Isandlwana, Last Stands

As a newcomer to this forum and really enjoying it I wondered if anyone might help one of my lingering thoughts. This battle of all battles has captured my imagination. It would appear there were a number of valiant last stands made. Do we know for sure how many stands were made and how long they held out?

Anstey seems to have fought a long way out of camp. Was he the last stand or was it yunghusband?

If only was written for this battle. How many troops would it have taken if they had secured ammunition to form an impenetrable British Square?

I would welcome any thoughts conjecture or not

I am pretty sure that their where 9 stands.

50 men of G company where found neer the Mpofane Donga
Colour-sergant wolfes and 20 men on the firing line
50 men in the second battalion camp most likly A Company 1st/24th
H company with 68 men behind the ist battalions camp
Colonel Durnford and Lieutenant Scott with Volunteers and some 24th men
70 men of the 24th where found in the Saddle where the monument now stands
3 officers iand 60 men ncluding Younghusband found under the southern crag of Isandlwana
60-70 NNC men where found around Captain Shepstone on the westeren slopes of Isandlwana
Anstey and around 40 men where found 2 miles down the Fugitives drift

Hope this helps Regards DB14

This is very helpful.

Shame these stands could not have converged. Maybe history would have been different and the film Zulu which changed a lot of our lives would not have been made.

Quote :

Shame these stands could not have converged

But the same problems still would have existed.

Superior numbers.
Lack of ammunition.
No fortifications.

Mind you,It would have been one hell of a last stand, but the outcome would have the same.

24th, Was there a lack of ammunition.

It has been proven that ammunition was getting to the firing lines,during the advance by the Zulus, I think the discussion relates to the last stands that were being made. It was these little groups that ran out of ammunition.

Very interesting. I guess my conjecture was if the stands had converged and ammunition of which there was plenty in camp was readily available could a compact British square of 350 to 400 men armed with state of the art rifle had held the Zulus off?

Given the time taken to take out some of the smaller stands with no ammunition or little ammunition maybe this square could have held off until Chelmsford returned. I am stretching the what if scenario here admittedly but welcome comments from fellow learned users .

It is the last stand aspect of this battle and the hopelessness of the situation that has always grabbed my imagination and it is great to have a forum to be able to discuss this.

By definition there was only one last stand, Anstey on the banks of the stream. The rest were just stands/points of resistance.

Regards

Hi Tomozulu.
A square of 350 - 400 with considerable ammunition still couldnt have held off 20 , 000 mobile and tenacious zulu's.
One of The main reasons the whole thing went pear shaped was the fact that the zulu had got into the camp from the
rear , Curling says that when the guns retreated back to the camp proper , it was already in the hands of the zulus .
Game over !. No disrespect meant .
cheers 90th.

Tomozulu wrote:

Very interesting. I guess my conjecture was if the stands had converged and ammunition of which there was plenty in camp was readily available could a compact British square of 350 to 400 men armed with state of the art rifle had held the Zulus off?

Given the time taken to take out some of the smaller stands with no ammunition or little ammunition maybe this square could have held off until Chelmsford returned. I am stretching the what if scenario here admittedly but welcome comments from fellow learned users .

It is the last stand aspect of this battle and the hopelessness of the situation that has always grabbed my imagination and it is great to have a forum to be able to discuss this.

I am of this opinion. The same evening one hundred soldiers held Rorkes Drift and in 1885 a british Square held against the Dervishes. So I feel that if a decent square could have been drawn up then things would have been different.
Durnford's engagement with the left horn is a red herring. He may have been cut off and destroyed but the underlying problem was the over extended deployment of the troops in the camp itself.

Hi Eric .
I can see your point , but you must remember they had time to Fortify Rorke's Drift to a certain extent , and also the
lay of the land meant the zulu were attacking a near 6 ft high embankment at one part of the defence . Not sure what arms
the Dervishes had in the 1885 conflict or the tactics that they employed , did the British have Gatling Guns or something similar
to aid their defence ??.
cheers 90th.

Hi 90th,

I think the outflanking and attacking through the rear of the camp does not necessary give you an advantage if the British were in square. The square was designed to defend against this very position.


I do think the Zulus would have struggled even in overwhelming numbers to penetrate this square and maybe the casualties would have been too much even for these truly wonderful warriors to take.

I am truly stretching it here as such a square was never remotely possible on the day. But if only......... I am not so sure the result would have been the same.

