Durnfords body removed from Isandlwana

Hi new to the website but i remember reading that Durnfords body was removed in september 1879 and burried at Fort Napier is this true?

"The funeral was held on Sunday afternoon, 12 October 1879, attended by well over 1,500 military personnel, together with a great number of the PMB civilian population.
In early October 1879, Jabez Molife, (although his signature reflects Mulipe) was sent to the battlefield, possibly by Bishop Colenso, to bring the body of the gallant Colonel back to Pietermaritzburg. This he did by ambulance, arriving in PMB on Thursday 9 Octobert. Lt. Scott's two brothers, on a similar mission at Isandlwana, assisted Jabez in the exhumation of Durnford's body.When the ambulance reached Greytown, Jabez wrote to the Bishop in a letter dated 7 October..An extract ran:
" He [Durnford} said, ' Jabez, if it gets worse here in Natal, so that I die, it will be well that Hlubi's people and the Edendale men should be there when I am buried.' But we were just speaking jestingly, though I remember his words today; for I could see that his heart did not think of mr as a black man; but that was his way with all natives."
About 60 of the Hlubi and Edendale troop who were with Durnford at Isandlwana were present at the funeral."

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

Thanks for that for me Durnford was always the hero of the battle so i wondered what happened to his body.

DB14, I'd be interested to know more about why you consider Durnford the hero of the battle at Isandlwana. Please can you expand on what it was that he did for you think this ? Thankyou.

Interesting question Colin. Looking forward to an interesting answer. Should provoke some reaction from the forum.

Regards

Hi he became the hero for me when he choose to stay and not escape, which he could of done easly being mounted and with 40 other horsemen.
This is a brief accont of his last stand
When James Hamer was trying to escape on his horse he noticed that the escape route over the Nek (low ground between to high points) was being kept open by men of the 24th(probely Popes) and good old Colonel Durnford making a heroic and most gallant last stand to cover the retreat. Having failed to find Pulline Durnford is said to have made a stand on the slopes of the Stony Koppie with 40 white horsemen and a further 30 Recoats. The willingness of Lieutenant Scott and 13 of his Natal carabineers to stand by the officer whom owing to bad blood at Bushman's river pass is nothing short of remarkable. All were excellent horsemen and crack shots and could easily of escaped as a group but amazingly they choose a hero's death. Durnford this time was an inspiration, Zulu eyewitness reports claim that a one armed officer killed 4 Zulu with his revolver as his party was forced by weight of numbers up the slopes of Stony Koppie. Melhlokazulu saw their end “ it was along time before they were over come, they through down their guns when their ammunition was done and then commenced with their pistols then they formed a line shoulder to shoulder and back to back and fought with their knifes."

No doubt Durnford did die a heros death, however dont you think he had very little choice in the matter?
If he had escaped and after the Bushmans debacle, his reputation would have been in absolute tatters.He is portrayed generally by those he came into contact with as an extremely honorable man. I dont believe he could have faced up to the derision that his peers would have poured on him.
With that said could it not be argued that having been a contributory to the defeat he took the easy way out?
I mention that because there is a theory that his group was part of a group initially roused by QM Pullen and then increased by Durrant Scott. This party of men, its been argued, then joined forces with the balance of H company to form the main stand below the saddle. That group split, and Durnfords group were eventually cut down below the koppie.
There is still a lot of grey area there, if we we get rid of the romantic illusions created by 'Zulu Dawn', there are still a hang of a lot of unanswered questions.

Good Topic

Regards

Good reply but i do not think he choose the easy way out. Just think about it 16,000 Zulus all intent on killing you, you would want to run, so i think Durnford was very brave for staying and he would not of thourght about the easy way out. Besides he was not respomsible for the defeat he was framed by Chelmsford and Crealock with some help by Shepstone. They said he had been ordered to take command when we now know that he was only ordered to "march at once." I think if the truth was told back in 1879 then people would not blame Durnford or Pulliene but but the balme were it rightly lies with Lord Chelsmford.

DB14, thanks for replying to my question. If we keep the topic solely on the subject of Durnford, there is a chance it could make better progress away from Chelmsford, etc., and the blame continuation. Focussing on him alone and his hero label, might uncover a few snippets of info not previously considered for discussion.

