Bogus claims to having taken part in the defence of the mission station Rorkes Drift.

Thought it would be a good excercise to try and list the names of those who claimed to have been at Rorkes Drift during the Battle.

This one must have claimed to have been a VC winner at Rorkes Drift.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
This one we know already posted on forum.

"Walting" was a lot easier and probably a lot more prolific in the pre-internet days.

God Bless the net?.

Not too bad, four since yesterday.  

Ray63 wrote:

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

Interesting that no one from the military is mentioned as having attended his funeral?

There must have been many 'Old Soldiers' back in day that told their stories in pubs for a pint or two, and much of it must have been believed by others as being 'fact', so when the old bloke passed on, they would most likely assume that these tales were true and that is why they get credited with being somewhere they weren't. It is a good job there are some good researchers and historians who can delve into these sort of things and get to the bottom of it all. I wonder if there has ever been headstones, etc, that have been altered after it was found out that the 'old soldier' was fibbing about his whereabouts?

24th wrote:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
This one we know already posted on forum.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Liverpool Echo 22 January 1927

Well , what can one say ....... So much rubbish in that story , wonder what the actual veterans would've though reading that ! .
90th

The biggest bogus claim as to having taken part in the defence of the mission station at Rorkes Drift must be by the 1964 film Zulu itself, where it was stated that the regiment was called the swb, when in fact that could not have been possible, as it did not exist until 1881, two years after the AZW.

The actual regiment involved hardly ever get a mention because of the hoax created by the almost fictional film, and it is about time that this injustice to the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) Regiment was rectified. This deliberate falsehood should be corrected, and an end put to the myth of the regiment being welsh and called the swb. The honour and glory should be rightfully returned to the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment and to the mostly Englishmen that served in it, and not credited to a regiment that did not exist during the AZW that was created by the mythological imagination of Baker.

All very true, Martin. But how to do it? A disclaimer or erratum at the beginning of the film would detract and, at the end, would somewhat diminish the impact of the film. I think personally it's better to leave it alone and then afterwards, when people say 'Did it really happen?', it can be said, "Well actually..." The film does at least generate interest in, and advertise enthusiastically the ZW!

But for Stanley Baker’s successful 1964 film ‘Zulu’, few people would have heard of the disaster of Isandlwana and the heroic deeds that took place at Rorke’s Drift on 22/23 January 1879.

Filmed mainly in South Africa and despite the restrictions of Apartheid, Baker achieved the support of the Zulu nation and in the process invested much of his own money.  He needed this commercial venture to be a success.  To promote the completed film in the U.K., it was necessary to represent the 24th Foot by its current name ‘South Wales Borderers’.  The purpose of ‘Zulu’ after all was entertainment not a factual documentary.

At the time of the Anglo Zulu War, the 24th permanent depot had been at Brecon for 6 years.  Previous army structuring a century earlier had allocated ‘Country titles’, but this scheme failed because regiments were not allocated permanent bases related to their title.  The 24th recruiting company was never based in Warwickshire.  Recruits tended to come from the poorer districts of large cities and Ireland.  From Norman Holmes’ brief analysis of the defenders of 24th at Rorke’s Drift, 49 came from England, 16 from Ireland, 1 from Scotland, 32 from Wales and 2 were born overseas.  Of those born in England out of the total of 122 24th defenders only 4 came from Warwickshire.

Perhaps, we should deny North Londoners in Islington from supporting Arsenal Football Club, the oldest Premier League Team, because the team originally came from Woolwich, south of the Thames.

Then there is the more senior ‘Warwickshire’ regiment – 6th Foot – later the Royal Warwickshire Regiment – then the Royal Warwickshire Fusiliers – finally The Royal Regiment of Fusiliers.  Of today’s 12 British infantry regiments, only two remain with a county title (Lancashire and Yorkshire).  Yet, on 2023 Coronation parade, The Royal Welsh proudly carried their Colours with the Zulu War battle honour and the Silver Wreath granted by Queen Victoria to the Noble 24th on the pike of the King’s Colour, that memorable day.

Perhaps, Mr Cooper’s anger ought to be really addressed, not to this forum, but to the War Office, who continually make necessary charges to the army’s structure to reflect modern defence needs and requirements.

‘Hats off’ to Sir Stanley Baker who brought us, history, fine heroes, and entertainment in style.

