuaded either way.
Which ever it was, Durnford was drawn - I won't say lured or tricked - but drawn away from the camp, much to the advantage of the Zulus.
The GREATEST deception as you rightly pointed out, was the Zulu luring of Chelmsford away from the camp.
The deception carried out by the Zulus at Mangeni Falls was no doubt intended to either draw a large chunk of the fighting force away from the camp, or to uproot the whole of the fighting force/ camp, in order to attack the column while it was on the move and most vulnerable.

Hi tasker

Thanks again for your comments.

Yes, I can see what you mean, however, I have read through various book about this point, and found that they more or less say the same thing. For instance, Lock and Quantrill make much mention of the use of deceptions used by Ntshingwayo, they also say that when Lt Higginson reported to Durnford that, 'the natives are retiring', Durnford replied, 'Ah! is that so, well then we will have to follow them up'. They go on to say that, Durnford decided to follow up the 'retiring enemy', whom he believed might well be on their way to attack Chelmsford.

Ian Knight says that Durnford rightly realized that the situation had changed since Chelmsfords departure, and he was concerned that zulu movements on the iNyoni heights might be part of a zulu attempt to cut Chelmsford off from the camp. He decided, therefore, not to remain in camp, but to sweep through the iNyoni hills, with a view to securing Chelmsford's left flank.

Again, Saul David mentions Lt Higginson telling Durnford about the zulus retiring, and Durnford saying that we will follow them up, and that as he rode up the valley, Durnford could see zulus retreating along the Nqutu Plateau, causing him to remark: 'If they are going towards the General we must stop them at all hazards'. He then says about the carbineer scout overtaking Durnford to tell him that 'it was a ruse on the part of the zulus, as the great army was now appearing, and would attack the camp'.

So, it does appear that Ntshingwayo had used his deceptions again, and that Durnford had been (as you rightly say), DRAWN out of the camp.

Either way tasker, it was clever tactics used by the zulus, and in particular Ntshingwayo.

Regards.

Martin.

Hi Martin / Tasker .
All valid points which have been seen to be fact by many people , but , as I said in my previous post ; If it was indded a ruse by the ' Wily ' zulu , why have they never announced or taken any credit for this type of action ? . As I said I've never read a zulu account anywhere that I remember were its stated '' We Lured Them from the camp so we could split their forces '' . Sorry I dont think I buy it . If anyone can show first hand statements from any of the zulu command I'm more than happy to be persuaded .
At the moment I believe it's a case of ' More good luck than good management ' .
cheers 90th.