Keith Smith Publications.

I don't know Keith Smith, but generally his work, is mainly based on revised work. I read his essay Charlie's letters, which was ok but based on a fictional character! never been one for revised work, I prefer the original.

Xhosa
And Ive just paid 35 pounds for it, ah well will look good on the shelf
impi
Where did you get the Charlies letters where fictional?
Keith is a brilliant writer, his books are the first I reach for when I need source material. I don't see how you can write him of without seeing his books ! His time frame for Durnford is a class piece of detective work as are quite a few of his essays, very definitely an original author.

springbok, i have the original, i thought
it was a new work that was being
offered! but i agree he knows his stuff.

Yeah I have the other three books, possibly as this is an update there may be some new angles.

yeah rodger that mate, let me know what you think please.

springbok9 wrote:

Xhosa
And Ive just paid 35 pounds for it, ah well will look good on the shelf
impi
Where did you get the Charlies letters where fictional?
Keith is a brilliant writer, his books are the first I reach for when I need source material. I don't see how you can write him of without seeing his books ! His time frame for Durnford is a class piece of detective work as are quite a few of his essays, very definitely an original author.

I can't see where I have written him off! And I never said Charlie letters were fictional. I said Charlie was fictional. Happy to be corrected!

Impi .
Once again you fall short of the mark , how can you possibly say what you said about Smith's work when

1 / you've never heard of him from which I'm not surprised !
2/ You dont own , or have read any of his books .

As Springy has stated his books are well researched and well worthwhile , especially if your wanting an Historian / Researcher's point of view , but as we seem to be quite aware you dont put much credence on their point of view ! . Dont be so precious as to think I'm having a go at you , I'm not , I'm merely stating the obvious , if your as you say you are ( running a successful business ), you obviously must have some ' smarts ' ? . It wouldnt hurt , or harm your standing on the forum by doing some quick research yourself , even try Wikipedia or whatever it's called if you dont wish to spend any of your ' hard earned ' on some of the well known Historian's works . That's completely up to you , but the old saying applies '' Dont go to a gunfight without any bullets ! '' .

I would be gratefull if you could point out what I have said, that is so distasteful?

Impi it isnt a case of you being distasteful , it's the way you say it ! . You dismissed his work as being revisionist , then you say you prefer original items , that's what his work consists of ! , I'm sorry if you dont understand the point I've attempted to make .
You dismissed his work even though you've NEVER read or seen it , and to say that , is a little narrow minded dont you think ?.

I think most prefer the original. Is he not a revisionist. And I did say I had read Charlies letters.
Perhaps his work isn't the same as the likes of Ian Knight ect. Still I'm entilted to my view. What books do you have from Keith Smith!

Of course, it's never been confirmed that Charlie, is who K.S says he is!

I'm not saying you arent entitled to your view , but if you dont have any clue as to what and whom you are dismissing , it makes you out to be rather ill informed , and possessing a very limited point of view on anything you are attempting to debate or debunk ! . You said Charles was based on a Fictional character or the letters were , anyway , I'm sure you know what I mean . !! , it appears he isnt ! . I dont have the Smith books here with me but they are titled , 1 / Select Documents ; A Zulu War Source Book , 2 / Studies In The AZW , 3 / Local General Orders Relating To The AZW Of 1879 . He has written a few others I think dealing with 1877 - 78 , I dont have any of those as yet . Perhaps Les , Springy or JY can shred some light on those ? .

Impi did you not see JY's post ? . If you wish to debunk or critic others you need to be well armed ! . As I said earlier
'' Dont go to a gunfight with no ammunition '' . I assume you see the relevance ?

I wasnt aware I was going into a gunfight! I prefer to read reviews. Keith likes to obtain information from Archives then puts it in to some order. Perhaps it is you, who should find out more about the person you speak off. So yes I would quite happily say Keith was a "revisionist"

Impi my lad , I'm truly sorry you failed to understand the humour and similarity between it and yourself , never mind , back to the ramparts and join your mates ! . How do you know what Keith does , up until a couple of hours ago you'd never heard of him or read his books ? . Did you do as I suggested and visit that fountain of knowledge known as Wikipedia ? . Good on you for trying .

Read the posts. I haven't read his books. I read reviews!

Apart from his newly revised book he has published three works, namely:
"Local General Orders relating to the Anglo-Zulu War, 1879", which is a compilation of military matters concerning the conflict that were published in the Natal press of the time, and is useful in tracing the appointment of Colonial officers.
"Studies in the Anglo-Zulu War", this traces the campaign, using and quoting primary sources within the narrative.
And finally his Select Documents: Zulu War Source Book" which uses the British Parliamentary Papers and National Archive documents, heavily, to describe events as they unfold"

There yer go, done your work for you! So you see, it's a case of taking documents and turning them into a book. A revisionist    Goodnight 90th next time bring some ammuntion with you Lol,

There a big difference in writing a book, and getting permission to publish already written documents?

