Isandhlwana: Fate of Godwin Austin and Pope

In "zulu victory" by LOCK and QUANTRILL p.217
"Godwin-Austen, armed with a revolver, had inflited a wound in the warrior's neck and another in his leg. A thrown spear took Godwin-Austen in the Chest".
It's the story of 2 "officers with mononcles" ("glass in the eye). Probably POPE and GODWIN-AUSTEN.
It seems to me that LOCK and QUANTRILL cannot really know if it was Godwin-Austen.
Mayble Pope, Maybe Godwin-Austen?

The body of Pope was found later on the battlefield.
Someone knows if he had a wound by a spear in the chest (as Dyer for example)?.
Thanks for your help.

Frédéric

I believe the only two officers that wore monocles were those two. Popes body was found and buried, the grave marked with an old iron, unfortunately that disappeared.

Cheers

springbok9 wrote:

I believe the only two officers that wore monocles were those two. Popes body was found and buried, the grave marked with an old iron, unfortunately that disappeared.

Cheers

Thanks Springbok.
I want to mean that Lock and Quantrill can't write that it was GODWIN-AUSTEN.
Another possibility: POPE
Regard

Frédéric

Frederic,

I'd like to know the same -- was the officer who tried to extract the spear Pope or Godwin-Austin?  As you say, I think the story itself is ambiguous without forensic evidence...but as you've probably read, this is how Donald Morris tells the story:

"The last of the Imperial infantry died a short distance away.  They fell one by one, until only Charlie Pope and Godwin-Austen were left, and a half dozen Zulus rushed forward to finish them.  Godwin-Austen was shot through the body, but Pope had saved a few rounds and blazed away at the foremost Zulu, an inDuna of the inGobamakhosi. The shots grazed his neck and his side and wounded him in the leg, but he flung his assegai and Pope staggered back with the blade sunk in his body. Dropping his revolver, he tried feebly to pluck it out, but the inDuna sprung forward and pressed it home. The warriors, inspecting the bodies, noticed that both men were still wearing monocles. " p.377, THE WASHING OF THE SPEARS.

It's certainly stirring, but the last sentence makes one wonder how many liberties were taken with the literal translation...and how many did Morris introduce to tell a better story?  

- 6pdr

6pdr wrote:

Frederic,

I'd like to know the same -- was the officer who tried to extract the spear Pope or Godwin-Austin?  As you say, I think the story itself is ambiguous without forensic evidence...but as you've probably read, this is how Donald Morris tells the story:

"The last of the Imperial infantry died a short distance away.  They fell one by one, until only Charlie Pope and Godwin-Austen were left, and a half dozen Zulus rushed forward to finish them.  Godwin-Austen was shot through the body, but Pope had saved a few rounds and blazed away at the foremost Zulu, an inDuna of the inGobamakhosi. The shots grazed his neck and his side and wounded him in the leg, but he flung his assegai and Pope staggered back with the blade sunk in his body. Dropping his revolver, he tried feebly to pluck it out, but the inDuna sprung forward and pressed it home. The warriors, inspecting the bodies, noticed that both men were still wearing monocles. " p.377, THE WASHING OF THE SPEARS.

It's certainly stirring, but the last sentence makes one wonder how many liberties were taken with the literal translation...and how many did Morris introduce to tell a better story?  

- 6pdr

Bonjour 6 Pdr,

I have not my book at hand.
I will search the original report of the zulu.
Indeed, i don't know how Morris can tell GODWIN-AUSTEN "was shot through the body" and Pope was killed with an assegai -unless the body of Pope was found witha wound of assegai.
Cheers

MacKinnon and Shadbolt "the south african campaign of 1879" (first publication 1880 / my edition is 1995)

-About POPE p.148
"... and the record of the part he played on the fatal day is supplemented by a statement made by an induna who was present at the slaughter. The zulu reported that, when surrounding the 24th at the nek at Isandhlwana, two officers (subsequently ascetained to have been Lieutenants POPE and GODWIN-AUSTEN), with pieces of glass in their eye, came forward, shooting at him with their revolvers. One fell dead from a gunshot, and the other kept firing his revolver at the induna, grazing the right side of his neck with one bullet, the left side with another, and wounding him in the leg with a third. The induna then flung an assegai, which entered the officer's breast. the officer, with a supreme effort, almost succeded in pulling out the weapon (at this point in his statemen, the zulu writhed his body in pantomine of the movements of the officer), but the induna fell on him and instantaneously finished his work with another assegai."