Hi Kenny

Completely agree. I have been avoiding addressing this subject since joining the site. I have read Mr Cooper's comments and others throughout all the threads, and how a Welshman will always be put down if they have a view, it's the same on other sites also.
I agree, the film was not a documentary, Stanley Baker brought an old, almost forgotten Colonial conflict back into our thoughts, and a great job he did.

Your point about restructuring has been pointed out to
mr Cooper many times In the past by Bill the curator at Brecon and others.
On that point, it was and still is the same regiment today, carrying the same battle honours and colours it always has, just under a new name. Just as the 24th Warwickshire did in 1879, being by then an English regiment in name only.
I know that statement will upset some, but I'm not going to argue over it, that's my opinion, and the reason i believe that has been highlighted by Kenny.

The point about the film calling the regiment the SWB, it didn't, it mentioned the 24th Warwickshires throughout, in his narration Richard Burton mentioned the SWB's in the here and now 1964, not back in 1879, it's just something the English like to jump on.

On the point of numbers you will always get the Monmouthshire issue raised In most sites, which is laughable. without going into politics to much, there was never an Act of Union between England and Wales, Scotland yes through Royal marriage, we were always occupied. There was the Welsh Land Act of 1536 that allowed England to Administer Monmouthshire, it did not make the county part of England, just Administered by them, it has always been part of Wales. When that Act went through Parliament there was not one representative from Wales present to vote on it, it was voted on solely by the English Parliament, there was no MP representation from Wales at that time, not until after the bill had been past.
An old historian in 1901 coined the phrase, and the Act,  "The Act of Union" which it never was.

At the defence of RD there were but one Company, B Company of the 24th, and a small number of other Corps, those Corps admittedly raising the English numbers.
It does not reflect on the nationalities or numbers of Welsh or Englishmen in the two battalions or the whole regiment of the 24th, the whole regiment by January 1879 we can be pretty sure was predominantly Welsh. Even the Commanding officer Lt Col Degacher said so in his letter to the council of Brecon, fought predominantly by your Countrymen.

Respect

Eddie
I broadly agree except there are some factual errors in your post re Monmouthshire and re the "whole" regiment being predominantly Welsh by 1879. These are not worth pursuing here.
I would also say that no-one on the site "puts down" the Welsh - many of us have strong connexions to Wales. Broadly speaking it is totally inaccurate to refer to the 24th (or any other regiment or corps) as anything other than a British regiment.
Kenny
My own figures for the RD 24th defenders give 72 born in England (16 of them in Monmouthshire), 21 in Ireland, 2 in Scotland, 17 in Wales, 3 overseas and 11 unknown.

Hi Julian

That is just the point I was making, manipulated figures to make the English input in the battle even more impressive.
Like you said, these are not worth pursuing here, it's been done to death on other threads, people can make up their own minds on where the Monmouthshire boys affiliations laid.

Well, in the end there are only the figures themselves. One can't manipulate what 'was'.
For some reason nationalities are important to some ZW enthusiasts - I don't think that was something that was significant to the 24th's soldiers at the time.
The important thing is to stick to the truth and the film Zulu does err in many ways- but I suppose which 'historical' film doesn't?! Kenny is right: the film never pretended to be a documentary; it was only ever an entertainment. Where we should apply constructive criticism is for biased documentaries; there have been plenty of those.

This whole Welsh/English thing is broadly not worth discussing. That's mainly because we're dealing with modern concepts of national identity that simply did not exist in 1879.

A man born in Wales or England with Irish parents might have considered himself an Irishman. A man born in Wales to English parents might have considered himself English. A man born in England with Scottish parents might have called himself a Scot. It's virtually impossible to know without asking them. More recent ideas of Welsh identity in particular are products of European nationalism post-WW1 and has grown slightly in our current age of identity politics. As Julian says, they were British soldiers. Often called Britons or English as a synonym.

One fact is indisputable, and that is the Colonel of the 2nd Battalion (Henry Degacher) wrote to the people of Brecon recognising how much the slaughter at Isandlwana would impact the community there. Take from that what you will but I think it suggests a closer link to that area than some would like to concede. He didn't write a letter to the people of Warwickshire!

coldsteel
I agree totally with the first part of your post.
Re the second part, I've always taken Degacher's letter to refer more to the barracks there and its impact on the town of Brecon than his soldiers' origins. Indeed, it would only be G coy 2/24th who might've had men from the town - the 2nd bn. had recruited far more in Wales than the 1st bn. And of the G coy men, the indications are that they came from all over Wales but especially Glamorgan and Monmouthshire - just a few from Brecon town itself. That said, Degacher knew his men better than I do, so you might well be right!

