Save the Camp

littlehand wrote:

Here you go!

"1. Statement of Lieutenant-Colonel J. North Crealock, Acting Military Secretary.

1. Soon after 2 A.M. on the 22nd January I received instructions from the Lieutenant-General to send a written order to Lieutenant-Colonel Durnford, R.E., commanding No. 2 Column, to the following effect (I copied it in my note-book which was afterwards lost): " Move up to Sandhlwana Camp at once with all your mounted men and Rocket Battery—take command of it. I am accompanying Colonel Glyn, who is moving off at once to attack Matyana and a Zulu force
said to be 12 or 14 miles off, and at present watched by Natal Police, Volunteers, and Natal Native Contingent. Colonel Glyn takes with him 2-24th Regiment, 4 guns R.A., and Mounted  Infantry."
2. I was. not present during the conversation between Major Clery, Staff Officer to Colonel Glyn, and the Lieutenant-General, but the evening before, about 8.30 P.M., on this officer asking the Lieutenant-General if the 1-24th " Were to reinforce Major Dartnell in the Magane Valley," he said " No."  The General received, I believe through Colonel Glyn, a subsequent representation which caused the fresh orders at 2 A.M.

This one. 90th what's confusing the issue, is that it's the highlighted text that Impi is referring to, not the text as a whole!

At this time he did not act in a way that would make anybody worried. He was possibly left behind because he could rally troops and he and his men new the land and culture better than anybody, so he was the best person and column to have if LC needed emergency support.


Commander Howse

Hi Martin .  
Now , Now , Martin your theories are a little out regarding the 4 - 0 as you say it should've been ! This is off topic I
know but its a reply which is on this thread . It seems you have forgotten the Broad ( decision ) Howler I may add , that cost us winning the First Test , along with the fact that we would've won the third but the rain saved you ! , I seem to arrive at 2 - 2 , then Clarke foolishly decides to keep you in the last game and you get close ! . Lets not forget that when play was stopped in the third test when we were nearly certainties to win , the light meter was reading 8 ! which is ok , especially when they went off in the last Test when it was 3 points less at 5 !! , which isnt ok ! . So you can imagine what the skipper was saying to the umpires , I know I can ! . :[url=http://ww 
Cheers MOCP 90th  

 Hi Dave .
I realise that , if you take time to read my post above yours , you'll plainly see I've mentioned that fact ! , also , I havent mentioned anything about the text , as there is nothing in it apart from the '' make believe '' line of '' take command of it '' !  
90th.  

But Impi has not used " Take command" in any context in relation to the discussion. He is talking about Glyn changing LC mind to assist Dartnel?

Commander Howse wrote:

At this time he did not act in a way that would make anybody worried. He was possibly left behind because he could rally troops and he and his men new the land and culture better than anybody, so he was the best person and column to have if LC needed emergency support.  


Commander Howse

The fact of the matter is LC did not trust him, along with many others? Durnford had been reprimanded for taking matters into his own hands based on information he received from a Zulu sympathiser, has he himself was!

So, LC is using personal feelings to decide battle order, that is another reason LC is to be blame. The thing is that the Army Staff and Field/Infantry Staff could not get along especially after the Batshe Valley Incident.

Commander Howse

Masson wrote:

What he Have Done shoulds, or what did he do (this is LC ...)? As a line in the movie Sharps Rifles, He Should Have gone behind His tent and His brains blown out.

 I had not thought of, but I do not think it is in his mind, alas ...

Masson wrote : Just think what would happen if the Zulus attacked before Durnford was there. Who would got the blame then?

You've got it!

Masson wrote : Durnford only took command after the Zulus went on the attack, not before. Durnford was only in charge of the #2 column not #3 column unless ordered. He was not ordered to take command of the camp just ride there. He did that and was headed out to do something, nobody really knows.

Masson ,Durnford had little power over the 24 th without permission Pulleine ... Like what he did not command the garrison of the camp ...

Masson, do not forget also that Crealock is a liar of the highest caliber ...

Masson wrote : At this time he did not act in a way that would make anybody worried. He was possibly left behind because he could rally troops and he and his men new the land and culture better than anybody, so he was the best person and column to have if LC needed emergency support.

It's especially he was the only one to have troops available and it was he who had the fastest troops ...

Pascal, your talking crap now !!  Don't ruin it. Perhaps we are back at that point, where nothing more can be said ? That moves the discussion forward!

Dave, my .... , eat here   ! The topic to the original "(how to) save the Camp!"  

