Pte David Jenkins. 'Forgotten' Survivor of Rorke's Drift Returned to Official Records

kwajimu1879 wrote:

Dave,

Wolves or sheep who cares!

But when you cut & paste make so the person you are copying knows what they are writing - look at the full text on the site where you got:

Dave wrote:

Major Chard was struck down with enteric fever and was sent to Ladysmith, by ambulance, on I7th.February,1879,where he was nursed back to good health by a Dr. and Nrs.Hyde.

It is riddled with mistakes - trustworthy I don't believe so?

'Jimu

Impi at least, we can indentify the of the forum! 2 today!

Poor Julian! He has work to do with some of you :p;::p;::p;:

impi.

"Not reading the posts", cheeky sod, listen who's talking, good god lad, you have got a nerve.

So come on then 'Brain of Britain', tell us all who the other Pte Jenkins was at RD????

Hey guys ! You are sure that there was not a third Pte Jenkins :p;::p;::p;:? They were Welsh :p;::p;::p;:?

Matin
There are immense gaps in the knowledge of your oponents in this debate. That credibility evinced by their total inability to produce a cogent argument or answer without resorting to inanities or insult. Go back over this thread and you will find, hardly to your suprise, that not one question posed has actually been answered. Instead any consideration posed, by any number of forum members, has been derided and discarded without any attempt to answer and when pressed replied to with personal insults.
I put it down to inbreeding!

But anyway springbok9, Julian explained what it was and should be presumptuous to say that he is wrong, is not it ?

PAscal
Presumtion is praising Julian before reading his essay. Lets wait and see shall we.
Regards

Hi springy.

Thanks for your support mate, much appreciated.

You are right, I have been back through this thread quite a few times, and all the evidence says that David Jenkins was indeed one of the defenders at RD. But like you say, all this evidence is either derided, ridiculed or rubbished by some of the doubters, yet they never put forward a proper answer as to who they think the other Pte Jenkins was at RD, and nearly always reply with some sort of insult, which just shows the level of their mentality.

No need to wait when you have that it is for me until further notice ,and for the Zulu war, it is the gospel according to Julian,Mr David Jackson ,Martin ,Marsupial,Tasker and you!

Why, you and Mate are not in agreement with Julian ?

DrummerBoy 16 wrote:

Impi

Again this has been said many times

Chard said 11 people of the 1/24th were at RD, we know the names of 10 of them, who was the 11th ?

Thats the question. Many are submising its David Jenkins. But there is no real proof that states "DAVID" There is a good argument for him being there, but nothing that actually puts David at RD or Isandlwana?

Late August of this year we will know it

24th
Your quite correct, so far, there is no piece of paper that states David Jenkins was at RD.
However as in any legal argument, the weight of evidence is sufficient to prove guilt/innocence.

So let me again itemise the evidence 'for,' and ask you to answer the questions posed.

Who was the 11th un named soldier refered to.
Why would Chard lie in mentioning David Jenkins.
Explain how J Jenkins could be laying in his bed, incapacitated, see Reynolds account, and was killed there, see Smiths account have got out of bed run around through a hail of bullets, fought along side Chard and then run back?
Why would he be in possesion of a bible, inscribed by the good ladies of Durban.
Why would his comrades acknowledge him on arrival In England as a defender of RD.
Why would he be introduced to the Duke of Clarence, in front of his entire Regiment, as a defender of RD
Why would he be introduced by his regiment to King Edward as a defender of RD.
Why would he be acknowledged by Lord Butler.
Why would he have been detailed by his regiment to attend on Lady Butler.
Why would his wifes 'warmest regards', be past onto him by Lord Butler.

So far the evidence 'against'

Innuendo trying to prove Jenkins was not there by virtue of his service record. Proved wrong
An attempt to prove that the bible wasnt genuine
An attempt to explain the bible a being a forgery
An attempt to explain away Jenkins not being in Natal
An attempt to implicate the Ladies of Durban in wondering around the keyside looking for bags to tuck bibles into and finding the wrong bag............. doesnt explain the dedication.
An attempt to accuse the museum staff of malfeasance.
An attempt to do the same to various historians.
An attempt to have Kris Wheatley included as a doubter................ she denies that 100% and gives full support to David Jenkins.
A feable attempt to show one Jenkins wasnt so sick that he couldnt have done his olympic dash back and forwards.
An attempt to throw doubt on Lady Butlers veracity.