Hi springbok would you not consider the place where Durnford died to be a last stand. After they split from H company their was probebly only 20-30 of them at most and their was no where for them to go, no ammuntion and completly cut off. I think this would count as a last stand

Regards DB14

Quote :

Given the time taken to take out some of the smaller stands with no ammunition or little ammunition maybe this square could have held off until Chelmsford returned. I am stretching the what if scenario here admittedly but welcome comments from fellow learned users .

Be interested to know what other members think, ( Question )

Could Chelmsford have really done anything if he had returned. Or would he have just been leading his men to certain death. They would have been a column on the move, which would have been an easy target. Plus they didn't have that much ammunition with them, as it was left in the camp. Personally I think he made the right choice by not rushing back to assist.

Hi 24th.
I agree with you , ' The Good Lord ' couldnt have gone back to the camp even when he recieved the first of a series of messages
asking him to do so sent by Browne , for the simple fact Chelmesford's force was well spread over several miles and no -one actually
knew where anyone was to any certain degree. If by chance they were all nearby and could have doubled back to camp the only outcome would have been many more losses on both sides . Chelmesford's force would have been well and truly cut to bits as they
didnt have any spare ammunition and out on the open plain it wouldnt have taken long for the demise of the Good Lord and his force.
Basically it was very a very lucky thing that the Good Lord didnt make it back in time to get the chop .
cheers 90th.

Eric has picked a parallel I often draw upon which is the Dervish Wars of 1884-5, but in many instances it was too close to failure, and proved that in the numbers game the odds are still against you.

The Squares against the Dervishes had far more men in them, it failed at Abu Klea, but managed to hold composure due to the baggage in the centre breaking the Dervish advance inside the square, it failed at Tofrek, primarily because the sudden ferocity caught the camp off gaurd, the half finished Zeriba at least affored some flank protection, and the quantity of assailants were held back by the heavy thorn surrounding. The fact that the Indian troops, and supporting fire from the Berkshires cleared the centre ground, finally broke the attack, but that was close run. Google Fripp, (yes the same one as the famous painting of Isandlwana) and Tofrek, his painting says it all.

Groups of the 66th attempted the same at Maiwand, again with the same end game.

There comes a point the sheer firepower alone will not stop a determined adversary,

Great post Neil. I will read up on these as they are good benchmarks.

24th i am pretty sure Chelsmford didnt decide not to go back to the camp because it was being attcked by to many Zulus. He simpley didnt have the time to muster the men intime to help, by the time he did everyone was dead. In my veiw if he knew the camp was under attack he woundnt have just sat back and said " dont attack boys theirs to many of them" and sat back and watched the Zulus butchur the garrison. He would have at least tried to distract the Zulus with artilery and mounted men. Thats just my veiw and anyway i have no idea about how effective this would have been just thinking.

Regards DB14

Hi everyone

LAST STANDS

It might be of interest to those intending to visit the Brecon museum to note that the Anstey family intend donating Lt Edgar Anstey's S Africa Medal to the museum in November, and we will be building a display feature around it.

Bill Cainan
Curator
The Regimental Museum of The Royal Welsh
Brecon

But like it's has been pointed out it, would have been a coloum on the move, which would not have been able to defend it's self. I'm not sure if it's a case of what if, Chelmsford retuned or not. All it would have needed was for a small Zulu army to harass them, and they would have been force to stop. So they would never have made it back it time anyway. Also I'm sure it crossed Chelmsford's mind and many of the officers with him that the Zulu's were now in procession of not, just the camp but the supplies in it. Including thousands of rounds of ammunition and rifles. I used to think Chelmsford dragged in heels on purpose,but now I can see a reason why he didn't return.

Bill, I'm behind with some things, but can you tell me if Anstey's individual grave has now got its own marker in the family plot ? I recall he was brought back, but the actual position in the plot was lost. Although I read this a while ago.

Colin J

I will check this with the family and get back to you.

Bill

Quote :

and we will be building a display feature around it.

Bill how are projects like this normally financed. And how much would something like this cost to assemble.

I think most museums struggle, normally paid for by donations. It all depends on what the museum is trying to create. It would have to be something special for a candidate as important as Anstey.

John

24th is correct - most military museums do struggle finacially, and Brecon is no exception. The greater part of our income is derived from "gate money" and this has to pay for all of our outgoings, including displays. We therefore try, with our displays, to achieve the maximum impact for the minimum outlay !