Extract from Charlie's Letters. Victorian War forum

Notes

1. The letters are in Killie Campbell Africana Library (KCAL) file KCM 89/41/1, “Letters from ‘Charlie’, an unidentified British soldier … stationed at Rorke’s Drift …”. I am indebted to the Director of the Campbell Collections of the University of Natal, Professor Yonah Seleti, for permission to publish the documents.
2. KCAL, KCM 89/41/1/1 (i – ii).
3. See, for example, the letters dated 25th February and 16th March from Captain Walter Parke Jones, Royal Engineers, in Frank Emery, (ed.), The Red Soldier: Letters from the Zulu War, 1879, London, 1977, p. 141f.
4. This is the first indication that the author belonged to the 24th Regiment.
5. The missing Colour of the 1st Battalion was found on the 4th February. The Colour of the 2nd Battalion was never found. See report from Colonel R.T. Glyn to the Deputy Adjutant-General, Colonel Bellairs, The National Archive, Kew, WO 33/34, Enclosure in No. 89; Daphne Child (ed.), The Zulu War Journal of Colonel Henry Harford, Pietermaritzburg, 1978, pp. 48ff; Charles L. Norris-Newman, In Zululand with the British Throughout the War of 1879, London, 1888, p. 116.
6. The bodies of Lieutenants Teignmouth Melvill and Nevill Coghill, 1/24th, were found the previous day, the 3rd February. Melvill was Adjutant of the battalion and Coghill was Orderly Officer of the regiment.
7. Rorke’s Drift, fought on 22/23rd January, 1879.
8. KCAL, KCM 89/41/1/2 (i – vi).
9. A ‘budget’ refers to a packet of papers, or letters.
10. Pietermaritzburg, the capital of Natal.
11. Officers usually had at least two of their own horses and one wonders what happened to those of the author.
12. Fort Melvill.
13. The matter previously recounted about a Pearson victory is an excellent example of a rumour which had no basis in fact, as the writer indicates at the end of the letter.
14. Presumably ‘Military Boss’.
15. The underlining of the letters emphasises the writer’s play on the words.
16. J.P. Mackinnon, and S.H. Shadbolt, The South African Campaign of 1879, London, 1880, p. 192f.
17. Information regarding company officer assignments in the 2/24th is drawn from Appendix VI, in F.W.D. Jackson, Hill of the Sphinx: The Battle of Isandlwana, London, 2002, pp. 69ff.
18. The last entry, dated 22nd January, in the diary of Lieutenant C. Pope, quoted in Norris-Newman, p. 180, says that his company was relieved by one of those of the 1/24th.
19. There is a reference to Lieutenant Curll standing with Captain Harvey and Lieutenant Banister, ‘H’ Company, with officers of ‘F’ Company, looking across the plain towards Isandlwana: account by Lt. H.G. Mainwaring, 2/24th, written on 22 January, 1895 in Norman Holme, The Noble 24th: Biographical Records of the 24th Regiment in the Zulu War and the South African Campaign 1877-1879, London, 1999, p. 197.
20. KCAL, KCM 89/41/1/3.
21. The column to relieve Colonel Pearson at Eshowe was long in preparation and did not cross the Lower Thukela until 29th March, fighting the battle of Gingindlovu on the way on 2nd April and arriving at Eshowe a day later.
22. An expedition to the battlefield had been undertaken on the 14th March by Major Wilsone Black, 24th Regiment, but none of the dead had been buried. See the account of an ‘eye-witness’ in Norris-Newman, pp. 122ff.
23. Perhaps further evidence that the author was Lieutenant Charles Curll: he arrived in Natal on 12 November, 1878. (Holme p. 102).
24. Intombi is the diminutive form of the Zulu noun intombazana, meaning a young girl.
25. KCAL, KCM 89/41/1/4.
26. This is probably a reference to Captain Penn Symons, who commanded ‘D’ Company, 2/24th.
27. Information provided by Hart’s Annual Army List, 1885 supplemented by Holme, p. 102.
28. The day after the battle of Isandlwana; one might presume that Curll received this step as a result of the deaths of Lieutenants H.J. Dyer (Adjutant), Sub-Lieutenant T.L.G. Griffith (commissariat duties), C. d’A. Pope and F. Godwin-Austen (‘G’ Company). Dyer and Griffith had also been out with Lord Chelmsford but returned to the camp with Major S. Smith, R.A., (commanding ‘N’ Battery, 5th Brigade), and Captain A.F. Gardner, (14th Hussars, general staff duties), arriving soon after noon. Major Smith also lost his life.