-Same comment about GODWIN-AUSTEN p.181

Cheers

Frédéric

Frederic,

Yes, the next sentence from that Norris-Newman account confirms that ultimately we will probably never know:

"The minute account of the death of the two officers, there can be little doubt, relates to Lieuts. Austin and Pope, of the 2/24th, who were the only officers of that regiment who constantly wore eye glasses."

But it is strange that Morris chose Pope and it was Austin in ZULU VICTORY. Hmmm...

6pdr wrote:

Frederic,

Yes, the next sentence from that Norris-Newman account confirms that ultimately we will probably never know:

"The minute account of the death of the two officers, there can be little doubt, relates to Lieuts. Austin and Pope, of the 2/24th, who were the only officers of that regiment who constantly wore eye glasses."

But it is strange that Morris chose Pope and it was Austin in ZULU VICTORY. Hmmm...

It's a pity that Lock and Quantrill are not registered on this forum (unless they are hidden under an alais)
Cheers

Ymob. None of them are members. Well not yet anyway !!

  [quote="Admin"]Ymob. None of them are members. Well not yet anyway !![/quote

I had a dream and Admin brokes it!!! 

I hadn't read 'The washing of the spears' for years but having recently reread the section on Rorke's Drift I no longer believe anything that is written by Morris.

Maybe it should be moved from the history section of the book shop to the fiction section.


Neil

nthornton1979 wrote:

Maybe it should be moved from the history section of the book shop to the fiction section.

Or of the library you mean. Because here in the States you're lucky to find a book about the AZW at all, let alone something as ancient as Morris. Luckily my wife is in and out of SA on a semi-regular basis. It does seem however that the more you understand the sources the less you take verbatim.

nthornton1979 wrote:

I hadn't read 'The washing of the spears' for years but having recently reread the section on Rorke's Drift I no longer believe anything that is written by Morris.

Maybe it should be moved from the history section of the book shop to the fiction section.


Neil

But it will always be the foundation, of where the Historians and authors are today. Morris has his place as one of the greats when it comes to the Anglo Zulu War 1879.

Well said chard1879.   

Do we know if Pope and Godwin Austin reach it back to the camp or did this happen in the forward positions

Hi Aussie
There was a Zulu report ( quoted above ) that placed two officers with 'glass' (monocles) on the lower reaches of the saddle. Popes body was recognised, buried and the spot marked with an Iron, unfortunately the Iron was taken so his final stand is not accurately known and I would assume his body was entombed with the rest of his men in one of the cairns. If that's so the last of the individual cairns below the saddle is a pretty large one and I would suspect that's his resting place.

Cheers

thanks for that springbok9 when you read that Barker book let me know

Hi Aussie
Just finished reading Zulus at Bay. At least the later half of it dealing with iSandlwana and RD. I have to say I was disappointed, there is a massive amount of conjecture with very little confirmation, foot notes or source notes.
He seems to have been heavily influenced by L and Q.
The passage dealing with Higginson is really confusing as hell. He at one point seems to suggest that he was never with M and C at all and at others accuses him of abandonment. Its very rambling and really difficult to get to his point.
Sorry probably not what you wanted to hear but I mentioned initially that I would wait to read before commenting.
I wouldn't regard the book as more than an interesting read, and definitely not as a source document.

Cheers

Hi Springbok9
The reason I got the book was the author being the Great Grandson of Barker who was an Qwabe on the day and yes there is a few things which is inaccurate.

I remember watching a documentry Zulu the true story some years back and i remember they interviewed a Zulu with the surname of Mthethwa which his forefather took part of battle he may have been at Rorkes Drift its been a while since seeing it and he explained the Zulu strategy of drawing the British out and thats the first i heard of i different point of view concerning this fascinating battle since then I visited the place twice staying at Isandlwana Lodge and the head Guide
Robert Gerard explained about this version about the Zulu army not being discovered at the historical spot. Since then i have been looking into it and i guess we all have quite a few questions that we will never get answered .

