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

Mister Whybra,
I am sure that the majority of the members have understood your thought.
No offense et no doubt for me !!!!!

For all,
Recently, on this forum, Mister WHYBRA has written that he learn "many things" on the zulu war from members who are "amateurs".

Cordialement

Frédéric BOMY

So education is key? i like others have no formal
education and left school at 14.but i possessed
a skill from a very early age when i discovered i
absorbed knowledge like a sponge, so i mastered
numeracy and literacy very quickly. i have never
forgot salvaging a stack of readers digest's and
remembering the staple article, 'how to improve
your word power. now some on here have had
quite enough of my verbosity, but i have always
found that the mastery of the english language
is a powerful tool when employed in persuasive
debate or argument! and that is why i fail to
understand Julians detractor's!. surely between
all detractors! you have the mechanism to provide
organised, and cogent rebuttal, of all the ' evidence '
and evidence, it surely is! that has been presented,
accepted, gathered in a methodical and meticulous
manner and presented to stand..or fall on its own
merit..it does stand! detractor's, no more insulting
shenanigans..take your time, by all means consult
and collaborate, then if you please, lead off in a
logical, and preferably sequential manner, and we
will watch in wonder as you stun us with your csi
approach at rebuttal.

Education comes in many forms. I AM not so daft as to think it only exists at universities and I'm not so daft as to think it ALWAYS exists at universities. The one thing that forums like this have to their advantage is that most of its members can argue logically, can explain clearly, understand others' arguments (without agreeing with them necessarily), and have done or can research wonderfully well. But a few can't - and that is the disadvantage of the forum: he who knows not and knows not that he knows not...(out of politeness I'll refrain from completing the Confucianism).
For me the good outweighs the bad for I HAVE learnt much of value from other forum members.
I am still awaiting impi's answers to my four questions - it would help me understand his failure to comprehend.

ymob wrote:

Mister Whybra,
I am sure that the majority of the members have understood your thought.
No offense et no doubt for me !!!!!

For all,
Recently, on this forum, Mister WHYBRA has written  that he learn "many things" on the zulu war from members who are "amateurs".

Cordialement

Frédéric BOMY

Perhaps Julian feels he has priority. Because he rubbed shoulders with Jackson. Didn't you know we are all amateurs. According to Whybra!

Impi
Far from it. You obviously don't know some of the other forum members.
Now, please stop stalling and provide the answers to the four questions. I'm just dying to know what 'fractured evidence' is.

You made the comment. Personally I feel JY book they fell like stones was the foundation of your research.

impi
This is getting utterly off-topic. Please stop putting comments into my mouth that I did not make. Personally I find your remarks tedious in the extreme as well as distracting and the other forum members must be thoroughly bored with them.
Please get back to the topic and answer the four questions.

I have never been off topic. Re-read your post, it was you who took it of topic, with the sarcastic education remark. Perhaps I did only had a Secondary school education, but I have a very successfull company, so it appears my education didn't do me to bad.  

The four questions you have posed, have been answered numberous time in the historical posts.

Your on a rocky road Julian! Panicking!

PS I still feel JY set the foundation for your work! So basically without J.Y and Jackson. Julian Whybra wouldn't exsist!

Hi Les .
Just a tad off topic but it seems you failed to disclose that you did indeed swallow a dictionary or two in your formative years !
LOL , LOL . Excellent work that man !
Cheers 90th.

Cheers Gary, its called verbal diarrhoea :) it
has sure got me into trouble from time to time.
xhosa

J.W. Education is the ability to listen to almost anything without losing your temper or your self-confidence.   

Impi , Is that one of yours or are you quoting JW ????.

  Of course, you are speaking in jest!!!!

90th wrote:

Impi , Is that one of yours or are you quoting JW ????.

  I come from a land down under! Nice one 90th   

Perhaps Julian feels he has priority. Because he rubbed shoulders with Jackson. Didn't you know we are all amateurs. According to Whybra! [/quote]

Bonsoir Impi,

Please, don't forget it's very difficult for me to express my thoughts in English language.

I don't kwow if Mister Whybra (or another member) think "we are all amateurs".
For me, sincerly, it's not the problem...

Formally, an historian is a person who after long universities studies became a specalist of one period of the History.
For me, an amateur is a person who didn't do this rigourous university formation.
But it's not a pejorative term:There are others ways for the knowledge...
For example, Misters John YOUNG and Ian KNIGHT who are not formally historians are brilliant researchers: i have many respect for their work.
Others members of this forum who are not (yet?) well known in the world of the edition and publication are also brilliant (for exemple Springbok or Drummer Boy).
But few of us have unfortunately this talent (I enjoy football: when i was young, i have played at this game every day, but i am not Michel PLATINI or Gary LINEKER!!!)
It's not a problem for me:
I am working at the Ministry of the French Finances public: I am better (i hope!!!) than Whybra, Young, Knight, and the majority of the members on this specific subject.
Normal, it's my speciality, not their job.
They are better than me on the zulu war?:Normal, it's their job, their "passion", or their talent.
I know i am a very modest amateur.
Sincerly, where is the problem?
I don't forget that these people give gracefully their time and knowledge on this forum.
It's an opportunity for all the members to increase their knowledge.
If these historians, "brillant researchers" and amateurs left this forum: it's a "big" problem for the "quality" of this forum.
If, i left this forum, it's not a problem...

