Gardner's testimony wih the sentence "entrench it" about the camp

Posts : 2268 Join date : 2010-10-22 Location : France

Bonjour,
There was some doubts in the past on this forum ("Durnford was is capable 5" / feb. 24 2015/ Frank Allewell/ Julian Whybra...) about the testimony given by Gardner and his last comment "entrench it":
"I left the force with the General about 10.30 a.m., and rode back to Islandana [sic] camp with the order to Lt Col. Pulleine to send on the camp equipage and surplus of the troops camping out and to remain himself at his present camp and entrench it".

On this subject there is an insteresting comment given by Glyn.

In a third memorendum, dated 26 february, Glyn responded at some length to Crealock's comments (...):
"The only order, to my knowledge, sent to the Officer commanding the camp at Isandhlwana that day was one issued by order of the Lt Gl to send out the tents, etc, of the force with the Lt Gl to the place where that force was to form a fresh encampment. Major Clery took the Lt-Gl's instructions to this effect down in his note book, and tore out the page on which they were written and sent it into camp. Major Clery informs me that he read over this message to the Lt Gl before sending it, to make sure he quite understood what His Excellency required done. He further adds that this message had reference to nothing except what concerned a part of the camp.
Captain Allan Gardner, 14th Hussars, was given this message to take into camp, and Major Clery states that he read this message over with Captain Gardner, as he gave it to him, to ensure his knowing its contents should any accident happen to it."

Source: Quoted from"Dead was everything" by Keith I. Smith

For Glyn, no instruction given to Gardner about the defense of the camp ...

Cheers

Frédéric

Posts : 2871 Join date : 2010-06-02

It's a good point Frederic. There is a clear discrepancy between Gardner's evidence and Glyn's statement. I have double checked the originals at Kew and they are exactly as quoted so it is not a transcription error. Gardner does not seem to be strongly supporting Crealock/LC's line however - the main point he makes is that if a cavalry regiment had been available (or a few squadrons) they could quite easily have prevented the Zulus flanking movement around Durnford and hence avoid the defeat. He is of course a cavalry man! But he does not give the impression he is part of any attempt to blame Pulleine for not entrenching. So, how to explain the discrepancy?

Steve

Posts : 2268 Join date : 2010-10-22 Location : France

Steve,
I'm pretty sure Glyn wrote what he thought was the truth about the order given to Gardner for Pulleine: his memoredum intervenes in full debate about the blame for the disastrous ( a "fight" between him and Chelmsford-Crealock).

How to explain the discrepancy?
Maybe the memory of Gardner is simply deficient? (personally, I am not convinced by this hypothesis Very Happy

)
For example, in his official evidence to COI (only given a few days after the disastrous) Gardner was to recall: "i may mention that a few minutes after my arrival in camp, i sent a message directed to the Staff Officer, 3rd Column, saying that our left was attacked by about 10.000 of the enemy".

Actually the content of the message was (as you know):
"Heavy firing near left of Camp.
Sheptone has come in for reinforcements, and reports the Basutos falling back. The whole force at Camp turned out and fighting about one mile to left flank".
Alan Gardner,
Captain, S.O.
(Quoted in "death was everything" by Keith Smith)

In his official evidence to COI, Gardner gives an impression of immediate danger for the Camp ("our left was attacked by 10.000 of the enemy"), which is not the case in the real message he sent...

Cheers

I.E: Last week, i made my first order to the "National archive" for a copy of reports on the Zulu war.
I am impatient to receive it!!!

Posts : 2268 Join date : 2010-10-22 Location : France

About the point "if a cavalry regiment had been available" there are some thoughts on this subject by Damian O'Connor in his essay "The missing cavalry ; A footnote to the history of the AZW" but i am Off Topic

Cheers

Posts : 2268 Join date : 2010-10-22 Location : France

From Steve (24th February 2015 / Durnford was he capable 5):

Chelmsford wrote to Bartle Frere on 23 January to inform him of the disaster at Isandhlwana. In it he says the following.

"The troops left in camp consisted of five cos. 1/24th, 2 guns RA, about 20 Mounted Infantry, 30 Mounted Police and 30 Natal Volunteers. The whole was under the command of Lt. Col. Pulleine 1/24th.

The rocket battery under Capt. Russell RA and five troops Mounted Basutos, the whole commanded by Colonel Durnford RE arrived at the camp in the course of the day that the camp had been attacked.

I had previously sent direction... (word illegible) the camp struck and moved to the point where the force was then operating against Matyan."

So no mention of a partial packing up, or entrenching for those who remained. He reports that he directed the camp to be struck.

Posts : 2268 Join date : 2010-10-22 Location : France

Lord Chelmsford minute statement, 19 march 1879 /TNA WO 33/34 Enclosure i in n°101/

"After captain Gardiner [sic] had delivred the message regarding the sending out of the tents and camp equipment to Lt-Col Pulleine at about 11:30 a.m. , it would seem that the latter Officer sent a message back to the effect that he was not able to carry the order at that time. This message was not received until quite late in the afternoon of the 22 January 1879, and as it contained no allusion to any danger from attack or any request for assistance, i feel that my assumption that no danger was anticipated must be correct".

(Quoted in "dead was everything" p.144)

Again, no mention of entrenching the camp for those who remained...

I.E: Frank: about your hypothesis (Younghusband), note that "This message was not received until quite late in the afternoon of the 22 January 1879" Wink

Cheers
Frédéric

Posts : 2268 Join date : 2010-10-22 Location : France

In conclusion:

1°) Gardner certainly never receipted a message for Pulleine with the sentence about the camp "entrench it";

2°) Only a moving part of the camp was planned (at this moment);

So the question, why this sentence ?

As Steve wrote: "Gardner does not seem to be strongly supporting Crealock/LC's line however" and " he does not give the impression he is part of any attempt to blame Pulleine for not entrenching".

-Today i gave an explanation (faulty memory);

-Frank Allewell wrote: "For Chelmsford to order the camp to be entrenched is completely illogical. It makes no sense at all. I would hesitate to accuse, but I don't believe that message came from Chelmsford, at that time". (24 february 2015 / "Durnford was he capable 5?")

-Mr Julian Whybra wrote: "Frank, For what it's worth I am inclined to agree. But still we are left with Gardner's exact words. Perhaps he was repeating hearsay from those around LC before he left the Mangeni. Perhaps it was supposition on his part. As this was part of his evidence at the CoI, Chelmsford would have been able to correct the statement, but he didn't.
It's something which has to be borne in mind. A piece from a different jigsaw perhaps? History can be like that at times.(24 february 2015 / "Durnford was he capable 5?")

Other suggestions?

Cheers.

Frédéric

Posts : 2871 Join date : 2010-06-02

I am not sure this adds anything but here is Gardner's written statement. Note there is a correction.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
copyright National Archives

Steve

Posts : 2268 Join date : 2010-10-22 Location : France

Nice paper!

I can't read the word crossed out under "himself"....

Cheers

I.E: i measure all the suffering in deciphering the copies of the original reports expected from the N.A..... Sad

Posts : 2871 Join date : 2010-06-02

Some are not easy to read. The word crossed out is "myself".

Steve

Posts : 2268 Join date : 2010-10-22 Location : France

Thank you Steve.
It seems to me that "Myself" in the context of the sentence is also possible...but its changes nothing...
Cheers

» A new memorial for the Gardners
» James Hamer testimony concerning time and distance
» Save the Camp