David and Adrian wrote an essay outlining their reasoning and like any accademic paper had to be put to the test, and it has been and found wanting in certain areas. Sufficiently so that it deserves a responce. That responce hasnt been forthcoming, except for an expected short statement from Elizabeth that is. Considering the debate that has gone on and the repudiation of a lot of the points raised by them one would expect them to have been only to willing to answer those critisisms with some hard fact. That they havent would put them in the same situation as an accused in the 'dock' and the oft attributed judges remark.........The jury should draw what inference they feel they must.

I look forward to your comments.

Regards

Hello

In 1991 after the list of Toby Giese, he had a patient in the hospital of 1/24 th named, Pvt 841 James Jenkins killed in the hospital ...But no David Jenkins ?

In the Campaign book No. 41 of IK is the same conclusion ?!

It's Good ???

Cheers

Pascal

Gadzooks springy, that's tellin' 'em. :p;:

It reminds me of a few good old sayings, which I know you will also remember.

'In like a Terrier'.

'Pick the bones out of that'.

'Put that in your pipe and smoke it'.

'Cry havoc, and let slip the dogs of war'.

There are other sayings I could mention, but I will leave it at that.

Best regards mate.

Hi all

On January 12, 1879... After taking the village of Sihayo, the third column is left with 10 Zulu prisoners intact and 4 zulu wounded and also prisoners .

Who escorted the prisoners, where and when?

Cheers

Pascal

Just been watching the tennis, but Springbok's post? I would say that is game set and match!

impi seems to have dug himself into a hole so deep, he is unable to get out of it and he is not receptive to any of the evidence to show David Jenkins was a defender.

Dave's poll to gather forum members' opinions by way of a vote, also back fired, with a resounding landslide of a "YES" vote in favour of David Jenkins being at Rorke's drift.
Only 2 (two) forum members were of the opinion that "NO", David Jenkins was not at Rorkes drift. Does anyone know who these 2 members might be?:p;:

But everyone knows he was in the escort that accompanied the Zulu prisoners taken the January 12, 1879 during the attack on the village of Sihayo!

Impi this is probably old hat by now but your post of Wed 26th june is Chard's first report on RD .
His far more elaborate and comprehensive report for Queen Victoria was compiled on the 21st Feb 1880 .
It is in ' Rorke's Drift by Those who were there ' by Jones & Stevenson , it runs from page 18 - 34 . Assuming YOU believe he ( Chard ) wrote the report in the first place ! . Also Chard Mentions Pte Jenkins saving his life , wouldnt one think if this Jenkins was the one who died in hospital , Chard would say so ?? . Something like '' Jenkins got me to duck , then the poor chap was killed in the hospital " .
90TH.

Hi 90th.

Exactly. How could a man that was debilitated and delirious with fever, suddenly recover enough to run from the hospital, fight alongside his mates, give Chard the "duck down Sir" warning, then run back to the hospital and suddenly become debilitated and delirious again, where he is then killed by the zulus. It just doesn't make sense.

Hope you enjoyed your break mate, did you get a sun tan? :p;:

Pascal,

In 1991 after the list of Toby Giese, he had a patient in the hospital of 1/24 th named, Pvt 841 James Jenkins killed in the hospital ...But no David Jenkins ?

In the Campaign book No. 41 of IK is the same conclusion ?!

Pascal wrote:

Research has moved on since both those publications were produced.

'Jimu

Springbok





Cheers

Gents you can post whatever you want relating to Pte Jenkins. But you have nothing to show he was at RD, until such times your welcome to speculate as much as you want? I can't see any point in adding to this discussion, now awaiting JW information.until then nothing more from me on this topic.

Click Here Who wrote the Chard Reports? A Stylometric Analysis By Dr. David I Holmes, The College of New Jersey, USA

Impi

What nonsence is

"you have nothing to show he was at RD."

Chard clearly says his full name and credits him as being at RD. There are also lots of other things that place him
there, why ignore them ?


Cheers

It has been said that a Sgt? Who was killed at Isandlwana or Rorkes Drift. Named Pte David Jenkins as being one of those send to rear, either as an member of a prisoner escourt or as a prisoner. Who was the Sgt?

DB. I have been looking for the document that shows Lt Chard naming "David Jenkins" by name Can you post it, or a link to it.

springbok9 wrote:

Matin
There are immense gaps in the knowledge of your oponents in this debate. That credibility evinced by their total inability to produce a cogent argument or answer without resorting to inanities or insult. Go back over this thread and you will find, hardly to your suprise, that not one question posed has actually been answered. Instead any consideration posed, by any number of forum members, has been derided and discarded without any attempt to answer and when pressed replied to with personal insults.
I put it down to inbreeding!