For me, this situation is really the problem...

Deliberate and provoking manner againt members are scandalous -against members who have "the knowledge", it's a "crime", the best demonstration of the human stupidity.

I am off topic and boring.
Sorry.

Regard

Frédéric

Ymob wrote:

I don't forget that these people give gracefully their time and knowledge on this forum.

This really is a bugbear for me! Why as you say " these people" get thanked for giving up there time and knowledge. Every member gives their time a knowledge.

Dave its simple,they have produced work
its all very well in this internet era, where we can
now trawl to their hearts content, but most of the
guys you seek to undermine were researching
well before the web!! all right thinking people know
the debt of thanks we owe to these people..

This is a summary of all the new evidence relating to Jenkins’s presence at Rorke’s Drift.  It is based on the assumption that the reader knows what a primary source is (these are marked PS) and what isn’t.  Please criticize my research.  Find fault with it.  I'd be happy to have anything corrected but you will need to provide the sources for proving any discrepancies in the evidence to be taken seriously.  Any criticisms directed at me personally I shall not respond to.

1.  Chard’s Official Report published in the Natal press on 8th February and in the Government’s Blue Books the following month was compiled 25th January-3rd February 1879.  It states there were 8 (unnamed) surviving and 3 kia 1/24th RD defenders, 11 in total.  No roll was included of participants.  The Natal Mercury 7.4.79 published the ‘Smith’ Roll which names Jenkins as one of the eight surviving 1/24th defenders [PS].  The Times 10.6.79 reports the return home on 9th June of time-expired 2/24th men, including several RD men, one of whom, Waters, furnishes “the complete roll of officers, non-commissioned officers, and men who were present at the defence of Rorke’s Drift on the 22nd January.”  The ‘Waters’ Roll names Jenkins as one of the eight surviving 1/24th defenders [PS].  At the unveiling of de Neuville’s painting of RD at the Fine Art Society Galleries 11.3.80 a Catalogue is published containing a complete roll of defenders – the ‘Fine Art’ Roll - which names Jenkins as one of the eight surviving 1/24th defenders [PS].  Records of the 1/24th datable from 7th June 1881 to 16th August 1882 in the hand of the then adjutant include a list of 1/24th participants at RD and names Pte. D. Jenkins as one of them [PS]. Finally at the 1929 50th anniversary commemoration Cantwell’s ‘Chard’ Roll appears (i.e. the one that now hangs in the regimental museum) and was subsequently published in Atkinson’s Regimental History.  Jenkins is named as one of the eight surviving 1/24th soldiers [PS].
All the above are independently verifiable, cross-refer and corroborate one another in stating that David Jenkins was an RD defender.

2.  The Western Mail 6.3.79 and 21.3.79; Merthyr Express 22.3.79; Y Gwladarwr 28.3.79; Brecon County Times 26.4.79 contain Jenkins’s three letters from Zululand 18.1.79, 28.1.79, 11.3.79: taken together they describe his progress from Natal to Isandhlwana and back again with the escort party and explain how he ended up at RD [4 x PS].  The third of these contains a number of statements that can be cross-referenced and independently-verified against other primary source documents.  The Times 3.10.79 and, separately, The Hampshire Advertiser County Newspaper 4.10.79 report the arrival in England of troops from the AZW, including Jenkins & other RD defenders.  Chard, Reynolds & others are singled as is a party of 1/24th men whose exploits are described – namely a prisoner escort party (which consists of Sergt Wilson, Roy, Jenkins, Desmond and Payton, i.e. other known defenders of RD).  They are introduced with other defenders as such to royalty (i.e. in the presence of Chard, etc.) [2 x PS]  The Aldershot Military Gazette 11.10.79 reports on how members of the regiment are presented  to royalty including Fitzmaurice (Ulundi), Wilson (Isandhlwana) and four RD survivors from the 1/24th including David Jenkins who are feted [PS].
All the above are independently verifiable, cross-refer and corroborate one another in stating that David Jenkins was an RD defender.

3.  The Monmouthshire Merlin and South Wales Advertiser 5.12.79 reports that Lady Butler was painting a picture of RD and that only RD defenders were being used to pose as models.  One of the sketches produced bears a label in Lady Butler’s own hand saying ‘Jenkins’ [PS].  The South Wales Daily Post 17.7.1900 publishes Lady Butler’s letter to Jenkins referring to him as an RD defender and thanking him for posing [PS].    The South Wales Daily Post 20.7.1904 and,  separately, the Swansea and Glamorgan Herald of Wales 23.7.1904 report on a visit by the king to south Wales and reports how Jenkins is introduced to the king by Lady Butler’s husband as an RD defender.  The posing for the picture is mentioned [2 x PS].
All the above are independently verifiable, cross-refer and corroborate one another in stating that David Jenkins was an RD defender and, as such, posed for Lady Butler’s painting.