© Killie Campbell Africana Library and Keith Smith, 2003.

I should add that this paper was first published in the Journal of the Anglo-Zulu War Historical Society, December 2003.

Real Zulu War Authors!

https://www.1879zuluwar.com/t1433-what-do-we-know-about-the-lives-of-the-zulu-war-authors?highlight=Authors

impi, i agree with you! these people with their
historical accurate facts! who are they trying
to impress! Hmmm, were not fooled for a moment!
you just accurately named his three outstanding
works on the AZW. i have by me the oxford
english dictionary and i'm looking at the definition
of the word..revisionist..

Revisionism may refer to: Historical revisionism, the critical re-examination of presumed historical facts and existing historiography.

dont see a lot wrong with that!

Neither does Impi. Keith's work is good, and it's not easy compiling these documents. But when's an auther not an author. When he doesn't write the books.

Hmmmmm so that puts, Ian Knight, Adrian Greaves Prof Laband Mike Snook Phillip Gon plus virtually every single AZW author in the same category for effectively they rehash the same history?
However using that basis, Keith Smith is the most original in terms of his investigative essays and conclusion based factual concepts. For instance:
The hazards of primary sources
The Zulu Bivouac
A Battle Time table
The Eclipse
The hero of Rorkes Drift
The NNC at Rorkes Drift
The isandlwana messages
The Several Captains Barton
The wind blew us back
The Boys in the band
The Queens Color
The Blame Game
The NNC withdrawl from Eschowe
The Lonely grave at Kranskop
The road to Ulundi
Lord Chelsford and Sir Henry Bulwer
Lord Chelmsford and Sir Garnet Wolseley
The Zulu use of Drugs
Major Graves v The Natal Colonist
Chelmsford and Whitehall

I could go on but suffice to say these are all Brilliant essays with original thought and conclusion.
But then again Impi and Dave you would know that having read and studied the, At least I would assume so in reading your erudite criticism of one of todays finest AWZ brains.

If you haven't read them then stop being so bloody stupid and learn about the subject before you spout such absolute crap.

OK Pete whats it to be, suspension, banning?
  

Not your fault springbok! the boys
were out to play last night! like
jerky pelham puppets!. ignorance
on that scale takes your breath
away..and they have produced zip,
nothing, nada, bit sad really.

And a presentation package of small red spherical objects !   

Impi I think you should try reading a book or two otherwise what's the point in reading a review ?
Dave , surely you've read a couple of books on the subject to realize that all the historians dont
just reprint past letters and journals etc etc , they , the Historians must put them together to make them readable , they do this by WRITING ( what Author's do ! ) . As Springbok has listed some of Keith Smith's WRITTEN work
if you get a chance to read Smith's work , you'll find it a lot easier to get a grasp on what we are trying to say .

I had a run in with KIS as he likes to be know, awhile back, for which I was corrected.

https://www.1879zuluwar.com/t1818-keith-smith?highlight=Keith

However, his mischievous comment on another site, regarding this forum showed him to be the man I thought he was. Can't say what that is, because it would mean a life ban for me. Some wounds never heal !!!

Comment made on another site!

"Posted: Thu Jul 01, 2010 11:24 pm

The site reminds me of the quotation by HG Wells: In the country of the blind, the one-eyed man is king. I might also add that they are pretty free with their quotations without attribution. What more can I say? 

KIS"

'Run in' ? Seem to recall to told him to 'go away' in no uncertain terms ?  
Anyway it really means nothing in terms of his writings.
I should add that when vexing questions have arisen on the forum Keith has always been very quick to respond to my queeries and has on occasion really put himself out to help.

  

I never did such a thing! I was merely putting my point across. And if I recall, he had only joined the forum to announce the copywrite issue, and had no intention of posting anything after.

As I say "Old wounds" you can't beat Col Mike Snooks publications.   

They do have their place without doubt. Really the only AZW book that ive ever looked at and 'chucked away' was that bloody awfull piece of fiction by your other favourite.

Yes I do happen to like Mr Gillings, I find his work very informative. I thought you did to. Knowing he was among my Favorite historians.

Kens a top bloke, and you know I wasn't referring to him, stop stirring.

springbok9 wrote:

Kens a top bloke, and you know I wasn't referring to him, stop stirring.

You did say my other favourite! You do you're mean man!!

Some of Smith's work..Local General order's of the Anglo Zulu War of 1879.
2005-2008.
Select Documents;: A Zulu War Sourcebook, 2006-2009.
Studies in the Anglo Zulu War, 2007-2008.
A Lexicon of Zulu Millitary Units, 2008.
The Wedding Feast War: The Final Tragedy of the Xhosa People, 2010.