Hi all

Example:
You will find that all Englishmen will say Robert Jones VC was an Englishman because he was born in Bristol , what they don't tell you is that his Welsh parents went to bristol to gain employment, and they probably returned later, for Robert to settle in Wales when he was discharged. Having not looked at my notes it may well have been William Jones.

Another would be Cpl Lyons from Newport and a family connection with Ireland. However I live but yards away from the churchyard where he and his family are buried, just by looking at the gravestones you can tell they had lived in Newport for two hundred years or so. You could imaging them to refer to themselves as Irish Welsh if anything.
Myself for instance, born in Newport in 1959, am I English because of Monmouthshire being Administered by England back then, who joined a regiment formed in 1915 called the Welsh Guards, was it an English regiment back then. What we know is it's a British regiment who's affiliations are to Wales, as was the 24th by 1879. By the way, I class myself as Welsh and it's on my birth certificate as such, no matter where I was born, but my mother was from Birmingham.

The point is as coldsteel has pointed out, who are we to decide their nationalities, only they could have done that.
On the point of Lt Col Degacher I believe he was being sincere in his belief that the regiment as a whole was predominantly Welsh.

Respect.

...and we all have passports issued by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (or in 1879 Ireland).

In late Victorian times, almost every British infantry regiments contained a mixture of men from many parts of the U.K. During the Anglo-Zulu war, the 24th Foot was no exception, and their soldiers were proud to follow the Colour bearing the title ‘2nd Warwickshire’.

Mr Cooper’s continuous rant about the use of ‘South Wales Borderers’ in the film ‘Zulu’ appears based on its use by Stanley Baker supported by the voice of Richard Burton. As I said in a previous posting, the movie was interpretation of what happened on 22/23 January 1879, for Baker the venture had to be a commercial success. This he undoubtedly achieved and brought the events of those 24 hours in Zululand to a worldwide audience. Without Baker’s efforts, this forum probably would not exist. With a budget of £0.6M, it made $8M in the US alone.

You could also argue that Nigel Green (6’ 4”) was the inappropriate actor to play the part of Colour Sergeant Bourne in ‘Zulu’. The latter being only 5’ 4” tall and only age 26. Many have suggested that based on actor Green’s performance as the seasoned Colour Sergeant that Bourne should have been awarded a VC.

I have many times sat on the veranda of the now rebuilt hospital building at Rorke’s Drift at 4 pm on 22 January and feeling a chill and much apprehension. I take my hat off to those brave soldiers of 24th who held the barriers against the enemy that day.

Kenny
i fully agree with your comments. I dont believe the issue is about the composition of the Company but more of Martins opinion of Stanley Bakers less than honest tipping of his cap to history.
Im pretty sure that forum members past and present greet Martins coments with a, 'ho hum' and either ignore or treat them with humour. I personally have a vision, a kindly one, of Martin being the roll model for the 'Giles Grandma'.
And yes a brilliant movie that I have watched countless times for its evocative images and passion.

Frank

Hi

I have a suspicion that in the absence of the Internet Stanley Baker concentrated his research mainly in Welsh newspapers. Having read an early publication about the battle and that the regiment changed its name shortly afterwards, combining that with news coverage of the day , 1879, came up with the idea for the film.
I don't think his intention was to be dishonest to history, as the 24th Warwickshires are mentioned throughout Richard Burtons narration. As I said above, Richard mentioned the SWB in the here and now, as in 1964, and not 1879.
In the endeavour to save money and probably under the impression that the regiment was mainly Welsh affiliated, the impression you do get in the press of the day, might be the case that that's where he gained his knowledge for his film. Yes admittedly including the Welshmen singing Men of Harlech was against reality, but he was making a film to entertain. On that point, although not at RD, after the battle of Ulundi, a Welsh soldier wrote home after the battle and said they sang to the tune of Men of Harlech on the march. Could this be where Stanley got his idea from, more than likely. I will have to dig that letter out.

Anyway, a lot of money has been made over the years on the back of Stanley Bakers resurrection of that great battle, and a great achievement it was too.

The screenplay for film Zulu was written by English author (born in Islington) John Prebble OBE (1915-2001) whose earlier work published included, interestingly, about Scottish history. The screenpay was based on his article entitled 'Slaughter in the Sun' publised in the magazine Lilliput in 1958. The Lilliput was one of the magazines in the barbers you read while waiting to be called forward to have your hair cut.