Springbok could you fill in the gaps, as to what's missing?

Ulundi.

The 'Sgt' was Colour Sgt Edwards, KIA at iSandlwana.

Mr M. Cooper wrote:

Ulundi.

The 'Sgt' was Colour Sgt Edwards, KIA at iSandlwana.

Thanks Martin. I'm not sure the letter in question is on the forum?

Do you have a copy, that can be posted or viewed elsewhere?

DB16
I dont think that Chard ever refered to David Jenkins. Just Prvt Jenkins. Because there was no other (suviving ) Jenkins around at the time, and wasnt untill the reinforcements arrived, David has been the only candidate.
Ulundi I hope that answers your question.

Regards

Ulundi.

According to an earlier post by Julian (way back in this thread), the letter written by Col Sgt William Edwards is kept at the museum in Brecon, and Julian states that he has seen this letter personally (so no problems there with it's authenticity).

I don't think a copy of the letter is on the forum, and Bill might have problems with the copyright regarding posting it.

I am not sure, but a copy of the letter might well be in the book 'The Red Soldier, letters from the Zulu War 1879' by Frank Emery.

Alternatively, watch out for Julian's new publication, as with all the new information that Julian has acquired regarding Pte David Jenkins, it might well appear in there.

Ulundi
RRW Museum Brecon Accession number 2002/25

Cheers

Expect the Julian's new publication, as with all the new information That Julian HAS Acquired Regarding Pte David Jenkins, you fall all agree.  

Ulundi, those overseas think everyone in the UK, live 5 mins from Brecon!!!!

I've taken the liberty of recreating Lady Butlers sketch of Private David Jenkins to add to the topic...........The1stL

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

impi wrote:

But you have nothing to show he was at RD

impi, clearly you were not serious in making the above remark? May I suggest you re-read Springbok's post of 26th June, 2.25pm. It summarises all the known and existing evidence linking David Jenkins to Rorke's drift.
Whilst I agree with you and get it that you think that this is not Forensic Quality evidence, which would place DJ at Rorkes drift "beyond all reasonable doubt," it is certainly a rather weighty collection of circumstantial evidence, which WOULD be more than sufficient to hold up in any Civil Court in the land on the "balance of probabilities."
If we were to apply the "beyond all reasonable doubt" Criminal Court requirement to all stories or supposedly known facts about this small war, there would be really very little left!!!

Poor impi      ! Get off on a bit now  

Mr M. Cooper wrote:

impi.

"Not reading the posts", cheeky sod, listen who's talking, good god lad, you have got a nerve.

So come on then 'Brain of Britain', tell us all who the other Pte Jenkins was at RD????

Martin it's not a case of guessing who the other Pte Jenkins was? What can you show to the forum that supports it was David Jenkins.
There isn't any primary source material to show it was him. those who believe he was there are only basing that on maybe's!!!
No one is bringing anything new to the table, so it's now a case of waiting for Julians publication.
 
Julian obviously feels the same and more research is required, or he would not be undertaking further research. And if you think Julian his doing the reseach to prove certain members wrong, you will be greatly mistaken, he is at the top of his game and takes his research seriouly. Like impi he is no longer getting involved, and impi is prepaired to wait for Julians results.

Littlehand was in a simular situation to impi regarding the Brave Fugitive, but he was first to credit Julians findings accepting Hall was the man. I have no doubt impi will do the same should the results show Pte David Jenkins 1st/24th as being the 11th member of this regiment at RD.

Dave wrote:

Mr M. Cooper wrote:

impi.

"Not reading the posts", cheeky sod, listen who's talking, good god lad, you have got a nerve.

So come on then 'Brain of Britain', tell us all who the other Pte Jenkins was at RD????

Martin it's not a case of guessing who the other Pte Jenkins was? What can you show to the forum that supports it was David Jenkins.
There isn't any primary source material to show it was him. those who believe he was there are only basing that on maybe's!!!
No one is bringing anything new to the table, so it's now a case of waiting for Julians publication.
 
Julian obviously feels the same and more research is required, or he would not be undertaking further research. And if you think Julian his doing the reseach to prove certain members wrong, you will be greatly mistaken, he is at the top of his game and takes his research seriouly. Like impi he is no longer getting involved, and impi is prepaired to wait for Julians results.