For the Edgar Anstey medal, I am proposing to use an existing display cabinet where the display will be centered on Anstey's South African medal. The family have provided a coloured picture of Edgar Anstey, which along with the Shadbolt image, will both be displayed. There will be a short element of text describing the last stand, possibly including some extracts from an Anstey family diary, which vividly illustrate the shock when news of Edgar's death is received. To mark the location of the last stand, we will use a copy of one of Thomas Anstey's (Thomas being the Engineer brother of Edgar) maps of Isandlwana. We will include another S African medal issued to a Private of the 1/24th as being representative of those who died with Edgar.

This should all be complete by mid-November.

Bill Cainan

Quote :

For the Edgar Anstey medal, I am proposing to use an existing display cabinet where the display will be centered on Anstey's South African medal. The family have provided a coloured picture of Edgar Anstey, which along with the Shadbolt image, will both be displayed. There will be a short element of text describing the last stand, possibly including some extracts from an Anstey family diary, which vividly illustrate the shock when news of Edgar's death is received. To mark the location of the last stand, we will use a copy of one of Thomas Anstey's (Thomas being the Engineer brother of Edgar) maps of Isandlwana. We will include another S African medal issued to a Private of the 1/24th as being representative of those who died with Edgar.

BILL. What would this cost to complete,

Mr Greaves

Fortunately, very little. I will re-use an existing cabinet. The two medals have been donated to the museum along with the coloured sketch and I will write up the text on our computer.

Otherwise, say £1k for the cabinet, £35k + for the medals, another £1k to have a professional display panel made up, etc, etc !

Bill

I think the camp at iSandlwana COULD have held if they had formed a square. They did not, and the lack of organisation in the defences has to be down to Pulleine, doesn't it?
The square at Abu Klea was only penetrated due to Col Burnaby's mad cap exploits and glory hunting when he ordered the rear of it to open up so he could get the Navy's machine gun and crew out, thus, allowing the Dervishes in when the gun jammed almost immediately. Also, the Dervishes were armed with fire arms, not mainly with shields and spears.
Surely, a better parallel is to be drawn with RD, when 100 men held off some 5000 Zulus, a British force of less than one tenth of that at iSandlwana, holding off a Zulu force a quarter of the size of that at iSandlwana.
The difference? Defensive organisation.

Pulline followed the oerders left to him by Chelsmford.
Adding to this if the Genreal Officer commanding of the British in South Africa thourght the camp was safe and did it not need to be fortified then why would Pulline disagree.

Tasker.

Quote :

I think the camp at Isandlwana COULD have held if they had formed a square.

I agree.

As our friend CTSG Often posts quote by Chelmsford to Durnford

“When a column is acting SEPARATELY in an enemy's country I am quite ready to give its commander every latitude, and would certainly expect him to disobey any orders he might receive from me, if information which he obtained showed that it would be injurious to the interests of the column under his command.

Giving Pulleine the leeway to do what Tasker states.

That was sent to Durnford not Pulline


Regards

When a column is acting SEPARATELY in an enemy's country I am quite ready to give its commander every latitude.

Chelmsford, put this it a letter to Durnford, It could have been used against him, if he didn't mean it.

YES BUT that was sent to Colonel Durnford NOT Pulline. So Pulline would never have seen that order and even if he had it wouldny effect him as it was addresed to Durnford.

Regards

Durnford received the letter prior to Isandlwana. And as he was the senior officer present,

Tasker

Stewart had at least 300 rifles per face, a gardner and 3 guns against Pulleins possible 150 + Mounted and two guns. Musa Wad Hilu had around 11,000 men to his disposal against Nshingwayo's 20,000. the odds were not the same.

The square did not open up due to Burnaby, it was wide open already as the baggage had not quite caught up, and some had simply plopped to the ground unwilling to budge, The Guards and the MiCR could not close as the skirmishers were still heading pell mell for the gaps. A perfect storm. Beresford threw out the Gardner which "potentially" had the ability to put a company rate of fire down had it not jammed , but put himself squarely in the field of fire from C coy HCR, on the angle of the square as the 5 , 4 & 3 Coy tried to close in echelon the ends were left open to infiltration. Burnaby went out bellowing orders for the companies to pivot on the right of each company to align the square.