Going back to what you think of the book yes there is even things mentioned in there which is totally different to the views of today and Barker was not there when the army was discovered on the very spot but we all know Raw was and there is a good chance the two Raw and Barker would of spoken at Helpmarker of the days events. Do you know if Raw ever wrote anything on paper concerning this battle he would be the supreme source of refrence, and the Zulu commander of course Ntshingwayo
the British failed in questioning him after the war "what is lost to history we would probably never know"

It seems i have more to learn and yourself has a greater depth of knowledge but we are both looking for answers to our questions are you able to direct me to my next question concerning if Raw ever wrote anything on paper of the battle

Thanks mate

Hi Aussie
Yes he did, there are a number of statements from participants on the plateau, Raw, Nyanda, Hammer and of course Essex, Higginson etc.
My biggest problem with Denis Barkers book is the complete lack of footnotes or source quotation so anything that had been 'passed down' is heresay and cant be relied on without confirmation from other sources.
An example of that is the passage we have already discussed about the meeting with Ntshingwayo. It really couldn't have happened.
Barker seems to be very heavily reliant on L and Q and bends issues to accomadate there views. Look its entirely possibly they and Denis are correct, but without substansive corroboration it will not 'stand up in court.'
I personally have grave doubts that Barker was as far out as Quabe, his estimates of distance are really all to pot. I put that question to Ian Knight and he replied at length with his view point that Barker was on iThusi. do a search for 'Questions for Ian Knight'. Its on the forum.
I know Rob Gerrard is a big believer in the impis point of discovery as am I. Last week I spent two days walking that area from Ngwebini around Mabaso to the ridge at point 'X' and then back to iSandlwana and then again along the Quabe valley. There is no way for me to accept that the impi was 'completly' in the valley at the time of discovery.
We musnt lose sight of the fact that in 1879 that road to Nqutu didn't exist, there was in fact quite a deep hollow and the cutting through the side of the Ithusi ridge didn't exist so the topography was entirely different.
The interview with
Have a look in the forum contents page, Im sure that Raws statement has been reproduced there.


Cheers

Hi springbok9
Yes i read the views of Ian Knight concerning the lookouts on the high points and also a quick read of his book Zulu Rising pages 323. to 325 and yes it is possible. Concerning the timing of the fall of the camp he Barker states 11am the only other source to my memories that mentions 11am is Hamilton Brown seeing the guns being used at 11am if the traditional view is correct then the earliest time the battle could start would be 1230 and not before which would allow the Zulu army 30 minutes to reach Isandlwana.

Concerning the road which goes up the notch and around Magago knoll when was that laid if i remember someone told me only in the last 20 or so years would you know when? also are there any photos of what it looked like before the road works happened have you seen them are they on the forum i would love to see them if any exist. What year was it when you made your first visit to Isandlwana thanks mate

Hi Aussie
There is a Brilliant time study by Kieth Smith, well worth a read in 'Dead was Everything'.
If you want to build up a time frame start at a point that can be pretty reasonably estimated, Durnfords arrival. Something like eleven sources put it at 10.30 ish. Now consider that he had words with Pulleine, had breakfast sent of the escort to bring in the wagons and the rocket battery its highly unlikely that any of his patrols were sent out before 11 o clock.
Durnford himself left around 15minutes after the arrival of the Rocket battery, and that after the departure of the troops onto the hill. So Russell arrives around 11.15 and Durnford leaves around 11.30.
Barker met up with the Rocket Battery some where around the base of Amatutshane, considering that distance and that they were held to the slowest pace of the NNC its at least 30 minutes ( been there and done it) Barker then rides of the ridge and chats to Russell, he in turn changes course and starts up the Notch. You've been there and seen the conditions, try to imagine walking from the South of Amatutshane, ignoring the modern road, finding your way through that maze of Dongas and then up that steep Notch! At least another 30 minutes if not more. That would put the Rocket Battery destruction at an earliest point of 12.30, and again the opponents of the rocket battery were only the advanced elements or skirmishers, couldn't have been the main impi or all of them including Norse would have been destroyed and that would have put a substantial impi in between Durnford and the camp, we know that didn't happen.
So that's the time frame for the patrols riding across the plateau discovering the impi and then retreating, maximum of one hour.
That's why I firmly believe in the theory of the impi being out of the Ngwebini valley when they were discovered. There really is no alternative. As to why they were there? We will never know. But we all have our theories.
Ken Gillings is probably the right guy to put a time on the road going down the notch. When I first started going to the battlefields, early 70s the road from the notch cut straight across the plain and then passed the old trading store and up to the saddle. The village at isandlwana was just a collection of kraals and there was no direct road to RD. In fact to drive from isandlwana to RD you had to retreat back to the Nqutu Babanango road travel towards Dundee and then take the Helpmakaar road and down the Biggarsberg to RD. A bloody long drive. Its only when the bridge was put in at RD that the road was put through and you could get directly through to Nqutu via St Augustines, And I have a gut feel that John Young had something to do with that road bridge being put in.