But you have no idea on this, you thought about it ? Sometimes ?

  

Despite the passion that stirs so many members of this forum, for decades (as springbok9 ,Impi and others great connoisseurs, to whom I owe 50% of my knowledge about this war ...), I would have wanted someone to tell me how LC could have saved the camp ... Nobody really answered because nobody really never thought ...(I'm so passionate that I did not know what to think ...)

Pascal
On the afternoon of the 21st lord Chelmsford and staff rode across the Nqutu plateau. They saw a group of horsemen on a ridge to the North east. He, Chelmsford mentioned, at the time, and later in letters and reports, that he intended the next day to send a patrol to recce that area.
In answer to your question.
If Chelmsford had left a mounted detachment behind in the camp on the 22nd with orders to recce that ridge they would have seen the zulu army forming up at position X. If that patrol had been carried out during the early morning then all the activity on the plateau would have been discoverd possibly in time for the column to have been recalled.
All speculative I know but its one single action that would have a chance of changing history.

Cheers

Commander Howse.

Can you see what I mean my friend, you are wasting your time trying to convince some of these people on here that Col Durnford is NOT to blame for iSandlwana. They are stubborn and their minds are made up, and even though the eveidence proves them wrong they will argue that black is red until they are blue in the face. 24th says that it is my theory and my theory alone regarding the earlier orders, but if 24th would read some books or search online regarding the subject, he would would see that it is not my theory, the evidence is written in various books by notable historians, and can also be found online by searching for the evidence. If you would take time to look back through the various threads regarding Col Durnford and the orders, you will find that much evidence has been provided by many other members, including a renowned Zulu War historian (Julian Whybra), to show that Col Durnford was not to blame for iSandlwana, and that he was obeying his orders. Some members seem to think that because Durnford received an instruction to move up to the camp, that this meant that he should have taken over command and stayed there, but nothing like that was written in the order, and what these stubborn members seem to forget is that Col Durnford was in command of a seperate independent column which was moving up to the camp then moving on to support LC (as instructed in the earlier orders). The problem is that their minds are so set on blaming Durnford, that they will ignore anything that proves them wrong, they still continue to believe the hogwash dished out by LC, Crealock, and others to put the blame on Durnford to cover LC's and their own backsides, they refuse to see through the web of lies and deceit that was spun by LC, Crealock, et al, and write silly remarks like "Durnford was ordered to go to the camp, end of", end of what may I ask?? why do they not ask themselves "then what"? What do these stubborn members think he was supposed to do when he arrived at the camp? Well, of course, they think he was supposed to stay at the camp and take command, but they cannot show any evidence that this was the case, ie; where is this written in the order? Crealock was proved a liar on this, so his evidence can be taken with a pinch of salt, or better still thrown out of the window.

So come on all you brainy anti Durnford members, what was Durnford supposed to do when he arrived at the camp, and don't say 'stay there and take command', because that is not written in the order, so come on, tell us what he was supposed to do???? Maybe if you were not all so stubborn (or thick), you would be able to read for yourselves what he was supposed to do, rather than keep on believing the rubbish churned out by LC, Crealock, etc, that is printed as being fact in various books by anti Durnford authors. Do your own research like many of us do, a good quote is "Seek and ye shall find", and instead of keep saying rubbish like "Durnford was ordered to the camp - end of", try asking yourselves, "Durnford was instructed to move up to the camp - then what". Use your brains and try to understand the meaning of the earlier orders, look back through the threads and you will seee that it has all been said before, stop being so stubborn and try to understand things better, and whatever Durnford got up to in his private life should have nothing to do with his military life, so don't be brainwashed by yet more anti Durnford rubbish.

Mr M. Cooper    

Commander Howse

Lord Chelmsford Writes
Lt Col Durnford. RE,comanding No 2 column met me on my return to camp(11th January), as he wished personally to report on certain matters connected with his command. I directed this officer to move one of his three battalions to watch, and eventually to cross at the Gates of Natal, between Rorkes Drift and the Umsinga Mountain, while he and the mounted men and rocket battery were to join me with No3 column. I directed the remaining two battalions to cross at Middledrift as soon as Col Pearson with No1 column had reached Ekowe. Chelmsford papers pp46-47
19th January
One of Colonel Durnfords regiments will cross the river from Sandspruit Valley, whilst his mounted natives will co operate with us from Rorkes Drift where they will be tomorrow (20th 0.

This is in addition to the known orders issued to Durnford.

