No Martini Henry Rifles Found Among The Zulu Dead At Rorkes Drift.

There were no non-commissioned officers or officers or single soldiers of the infantry of the NNC of isandhwana , which could beings caught and killed just before the battle of RD by the amabuthos of the loins who would go to RD ?

Because there were MH in the infantry of the NNC at Isandhwana ...

Julian
I concur with both you and Bill. Without evidence to the contrary there is no reason to doubt CSM Bourne. Although his memory seems faulty on detail and names that crack that he heard is the type of thing that could stick in the memory.
In respect of there being no proof of wounds, possibly non were caused ?
There were MH rounds found on the Shiyane ledges, cant quite put my finger on that source but it does exist.

All sorts of possibilities to explain away the various issues, Bourne being deafened by the noise, Mehlokazulu not being able to tell the difference between an Enfield and an MH. The rounds found being spilt from a soldiers ball bag when searching the slopes.

But as you have pointed out it would be a very brave man to discount it completely.

Hung Jury?

Cheers

If no non-commissioned officers or officers or single soldiers of the infantry of the NNC of isandhwana , are killed just before the battle of RD by the amabuthos of the loins who would go to RD, because there were MH in the infantry of the NNC at Isandhwana ...

Possibility of MH at RD...Et toc ...

Pascal
The Zulus who attacked RD would not come in to contact with fleeing Isandhlwana NNC, just as they didn't come into contact with fleeing redcoats.

Hi Springbok9,
Agreed, 50/50, neither proved or disproved.
Yet one thing tells me there could be more to this interesting thread.  During the attack on RD accurate fire was been taken into the laager from the terraces,caves and slopes of the Oskarberg. In this, Schies, Scammell and  Byrne, amongst others, took hits from incoming enemy fire originating on the mountain. Byrne was hit twice and the last was a fatal head wound. Now this type of shooting over that distance is not some paluka up on the mountain firing a blunderbuss charged with cast iron pot legs, nails and rusty nuts.  
Perhaps something will come out yet telling us more.

regards

barry

Hi Barry
Im really inclined to agree with you, but go back to the old days of the British longbows, Agincourt maybe? It wasn't they were so accurate it was a few hundred, thousand, bowmen firing together. Some had to hit ! Potentially the same at RD twenty or so all firing of say twenty rounds each from old muskets etc. From 400 rounds 4 hit, its a 1% hit rate. Your the gun Boyjie, what do you reckon, possible?

Cheers

On the other hand Barry, they were potting away from 4.30 till it got dark and how many soldiers did they hit - Nicholas, Chick, Cole, Fagan, Scanlon, Byrne, T. Williams, Desmond, Waters, Allen, Lyons, Keefe, Hitch, Tasker, Green, Scammell, Schiess, Dalton and maybe Anderson.
All it would have taken would be to have one or two good Zulu marksmen - they could have shot the lot.
Springbok, I tend to agree.

they could of shot the lot, say's Julian.
how long till darkness? where was
Dablumanzi during the fighting? he of
the sophisticated European hunting
rifle.. xhosa

We tend to forget that the caves were not the only place firing came from, Henry Hook: "they gained the shelter of the storehouse and ovens and gave us many heavy volleys."
And then late in the battle the Zulu poured fire in from the abandoned barricades.
Again proof that some of the muzzle loaders were effective would be the case of Corporal John Lyons who was hit by a musket ball, carried it around in his body for quite a while.
Again Walter Dunne while building the mealie bag redoubt he was continually under fire, and that was protected from the rear by the storehouse. So all in all rifle fire came from all sides.

Cheers

And from the orchard...
Darkness - I couldn't say for certain, but sometime after 6.30 to 7 at a guess. You'll have to look it up.
Xhosa, I was being facetious...I didn't really mean one or two men could have shot the lot - the Enemy at the Gates was getting the better of me!

Not to mention that in the assault waves, there were warriors with firearms, firing from very near.

Xhosa, I was being facetious..

facetious..i remember the old
reader's digest, how to increase
your word power. reckon that
qualify's as my word of today!

the next morning after the defense,
when the patrol's were were out
dispatching ( murdering?) the Zulu
wounded. they were also weapon
collecting,no mention of MH's.
xhosa

Now, now Xhosa, what do you think the Zulus were doing to the wounded at Isandhlwana? Nursing them back to health? They weren't an army of schoolgirls, remember!

xhosa2000 wrote:

Xhosa, I was being facetious..

facetious..i remember the old
reader's digest, how to increase
your word power. reckon that
qualify's as my word of today!

the next morning after the defense,
when the patrol's were were out
dispatching ( murdering?) the Zulu
wounded. they were also weapon
collecting,no mention of MH's.
                                xhosa

Wasn't that by the NNC. We have read many times the Zulu gave no quater and expected none!

