An excuse for their action at Rorkes Drift

I came across a conversation regarding the killing of the wounded Zulus after the Battle of Rorkes Drift. The person who stated the conversation, firmly believes that what took place was a War Crime. Most probably what did take place was, but was it done because the Zulu was the enemy or was it done purely out of revenge for the atrocities which took place at Isandlwana.

I can except that disembowelment was part of Zulu tradition and the reasoning behind it. But we know there was far more than done than just the disembowelment, we know about the beheading of soldier, the hacking off of jawbones and no doubt far worst. I believe there is a very find line between revenge and War Crimes.

However what I’m struggling with is this.

How would those at Rorkes Drift had know about what happen at Isandlwana. There is those that fled Isandlwana and made it to Rorkes Drift but would they have seen what was happening or had they left before the Zulu had got into the camp area. Those that may have witness some of the atrocities by passed Rorkes Drift so they would not have been able to tell the tale.

So was the killing of the wounded Zulu done because the British lost the Battle of Isandlwana, and for no other reason and once the details of the atrocities had come to light the did the British used this as the explanation as an excuse for their action at Rorkes Drift.

News of the disaster at Isandlwana was confirmed by the arrival of Lieutenant Adendorff. However there is some doubt as to what time he actually left Isandlwana. Either way he would not have known about the carnage you mention.

Now this gives me cause to bring the 259 Private Jenkins discussion into question.

Jenkins mentions in his Letter to his Father. “ The remainder were cut to pieces, - in fact cut in bits” Now if we have evidence to show Jenkins as being at the Battle of Rorkes Drift. Did he get there before Adendorff or after? The fact that Jenkins say’s Cut in bits tells us he must have left quite late into the battle. But it appears both Jenkins and Adendorff were at Rorkes Drift before the Zulu’s attacked.

Could he have told the R.D defenders what he saw, which may have given cause for the treatment to the Zulu's after the Battle. Then of course some of the defenders saw what happen to Private Joseph Williams.

hi ctsg.
Jenkins was at R.D well before Adendorff , in my earlier posting you will see Jenkins , Roy and others were sent back to
R.D with orders to take back prisoners , this may have been done the prevoius day or very early on the 22nd when there
was no threat of an attack on Isandlwana .
cheers 90th.

Chelmie
The simple fact is that even in 1879 the redementary medical techniques were still not up to the catastrophic trauma wounds of the time, even in the American civil war, trauma wound treatment was still a "work in progress" ,amputation, rather than extraction and damaged flesh removal was the treatment of choice.

Given the overloaded medical condition of the moment, a quick "humane" despatch, was considered the best option, these were not the "european" enemy that the British army had expected to fight, but a native army that rhe rule of convention did not apply, a rule that in 1898 at Ondourman still was applied, and, that still applied in 1945 in Okinowa, if he was not dead, then you bl**dy well made sure he was, as he was most likely to jump up and do you, than be treated!.

A man stabbed with a lunger, blackened with the blood of the previous victim, the stinking residue of black powder and bee efluva is going to die of blood poisioning, even if the wound is slight, for a native, when you could barely treat you own, in a pooly sanitised ward, full of your own with gunshot, enterric fever and dystentry, despatch was the only resort,

Victorian society was indifferent to emotion, hence the fact that at Isandlwana, Maiwand, Abu Klea and Ondourman, that prisoners, or wounded on both sides were baggage, and an incumberance not to be taken off the field.

Difficult in todays society to accept, but, and I fear, what would be the fate of a soldier captured in Afgahnistan?, the thought Is hard to imagine and testimoy to our lads out there they will not let it happen, so in the world may move on, but the ethos remains the same.

Neil. If Isandlwana hadn't taken place, do you think the same treatment would have been issued to the wounded Zulus at R.D. or would they have been taken prisoner. I see your point.

But I do recall an incident, I believe with Brown. He asked some Zulu’s why he should not kill them as they gave no quarters to the men at Isandlwana.
The Zulu replied you should not kill us because that is not the way of the white man. Or something along those lines.

There was the case of "Breaker Morant" During the Boerwar.He took no prisoners but faced a firing squad..