In 1964, there was little published about the Anglo-Zulu campaign; even Donald Morris's 'The Washing of the Spears' did not appear until 1966.  No Ian Knight, John Laband, Norman Holme, or Ron Lock, etc to refer to.  They were fired up by the appearence of 'Zulu'. Those days it was hard graft, no scans or digital cameras.  You had to physically visit the archives and libraries.

Richard Burton NEVER mentioned the 2nd Warwickshire's at all during his narration. It was William Jones born in Bristol NOT Robert Jones. All said and done at the time of RD it was an English Regiment, the 2nd Warwickshire, FULL STOP, just look at the glengarry badge.

Hi jgregory

I knew it was one of the Jones's, still his parents were Welsh and went to Bristol for work, who's to say what nationality he perceived himself to be.

Yes the regiment had an English name back then, and with respect to all who served wearing the glengarry, in my opinion, it was in name only by 1879, and we are all entitled to our opinion.
Take a look at the film again, he mentions the 24th of foot straight away, in his opening narration. Admittedly after mentioning all the VC recipients being in the 24th foot, then when he comes to mentioning Bromhead he does mention the SWB's. All In all it was a film to entertain, which has been said in previous posts.

Sad to see the Welsh dislike of the English creeping in in this discussion.

Danny did you ever get around to looking at the items I sent you?

Hi Eddie, sorry but the 2nd Warwickshire name is never mentioned. As we all know in 1879 the 24th was an English Regiment. Burton in his narration does mention the 24th of Foot but only at Isandlwana. Yes the film is just a film although it is annoying the way some of the English soldiers are portrayed. Just Bakers way I suppose of showing his dislike of the English. Although he played the hero !!!

Hi Danny1960

With respect, there is no intention to dislike the English in this discussion, after all, the same could be said about the Welsh in many previous discussions. I pointed out above that my mother was English, I have nothing against the English at all.
I also said that that was my opinion, and we are all entitled to one, it does'nt mean that someone is anti English if they have a view.
I also said above that I avoided this subject since I joined the site, as it has been done to death in many threads on here. I also said I wasn't going to argue the case because of that.  I only gave my view as I see it, right or wrong.

Regards

Well, there are a lot of lame excuses for the way that Baker had this almost fictional film made.

You know as well as I do that the regiment was raised in Kent, England, and went under its colonels name until line numbers came into being, it was then numbered the 24th regiment of foot. That title only lasted a few short years until regiments were given county titles, the 24th becoming the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment of foot, a tile it held for the best part of 100 years, longer than any other title it ever held, and it was under this title that the regiment fought in the AZW, at both iSandlwana and RD.

Baker deliberately left out the regiments real title and just said 24th, but it was only the 24th for a few short years, the name Warwickshire was NEVER mentioned.

The false welshness in the film is over done far too much, just to con viewers into believing that the regiment was a welsh outfit. The (supposedly) welsh soldier, saying, "this is a welsh regiment with a few foreigners from England in it", what a load of tosh, you know as well as I do that it was the other way round. Then there is Ivor Emmanuel saying about Bromhead letting them have a welsh male voice choir, and later the sing off that never happened, with M o H as the regiments song, when in actual fact it was The Warwickshire Lad. The mention of the regiment being at Brecon when neither Battalion had ever been to Brecon, they were moved there on paper only, the the mentioning of welsh place names to give the viewer the false impression that most of the men came from wales. The roll call that mentions welsh names that were not there, the horrible way the film portrayed Henry Hook V.C. , his family walked out of the preview in tears and disgust.

Baker was an anti English welshman, he had a massive chip on his shoulder and saw his way into making this film to ignore the actual regiment and the mostly Englishmen that served in it, and turn it into an almost fictional fantasy. He deliberately added loads of false welshness, and totally ignored the real title of the regiment, and through this hoax he created the myth of the regiment being welsh and called the swb, which many gullible people still beleive to this day. And to top it off, the anti English welshman Baker played the part of an English officer (perhaps because there were no welsh officers for him to play), he played the part of Lt Chard V.C. , and made himself the hero.

No matter how you try to make it appear, history will show that the regiment was called the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment of foot, NOT the swb, the swb did NOT exist during the AZW.

The film needs to be remade with the real name of the regiment that did the business at Rorke's Drift, The 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment of foot.

