Prudent & Foolish Desicions at Isandlwana

Arthur,

I always mention the fact that Sir Henry Bartle Edward Frere was the Commander-in-Chief of H.M. Land and naval forces in Southern Africa. Lord Chelmsford was his General-Officer-Commanding, and therefore Frere's subordinate.

Chelmsford's use of gathered intelligence allowed him to compile the various essays and pamphlets that he had produced prior to the invasion. The facts that he did not adhere to his own suggestions is another matter.

John Y.

What you find when you study the wider context is that there were no outright villains in this. Bartle Frere had been appointed by Lord Carnarvon to pursue the objective of  confederation in South Africa. Frere had had great success in India, during his time as Chief Commissioner of Sindh his good work ensured that the province remained quiet during the mutiny.  Carnarvon had pulled of a major coup by bringing about confederation in Canada, providing a constitution that survived for over a hundred years. But during Frere's time in South Africa three elements came together to catastrophic effect. Carnarvon was replaced back at home, the Transvaal Boers were not going to accept confederation if they were not permitted to take over Zulu land. And Chelmsford was hamstrung with too few forces and no time to achieve the objective of defeating the Zulu before London discovered what was going on and called a halt. Frere took the gamble, Chelmsford was over confident, and a perfect storm occurred! At the end of the day it was a clash of cultures, not British and Zulu, but British and Boer. Took some time to resolve! Discuss.

Steve

So when Frere issued his ultimatum's, his intentions wasn't to draw the Zulu nation into a war?

John

Frere's ultimatum was most certainly to draw the Zulus into a war. But the aim of that was to subjugate the only force that was going to prevent the Boers gaining the land they wanted and refusing confederation (you might argue they would have refused it anyway). The war was a way of enforcing the boundary changes. Remember the British had crowned Cetshwayo king with great ceremony, I think he would have quietly gone along with confederation of his kingdom had he not been faced with the continuing encroachments from the Transvaal Boers.

Steve

90th wrote:

Hi Arthur
From memory , I don't think I've ever come across a statement from a Zulu stating their intention was to lure LC away . Let's face it , how would they know the British were going to separate their force in the first place , and to be honest , I doubt they , the Zulus even thought of it . The Zulu never attempted to lure part of the british force away from their camps later in the war , I believe it wasn't part of their strategy to begin with .
Cheers 90th

Who else would have gone to Dartnell's assistance bearing in mind they thought they had found the main impi.
LC took enough men, and left enough men at Isandlwana to look after the stores.

We know the Zulu's had spy's as we the British did. It wouldn't have taken long for the Zulu's to establish that if they destroyed the camp. (Stores needed for the invasion) it would halt or slow down the invasion.

One question.Why did those Zulu near Dartnell create so many fires, was it not to give the impression, there was a large Zulu army. Does that not show, that some kind of decoy plan had been instigated.

Many thanks again. Just a thought in the back of my open mind. (rather ignorant and empty one at that). I find that quite often in life we tend to limit ourselves by having a bit of a closed mindset. Must apologise for an earlier reference regarding the acquisition of intelligence as I meant to refer to Fynn' s intelligence. Really need to get all these names sorted in my head. Plus the sizes of the various troops, their movements and corresponding dates. As to a timeline, I shall not worry at this stage as it would seem that there are too many accounts and variances differ by a number of hours. Further questions from myself (in due course) will be found in the General Discussion forum as I think that applies better at this stage. Thank you all for your responses.

Arthur have you read TMFH by Peter Quantile & Ron Lock.

Click on link below

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

Be interested in your thoughts.

impi wrote:

Arthur have you read TMFH by Peter Quantile & Ron Lock.

Click on link below

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

Be interested in your thoughts.

Many thanks for that. I haven't read it as I, in my ignorance, didnt know it existed. However, I have now printed it out and laid it aside for tonight's reading.

Thank you very much Please could I encourage any other links, ideas and suggestions. Ignorant, but hopefully not stupid and very willing to learn and listen/read.

Many thanks for the responses. I have almost finished my rough draft of a timeline of events leading up to the 22nd and just need to fill in quantities of troops involved before refining it all. As to who was ultimately responsible, one could argue it all the way up to the Queen, I suppose as the troops that died were there in an attempt to extend and secure the Empire. Mistakes and poorer decisions are made from time to time and unfortunately, in war, many lose their lives as a result. However, I think it is worth assessing matters so that one can learn form the mistakes and also to attempt to not unduly burden the wrong people for mistakes they did not make.

I still have quite a bit of material to read but appreciate any info as well as thoughts and insights or suggestions.

May I ask, if at all possible, for source references to be included for observations such as to the many fires that were made by the Zulu in order to keep fact from fiction or assumptions? In my own few readings of my limited material to hand at this stage, I have no references of these and would very much like to add any such references to my rather quickly growing collection.

Just out of interest what was the effective range of a Snider Carbine.

LH. Your probably right.

It would seem that the effective firing range was 600yards (550m) according to the Wikipedia site [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Arthur
I look forward to seeing your timeline.

Frank Allewell wrote:

Arthur
I look forward to seeing your timeline.

Thank You. I should have it done in a week or two due to time constraints and work demands. Then it's just a check for permission and consent(?) where may be relevant so should have it ready to share by the first week of December. I will be using some established and published information, but am adding sizes of troops etc to it as I find that rather necessary to an initiate such as myself who is not familiar with many aspects of the battle, the terrain, movement possibilities and distances etc but will refer such to experienced folk knowledgeable and experienced in those fields themselves through personal experience.

I apologise if I offend anyone anywhere as it is not my intention to do so, but experience has taught me to trust rather that which I can verify and hence, the timeline and my work will be able to stand on it's own merit and the strength of verifiable facts as far as is humanly possible. All too often, I have seen the results of assumptions.

I believe that there is a possible seperate thread for timelines and humbly ask that admin redirect or move this post if it is the wrong place. Apologies if this is the wrong place, but I am still learning my way around the site.

Regards
Arthur

Hi Arthur,

There has been some on-going work on a timeline but I think that it may have got a little bogged down at the moment. I look forward to seeing your timeline, I'm sure that it will spark some debate, which is always welcome.

Waterloo50