There are a few photos of early isandlwana on the forum, theres also one or two in Coupland.

Hope that helps.

Cheers

springbok9 wrote:

Hi Aussie
There is a Brilliant time study by Kieth Smith, well worth a read in 'Dead was Everything'.

Actually, that ought to be prerequisite reading before being allowed to post here. It doesn't even matter which sources one ultimately chooses to to credit more or less. The point is that people realize how many sources there are, how diverse they are, and how long (and to what degree of detail) people have been studying the issue. Once you understand the parameters of the timing problem, it throws a distinct perspective on the entire idea of being certain about anything else that happened in the battle. If I were teaching a history course, of any kind, I would start with that essay to give participants an understanding of what means to attempt to parse history on even the most objective micro level.

Frederic
Briefly to return to Pope and Godwin-Austen, it simply cannot be known which fell first. The various authors' 'statements' are simply artistic licence.
springbok et al
Interesting discussion and broadly speaking I concur with you timings.

Julian Whybra wrote:

Frederic
Briefly to return to Pope and Godwin-Austen, it simply cannot be known which fell first.  The various authors' 'statements' are simply artistic licence.
springbok et al
Interesting discussion and broadly speaking I concur with you timings.

Bonjour Julian,
Same conclusion ...artistic license.
Thanks.
Frédéric

Frank Allewell wrote:

Hi Aussie
There was a Zulu report ( quoted above ) that placed two officers with 'glass' (monocles) on the lower reaches of the saddle. Popes body was recognised, buried and the spot marked with an Iron, unfortunately the Iron was taken so his final stand is not accurately known and I would assume his body was entombed with the rest of his men in one of the cairns. If that's so the last of the individual cairns below the saddle is a pretty large one and I would suspect that's his resting place.

Cheers

What is meant by "an Iron" here?

The place where Pope's body was found was marked by a meat-scale (put there by a 2/24th sergeant - probably Sergt. Tigar) and an iron cross was later erected on the spot.

Hi Bruce
The description is a touch bemusing, possibly it was literally a flat iron (as used to iron the officers uniforms)

Julian Whybra wrote:

The place where Pope's body was found was marked by a meat-scale (put there by a 2/24th sergeant - probably Sergt. Tigar) and an iron cross was later erected on the spot.

Thanks; I thought it may have meant a cross but then wondered if it was a short-hand for a piece of military equipment.

Bruce
Mackinnon & Shadbolt say it was a meat-scale.  The reference is unusual and highly individual and I don't doubt their veracity.  It was probably in the destroyed camp kitchens and Tigar found a use for it.

That does sort of suggest it was to mark the grave rather than as some sort of memorial.

Yes, of course.

Its also suggestive that because of the implement used the grave would be near/close to the field kitchen area and that fits quite well with the Zulu accounts of his death and tends to disagree with Colonel Snooks theory.
Just a random thought.

Good point.

Absolutely.

As already mentioned above, an iron cross was apparently erected to mark Pope's grave - is there any known connection between this cross and the one which is still in place within the 'Colonial Cemetery' on the battlefield?