Julian,john, just thought i would put that
out there, remember the time line,a few of
the survivors from Isandhlwana that passed
the drift, stopped to inform the defender's
snippet's of information about the fallen camp.

The Zulu custom of ' ripping up ' their enemy
was firmly established and understood! could
it be possible that the British thought this
practice would not have applied to them! oop's.

so the garrison after seeing joseph william's grisly
dispatch were in no mood to cede quarter.

john, the NNC were later after his lordship arrived/
departed. they also hanged a few by accident.
xhosa

War is a nasty business, I'm afraid.

Its one thing to know the Zulus cut people to pieces, its another thing to see it to people you know.......

good evening DB.  yeah, but that
obviously works the other way round, so,
no MH's at the drift?.
xhosa

The British were warned, about Zulu tatics. They took no notice, well not at least until after the Battle of Isandlwana. An eye for an eye ect.

Les there were MH rifles at RD. The British were equipped with them.

chard1879.      

John wrote:

We have read many times the Zulu gave no quater and expected none!

My guess is that that most wounded left behind were probably being intentionally left to die. At least I have read that's how it was handled after Isandlwana. In other words, the "walking wounded" left with the healthy, and those hurt too badly to expect recovery were left to their fate. It was expected--a form of triage, I guess--so, while I am not excusing the lynchings etc...its' pretty harsh to indict the British soldiers sent to "police the battlefield" for murder exactly. Does anybody know differently?

DrummerBoy 16 wrote:

Its one thing to know the Zulus cut people to pieces, its another thing to see it to people you know.......

True, I'm sure. But I would also question exactly who knew what and when? I think the typical private in the 24th, apart from when he was in a town, probably lived a life pretty much hermetically sealed from Zulu society. The Zulu had not fought a major battle since Cetshwayo won his kingship...unless you count border or cattle raids that did not involve the British to any great extent.

I'm sure somebody will clue me in to exactly where the account came from but I remember how shocked the British, or British colonials at least, were when they witnessed what was done to cows to make shields -- the cruelty of the way they killed them to keep the leather supple, I mean. So on top of the shock of losing the battle, it would have been a horror to find their countrymen stripped and disemboweled.

But even if all the Zulus in RD, MH had owned, they do not know how to use, so it would not have changed much ...

They didn't understand the workings of the sights.

Fortunately, the only Indigenes better than the whites with firearms were the Nez-percés...

3500 Nez-percés of 1877 in place of 3500 Zulus at RD have liquidated the garrison in 1 hour ...

Hi all. it's been mentioned before,
but why? oh why? did not one bright
soul think to slash the bottom tier
of mealie bags horizontally, the
meallies spills out rapidly, the wall
collapses, the door's open?.  
xhosa

Hi Les .
Yes , I've come across that before , certainly strange that they didnt think of that whereas other people have them luring LC out of the camp , but for the life of them they didnt think to slit open some mealie bags ! , the mind boggles doesnt it ?
Cheers 90th .

Lester :: Because the Zulus were not used to this kind of situation and in any way their military system was completely rigid ...

Yes Grand Marsupial with the Zulu, the mind boggles doesnt it ! Because it's their military system was completely rigid ...

hi Gary,Rascal, just briefly, pascal
alludes to mindset! what did the
Zulu commander say to his troop's
when he decided there was no point
following up into the doomed camp
at Isandhlwana?. he persuaded, and
remember these were much older men,
indeed Cetshwayo's own regiment..
that it would be to their advantage to
raid across the nearby border into Natal!.

The King expressly forbid any such incur-
sion, but Dablumanzi must have made a
good case to his followers, did the fact
that the Zulu knew that they should not
of been there at all, encourage their al-
most suicidal charges?. trying initially to
overwhelm the defender's, and what of
those stalwart men in the mission station,
their motivation is very clear..to avoid at
all costs annihilation.. it was as usual,for
him..grossly unfair of Wolsley to commit
his remarks to history,viz..they were pinned
like rats in a hole. thus had no choice but
to fight to the last man.. i think he misses
the point by the proverbial country mile..
that action re-enforced what the Boer,s had
learned at Blood River. ie, that the Zulu's
chances of success against a prepared and
entrenched position was indeed very limited!
and the British learned that lesson,quickly..