Hi Impi. I'm glad you brought up the "Breaker Morant" case. This was posted on the Victorian War forum. Back in May 2010.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I am new to the forum and trust I may add something to the discussion about this case. I am the military lawyer attempting to set the record straight after 108 years of tedious argument and theories on the matter of the trial and execution of Morant, Handcock and imprisonment of Witton. A couple of things, Firstly, it surprised me that the case had never been reviewed in 108 years. Lots of assumptions by so called 'experts' and 'historians' have been made that the men were guilty of murder and received fair trials. I have studied all the books, articles etc on the Morant saga, even comment that the film revealed the 'truth' behind what happened. Having initiated legal action to review the case on petition to the Australian Parliament and the British Crown, I am pleased to say that the matter is being taken seriously and although it may be infuriate historians who have 'staked' their reputations on their writings in favor of Morant's guilt, the fact remains that I have availed myself of a right to review the cases according to the legal traditions of petition, (a right that is enshrined in British history). I personally believe there is sound case for review, believe there were serious errors made in the trial process by the Judge Advocate, the sentences were excessive, the recommendations for mercy not properly considered for Morant and Handcock and possibly the most aggravating feature of the process was the cruel and calculated denial of appeal rights by Military Command. The men were denied the right of appeal to the King, to consult their relatives before and after the trials. A 'shroud' of secrecy surrounded the arrest, investigation, trial and sentencing of the men. If the trials were sound and in accordance with the law, why the secrecy? Perhaps, Lord Kitchener feared appeal from the Australian government and ultimately accountability. This secrecy orchestrated by Lord Kitchener was contrary to his undertaking some months earlier that he would advise the Australian government of any arrest and trial of Australian volunteers serving with the British Army. Indeed, the Australian and relatives did not not receive confirmation of the matter until April 1902, almost two months after the sentences were carried out. The time has arrived to remove the secrecy. The case for review is gaining traction, and regardless of the shouts of protest, the caravan 'rolls on' and the matter will be decided one way or the other. A fair, transparent and competent inquiry will hopefully resolve a case that involves important social and legal issues and an aspect of Australia's military history.

The issues in the case are complex and involve a study of the law and customs of 1902. I wish to assure detractors, that the case in favor of quashing the convictions and granting pardons does not rely on the laws of 2010. The defending officer at the trials, Major Thomas stated in a letter to Witton's father, 'I should like to see that all the facts from the prisoners' point of view are fairly brought forward.' Thomas also complained that it was an 'insult to our nationality' that the men were denied the privilege of appealing to their own government and the British Crown. I intend to see that the work Thomas did in defending these men is finished through an inquiry. This time there will be no secrecy and deception! The historians have had their say, now is the time to put the matter to review. If these men were guilty of anything (and I don't concede they were), the 'wicked' sentences imposed were not justified and posthumous pardons are justified. I will keep you 'posted' of developments. Thank you and I look forward to responses.

Posted by jamesunkles Victorian War forum. May 2010

Thanks for that Saul David1879.

The point i was trying to make in relation to R.D. was.

According to Bleszynski's book, Shoot Straight, You Bastards!, Morant ignored the order until after his friend, Lieutenant Hunt, was killed and his body mutilated.

But doe's this give him cause to do what he did. Is it a valid reason and was this reason valid for those at Rorkes Drift.

Based upon Neil's post. Heres a extract from Pte: Henry Hook.

Quote :

"if he was not dead, then you bl**dy well made sure he was, as he was most likely to jump up and do you, than be treated!."

"I went away, and was walking up the dry bed of a little stream near the drift with my own rifle in my right hand and a bunch of assegais over my left shoulder. Suddenly I came across an unarmed Zulu lying on the ground, apparently dead but bleeding from the leg. Thinking it strange that a dead man should bleed, I hesitated, and wondered whether I should go on, as other Zulus might be lurking about. But I resumed my task. Just as I was passing, the supposed dead man seized the butt of my rifle and tried to drag it away. The bunch of assegais rattled to earth.

"The Zulu suddenly released his grasp of the rifle with one hand, and with the other fiercely endeavoured to drag me down. The fight was short and sharp; but it ended by the Zulu being struck in the chest with the butt and knocked to the ground. The rest was quickly over."

"Altogether we buried 375 dead Zulus, and some wounded were thrown in the grave," wrote one trooper, William James Clarke. "Seeing the manner in which our wounded had been mutilated after being dragged from the hospital we were very bitter and did not spare wounded Zulus."

Horace Smith-Dorrien, a lieutenant who later became a general, wrote that a frame to dry ox-hides became an improvised gallows "for hanging Zulus who were supposed to have behaved treacherously" during the battle.

Samuel Pitts, a private, told the newspaper the Western Mail in 1914 that the official enemy death toll was too low. "We reckon we had accounted for 875, but the books will tell you 400 or 500."

Lieutenant Colonel John North Crealock's private journal, discovered in the royal archives at Windsor, reported that "351 dead Zulus were found and 500 wounded". He did not elaborate on the fate of the wounded and the book's authors conclude they were probably all killed, since there was no record of taking prisoners or tending wounded."

