Feedback from the Battlefields

Mr Whybra,
From Lt Banister :
« Whilst wainting up there for orders we heard guns from the camp and I with my glasses saw where our lines of skirmishers were by the puffs of smoke and could also disintguish Kaffir lines ».
Regards

Frederic
In connection with your comments about Durnford and Pope. Go back to your Grainger letter and read carefully.
Grainger was sent out to the right flank with a half troop,
1)he was supplied with ammunition, he /the half troop fired of 40 to 50 each.
2)He was in view of what was happening behind him so he had to be lower down the slope or the tents of the 1/24th would have blocked him.
3) 40 (only40) Zulus charged up the slope.

Where were the rest?
4) he heard a bugle call to retire, he was called back with the cry "Carbineers retire."

That's what Ive taken from the letter.
Place that onto the battlefield and you get a picture of an 'L' shaped defence with gardiner on one leg and the carbineers in line below as the other part of the leg. that's a pretty good defence line.
Theres a lot more in that letter but I wont spoil your fun.

Cheers mon Ami

From Lt Banister (letter written the 27th January to his father)
« Very shortly afterwards the attack recommenced, but they were being held at bay when it was discovered they had got round to the rear and has outflanked us. The retreat and change of front was steadily made and still all was well when their numbers were discovered to be so enormous that Col. Dunrford gave the word to retire immediately »

Frank,
Thank you.
The study of the Granger's letter is not yet finished.
Amitié;
Frédéric

I have to ask the question: Bannister knows this how?

He certainly met at least Essex before to write to his father (in connection to his comment about Pulleine "What a fool fellow is ... and given them a right good trashing").

Frank
Whilst we cannot be certain that AD'c remark to Bradstreet and Gardner were translated into orders, it would be an almighty coincidence that the remarks were followed by witnesses hearing bugles, a cease fire, and then the withdrawal of the whole line.  AD's remarks to Gardner weren't mad casually.  Gardner had been sent by HP specifically to find out what AD was up to. Having found out, Gardner the Staff Officer would have reported back to HP and...logic requires a certain amount of interpolation...after all 'someone' had to have ordered that withdrawal...it wasn't spontaneous (the coy commanders were in no position to confer)...it had to have been AD direct or HP acting on behalf of AD...you know, Booleian logic and all that...
0 + x = 1, what's x?...there aren't exactly hundreds of alternatives...

Love this site. Boolean Logic - was he one of the colonials?

Steve

Morning all
Julian again for the sake of debate ( I did argue at length some time back that Durnford had issued the orders ).
Firstly my wife doing a budget can flatten any form of mathematical logic in seconds, and wasn't it Prof Hawkins that in a lecture jokingly and then more seriously set out to prove that mathematically a wheel cannot turn. Something to do with Parabolic progression I seem to recall.
Anyway I digress.
Our points of agreement,  Durnford or Pulleine were the only ones to have the authority. I would say that it wasnt Pulleine, Gardner, self attached to Pulleines staff doesn't mention orders being given. whilst Essex was down on the line ( I maintain behind the guns).
As above therefore Durnford issues the orders.
There seems to be agreement that two calls were made.
The line retired.

Where we part, even in view of a binary reference, there is no certainty that smoke was having an effect.
The Zulu were being thrashed at distances of 300 or 400 metres. They had advanced in a series of rushes. I would say that was in pauses between the volley fire and the resultant smoke screen.
That smoke screen could possibly only have been there fore ten to twenty seconds, long enough for a Zulu warrior to cover 50 metres.
The logic of the above would tend to explain how the impi managed to get that close to the redcoats.
I don't recall testimony saying the two bugle calls being close together?
The bugle calls are traditionally sent down the line as part of a pre arranged plan, ie: a company order is carried first by messenger with the instruction to act upon with the bugle. Not always but in a circumstance akin to this engagement it would be imperative. Without that happening and a recall being blown, recall to where? How far back? Where is the new line?

My summary therefore would be, as with all things iSandlwana a combination of the line threatened, Durnfords awareness of that and a Smoke screen effect allowing the Zulu companies to close on the line.
Just a thought


" If a mans wits be wandering, let him study the mathematics; for in demonstrations, if his wit be called away never so little, he must begin again."