Littlehand was in a simular situation to impi regarding the Brave Fugitive, but he was first to credit Julians findings accepting Hall was the man. I have no doubt impi will do the same should the results show Pte David Jenkins 1st/24th as being the 11th member of this regiment at RD.

  it's a case of waiting for Julians

I think is a bit odd, that Pte David Jenkins himself never claimed to have at been at Rorkes Drift! The only account he left, gave the impression he had taken part in the Battle of Isandlwana.

And does anyone know why? The original roll of honour cannot be revised.

And just how did he get from Rorke's Drift, to Pietermaritzburg so quickly? He would not have left on the 23rd Jan.
Is there any mentioned of other RD defenders from the same regiment, going Pietermaritzburg or did he go alone.

Waiting for Julians  

24th
No speculation mate all fact. During the course of the discussion the newspaper articles reporting the meetings were either reproduced or referenced. They are all source material and as they are from different newspapers I think we can rule out any collusion.
24th we are debating, no appology is required or wanted ( a simple and humble grovel would be good.   )
AS Ive posted to DB16, Chard never mentions David, merely Jenkins. As Ive posted the only other Jenkins was killed in the Hospital ( no mention any where of him crawling around.) It is documented by Reynolds that he was incapacitated and by Smith that he died in the hospital. There is no way at all that he could have moved backwards and forwards. I posted some time ago photos of RD one in particular from the position of the biscuit box wall looking at the hospital. Its a big distance, not a space that an 'incapacitated man' could navigate twice under fire. Therefore the man on the walls refered to as 'Jenkins ' by Chard could not have been James Jenkins, its an impossibility. Once that fact is accepted there can, by a process of elimanation, only be one other Jenkins in the vicinity. And only one Jenkins that suvived. Its not therefore a giant leap of deduction to pinpoint the identity of the other 'Jenkins'.
Ive read Ians article, at no point does he deny the bible. Ians whole aproach is to outline what he considers the situation and let you make up your own mind.
Julians about to produce some other facets so I do not want to interfere with that, he has given a strong hint in the early stages of this debate, so on that really tantalsising snippet I will leave you for a while.
Im out of action for a couple of week.

Cheers

Ulundi
The letter was marked PMB, that does not mean to say he was there.
Jenkins did claim to be there.
Cheers

springbok9 wrote:

24th
No speculation mate all fact. During the course of the discussion the newspaper articles reporting the meetings were either reproduced or referenced. They are all source material and as they are from different newspapers I think we can rule out any collusion.
24th we are debating, no appology is required or wanted ( a simple and humble grovel would be good.   )
AS Ive posted to DB16, Chard never mentions David, merely Jenkins. As Ive posted the only other Jenkins was killed in the Hospital ( no mention any where of him crawling around.) It is documented by Reynolds that he was incapacitated and by Smith that he died in the hospital. There is no way at all that he could have moved backwards and forwards. I posted some time ago photos of RD one in particular from the position of the biscuit box wall looking at the hospital. Its a big distance, not a space that an 'incapacitated man' could navigate twice under fire. Therefore the man on the walls refered to as 'Jenkins ' by Chard could not have been James Jenkins, its an impossibility. Once that fact is accepted there can, by a process of elimanation, only be one other Jenkins in the vicinity. And only one Jenkins that suvived. Its not therefore a giant leap of deduction to pinpoint the identity of the other 'Jenkins'.
Ive read Ians article, at no point does he deny the bible. Ians whole aproach is to outline what he considers the situation and let you make up your own mind.
Julians about to produce some other facets so I do not want to interfere with that, he has given a strong hint in the early stages of this debate, so on that really tantalsising snippet I will leave you for a while.
Im out of action for a couple of week.

Cheers

No mate not fact! It's your speculation, regarding newspaper reports, which we were told to take with a pitch of salt, by JW in other discussion. Newspaper are not primary resource material. Here say! It was you who stated David Jenkins was named by Chard, no one else. The only " fact" there is, is you have nothing that confirms David Jenkins was at RD. it's best to wait for Julians publication.rather than reading the rubbish that is being posted. Julian will be providing facts!!

Don't you your newspapers to suit your needs!

Waiting for Julian  

This Colour Sgt Edwards letter. Does it actually state " David Jenkins"

Or just Jenkins.

Because James Jenkins was also of the 1st 24th and at Rd. How do we know Edwards wasn't referring to James Jenkins. .

Meanwhile best, all you want about David Jenkins is on the notes on page 72 of the ES seventh edition ...  

 

Ulundi,

I'll translate for you:

Pascal wrote:

Meanwhile best, all you want about David Jenkins is on the notes on page 72 of the ES seventh edition

'England's Sons' 7th edition page 72.

I didn't realise I could read Breton until today!

'Jimu