Source: Possibly Zulu Victory.

I might have it wrong. But I thought it was a native regiment that was part of Chelmsford relief column that killed the wounded Zulu’s at R.D and not the defenders.

"Altogether we buried 375 dead Zulus, and some wounded were thrown in the grave," wrote one trooper, William James Clarke. "Seeing the manner in which our wounded had been mutilated after being dragged from the hospital we were very bitter and did not spare wounded Zulus."

Clarke write's like he was one of the defenders. But I can't find him on the roll call. (Or have I missed him)

Quote :

Lieutenant Colonel John North Crealock's private journal, discovered in the royal archives at Windsor, reported that "351 dead Zulus were found and 500 wounded.

We must also remember, that Dead Zulu's were found weeks afterwards around the vicinity of RD. Where they had crawled away and died. I think it will be nothing more than estimations when it comes to the dead wounded at R.D. even by those that were there.

There are two conflicting "reasons" here, Breaker Morant who's famous "Regulation .303" is a classic, was acting in rage after finding the Boer in the clothing of his Lt, in which he carried out a summary execution, likewise the men at the Drift would have had little pity, thier blood was up.

Contrast this with the 24th only a few years before at the battle of Cetane, Isandlwana was still a distant nightmare to happen, a must read is "The Road to Isandlwana" by Philp Gon. After that engagement no prisoners were taken, chances were the wounded were left to fend for themselves, such was the nature of native fighting.

Likewise, on 22nd Jan 1879, there is very little mention of Zulu wounded or prisoners after the Nyezane battle, and this is a few hours before the first shots were fired at Ngwebeni. The simply marched off.

Quote :

in rage after finding the Boer in the clothing of his Lt

Was any of the Zulu's that attacked R.D wearing any of the red jackets taken from British killed on the fugitive trail as the Zulu made their way to Rorkes Drift?

There are no rules in war. Give them nothing, but take everything..

Hi Ctsg.
In answer to your question I cant tell you if they did wear dead soldier's jackets or not , but I have never read or heard of
the defenders mentioning it , and if it happened you would think someone would've mentioned so .
cheers 90th.

I recall Colour Sgt Bourne mentioning the Zulus were using our own rifles against us, but not jackets.

What provision was their in-place to look after prisoners (If Any) taking in consideration the amount of wounded Zulu’s after the battle?

Also I think we should remember that the Zulu attacked the hospital, they had no objections against killing sick and wounded men. The Zulu Army did not have rules of engagement. It was purely kill or be killed. Of course the British solder was very adaptable and could quite easy adopt the Zulu’s rules of engagements, which they appeared to have done.

Thinking about it!! Who claimed, what happened after the Battle was a war crime. It certainly wasn’t the Zulu’s

Quote :

Thinking about it!! Who claimed, what happened after the Battle was a war crime. It certainly wasn’t the Zulu’s

Now that really is a good question.

Mr Greaves

Although Bourne claims to have been shot at by our own rifles, its highly unlikely. Apart from those recovered on the attack on the Royal Engineers section working on the road, (even that is highly debated) by the right horn, there is no doubt that The Zulu's were firing black powder rifles of various calibres, and, at 400 yards+, the range of the oskerberg, you simply cannot tell the retort of one rifle than another, I know this from working the butts at the rifle range.

You can tell the high velocity "crack" of a round exceeding 2000 fps, but any black powder rifle be it a 45/70, a Martini or a Sharps, just sound the same, a deep "whumph" of the firing, and a deep "whhhhhack" as it makes contact.

Impi
The collection of prisoners, was not really considered, apart from the usual intellegence gathering, the British Army did not carry out large scale collection of combatants until the Boer war.

There is often outrage and revulsion at the fact that the Zulu's chopped bits off as trophies or for spiritual purposes, and whilst it was tough for the British soldier to be on, and seeing it from the receiving end, its a bit hypocritical, we actively encouraged the Canadian indians to bring in scalps as proof of the Frenchies, they had killed, the Gurkha too has a penchant for Japanese ears, in Britian only a couple of hundred years before, hung drawn and quartered was a spectator sport.

This about the British at the Battle of Culloden Moore.

Quote :

The “...numerous wounded lying on the field were systematically bayoneted or shot or clubbed to death.”

And I don't think the Scots were in to disembowelment.

Neil Aspinshaw wrote:

Apart from those recovered on the attack on the Royal Engineers section working on the road, (even that is highly debated) by the right horn,

Can anyone please elaborate on this - I've never heard of this before.