Hi Frank,
Good to hear that you had a good trip to the battlefields.
Anyone who has used BP ( black powder) or gun powder as formulated by the British in 1879, knows that it burns with copius quantities of blue/black smoke, and any fire, incidentally, involving this material is  characterised by a  deep orange coloured flame and  very intense heat.
Now BP was used in the MH ammunition as a propellant, and the Zulus were smart enough, according to Mehlogozulu if my memory serves me, timed  the fussilades  at Isandlwana by observing the smoke from the firing line, then hearing the bang, and all ducking some seconds later as the 577 grains of lead whizzed harmlessly high over their heads. The Impi knew that if the moved forward quickly they would be safe from the next fussilade. Added to which the density of the smoke at times obscured the target. This is how they gained ground and  telling advantage in the battle.  
So your supposition is on the button, and as for the Boolean link, that too, ie  smoke +bang + duck + forward ( perhaps we need to contrive symbols for these).

Regards

barry

Morning barry
Thanks for the info, its exactly what Pat Rungren told me. As for the formula, leave that to the experts, Im sure Steve will come up with something.

Cheers Mate

I can honestly say that in a career spanning 44 years I never needed to apply Boolean Logic - which is just as well. Turning to more important issues, is there a photo of you on your nag bounding across the African grasslands? I attach a contemporary sketch which I imagine captures a similar moment in history. Please forgive the language used at the time.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Steve

Steve,
Interesting, and took place at Karkloof, to boot. The cultural "centre"

barry

Frank
1.  One last throw of my Booleian logical die...
IF there were huge quantities of smoke, and IF the coy commanders deemed it necessary to move the firing line out of the smoke to get a better view of the Zulus, THEN the line would have moved FORWARDS 30 paces (moving backwards means your view is still obscured).
But the line didn't move forwards, it moved backwards, it withdrew steadily all the way to the camp.
Ergo, the smoke was not the cause of the line moving.  There is a distinct lack of historicity.

2.  Next, a series of Zulu rushes while the smoke cleared in 20 second bursts is not backed up by testimony.  Lying on the ground pinned down by volleys every time they tried to stand up was the norm in the Zulu accounts which go on to say that it was one mad final rush following a triumphal shout of encouragement-cum-taunt to the umCijo which was taken up by each iButho in turn down the Zulu line.
If there were a series of rushes which gave them success, it would have been strange for the Zulus not to have repeated the lesson at Kambula and Ulundi.

rusteze
Just think...44 years and you're still learning. Isn't life wonderful?
And Booleian logic works - that's why it's logical.

Morning Julian
Nope, the line would move backwards to avoid walking through your own fog, your then creating space between yourself and the screen and giving time if anything pops through it ( lessons in Tank Commanding from my own army days)
Your second point fire was effective at 400 yards, the impi was pinned down solid at 300 ( My photos just posted show the ground and slope ) a 300 yard dash would be a minimum of 40 seconds for an Olympian never mind the ground conditions. So the point I make is yes there was a final dash, from close range but the Zulu had to get to that point to start with.

Unfortunatly for the Zulu they just never seemed to learn from their previous battles. Inyezane iSandlwana Gin Gin I love you et al. Tradition tradition and more tradition Im afraid.

Anyway always nice to bandy words and ideas.

next...................................................................

I mentioned opening this string that Talana had acquired letters to Cetswayo whilst he was living in London. a small snippet. "Dear Mr King Cetswayo please don't kill anymore of your friends when you go back home its not very polite you know, and if you do then soon you wont have anybody to bring you tea. " That was from an 8 year old girl. Pam McFadden had us in stitches.

Snake oil JW, from a consummate salesman. The Trump doesn't need to read books and neither do I - now that reminds me of another thread.

Steve

Barry
Sorry meant to add, I was up at Helpmakaar, with the drought and the absence of grass I found a couple of points that could well have been the old fort walls. Unfortunatly so slight that it doesn't show up from the camera. But right on the nose of the place we discussed last time.

Cheers

Frank Allewell wrote:

Morning Julian
Nope, the line would move backwards to avoid walking through your own fog, your then creating space between yourself and the screen and giving time if anything pops through it ( lessons in Tank Commanding from my own army days)
Your second point fire was effective at 400 yards, the impi was pinned down solid at 300 ( My photos just posted show the ground and slope ) a 300 yard dash would be a minimum of 40 seconds for an Olympian never mind the ground conditions. So the point I make is yes there was a final dash, from close range but the Zulu had to get to that point to start with.

Unfortunatly for the Zulu they just never seemed to learn from their previous battles. Inyezane iSandlwana Gin Gin I love you et al. Tradition tradition and more tradition Im afraid.

Anyway always nice to bandy words and ideas.

next...................................................................

I mentioned opening this string that Talana had acquired letters to Cetswayo whilst he was living in London. a small snippet. "Dear Mr King  Cetswayo please don't kill anymore of your friends when you go back home its not very polite you know, and if you do then soon you wont have anybody to bring you tea. " That was from an 8 year old girl. Pam McFadden had us in stitches.