Mr Cooper, well said you are 100% correct. Dalton was treated terrible in the film as well, he was portrayed as a quivering wimp. I cannot understand why some people will not accept it was the 2nd Warwickshire Regiment.

Hi

I think we all agree and accept that it was the 2nd Warwickshire Regiment, I don't think anyone on this thread said it wasn't.

It was made like that because Baker had found out that some incompetent twerp in an office had moved the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment to Brecon (on paper only), a few short years prior to the AZW, however, neither Btln had ever been to Brecon at the time.

So knowing that the general public would know very little about the AZW, Baker jumped on the chance to portray the regiment as being a welsh outfit called the swb, rather than the actual regiment that fought at RD. He therefor included a load of bogus welshness into the film to con the viewers into believing that it was indeed a welsh regiment, and hence give the honour and glory to wales and to a regiment that did not exist during the AZW. Or could it be as I have heard people say "so that they could thrust out and thump their chests and pretend that it was mostly the Welsh that did the business at RD, whilst it was mostly the English that got clobbered at iSandlwana".







The idiot that moved the regiment to Brecon (on paper), should have been shot each morning at dawn until further orders, what a stupid clot.

LOL!!!!! Very funny Springy mate.

Britannia with her brolly and trusty handbag.

You make 'em 'av it Owd Lass.

Yep, baker was certainly anti English as most Welsh are, and it showed in the film

Another anti English post from anti English welshmen, I’ve had private messages explaining away the thoughts of the Welsh on this forum, very distasteful and wholly unacceptable on this forum, good to see the underlying anti British rising to the top on this forum, absolutely disgraceful

Eddie wrote:

Hi Danny1960

With respect, there is no intention to dislike the English in this discussion, after all, the same could be said about the Welsh in many previous discussions. I pointed out above that my mother was English, I have nothing against the English at all.
I also said that that was my opinion, and we are all entitled to one, it does'nt mean that someone is anti English if they have a view.
I also said above that I avoided this subject since I joined the site, as it has been done to death in many threads on here. I also said I wasn't going to argue the case because of that.  I only gave my view as I see it, right or wrong.

Regards

There’s no respect, you set out to create a divide as most Welsh anti English do, I’ve experienced the Welsh ‘ love’ of the English first hand and I can assure you that you rank amongst those people

Mr Cooper, you have set out the history of the 24th from it raising in 1689 accurately.  However, at the time of the Anglo-Zulu campaign, you omitted the fact that the permanent regimental depot was at Brecon and had been established in Wales some six years earlier.

I think you wish the 24th to have a strong ‘Warwickshire’ allegiance.  However, like all British infantry regiments at that time it was an amalgam of men from the whole UK.  Perhaps today, like if you were born a Mancunian and supported Manchester City FC, only one player is a Mancunium – Foden.  It was not until the ‘Pals’ battalions were raised in WW1 that we saw truly soldiers recruited under the title of their home town.

I think you are being extremely hard on Stanley Baker, who brought the deeds of the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) Regiment of Foot during the Zulu campaign to a worldwide audience.

You obviously were not present at the World Premiere of the movie ‘Zulu’ held at the Plaza Theatre in Regent Street, London on 22 January (a good date!) 1964.  Before the film was shown, Baker stood in front of the audience and apologised for the historical changes he had made, but these were necessary to ensure a successful outcome.  The changes (or inaccuracies) were necessary so that the film appealed to the widest audience.  We must be grateful to Sir Stanley’s vision and certainly not denounce him.

As a friend of mine regularly states that Zulu is not a documentary, it is a work of entertainment.

Please let us treat it as such.

JY

Danny1960,
This is why I avoided this subject, up until now, because of the abuse, such as in your post above. I have read all the abuses on previous threads towards any Welshmen with a view, you always get one that becomes abusive.  
You do not know me to make such an accusation, that I am anti English, who are you to suggest such a thing. Have I upset you in a former life or something, as I don't even know who you are.
I have a right to my own opinion, which isn't designed to create a divide as you say, even though it obviously upsets you so much you become aggressive in your writings.
I ask, who is creating a divide with aggressive words such as that in your post. Please refrain from addressing me in such a manner in future, and hopefully have a Decent, mature debate.