Regards,

Tim

Tim there was also an iron cross planted by Archdeacon Usherwood with George Smith and Canon Johnson. Canon Johnson says the cross was erected on a small cairn of stones. Im not to sure of the design of that cross but the one at iSandlwana currently is the same used to mark many graves across Zululand so that particular cross has a number of potential sources.

Regards

The iron cross (or part of it) was later placed in St. Vincent's church nearby.

Frank/Julian,

Many thanks, as you'll know there are a couple of now anonymous grave markers in the colonial cemetery - just a shame that these graves are now no longer known....

I understand that there was once a plaque to Lt. Pope in St. Vincent's church which was later moved to the cultural centre at Ondini (information from Rai England) - unfortunately when I visited a couple of years ago they had no knowledge of it.

Regards,

Tim

Hi Tim
Last time I was at iSandlwana I made a point of examining two old markers, both were damaged and missing any identifiable content. They were both close to the 'iron cross' on the cairn at the Colonial Cemetery

Regards

Frank,

It would be interesting to know whether these memorials were ever inscribed with names & if so whether they were ever recorded....

Tim

Hi Tim
I had an exchange with John Young some time ago on this very subject. He has a photo which shows one of the markers complete with a stone cross on the top. At some point that has been broken of and Ive never been able to locate a record of any name associated with it.
I would believe that there are only two men that could have shed light on it, Ken Gillings and George Chadwick. George as we know has shuffled of the mortal coil some years ago. He did leave all his records and Ken has at times been trolling through them. On thing he did do was record all the cairns and rebuild a few missing ones and at the same time compiled a photographic record. There is a reference to him doing that on one of the older forums, in his own words. Ken has attempted to locate that file without success. If it could be found it would possibly record any named monuments, assuming that the damage was caused after that period of course. The other issue it would clear up is the position of the cairns he discovered on the Spur.
Again one of the tantalising mysteries of iSandlwana.

Regards

This is Johns photo he posted at the time, with all due apologies to John for posting without his permission.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Look carefully and you can see the headstone with a cross. At the same time the iron cross, typical of the markers used to identify the graves of British Soldiers. Im not to sure if that type of cross was ever used on a colonial or volunteer grave. If not then at least there is a strong indication that British soldiers are buried in the Colonila area.

Hi Frank
I think it would be pretty much reasonable to assume that Imperial troops died with the Colonials in their stand . An excellent photo by the way , here's hoping JY isn't to upset with you ! . 0 / 82 at lunch , all to late I'm afraid , 3-2 is better than 4 - 1
90th

Hi 90th
Better start, maybe Smith is already feeling like a Captain, and good for him I have a feeling hes going to be one of the old school. I think the point I was trying so badly to make was that its becomes well within the realms of possibility that Pope and Gowin Austin were buried in that cluster. The pointers, all speculative I know, it wasn't to far away from the kitchen area, it was just below the saddle and it was on the line of their company retreat. Clutching at straws maybe?
Cheers

Frank,

Many thanks for the photo (also to John Y!), it's interesting to note that the prominent memorial to Archbell doesn't seem to have been erected at this point. I've found a recent photo taken from a similar position, and the iron cross & anonymous tablet which are still there today seem to broadly correspond to the positioning of the two smaller markers in John's photo - I'll ask Pete to post this for me as I still don't know how to do it myself...

Regards,

Tim

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Bottom Photo By Tim Needham.

Here's another early shot of the grave markers taken from the opposite direction to JY's. The stone cross is visible and I think the iron cross is side-on to its left. There is another cross further towards the right and what looks like a set of sheer legs in front of the largest cairn near the centre (presumably to lift some of the rocks). If you look closely at the iron cross in JY's picture it looks as though it has a stone or wooden main leg?

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

Steve

Steve,

Many thanks - another fascinating photo of the cemetery, showing that a handful of other graves appear to have been individually marked; unfortunately it seems that the identities of those interred beneath have been lost as these markers have weathered, collapsed or been removed.

Frank,

At first I thought that the simple iron cross there today may have been erected to replace the fanged one at some point - however I've just come across a copy of a news report covering the centenary commemorations in 1979 & there is a shot showing both crosses.

Regards,

Tim

Hi Tim
Look forward to seeing that. I wonder if its the same photo/series that 90th owns? Maybe he can also shed some light.
Regards