I firmly believe that Durnford interpreted his orders of the 22nd as an extension to the plan of action compiled by Lord Chelmsford. He was pretty upfront when Pullein told him: "I am sorry you have come as you are senior to me and will take command.", his reply of "I 'm not staying" laid it out straight away what his intentions were.
so senior or not he declined command and defered to Pullein.

All of the reports coming into the camp from then on seemed to indicate that the Zulu were not a threat to the camp. The sentry sent to the top of isandlwana reported that they were withdrawing.

Its from that point on that I have a problem with Durnford. If he hadproceeded towards Chelmsford and the 'Matyanas', Chelmsfords outlined plan, then he would have been within his orders.

But he didnt. He seems to have been half way controlling the camp, despite what he told Pullein, in that an imperial company was sent onto the Tahalane spur and he sent two of his companies onto the plateau. Thats a problem for me.

Then he makes a quick decision ( Molife) to quit the camp and chase the retreating ( so the reort said) 600 zulu.

If they werent threatening the camp then why do it? Again a problem

Why didnt he chase after the 5000 reported to have travelled towards the West behind the Tahelane and the mountain itself ?
Again a problem.

All of these were bad decisions, and hindsight doesnt come into it.

On the issue of lagering or taking a defensive position, there was no air of danger in the camp ( Essex) all and sundry had heard the firing to the East and thought Lord Chelmsford was engaging the zulu army. Chelmsford himself had decided that lagering wasnt required, in view of a lack of threat why should Durnford?

Durnfords problems re occured with his retreat and his handling of the situation fron the Quabe valley onwards, in fact he shoudnt have been in the valley at all.

Pullein meanwhile should have done more. From the time the firing on the plateau filtered down to the the arrival of Shepstone, even at that point he still had time to draw up a better defensive line, drop the tents, and estaablish amunition points. The Zulu army had to cover 4 miles being harrassed and fired at, they were beaten back on the plateau at one point, that all meant time. He had Shepstones word of the army he was about to face. All he did was send another troop onto the spur ( its often said on this forum that was done to support Durnford. Thats wrong Durnford was in the oposite direction).And then almost immediatly recall them. What it does show is that Pullein was perplexed as Gardener called it.
Didnt have a clue would be the modern term.

So Chelmsford should have researched the plateau and been more accurate with his orders. Durnford should have taken better action and Pullein, well he shoudnt have been there at all

Just something to keep the pot boiling. 

Cheers

springbok9, what you said makes sense, but we do not really know what was in Durnfords mind except that he was headed towards the Zulu movement reports. If there was indeed 600 Zulus reported the men he had, the only artillery he had, the rockets, and the two companies he asked for were good enough to chase the Zulus off. Even if they were deem not a threat at the time, 600 Zulus could play havoc on communication. Unfortunately, he wasn't given the men he asked for, so he went on ahead with his plans, again unfortunately it wasn't 600 Zulus it was part of the main force. What could he have done to protect the rocket force, without allowing the Zulus through the defenses.

Again he could have been protecting his own flank before moving on to Chelmsford by going Northeast. This is all speculation on my part, but we really do not know what he was thinking. About the camp he did not have to or was in the position to take command of the camp. It could have been like a county and a city. As senior officer he commanded the field (County) and Pulliene commanded the camp (City).

Commander Howse

Springbok wrote Its His Single Action That Would Have a chance of changing history.

And once Lord Chelmsford was with Dartnel ,the camp was definitely screwed ?

As for Springbok last post , it seems that Durford or not to turn knew ! Stay in the camp or join Lord Chelmsford ? It was a little undecided in my opinion! It was his temperament or what?

Pascal, It was LC's fault, he backed everyone into a corner. LC messed everything up, that made it harder to think and come up with an action plan.

Commander Howse

Yes Durnford did not know what to do!

I know what will happen and still have a hard time making a decision of what to do. Protect the camp or support LC? Camp is important for supplies and LC is in command, nevermind supplies can not be replace and LC can easily be replace with better results. Protect the Camp. :[url=http://ww 

Commander Howse

To get back to the topic, In my opinion LC could do nothing to save the camp at Isandlwana, when he got word that it was under attack.

Hope this helps Pascal, I apologies for getting us off topic.

Commander Howse

As with all such battles (like Little Big Horn for example) it's all about timing, this is what he would peel to see if there was not a tiny possibility for LC to something ...

You understand Masson?  

Mr M. Cooper wrote:

Commander Howse.