I wonder at what point in the early morning
hours Dablumanzi thought, crap! ive
got to answer for the failure and decimation
of so many brave warrior's. xhosa

Lester

After RD,(even after 1838 after the Blood River) the Zulu generals were forbidden to attack british entrenched defensive positions , they nevertheless do, at least the general did not have the authoritative to prevent their soldiers to do ...

They should never have attacked at Kambula , Gingindlovu and Ulundi , but as their system was rigid , they do it anyway ...

This is not in wartime for change his tactic system , but before Isandhwana , the Zulu general could try to put another system to the point ...

To beat the British , Zulu opponent must attack the british in a no-entrenched defensive positions and if the british possed less than 2000 modern rifles and carbine ...

Their real troubleshooting, is that when the enemy was located, the zulus was unable to see exactly what was in front of them in firepower ...

They know that the attack and Still the same way ... The Xhosa have adapted after the 7th Cap war , and Pedis abandoned outright spears and shields ...

In fact the Zulu beings should have easily crushed in January 1879 , if LC had not been so stupid to underestimate and ...

Cheers

Pascal the Rascal

xhosa2000 wrote:

...but why? oh why? did not one bright
soul think to slash the bottom tier
of mealie bags horizontally...

Or, after seeing the hospital burn, attempted to do the same for the storehouse?

Ye Brandon And why be entered in Natal when the king had forbidden  

Pascal MAHE wrote:

Ye Brandon And why be entered in Natal when the king had forbidden   

Jealousy...ambition...anger...resentment...boredom...the usual reasons. Take your pick.

6pd
There were repeated attempts to set fire to the storehouse, Im pretty sure that Chard gives credit to the defenders, including Adendorff, for stopping them.
Just a gut feeling.

Xhosa
Is it possible that the Zulu did not know what was in the mealie bags hence wouldn't attempt to deflate them? Just a thought.

Considering there's going to be a lot of chat from tomorrow on the ashes try this one for size

Who won the cricket match at RD on the 28th June?

Enjoy that one.

Cheers

6pdr
Chard mentions that Adendorff shot a Zulu in the act of firing the storehouse roof.
Springbok
Re the mealie bags - I imagine they were badly ripped up by the end of the affair but they could fairly easily be replaced - just shove another one on top! Also a Zulu would have to get close enough to rip one without becoming a target - not that easy!

Julian Whybra wrote:

 Also a Zulu would have to get close enough to rip one without becoming a target - not that easy!

Yes, I read where the British mounted these pointy things on the end of their rifles.

hi all, its my understanding, that not
only did they reach the barricade,but
also stood atop it, and indeed broached
the inner defences. albeit momentarily
till they were shot,stabbed,clubbed
down.  

Good point Les they stood on top of the Mealie bags. They could have quite easily have pushed them over. Thus creating a form of steps for their comrades.

Do we know if the Zulus that attacked RD had access to the Red Dust? Therefore effecting the ability to think practically.  

The bayonet. They did like the bayonet. Most of those trying to get over the barricades, were met with a point of bayonet.

Wonder why they fear the bayonet more than a bullet?

xhosa2000 wrote:

albeit momentarily
till they were shot,stabbed,clubbed
down.

Well yeah, which would tend to focus the mind on the problem at hand, survival, rather than long term benefits.

Chard
A big help of course was that the barricade was built on top of a rock ledge so the sacks weren't all that high.

Xhosa
Yep quite right, According to Caleb Wood: "We were so pressed on that Evan Jones hit out with his fists, and let me say he knew how to use them. When our ammunition began to run short the order was given to use cold steel. We stood back from the wll and received the enemies charges with the bayonet at the 'shorten arms'.

So the fight wasn't just about firing over a barricade, fists and all.

If you haven't read the Ilkeston Pioneer report from the 26th December 1913 your missing out, its probably the best description of the fight Ive read.
like this: " This battle had different effects on our men. Some had always been ready to crack a joke could not now speak a word. One man, unbearably vexed at our position cried like a child, fought like a lion and swore like a demon."