Abu Kru does give an insight into what square, prepared and ready could do, The GCR, HCR and MICR had about 900 rifles at their disposal, Anja had around 8000 men available, this time the square held, but again, the ratio of firepower is still much higher. Tofrek is an example of a defensive preparation working to as good as an extent as it offers a gap, as the mealies did at RD, against a hand held weapon, but interesting that alot of the injuries at RD were caused by firearms, not edged weapons. The Mahdist infiltration between the two squares gave them a 1-0 lead at half time, but lost 2-1 in the end. If Chard had not bisected the defence at RD with the buscuit boxes, and thus offered an open flank, the odds?, well who knows??.

As I try not to" what if" historical contemporary actions can, providing the odds were levelled, give an insight as close as human conflict, with the same weapons can offer.

YES but why would they think to fortify the camp. The Zulu army was thourght to be miles away and the GOC didnt think the camp needed a laarger. Imagine if Chelsmford asked for the wagons to bring up supplies and the rest of the camp to be moved and all Pulline and Durnford could say is " Sorry we have Laagered." The only time this could have been done is when Shepstone reported that the Zulus where only a short way from the camp and at this time a company of the 24th was already fighting on the spur. Why would they need to retreat to a square when they where sure there weapons could beat the Zulus??

Problem was, it was to late to form and Laager it would have taken far to long to organise. And the ground would have still been as hard as it was when they arrived. It would have been a case of doing the best with what they had, and that they failed to do. Regardless of what Chelmsford could have done or should have done he was miles away from the camp on the 22nd Jan and there was nothing he could do. The two officers in command on that day should have worked together instead of against each other; they failed to deploy their men in accordance with the movements of the enemy.

Quote :

Mr Greaves

Fortunately, very little. I will re-use an existing cabinet. The two medals have been donated to the museum along with the coloured sketch and I will write up the text on our computer.

Otherwise, say £1k for the cabinet, £35k + for the medals, another £1k to have a professional display panel made up, etc, etc !

Might be a good idea to have an ceremonial unveiling of the display, after all he was quite an important character in the Zulu War. Could be turned into an event.

Just a thought.. Proceeds could be put to good use for the museum.

Lillehand

The presentation of the Anstey medal will be a private family affair.

Bill

Drummer Boy 14 wrote:

Pulline followed the oerders left to him by Chelsmford.
Adding to this if the Genreal Officer commanding of the British in South Africa thourght the camp was safe and did it not need to be fortified then why would Pulline disagree.

DB14, the moment YOU are the senior soldier i/c of any asset whatsoever, inc. yourself, YOU are responsible for it and its safety.
Standing orders, strategy, etc etc are as they stand obviously, but safety and security is YOUR responsibility.
The moment Chelmsford left camp, Pulleine, by definition, was the man responsible and in charge of its safety and security, no matter what Chelmsford did or did not say before he left. Pulleine was the senior man at the camp and would have been exactly within his remit to make whatever changes he saw fit, any time he liked. The GOC was not there.

End of story.

OK, a PS. Try this. You are with a troop of girl guides and you camp on a disused railway track. The troop leader sets up the camp and leaves telling you that you don't need to change anything. A few hours later, you hear some whistling in the distance several miles away and feel some faint vibrations through the track.
Would you not change anything, because the troop leader had told you nothing needed to be changed?
Believe me, as a girl guide troop leader, or an army officer, the responsibility for the welfare of those under you is yours.
If you are the senior man on the ground in a situation, if no one more senior than you is at hand, you are the one who must make the calls.

Neil Aspinshaw wrote:

Tasker

Stewart had at least 300 rifles per face, a gardner and 3 guns against Pulleins possible 150 + Mounted and two guns. Musa Wad Hilu had around 11,000 men to his disposal against Nshingwayo's 20,000. the odds were not the same.

The square did not open up due to Burnaby, it was wide open already as the baggage had not quite caught up, and some had simply plopped to the ground unwilling to budge, The Guards and the MiCR could not close as the skirmishers were still heading pell mell for the gaps. A perfect storm. Beresford threw out the Gardner which "potentially" had the ability to put a company rate of fire down had it not jammed , but put himself squarely in the field of fire from C coy HCR, on the angle of the square as the 5 , 4 & 3 Coy tried to close in echelon the ends were left open to infiltration. Burnaby went out bellowing orders for the companies to pivot on the right of each company to align the square.