4.  Chard’s Account of RD for Queen Victoria 21.2.80 mentioned Jenkins’s role in the defence twice in separate incidents: first his behaviour and conduct under fire is commended; secondly for saving Chard’s life with a shouted warning [2 x PS].  These are not to be confused with those anecdotes of the other Jenkins kia.  The chronological nature of the report precludes any confusion between the two men as Jenkins the survivor is mentioned in the latter stage of the battle post 6 p.m. AFTER Jenkins kia has been killed in the hospital pre-6 p.m..
These corroborate that David Jenkins was an RD defender.

All the above EIGHTEEN PRIMARY SOURCES are independently verifiable, cross-refer and corroborate one another.

This is without mentioning the RD Bible and four other occasions where Jenkins is mentioned as an RD survivor.

And the Fat lady sings. Exit stage right >>>>>>>>>> Curtain comes down.

xhosa2000 wrote:

all right thinking people know
the debt of thanks we owe to these people..

Less, Thank you.

Cordialement

Frédéric

merci frederic, nous pensons la même chose! et nous ne sommes pas
seul! connaissance est le pouvoir .. ignorance n'est nulle part.
                                                     Cheers mate Les

That certainly adds weight to, Private David Jenkins being present at Rorke.'s Drift.

Stay on topic. Two posts sent to the ring. Stop with the stupid personal attackes and Les, leave off with the gang remarks.

littlehand wrote:

That certainly adds weight to, Private  David Jenkins being present at Rorke.'s Drift.

Certainly. In the hope to read constructive criticts directed at Mister Whybra 's work and to stop stupid and personal attack against thé man.

Ymob, behave, next your be asking Julian out for dinner. What are you his mummy.

Julian some indepth research there. Seems you have succeeded in placing Jenkings correctly at RD. and it seems I owe you an appoligie for doubting your findings.   

And to those members who can't wait to impress JW by telling me " I told you so, I told you so" it doesn't impress him. Your just a bunch of Girls " swinging on his skirt tail.

Some girls! Some tail!

CTSG
That took some thing.    Respect.
Now all you have to do is admit Chelmsford was an idiot and we will have civilised you   

Don't push it.   

Anyway payback coming on another topic.   

Bring it on   

Stubborn old Boer !

Springy,

I never realised you were a farmer?

John Y.

His spelling is wrong, he really meant Bore !   

Perhaps it was Buer with silent 'g's?

Chelmsfordthescapegoat wrote:

Ymob, behave, next your be asking Julian out for dinner.

Bonjour,
Why not, it's a very good idea. :  
Cheers

ymob
Only if we go Dutch on a first date!

springbok9 wrote:

His spelling is wrong, he really meant Bore !   

Yes! It's a pity the convict didn't get a vote!   

I didn't fail the test, I just found 100 ways to do it wrong. Well researched Juiian, can't argue with that.
  

I didn't fail the test, I just found 100 ways to do it wrong. Well researched Juiian, can't argue with that.

  

Julian Whybra wrote:

ymob
Only if we go Dutch on a first date!

For once, i am with the good Lord Chelmsford, the choice of the nationality of his Cook, M. Laparra   

The David Jenkins discussions so far has accounted for.

1'583 replies.
24,999 Views. 

  

so that's that then! job done. all
safely gathered in!.

Impi , Cctsg and some others , all the mud slinging would've been avoided one feels if you had bothered to purchase JW's publication in the first place.   
90th

Impi   

90th wrote:

Impi , Cctsg and some others ,  all the mud slinging would've been avoided one feels if you had bothered to purchase JW's publication in the first place.   
90th

Say's old money bags!   

John LOL , I hardly think 6-8 GBP's constitutes an old money bags remark ! . Now if it was 80 or so , you may have had a point !.
I'm sure anyone can find that lowly amount of cash to further one's self education ? . Well I hope one can ! . What can you buy with 8 quid , a pint or two , or a packet of Smokes ? .
90th

Mate! Food in the belly, cloths on the backs, and a roof over your head. Every little helps. Everything is going up, accept the wages. Hard times I'm afraid. We no longer talk fags and booze! Now its electricity and Gas.  

90th how did you get that cheap over there. It's £12.95 over here!

John
Cut down , go on a diet ! . Have no treats for a couple of days , If you go to the pub , go home earlier , or dont go for a day , Bang , there's your 6-8 quid and probably more towards the book ! . It's not difficult , if you want something you need to be prepared to give up something else ! . It's no different out here .
90th

£12.95. I take it you didn't purchase Julian's book, as you don't know the cost. Plus postage to down under.

John , My bad , I shouldve checked the price before posting , yes I paid the 12.95 plus 6 more or something similar for postage .
Still it doesnt make it a pipe dream to purchase it ! . Like I say , if you want something you'll skimp and save to get it .
I dont know if you buy coffee on the way to work , or buy your breakfasts or Lunches at work etc , if you do , dont , take it ,
it works out a lot cheaper ! , I assume you work ? , if not , things may be different ! . Speaking of work , time for me to go !
90th