Gritty

Cheers

John wrote:

Wonder why they fear the bayonet more than a bullet?

Can't see a bullet coming, bayonet looks pretty nasty to stare down.


Cheers

 

xhosa2000 wrote:

Xhosa, I was being facetious..

facetious..i remember the old
reader's digest, how to increase
your word power. reckon that
qualify's as my word of today!

the next morning after the defense,
when the patrol's were were out
dispatching ( murdering?) the Zulu
wounded. they were also weapon
collecting,no mention of MH's.
                                xhosa

From Memories of Forty Eight Years Service.

"The next day I rode down to Rorke's Drift, some twelve miles, to resume charge of my depot. There was the improvised little fort, built up mostly of mealy-sacks and biscuit-boxes and other stores which had been so gallantly defended by Chard, Bromhead, and their men, and Parson Smith, and all around lay dead Zulus, between three and four hundred; and there was my wagon, some 200 yards away, riddled and looted; and there was the riem gallows I had erected the previous morning. Dead animals and cattle everywhere— such a scene of devastation ! To my young mind it appeared impossible that order could ever be restored, but I set to work, and next day, whilst sitting in my wagon, I saw two Zulus hanging on my gallows and was accused by the Brigade Major, Clery (afterwards General Sir Francis Clery), of having given the order. I was exonerated, however, when it was found that it was a case of lynch law performed by incensed men, who were bitter at the loss of their comrades. Other incidents of the same sort occurred in the next few days before law and order were re-established."

i posted the same thing on here
a few month's ago, but thank you  
some people thought my use of the
word murder as somehow injudicious,
either they were dead when they
hung them up ( but obviously )
we are left with the inconvenient
truth, intellectual masturbation is
fine up to a point, but murder is
murder, surly they were alive after
the relief, did not maori have some
part in this..

xhosa2000 wrote:

some people thought my use of the
word murder as somehow injudicious,

For my part, I specifically said NOT excusing the lynchings...which were clearly murder.  

But as for the others -- the wounded intentionally left exposed to the elements waiting to die -- is it murder to put them out of their suffering?  Killing sure, but murder during a declared war when their own people had left them?

When I read this passage from his memoirs, which I have done many times, the question I have is WHY did Clery choose to blame Smith-Dorrien specifically?  By implication it is because he built the gallows...but that claim is a bit hard to swallow because as SD scrupulously explains, the gallows were built for stretching reims, a resource necessary for a transport/Commissariat officer.  I don't even think that was speculated upon in Ron Lock's book...though my memory may be faulty.  Was there bad blood between them?

During the afternoon it was discovered that
a large number of wounded and worn out Zulu's
had taken refuge or hidden in the mealie fields
near the laager,my two companies of Zulu's
with some of my non coms and a few of the
24th quickly drew these fields and killed them
with bayonet,butt and assagai..

It was beastly but there was nothing else to do!
war is war, and savage war is the worst of the
lot. moreover our men were worked up to a pitch
of fury by the sights they had seen in the morn-
ing and the mutilated bodies of the poor fellows
lying in front of the burned hospital.

Colonel G. Hamilton-Browne.

sorry 6pdr, no there was no bad
blood, as a mere Lieut, attached,
he was'nt in Clery's orbit.  

Hi All,
Much has been said about the brutality of war here, but specifically questions have been raised as to why the defenders acted opposite  the wounded enemy the way they did.
In answer : It was recorded that early in the battle that one of the defenders was wounded by a Zulu and was dragged away from the parapets and butchered alive in view of the men on the walls on the laager. The intention  of the  Zulu doing this was to harvest body parts.  The injured man was screaming of course and this drew the attention of the other defenders , one of whom lifted his MH and sent a .455 slug boring out the brain of the Zulu who was intent on the butchery.  The injured defender was in the meantime dying and the two lay huddled together, in death,  until the next morning.
That incident set the cat amongst the pigeons and  the tone, vis-à-vis any mercy given.
Further, with 375 dead Zulus at the parapets and umpteen  dead and injured a little further out  there was not enough  medical assistance to deal with even the Imperial wounded, never mind the Zulus. So, with that sort of pressure on the RD doctor,  one wonders how anyone could make any categorical and credible  statement  about the injuries sustained. There was certainly no time for any proper forensic examination, as all of the dead were buried by nightfall that same day (23/01), by Chelmsford's relieving force.

regards

barry

Well i've never heard that one before