+ there would be little chance of stumbling over the dead, you certainly wouldn't want to be moving forward. Not quite the same, but smoke canisters are used to day to allow men to retreat and reform.

"By Bertram Mitford.

The extract following narrative is that of a warrior of the Umbonambi regiment, who was present at the battle; I give it as nearly as possible in his own words :


"My regiment and the Umpunga formed the centre of the impi. When the soldiers in the donga saw that the Kandampemvu were getting behind them, they retreated upon the camp, firing at us all the time. As they retreated we followed them. I saw several white men on horseback galloping towards the " neck," which was the only point open; then the Nokenke and Nodwengu regiments, which had formed the right horn of the im'pi joined with the Ngobamakosi on the " neck." After that there was so much smoke that I could not see whether the white men had got through or not. The tumult and the firing was wonderful; every warrior shouted " Usiitu! " as he killed anyone, and the sun got very dark, like night, with the smoke. The English fought long and hard; there were so many of our people in front of me that I did not get into the thick of the fight until the end. The warriors called out that all the white men had been killed, and then we began to plunder the camp. The Undi and Udhloko regiments, which had been in reserve, then went on " kwa Jim "^ to take the post there. We found " tywala"^ in the camp, and some of our men got very drunk.
We were so hot and thirsty that we drank everything liquid we found, without waiting to see what it was. Some of them found some black stuff in bottles (probably ink); it did not look good, so they did not drink it; but one or two who drank some".

There is actually far to much to ignore as a contributing factor to the line withdrawl. This statement in particular concerns the battle for the saddle but it is indicative of the effects of the firing.

Frank
I hate to mention this but the British at Isandhlwana were not driving tanks.

Impi
The British line moved forward twice to get a better view down into the 'hollows'. There were no British dead for them to be stumbling over.

Littlehand
Thank you. One of several Zulu testimonies (a number of which I mentioned earlier) giving the cause of the British movement backwards from direct observation. Can anyone find one which gives that cause as being so they could move out of the smoke to shoot at us all the better?

Rusteze
Snake oil? From Frank?? Yes, I would buy a second-hand car from him. Every time. Provided it went forwards through fog (or smoke) not backwards.

Rusteze

An Introduction to Booleian Logic for you.

Propositions may be TRUE or FALSE, and are stated as functions of other propositions which are connected by the three basic logical connectives: AND, OR, and NOT.

For example, the statement:

“I will take an umbrella with me if it is raining or the weather forecast is bad.”

A simple Proposition connects the proposition I will take an umbrella with me functionally to the two propositions it is raining and the weather forecast is bad. We can see that the umbrella proposition can be fully determined by the raining and weather ones. In functional terms we can be consider the truth value of the umbrella proposition as the output of the truth values of the other two. We can represent this by means of a simple block diagram (Figure 1).


Figure 1: A Simple Proposition

Rain                                         →
                                                                 OR         →          Take Umbrella
Bad Weather Forecast             →


The meaning of the OR connective is that the corresponding output is TRUE if either one of the input propositions is TRUE, otherwise it is FALSE. Since there are only two possible values for any proposition, we can easily calculate a truth value for I will take an umbrella for all possible input conditions. This produces the Truth Table of the basic OR function:

Raining         Bad Forecast          Umbrella
FALSE           FALSE                    FALSE
FALSE           TRUE                     TRUE
TRUE            FALSE                    TRUE
TRUE            TRUE                     TRUE


We can make the propositions as complex as we require.

For example, if we want to include the proposition I will take the car, we may make a statement such as: “If I do not take the car then I will take the umbrella if it is raining or the weather forecast is bad”. However, to find the correct block diagram we have to state the proposition in a well structured way using brackets to indicate how the proposition is composed. The correct representation is:

(Take Umbrella) = ( NOT (Take Car) ) AND ( (Bad Forecast) OR (Raining) )

Notice that we have changed the IF verbal construction into an equation with binary variables. The block diagram is shown in Figure 2.


Figure 2: Another Proposition

Rain                                     →
                                                          OR          →                
Bad Weather Forecast         →
                                                                                      AND         →     Take Umbrella

Car                                       →          NOT        →


Now try this for yourself:

The firing line will not move if it able to see clearly or it is ordered to stay
The firing line will move if it is not able to see clearly or it is not ordered to stay
(Battlefield Tank Manual Regulations do not apply)

Please stay on topic. You have the opportunity to carry on with your discussions about snake oil and  Napoleon in the off topic section, which has nothing to do with Feedback from the Battlefields.

rester sur le sujet.