No abuse in my posts at all, I was just stating facts, if you go back and read your posts you will see that it’s you who starts with the anti English sentiment, in my experience with the Welsh that anti English sentiment is always bubbling beneath the surface as if they can barely contain themselves, I’ve had all the fake smiles and handshakes believe me, I just never found out from the welsh people I met why they have this hatred for the English, perhaps you could enlighten me, I don’t have to know you to understand what your sentiments towards the English are you in your own posts have disclosed that. I’m more than happy to carry on with the discussion concerning rorkes drift and it’s defenders, and never raise this subject again, but I will not stay quiet and say nothing when there’s yet another attack on a race of people purely because we are English

Danny1960

You are completely wrong in your assumptions, I was born from an English mother and have no anti English sentiment within me. Just because I have a different opinion to you doesn't mean I am anti English, and have  hatred of them, hatred being a very strong word indeed. It means that you can not deal with the fact that someone has a different opinion to yours. You don't have to revert to this verbal abuse.
Now for the record, I have been nothing but respectful to you, and I will point out to you that you are now becoming confrontational and verbally aggressive.
So I suggest you draw a line on your assumptions right there and cease replying to my posts from now on if you can't control your aggressive rhetoric.

Quote: "the underlying anti British rising" that statement surely can't be aimed at me having served my country of Great Britain and Northern Ireland for over 23 years as a member of her Majesty's Foot Guards. As proud as the men of the 24th doing the same back in 1879.

Mr M. Cooper must surely be somebody hitting the wasp's nest for a laugh? Surely nobody could be this belligerent, obsessed and ill-informed for real?

Zulu is a film, not a documentary, and is the single biggest reason any of us are on this forum. Films entertain and then prompt people to go and find out the facts. If you can't cope with the gulf between entertainment and history then you're probably beyond help. Baker was not anti-English, he was vocally against Welsh nationalism and merely had the justifiable pride of being a working class Welsh lad who made it big. He wanted to insert some of that in his film and was entitled to do so. It was his dime and his reputation.

The 24th's connection to Brecon was not simply on paper. This is wrong, incorrect and wilfully ignorant. The depot was was moved there in 1872/3 and many of the officers and men of the 2nd Battalion in particular had been there. The majority of replacement troops fed into the 24th from this point went through Brecon. There was a higher than average quantity of men from Wales in the regiment compared to others despite it not being a regiment as 'Welsh' as say the 23rd. But as I said before, what individual soldiers considered themselves to be is impossible to ascertain and is at best nebulous. Some of us here are treating history like an ill-natured six nations game where we're trying to out sing each other with Swing Low Sweet Chariot and Calon Lan.

The connection to Warwickshire WAS simply nominal. No depot there. No meaningful connection there. None of the accounts or letters written during or about 1879 by those who were there mention 'the 2nd Warwickshire' because it WAS just on paper.

There is no anti-English sentiment here but there is definitely a bit of anti-Welsh. I never thought I'd get the experience of arguing with an ill-informed old barfly outside of a pub!

Mr coldsteel, Mr M. Cooper is just stating the facts that the film does not do credit to the 2nd Warwickshire Regiment. Baker portrayed the English soldiers like idiots, he even wanted Roy Kinnear ( a comedian ) to play Hitch, I have never read a statement from a Welsh person who actually admits that it was not a Welsh Regiment at RD, even the curator at Brecon just says it was the 24th of Foot never says the 2nd Warwickshire. And I have been to Wales on numerus holidays and had so much hostility towards me that I have had to bring the family home early. In one shop we went in there was a card with a person weeing on the George cross flag, disgraceful. never would I go there again.

jpgregory,

Very sorry to hear of your experiences of Wales. Whereabouts was this?

Mr M. Cooper makes few, if any, good points and seems to have an allergy to facts. We all know the South Wales Borderers didn't exist in 1879. They were the 24th regiment of foot with (2nd Warwickshire) in brackets. This was a nominal association. There is no conspiracy, nothing to concede or admit. There was no practical link to Warwickshire.

Baker had no axe to grind against the English. Bromhead, Bourne, Hook, Hughes, Allen, Hitch are all portrayed as competent heroes. He over-egged the Welsh element. That's pretty much all he's guilty of.

No axe to grind !!!! Hook a drunkard, Dalton a quivering wimp, Hitch a slovenly soldier, there was no Hughes at RD. I've been to North and South Wales and in both areas as soon as you open your mouth the attitude changes. Sad really.

I've lived in Wales my entire life and I've never encountered the kind of cartoon anti-English atmosphere you describe.

Seems like we're going to have to leave it there. Good luck to you.