This is the finding of Durnfords body and the removal of his orders.
According to Forbes Durnfords body was discovered in a patch of long grass near the right flank of the camp. His big moustache still clinging to the withered face. Forbes also added “Captain Offy Shepstone recognized him at once and identified him further by rings one the fingers and a knife in the pocket with the name one it. A stalwart Zulu covered by his shield lay at the Colonels feet. Around the Colonel almost in a ring lay a dozen dead men half being Natal Carabineers all riddled with assegai stabs. Clearly they had all rallied around Durnford in one last gallant attempt to cover the flank of the camp. What Forbes didn’t mention and possible didn’t witness was offy Shepstone removing a packet of papers from Durnfords body. This packet almost certainly contained the order to clear his name but the papers were given to Crealock in secret and suppressed for many years. Durnford was buried in a donga not far from were he fell, a spade was put in the grave to mark his spot. In September his body was exhumed and given full military honour and buried in fort Napier. In the 1960s His papers were found in the royal engineers Museum. They were stuck together with his blood and other substances but were separated and he was cleared.

Does anyone know what happened to Durnfords sword and revolver? I wondered if they were taken by the Zulus or were they found in his tent or a trunk?

I don't think Durnford had a choice, he was in command of the camp. He had left he would have been court marshalled. And the other reason he had to stay is because as he was leaving he ran headlong into the advancing Zulu's.

Mr Greaves, I understand how you have come to that conclusion however I do think that there were several opportunites when he could have left the battle field as he was mounted. The biggest oppertunity that he had to leave was when he had just returned to the camp after retreating from the Donga as this was the moment when most of the mounted men took the opportunite to escape. The papers held at the Royal Engineers Museum confirm that he had no orders to take command.

I don't think he stay through choice. Rank prevented him from leaving. He should never have contemplated leaving in the first place, and it was him that lost the rocket battery.

Again i see were this is coming from but to be fair to Durnford he had no idea that the Zulus would attack, he beieved them to be retreating towards Chelsmfords colum that was in the open and exposed. As well as this the Battery was protected by a company of NNC under the commond of Captain Norse.

Drummer Boy 14 wrote:

What Forbes didn’t mention and possible didn’t witness was offy Shepstone removing a packet of papers from Durnfords body. This packet almost certainly contained the order to clear his name but the papers were given to Crealock in secret and suppressed for many years.

Could you provide a source for this statement regarding Crealocks part in it?

The witness to the papers being removed was Surgeon Longhurst, in a letter dated 20 feb 1882 to Edward Durnford. And prior to that a letter written to friends in England.
A key element was his statement that Col Durnford was wearing a coat over his red vest, in this coat were the documents. Shepstone when attacked by Luard produced three witnesses to testify that there was no coat, for one reason or another all three statements were rejected ( Royston, Cook and Yabez Mulife) a further statement from macfarlane was withdrawn.
Luards case against Shepstone was subsequently withdrawn and he issued an apology.

Thats a side show however. The main point being wether Durnford was ordered to take charge and I agree he wasnt.
One of the critical areas around the pre battle time is the really bad communications between the various senior officers. Glynn only heard second hand that his column was to be split, as an example.

Cleary was of the opinion that Chelmsford had ordered Durnford to 'reinforce the camp'. This was contained in the orders given to Pullein.
As a scenario: 4 oclock in the morning, orders being issued left right and centre to get the force moving. Possibly Chelmsford tells Crealock ( his secretary) to issue orders telling Durnford to reinforce the camp. Crealock issues orders but doesnt actually say that. Cleary overhears the verbal exchange and thats what gets passed to Pullein.

In that scenarion the mistake is with Crealock in not issuing correct and precis orders.

Cleary has passed on to Pullein that "he will be in charge of the camp". Bit of confusion there because if the intention was to have Durnford reinforce the camp then as senior officer he would naturally have taken command. Unless of course Chelsford still had in mind the stinging rebuke sent of to Durnford a few days earlier, potentially what was in his mind was that a line officer would take command of the camp and Durnford would suborn to him.

What is important is Durnfords actions after arriving at the camp. His decision to split his command and then ride out to 'protect' Chelmsfords flank is probably the key accusation against him. And its this area and the subsequent handling of his withdrawl back to the camp that I believe he was at fault.

He moved of with his mounted men without giving consideration to the slower moving rocket battery ( possibly if he was going to adopt a flying column aproach they should have been left at the camp).
When he made contact he had at that point an oportunity to turn tail and head back to the camp at maximum speed instead of the rather futile fighting withdrawl that accomplished nothing at all.

The extra time he would have gained by getting back to the camp, the ammunition saved, could all have made a difference.

When he was fighting in the Donga he had at one point sent his white officers to all points of the compass, fetching ammo, mesages to the artillery etc. He was left with virtually no command structure at the most critical time. His withdrawl happened at that point with no senior commanders to control it.

Three critical decisions made that quite possibly changed the course of the battle. Because of those Durnford has to share the blame with Pullein for the missmanagement of the actuall battle itself.