Can you see what I mean my friend, you are wasting your time trying to convince some of these people on here that Col Durnford is NOT to blame for iSandlwana. They are stubborn and their minds are made up, and even though the eveidence proves them wrong they will argue that black is red until they are blue in the face. 24th says that it is my theory and my theory alone regarding the earlier orders, but if 24th would read some books or search online regarding the subject, he would would see that it is not my theory, the evidence is written in various books by notable historians, and can also be found online by searching for the evidence. If you would take time to look back through the various threads regarding Col Durnford and the orders, you will find that much evidence has been provided by many other members, including a renowned Zulu War historian (Julian Whybra), to show that Col Durnford was not to blame for iSandlwana, and that he was obeying his orders. Some members seem to think that because Durnford received an instruction to move up to the camp, that this meant that he should have taken over command and stayed there, but nothing like that was written in the order, and what these stubborn members seem to forget is that Col Durnford was in command of a seperate independent column which was moving up to the camp then moving on to support LC (as instructed in the earlier orders). The problem is that their minds are so set on blaming Durnford, that they will ignore anything that proves them wrong, they still continue to believe the hogwash dished out by LC, Crealock, and others to put the blame on Durnford to cover LC's and their own backsides, they refuse to see through the web of lies and deceit that was spun by LC, Crealock, et al, and write silly remarks like "Durnford was ordered to go to the camp, end of", end of what may I ask?? why do they not ask themselves "then what"? What do these stubborn members think he was supposed to do when he arrived at the camp? Well, of course, they think he was supposed to stay at the camp and take command, but they cannot show any evidence that this was the case, ie; where is this written in the order? Crealock was proved a liar on this, so his evidence can be taken with a pinch of salt, or better still thrown out of the window.

So come on all you brainy anti Durnford members, what was Durnford supposed to do when he arrived at the camp, and don't say 'stay there and take command', because that is not written in the order, so come on, tell us what he was supposed to do???? Maybe if you were not all so stubborn (or thick), you would be able to read for yourselves what he was supposed to do, rather than keep on believing the rubbish churned out by LC, Crealock, etc, that is printed as being fact in various books by anti Durnford authors. Do your own research like many of us do, a good quote is "Seek and ye shall find", and instead of keep saying rubbish like "Durnford was ordered to the camp - end of", try asking yourselves, "Durnford was instructed to move up to the camp - then what". Use your brains and try to understand the meaning of the earlier orders, look back through the threads and you will seee that it has all been said before, stop being so stubborn and try to understand things better, and whatever Durnford got up to in his private life should have nothing to do with his military life, so don't be brainwashed by yet more anti Durnford rubbish.

Nothing Martin! LC just required him to go to the camp. Why does there have to be something for him to do!!
As for taking command, he done that himself.

Pascal, I understand, the problem was that time was against LC. Even if LC had his entire force he would not have been able to get back to the camp to save it. LC was to far away. He probably believed that they could have handled it themselves anyway. Until he got reports of the camp's destruction or pending doom, he would not have done anything to get there in a timely manner. Besides, LC's troops were scattered trying to find the Zulu Flanking guards that they thought was the main Zulu army.

Commander Howse

So according to impi, all Col Durnford had to do was go to the camp, sit on his backside and do nothing  

As for taking command, he would have been deemed to have taken command because he became the senior officer on his arrival at the camp. But he told Pulleine that he was not staying at the camp, however, whilst he was there at the camp he had every right to give Pulleine his opinions and advice, but he was not interested in taking over command of the camp because he was not staying there, he had his own orders to carry out, and once he moved off, Pulleine would again become the senior officer at the camp. The inept Pulleine had done very little about all the reports about Zulu activity in the area, and Durnford was surprised about this, so he sent out some of his own men to try to get some better information about these reported Zulu's in the area, and this is when the report came in about the Zulu's heading in the direction of LC. Durnford had to act on this information, he could not risk having his general being cut off or outflanked, he is quoted as saying "we must stop them at all hazards", so when he moved off to try to find out more about these Zulu's, the command of the camp would be in Pulleine's hands.

I don't know why I keep trying to explain this, and NO, it is not my own personal theory, all you need to do is either read some good informative books, or go online, use your search engine, and read it all for yourselves, plus you can always use the search box on the forum to find previous postings on the subject.

If anybody else wants to continue the discussion on why Durnford left camp it can be done here

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] We need to get back on track with this threads topic

of how could Chelmsford save the camp.