Many thanks

Cisco. I think Neil is referring to the missing two compaines. ( I Think!!! )

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

Thanks.

I keep hearing about the two missing companies when there is no evidence to suggest this, it had been debated on RDVC but the general consensus is that the companies that went uo the Telahane Ridge dropped back into the line, with Younghusband on the left. The is evidence of a small detachment being lost, but that section was not a company, (which at full strength would be 70-100 men) but not two full companies.

There was a team of RE men "working on the Road", under Lt McDowell,... Gamble, Cuthbert, Mclaren and Wheatley, but there is some conjecture in to a) what part of the road?, front or rear of Isandlwana, and b) if they were recalled anyhow. Chard states he passed his small contingent on his way back to RD after receiving orders at Isandlwana, but he does not state if they were working or simply moving up.

A side note to all this is irrespective if they were or were not on the road being RE men they would not be in full webbing, most likely a single pouch (20 Rounds) hence if they were over run the ammo they would have carried would last a few minutes and four rifles, hardly an army.

Hi Neil
According to Chards report to Queen Victoria:

On the morning of 22nd January, I put the corporal and three sappers in the empty wagon with their field kits etc to take them to the camp of the 3rd Col and also road out myself. The road was very heavy in places and the wagons went slowly....................................... Seeing what my duties were I left the camp, and a quarter of a mile, or less out of it met with Col Durnford.....................At the foot of the hill I met my men in the wagon and made them get out and walk up the hill with Durnfords men.

I would suggest therefore that they were moving up.

Other accounts refer to the poor state of the road onward from the camp along Chelmsfords route. Chard doesnt mention meeting up with any other RE detachment. I think its generally in this vein that the theory of the RE working on the road is confined to the road onwards from isandlwana.

The cairn often pointed out by the local guides adjacent to the road as the burial place of the RE detachment, is a long way from the original road and has generally been discounted as as burial cairn.

Springbok, I agree with the cairn, the one just over the mazimyama Stream bed left hand side on a small pinancle? akin the modern concrete ford.

I do think that was the point that the original road turned right and uphill to the right of isandlwana. I walked the road to about 500 yards short of the crossing point with Mike Snook in January. If you look at the DVD from Ron and Peter, there is a helecopter sweep of the rear side of Isandlwana, freeze frame that and the road can clearly be seen.

You have you walk about 300 yards over the nek to pick up the clear road bed, I am not sure when this fell into dissuse and the modern dirt road took a left to Isandlwana village.

Chard does not mention the names of his sappers, and Its highly unlikely that a camp the size of Isandlwana would not have had an RE contingent on site for digging cess pits, road repair, fording equipment etc.

Rorke's Drift, 6th February 1879.

"Sir,

I have the honour to report that about eight p.m. on the 21st January 1879, I received the order (herewith) for the NCO and three sappers under my command to proceed to join the head quarter column without delay. As my orders were to place the punts in working order, and these men leaving, left me without the necessary skilled labour for the purpose, I requested permission of Major Spalding Commanding at Rorke's drift to go to the camp at Isandhlwana to get definite instructions as to what I was to do on the following morning.

On the morning of the 22nd, I sent off the 4 men, in the mule wagon attached to 5th company R. E., with arms & field kit complete. They were driven to the foot of the hill below the Isandhlwana camp from where they marched up, the wagon returning here. I saw the men get out of the wagon and walk up the hill, on my return from the camp to which I had ridden on ahead of them. Finding none of the staff in camp I did not remain at more than a few minutes in the camp. Shortly before leaving my own men at about 10.30 a.m., and about ½ a mile from the camp, I met Colonel Durnford R. E. at the head of his mounted men. I told him of the movements of the enemy that I had seen from the camp and by his order rode back to Captain Russell, who was about a mile behind, and gave him the message to hurry up at once with his rocket battery, and detach a company of Sikali’s men to protect the baggage which was following, and I passed the word all along the line to look out to the left. On my return to Rorke's Drift, I reported to Major Spalding the movement to our left of the enemy that I had noticed, and the impossibility of protecting the punts with a guard of only 7 men in the event of an attack. It told me that he had already intended going to Helpmakaar to hurry on the company ordered to be brought here as a guard for the punts, that he should be back before dark, leaving me in command during his absence. I have had no definite news of the fate of the NCO and men referred to, viz:

Corp’l Gamble
Sapper Cuthbert
Sapper MacLaren
Sapper Wheatley

but there is every reason to believe that they are among the members of the killed in the disaster at Isandhlwana camp on the 22nd January 1879.