Regards

Drummerboy. If you read the topic was Durnford capable, it names the source there with regards to the order removed from Durnfords body. For me I find it hard to believe that Durnford wanted to the leave the camp in the first place. If he and Pulliene had worked together they could have put together some sort of fortification. But I think there was a power struggle between the two officers commanding. A case of you have your soldiers and I have mine.

Totally Agree with Colin.

Quote :

If we keep the topic solely on the subject of Durnford, there is a chance it could make better progress away from Chelmsford, etc.,

When Durnfords body was removed from Isandlwana for reburial he was wearing his patrol jacket that, Shepstone said he did not have on. This source comes from The heroism and tradagdy of the Zulu war 1879 by Saul David, also in this book it says when Durnfords body was found his papers were taken by Shepstone and given to Crealock.

In regard to Durnford seeing the left horn and running straight back to the camp i do not think that any officer in his posistion would of seen that many Zulus and just run away without fighting them. Once the Durnford reached the Donga he held the Zulus as long as he had ammo. So i think that his fighting withdrawl was woth it.

Also fair point i also think Durnford never thourght of leaving the camp.

And lastly in regard to Durnford and Pulliene working together and building a fortification they were only with each other for an hour and during that time they were not under attack so they would not of thourght this necerserry as Chelsmford had not thourght this necersery.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Colonel Pulleine's last message to Lord Chelmsford.

Look at the time on this order 8.5am. Getting to Chelmsford at 9:30am Durnford Arrived between 10:00-10;30 hrs. After which they both had Breakfast and a debate about who was in-charge. Did the Zulus that were attacking in force sitting down and wait until they had finished their breakfast before resuming their attack.

Hi all.
I'm not keen on getting involved in this thread again as I have my thoughts on who's to blame etc etc . Many involved !!.
Littlehand if you look at Pullein's message at 8.05 am , it states ' Advancing ' not attacking !. Pullein acts on this and sends
people out to determine whats happening , he then receives the report that the zulu's are withdrawing !!. Off hand cant remember
who stated this but this is the first of many mistakes . Did this person / persons mean the NNC were withdrawing back to the camp
( Which is what I think was meant ) or did those in charge take it to mean the '' Zulu Army '' was withdrawing in which case by their
actions that seems to be the course that was followed .
cheers 90th.

But Littlehand states this is the last order. Advancing, Attacking. Both me the same really. But 90th does raise a good point who was falling back???? Could it have meant Raws Troop.

Colin J and CTSG have the right idea keep the topic on Durnfords actions.

The three seperate issues I believe are his downfall have been posted. Dissprove them if you will.


Drummer Boy
Saul David, whilst being a prof of history is hardly a source to quote from. What he has written is an opinion not a fact.

Regards

Hi John.
Littlehand does say it's Pullein's '' Last '' message , but in fact I think it is his first message , note the time it's 8.05 am !!.
Pulleine does I think send another stating that he cant move the camp at present due to the proximity of the zulu force .
( Which has been lost in the sands of time ) Advancing isnt exactly the same as attacking , you can advance and stop a certain distance from your enemy which is
exactly what the zulu army did do . Attacking is actually doing that , no stopping involved , rolling on so to speak . Hope that
makes sense !.
cheers 90th.

Drummer Boy

Just to kill the concept of Crealock hiding the Durnford papers.

The papers were removed from Durnfords body by one of the burial party, Trooper Pearce. he gave them to his brother, editor of the Natal Witness. He held them for 5 years and then gave them to Frances Colenso who in turn sent them to the Royal Engineers. The papers wee eventually seperated in 1989.
His sword and scabbard were recovered from the battlefield and also sent to the RE at Chatam.

Crealock was aproached when news of the papers discovery was made public and refused to comment ( Hansard).

I don't know why people relate to Durnsford death to a famous last stand. He had no choice there was nothing he or those with him could do about it. He got himself in that situation because he chose to leave, not giving a thought that he would be decreasing the numbers in the camp. Along the way he managed to get the rocket battery wiped out. Then when it all goes wrong he retreats back to the camp requiring help to do so. As far as I'm concerned there were far more famous last stands being made that day by soldiers who never left the battlefield and remained with their men until death. For me the most famous last stand that day was made by Younghusband.

Hi Ctsg.
Dont forget poor Charlie Pope & Fred Godwin - Austen of ' G Co ' who were attempting to reinforce Durnford when the latter
decided to withdraw , due to the dire circumstances of his force becoming outflanked and short of ammunition . Certainly
Younghusband also sold his life and those of his men dearly .
cheers 90th.