Commander Howse

Mr M. Cooper wrote:

So according to impi, all Col Durnford had to do was go to the camp, sit on his backside and do nothing  

As for taking command, he would have been deemed to have taken command because he became the senior officer on his arrival at the camp. But he told Pulleine that he was not staying at the camp, however, whilst he was there at the camp he had every right to give Pulleine his opinions and advice, but he was not interested in taking over command of the camp because he was not staying there, he had his own orders to carry out, and once he moved off, Pulleine would again become the senior officer at the camp. The inept Pulleine had done very little about all the reports about Zulu activity in the area, and Durnford was surprised about this, so he sent out some of his own men to try to get some better information about these reported Zulu's in the area, and this is when the report came in about the Zulu's heading in the direction of LC. Durnford had to act on this information, he could not risk having his general being cut off or outflanked, he is quoted as saying "we must stop them at all hazards", so when he moved off to try to find out more about these Zulu's, the command of the camp would be in Pulleine's hands.

I don't know why I keep trying to explain this, and NO, it is not my own personal theory, all you need to do is either read some good informative books, or go online, use your search engine, and read it all for yourselves, plus you can always use the search box on the forum to find previous postings on the subject.

So according to impi, all Col Durnford had to do was go to the camp, sit on his backside and do nothing . 


Based on the fact, he knew from Lt Chard, that Zulus had been seen around Isandlwana. 
Based on the fact he assumed command.
He coud have kept himself busy. 

Who responsibility was it to! 

Position the men when the attack was imminent.

Ensure a ample supply of ammuntion to firing lines.

The construction of ammo stations.

Striking the tents.

The setting up of communication between the Compaines.

Ray63, It would have been Pulliene's job until Durnford decided if he was going to stay and fight with the camp or continue to LC's location. If Durnford took command of the camp, by defualt, which most likely he didn't, when he left it would have been PUlliene's job again. When Durnford left the camp the Zulus had not begun the fight yet. So it would have been Pulliene's fault that nothing got done. In my opinion, of course.

Commander Howse

You say Durnford was going to LC location. Why then was he going in the opposite direction. 

You say Command went to Durmford by default. Why then did he assumed command. The argument between the two officers must have taken place, and Durnford must have put up a good argument, because we know Pulleine gave over to Durnford. Why would Durnford go through all that when he had no I intention of staying.

Ray63 wrote:

Who responsibility was it to! 

[1] Position the men when the attack was imminent.

[2] Ensure a ample supply of ammuntion to firing lines.

[3] The construction of ammo stations.

[4] Striking the tents.

[5] The setting up of communication between the Compaines.

This is my current understanding.  Feel free to correct me where necessary.  My answers are specific to this army, during this time, and in this place.

6pdr, you are correct, this should have been done before the Zulus attacked, and it wasn't. The ammo was still on the wagons unopen. This was because Pulliene did nothing to prepare for battle. He must have thought that the main Zulu Army was to the east and LC was between the camp and the Zulus. The camp could have taken care of a small force with ease. So preparation was not needed in their view.  

Commander Howse

MThanks 6pdr. Excellent summary! 

Question 1) really says it all. 

Perhaps Durnford was just among the many casulities of Pulleines failure to do anything prior to his arrival. However his decision to leave put stress on the already over stretched resources available to Pulleine! With refrence to Durnford's fall back.

Ray63, When Durnford arrived to the camp he was told that there reports of Zulus to the North East, This is where he told LC the day before Zulus where reported, now he has official conformation. He must have changed his course to scout or intercept the Zulus to prevent LC or communications from being cut off. Apparently Durnford took command of the field not the camp, due to the fact Pulliene would not give him two companies, if Durnford was in command Pulliene could not refuse an order, unless it was a suggestion and not an order.


Commander Howse

Commander Howse wrote:

Ray63, When Durnford arrived to the camp he was told that there reports of Zulus to the North East, This is where he told LC the day before Zulus where reported, now he has official conformation. He must have changed his course to scout or intercept the Zulus to prevent LC or communications from being cut off. Apparently Durnford took command of the field not the camp, due to the fact Pulliene would not give him two companies, if Durnford was in command Pulliene could not refuse an order, unless it was a suggestion and not an order.


Commander Howse

That is speculation! We don't know what Durnford was thinking?

Ray63 correct when Durnford left camp before the fight nobody knew there was going to be a big fight. You can not blame Durnford he just arrived with orders to ride to Isandlwana, he did not know what was happening that night into the morning.

Commander Howse

Ray63, True, nobody Knows, that is the problem, it is pretty much all speculation.

Commander Howse

I can't find nothing in any form, that confirms that Durnfords intention was to go to LC location when he left the camp. No account what so ever. But there are accounts which state he went to meet the Zulu at the front. Surly Durnford intentions would ave been mentioned some where.