I wish to bring to your notice their exemplary conduct and cheerful obedience to orders, while under my charge, especially during the march up from Durban to this place, which owing to the heavy rain and bad roads was attended with many hardships and difficult.I send herewith a copy of the report I furnished Colonel Glyn C.B., commanding 3rd Column, of the attack on Rorke's Drift on the 22nd Jan’y 1879.

I have the honour to be
Your obedient servant, John R.M. Chard Lieut"

So are these the 4 in-question.

Corp’l Gamble
Sapper Cuthbert
Sapper MacLaren
Sapper Wheatley

In both reports made by Chard he mentions the Corporal and three sappers being moved to the camp. At 10/10.30 Chard made his return to RD.
He met with his men, instructed them to dismount and walk to the camp.
These were the four men named Gamble Cuthbert Maclaren and Wheatley.
Ergo they couldnt have been working on the road.

I do recall reading some where that Anstey had a troop working on the road, that has generally been sumised as working on the ongoing road correcting the damage at the dongas caused by Chelmsfords onwards movements.

Neil.
I posted a photo some time back from the KC archives showing the road aproach. Last time I walked it I was baulked by a large wash away but was under the impression it joined the concrete road before the loop and drop leading over the stream, it then angles towards the saddle around 3/400 meters away from the present crossing point.

Regards

If the 4 in-question marched up the hill with Durnfords men. Would they not have stayed with them, I know things when wrong, But Chard mention the enemies movements to Durnford, so I don’t thing that any one would be requesting road repairs at this point. I think they all died in the camp with the others. Going back to last year and the discussion about the Button and remains that was found, I do recall someone saying that the button was similar to the Royal Engineers button.

So Just out of interest would the 4 in question have been in and around that area where the button was found.

24th. I don't think I was a member of the forum when the Button and remains discussion took place. Can you or anyone else post a link to this discussion?

As a suport for the argument that the roads being worked on were to the front of the camp.

Dear Major
Bloomfield QrMaster came to me just now with his finger in his mouth saying the light spring waggon would not hold the 2000 rations so I have requisitioned a larger one from the MI There was no escort so I sent down to the 1/24th to know if they could provide one. I was waiting for an answer when Pugh came and told me you had sent an order to the same effect.
[i]I do not think that any waggon can cross the last donga near the kraal. Perhaps waggon and escort could take advantage of the stone cattle kraal, pulling down the huts and wait till the NNC come for their rations.

Yours Neville J A Coghill

Letter sent to Clery concerning the Nyogane donga

Surely then this would be the road that Lt Ansteys men were sent to improve?

Regards

There was a team of RE men "working on the Road", under Lt McDowell

McDowell returned to the camp the same time as Alan Gardener

He was reported to have been shot dead at close range attempting to carry
ammuntion forward to the line.




Cheers
DB14

Lt. MacDowell, No. 3 Column’s Engineer officer, had been at Mangeni with Lord Chelmsford before the battle, and had only returned to Isandlwana as the Zulu attack developed; he was supposedly seen handing out ammunition at the height of the fighting, and his body was found in the camp, not by the road.

PS. Sgt Milne (RD Defender) was under the commard of MacDowell.

I see a question was asked earlier in this topic if Tpr William Clarke was one of the defenders at Rorkes Drift ?.
The answer is, no he was not.
He had spent the previous night at Isandhlawana and came to RD the next morning with Chelmsford and Dartnell. He did however remain there for a while, post 23/01/1879, as part of the RD garrison.
The current post and transcript from his diaries, seen elsewhere in this forum, covers this very event.


barry

Hi all

I noticed in the post by Neil Aspinshaw he mentions a DVD of a helicopter sweep of Isandlwana and RD. Can anyone tell me where I can get one of these

Thanks

Hi Turkey1954.
I have a few dvd's on the zulu war but the only one I remember using a helicopter is ' Isandlwana - Battlefield ' which till
the last 6 months or so was available at the Royal Regt of Wales on- Line shop. I dont think they flew over R.D . I may be wrong .
There isnt a great deal of helicopter footage in any case , Unless there has been another produced that I dont own or have forgotten about . I'm sure Neil will sort this out for you once he reads your post .
cheers 90th.

90th wrote:

Hi Turkey1954.
I have a few dvd's on the zulu war but the only one I remember using a helicopter is ' Isandlwana - Battlefield ' which till
the last 6 months or so was available at the Royal Regt of Wales on- Line shop. I dont think they flew over R.D . I may be wrong .
There isnt a great deal of helicopter footage in any case , Unless there has been another produced that I dont own or have forgotten about . I'm sure Neil will sort this out for you once he reads your post .
cheers 90th.

It's at the begining if I remember correctly?