Where do you stop really? 'A' company backs against the mountain? Ansteys fighting retreat? As CTSG points out lots of brave acts took place.
Probably for me its the defensive action by CS Wolfe and his twenty man section covering the withdrawl of H company, that took guts, it wasnt a forced situation like the others, he knew when he volunteered that he was going to die. One hell of a bloke.

Regards

True , Springbok .
cheers 90th.

There is one option I suppose may have caused Durnford to leave the main battlefield, and that would be if he had been cut off totally from the main force by the encircling horns. That being the case, if N.N.H. and Colonial mounted men were still with him, might have used harassing tactics from behind the warriors, his force not being strong enough to cut through to the camp. This then may have led him to also follow the Fugitives' Trail in a fighting withdrawal, trying to assist fleeing men on foot, including had he made it to the Buffalo river as well as across it. Again, probably covering men from the Natal side. Not finished with this though, I can see Durnford making for Rorke's Drift rather than riding the opposite way, as he would have been outraged at being forced to leave Isandlwana, so insist on possibly having another go at the Zulus by helping defend Rorke's Drift. How would that battle have went with his help, one wonders ?

That said, there is a chance he may have decided to make a stand alongside a group still fighting further away from the camp With Lt. Anstey and his men perhaps ?

Hi Colin
Interesting thoughts. RD did pretty well without him really. Not to sure if he could have helped Anstey. Mike Snook has some interesting thoughts on Durnfords Battle ( apart from all the sarcastic remarks that is). In HCMDB he puts forward the theory that Durnford lost control of the retreat from the Donga, hence the Basuto and Edenvale contingents leaving the battlefield. From the result that sounds pretty fair. When QM Pullen gathered men together for a reguard action it was with the intention of holding back the left horn. Scott's men joined them and at a later point Durnford. That group succeded in holding back the impi untill H company with Wardell managed to join up with them. Its an interesting theory particularly if you look at the relevant positions of those stands.
The point he really tries to make though is that Durnford knew at that point that all was lost and realised he had made a few errors, he would never have recovered from the humiliation so determined to go down with the ship. The honorable thing to do really.

Until new information comes to light that excoriates Durnford from blame, I do not think it’s fitting to label him with the word “ Hero” The feel sorry for Durnford was started by his lover Colenso who was sole bent on destroying the reputation of a well known personality of the Zulu War.

It has been pointed out that “His decision to split his command and then ride out to 'protect' Chelmsford’s flank” This decision was taken by him and him alone without any consideration for the camp and those in it. I do believe an argument did take place between Durnford and Pulleine on a personal level as to who was in-charge. When other officers backed Pulleine, Durnford decided to confirm his orders by going after Chelmsford. The rest is History. But don’t class a man who was prepared to leave a hero.

CTSG
I fully agree, hero definitly not, brave man yes.
But there again I wouldnt classify a Commander in Chief who passes the buck as an honorable man either.

Regards

I've read the version with Pullen, but have great doubts about it. As you read other accounts, you would usually see comments about the 24th stands, Durnford and the Colonial stand and Shepstone's stand. In the new take on events, it appears it was a Quartermaster from the 24th who initially made the stand, eventaully joined by the mounted men and Durnford himself. Also, it is suggested that Shepstone's stand wasn't a deliberate act, but he was forced up onto the slopes of the mountain with no other options. Now these latter guesses would basically then take away any other stands formed by those units outside of the 24th, removing any sort of input these non-regular units made on their own part to hold back the Zulus. The 24th would then be credited with creating all stands that others joined. This is incorrect I feel.

Colin
Not to sure I understand you. The Pullen I was refering to was the Quarter Master.
Theres a couple of different theories on why Shepstone ended up where he did. For a long time he was placed in the line to the left of Younghusband anchoring the line on the scree slope.
However eye witness accounts places him heading down to the Donga at one point. That puts forward the scenario that as the Basuto et al abandoned the field he regrouped the isiGqoza and fought from the saddle up to the mounbtain where he now rests.
Regards

Based on we are only talking Durnford. And The Good Lord Chelmsford was doing something else that day. Myself and the Good Lord Chelmsford are unable to comment at this time.

Sorry. Pullen and the Quartermaster mentioned in my post are one and the same person. Pullen tried to rally a few men as they ran past his wagon, hoping to turn the Zulu flank. In the panic, it is unknown how many men he managed to convince to follow him, but were there enough to begin a stand to join, or only a few that might not be seen amongst the tents, wagons and melee that was going on ? I'm always surprised to read that he left his post. I've not heard of Shepstone being to Younghusband's left, but in between him and Mostyn, but only in reference to the N.N.H. joining the line from the spur. It is likely Shepstone sought out Durnford at some stage, for orders as well as updating him on the situation to the North. I've even heard of Shepstone and some N.N.H. actually not joining the line but heading West at the bottom of the spur turning South on the West of the mountain to harry the warriors gathering there, but this could have been from Morris's book. Where is Shepstone's grave exactly ? Southwest, West or Northwest on the actual slopes of the mountain ?