Abu Kru does give an insight into what square, prepared and ready could do, The GCR, HCR and MICR had about 900 rifles at their disposal, Anja had around 8000 men available, this time the square held, but again, the ratio of firepower is still much higher. Tofrek is an example of a defensive preparation working to as good as an extent as it offers a gap, as the mealies did at RD, against a hand held weapon, but interesting that alot of the injuries at RD were caused by firearms, not edged weapons. The Mahdist infiltration between the two squares gave them a 1-0 lead at half time, but lost 2-1 in the end. If Chard had not bisected the defence at RD with the buscuit boxes, and thus offered an open flank, the odds?, well who knows??.

As I try not to" what if" historical contemporary actions can, providing the odds were levelled, give an insight as close as human conflict, with the same weapons can offer.

Thank you for the reply to my post Neil, and you clarification of the events leading to the opening of the square in 1885.
I think the point of my post was to point out that comparing Abu Klea with RD/iSandlwana however, is not a fair comparison, we are not comparing like with like.
Wouldn't RD and iSandlwana be a fairer comparison to make when we are talking about odds and defences?
RD had well prepared defences due to Chard's planning, whereas iSandlwana did not, due to Pulleine's lack of planning.
In the numbers game, comparing British infantry to Zulu warriors, surely one would have put their money on iSandlwana being a more successful outcome to the British than Isandlwana? (100 v 5000 against 1000 v 20,000).


PS - Neil, one last thing. If Pulleine, at the Camp back in 1879 had ordered the infantry into a square formation with the ammo in the middle, do you think they could have repelled the Zulu attack?
(Please don't say you don't do what ifs!!!!) Your opinion would be richly valued. PM me a Y or N if you do not want to speculate on a public forum. Cheers, Tasker.

Tasker
In in broad principle I agree with you. However you have to put yourself into the Victorian soldiers mindset. Conditioned to follow orders.
I agree Pulleine was to rigid. But look at the C**p Durnford got into when he thought on his own. Would Pulleine want to go the same route? Or would his Victorian upbringing actually allow him to.
Look at that photo of him with his wife........wow does that strike you as a man that would disobey an order?

Regards

PS Tad concerned about your preoccupation with girl guides :lol!:

"wow does that strike you as a man that would disobey an order?"

Springbok, Pulleine would not have been disobeying any orders - unless - things were very different back then. Is that what you are saying?

Are you saying that in Victorian times, if I had been asked to stand on a disused railway line with my men, then, unbeknown to the senior officer who had asked me to stand there, a train unexpectedly had come along, I would have been disobeying an order if i had rearranged the disposition of my men and I?


PS - please answer Yes or NO only.

Yes = you win
No = I win

Quote :

The presentation of the Anstey medal will be a private family affair

Fair enough just an idea.

Tasker

To simplistic. many instances of orders being given and obeyed knowing disaster looms.
Balaclava?
Charge of the Light Brigade.
American Civil War abounds with examples.
First would war trenches.

In essence yes and no.

Quote :

Charge of the Light Brigade.

The order was ok, It was Nolan who got it wrong.

Curling States
"During the action, cease firing, was sounded twice". ( Why would this be)

Nolan was a scapegoat. Lucas was at fault for issuing unclear orders and Cardigan for following through. But that really proves my point.
Either Cardigan was a blithering idiot to lead the 11th up that valley or obeyed orders, despite the consequencies. None of the troops or officers ( or Girl Guides ) backed down.

Onward onward into the valley of death rode the gallant 600............................

Regards

Hi Littlehand .
As to why the cease firing call was heard twice by Curling , may have had to do with the conditions on the day , hot , not much wind
which wouldnt have helped disperse the smoke , which surely hung over the battlefied making it very difficult , if not impossible to see
with clarity what was unfolding in front of them or elsewhere for that matter .
cheers 90th.


PS. Hi Springbok , I think you mean Lucan ? :lol!: . Your cup tilt may be over next Sunday , Go Aussies Go !.
cheers mate , 90th

90th
Lucan to be sure, long time since I read that afair.

My cup tilt????????? Never spilt a drop in my life :lol!:

Whatever happens, the weekend will see a large amount of the brown stuff going down, win or loose. Im sharing a hotel with what seems half of Australia. Damn but they can drink, the bar closed early last night because they ran out of beer.

Regards