Durnford was sent to the camp, so he could support LC at a moments notice when called upon. He got to camp stayed for a hour and then left. That is all we really know, there are many accounts that say many things, so that is why the battle of Isandlwana is so debatable then, now, and in the future.

Commander Howse

6pdr, I couldn't have said it any better.  

Commander Howse

Ray63 wrote:

I can't find nothing in any form, that confirms that Durnfords intention was to go to LC location when he left the camp. No account what so ever. But there are accounts which state he went to meet the Zulu at the front. Surly Durnford intentions would ave been mentioned some where.

Durnford also made various offhand comments to his irregulars about the need to support Chelmsford's force.


* "The columns are separating, one moving to the left rear, and one towards the General."

I keep hearing that Durnford expected new orders to be waiting. Is this just us speculating or is there evidence to confirm this! 

Durnford order is quite clear and to the point. If LC had wanted him to do anything else other than go to the camp, would he have not said in the original order? 

Ie. move to the camp and await further orders, or follow orders issued previous day? 
I don't understand why certain members insist that there was something else for Durnford to do, apart from reinforce the force already at Isandlwana. For my part, I see it as Col Durnford disobaying orders by leaving the camp.

LC was known for making rash judgments without using a council to come up with ideas. He was also preoccupied with what to do about Dartnell further to the east. His plans all along was to use # 2 column to support # 3 Column. LC did not care about the camp, he wanted Durnford there to support his advance not to take command of the camp. It would have been common knowledge for Durnford to take command, so with everything else going on he did not put it in the orders. What he did not realize was that even when it was common knowledge for Durnford to take command it still would cause a rift and many questions. Of course the orders were given twice first to Clery, then from the other tent Crealock heard this and was mad that he was not given the order to give to Durnford so it was given again to him. The order to Command the Camp could have been left out.

When Durnford received the generic order he would have thought that he would have orders waiting for him at the camp, when there wasn't he was free to support # 3 column in any capacity.

Commander Howse

Ray63 wrote:

I keep hearing that Durnford expected new orders to be waiting. Is this just us speculating or is there evidence to confirm this!

Hmmm...I think it's just speculation...that I had come to believe as gospel.
 

Ray63 wrote:

Durnford order is quite clear and to the point. If LC had wanted him to do anything else other than go to the camp, would he have not said in the original order?
Ie. move to the camp and await further orders, or follow orders issued previous day?

Well, I think this comes under the heading of "military protocol and practice." Until new orders are issued, isn't it commonly accepted that one is bound by prior orders, exigent extraordinary circumstances. Durnford's prior orders concerned him operating in support of LC...so it was logical for him to assume that is why he was moving up to Isandlwana. Remember, the big scandal was Crealock adding the words "and take command," which was a convenient, but inaccurate, addition to the historical record.

Ray63 wrote:

I don't understand why certain members insist that there was something else for Durnford to do, apart from reinforce the force already at Isandlwana. For my part, I see it as Col Durnford disobeying orders by leaving the camp.

Apart from my answer above I would also add that Durnford was commanding a maneuver force almost entirely consisting of irregulars. I don't think he would have believed it natural for him to take over a command of Regulars which was why he was quick to reassure Pulleine on that score he had no intention of mucking things up by doing so. It is interesting to note that even had Durnford elected to exercise his textbook authority, Pulleine would have remained in direct command of the 24th and been primarily responsible for defending the integrity of the camp.

Finally, Durnford was very quick to back away when confronted by Melvill about detaching those two companies of Regulars. Melvill was obviously NOT in command but he acted as if he was...because Durnford was an outsider who had no moral authority to be overruling the established order in camp. What's strange to me is that contemporary amateur historians find this so difficult to credit when there was NO DISPUTE WHATEVER about it at the time. Cochrane's testimony makes it abundantly clear there was no acrimony. Everybody was using the same playbook at the time. I think that insisting Durnford HAD to take command of the camp is seeing yesterday's world through the legalistic prism of today. In other words, it's anachronistic thinking.

Commander Howse wrote:

LC did not care about the camp...Commander Howse

I agree he wasn't concerned about DEFENDING the camp because he had zero expectation of an attack. To the degree he was thinking about it at all, what concerned him was the moving of it to the area of the Mangeni...

Masson wrote: Even if LC HAD His Entire strength he Would not Have Been ble to get back to the camp to save it.

Everyone is in agreement with this, there was not a little hope ?