Quote :

Pullen tried to rally a few men as they ran past his wagon,

Julian Whybra made refrence to this. Possibly witnessed by a Lieutenant Henderson in passing and who later assumed this was the last stand of the 1/24th.

Could it not have maybe been Brickhill, who recognised Pullen ? I'm not sure about this, but did they not share a tent in the camp ? Henderson may have been out of the camp past the nek seeking ammo with his N.N.H. men.

Hi Colin J.
Shepstone's grave and that of his men are on the Western Side of the Mountain .
cheers 90th.

The person who regonized Pullen was James Brickhill this is mentioned in Ian Knights Zulu Rising.

I am sorry if my posts are not accuarte. I once devoloped an intrest in the Zulu war when i watched the film Zulu and then i saw Zulu Dawn. Around a year later i read the novel Zulu Hart by Saul David and i decided to rent a few books on the Zulu war from the library to learn the facts. However as i am only 14 years old i have lots of time to learn.

Drummer boy your doing just fine.

I commend your knowledge on Durnford and it's good to see someone of your age choosing someone who was partly to blame for the biggest blunder in British military history as his hero.

Have you ever read any of col: Mike Snook's books. If not I would highly recommend it.

Thanks no i havent but i will try and loan them from the library if i can, are their any more good books i should be aware of?

Thanks for any help

Hi Drummerboy 14.
Great to see you are interested in the Anglo Zulu War , regarding the books as in which to read , you must certainly
get '' Zulu Rising '' it is the benchmark in written work on Isandlawana & Rorkes Drift , Ian Knight's latest work and
a must read . The others all depend on what part of the war you wish to read about . There are many to choose from
but what I've found anything written by Knight , Laband , Lock & Quantrill and Snook's ' How Can Men Die Better ' are
well worth reading almost to the point of you must read them to fully understand the war . Their are many others written
by those who were there which also are well worth reading , it all depends on as I said what you wish to read . Hope this
has been some help .
cheers 90th .

Look for eyewitness accounts. They will give you a better understanding. Also word of caution many of the books contain the same information so spend your money wisely no one really knows what took place at Isandlwana after the Zulus had got into the camp apart from the Zulus who never kept accounts like the British. I would go for ”Zulu Victory"
Somewhere on the forum, there is a small publication "The Missing Five Hours" composed by the same authors who wrote the book mentioned above, I think you would find that an interesting read and its free. Be interested to know what you make of it.

There are two accounts concerning Pullens rearguard action, not last stand. Private Bickley makes it clear that after the collapse of the right it was Pullen who tried to stem the flight and called for help. Brickhill records that Pullen asked him to get Pulleine to send men to assist him in stopping the Zulu flanking move. He also mentions Pullen leading a party of soldiers to the foot of Mahlabamkhosi. Its been speculated that those soldiers were the pioneer corp and orderlies. All of which would have been in the area at the time.

Sorry Colin it would appear that this again was a 24th stand at the outset and aided at a later point by the colonialists.

Regards

Hi thanks for all the suggestions i have already read Zulu Rising it was a very intresting read. At the moment i am reading Rorkes Drift by Adrian Greaves and when i have finished that i will try and get some of the books suggested.

Durnford was the hero for me but i do think their were many others as well.
Younghusband for his charge down to the Nek
CS Wolfe and his men for their reargaurd action.
Dr sheperd for stopping to help a man even though the camp was in Zulu hands.
Vereker for giving away his horse and only chance of life.
Samuel Wassel VC for saving a brother soldier.

Regarding Pullen. It strikes me that he might have been better remaining at his post and amassing a fighting group around the ammunition wagon, as the situation was such, he would have seen the importance of protecting the supply. Therefore, if anyone did add to his group they would have ammo in the centre of the defenders. This way he would have stayed at his post, as well as securing a substantial supply of essential cartridges. Leaving with men instead of remaining static would have left them isolated without a reload facility. Bloomfield's ammunition wagon at that time was probably or about to be lost amongst the chaos. I guess we'll remain with our different opinions on this incident.

Without doubt, in hind sight Pullen would have been better of staying with his ammunition supplies. At the time from the position he was in he would have seen the collapse only of the right and proably formed the opinion that it was important to stop the left horn getting to the tents.

Regards