Who was in charge at iSandlwana

Seems that whenever a discussion swings into gear this subject seems to take over and dominate.
Let me put my cards on the table as an opening gambit.
Ive posted elsewhere that I am of the opinion that Durnford on his way to iSandlwana had already made his mind up that he was going to ride of hunting.
that seems to be born out with a few pointers.
1) He told his men not to off saddle and be ready to move. That would indicate strongly his intentions.
2) He told Pulleine in no uncertain terms that he would not be staying. And that not to long after he had arrived, so would indicate he had made his mind up on the ride from Rorkes drift.
3) During his conversation with Pulleine the orders left via Clery were verbally passed at least three times. Surely the portion re Pulleine being in charge would have been mentioned and if Pulleine believed these orders emanated from Glyn they would supersede any that Durnford could give. (I mention from Glyn as Clery was his ADC and even though he was aware of the relationship with Chelmsford I doubt if he would be brave enough to make up orders on behalf of the Column Commander, but the regimental commander then yes.)
4) We don't know for sure who sent the first company onto the ridge. Its been speculated that they were sent as a result of Durnfords plea that "If I get into trouble I would expect you to support me." Essex incidently points the finger at Durnford.
My issues with this are that there was no firing or sign of trouble on the ridge before the first company was sent off. So patently they wouldn't have been sent in terms of Durnfords statement. And as a second pointer, Durnford didn't go onto the ridge, he went across the plain, the oposite way.
As a possibility for discussion would they have been sent onto the ridge because the company of NNC on the ridge had been told of to go with Raw and Barton etc.
The order for that incidentally was given by Durnford to Raw. Durnford theoretically had no power to issue that order if he hadn't taken control from Pulleine.
5) When Durnford left the camp a number of other circumstances have a bearing on the issue. As pointed out by Impi, when Chelmsford sent back notice to Pulleine he would have assumed that Durnford was in camp and would have known to direct his order to him. He didn't it went to Pulleine so potentially the order given by Clery 'You will be in charge of the camp' was as a result of talks with Chelmsford.
6) When Durnford was stopped by the Carbineers he took great umbrage at the Carbineers reluctance to pass his orders to Scott. Again if he wasn't in charge of that camp he had no right to issue that order without asking permission from the camp commander.

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind, and I cant prove it, that when Durnford left the Donga he took, or attempted to take, control of the camp personel. In his conversation with Essex he ordered him to try and take men to the right, and mentioned his wanting to get the men together. Again unless he had spoken to Pulleine he had no right to consider ordering those troops around.

So points for and points against. But in the long run was it important or not that Durnford was in charge between 10.30 and 11.30?

Cheers

springbok9 wrote:

But in the long run was it important or not that Durnford was in charge between 10.30 and 11.30?

Cheers

Bonjour Springbok,
You already know my thought on this specific point...
Cheers.

Frédéric

I do indeed Fredric
Theres been so much discussed that I felt it would be in everyones interest to just put it down for comment.
Maybe you could repost to see what the forums comments would be.

Cheers

But what exactly do you mean by that phrase springbok?

Ive posted elsewhere that I am of the opinion that Durnford on his way to iSandlwana had already made his mind up that he was going to ride of hunting.

Do you mean he went to actively engage the enemy..who he knew all to well!

a few posts back littlehand attempted to defend LC!.

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

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


Chelmsford was not fooling the people that counted!.

Les
In saying that he had made up his mind to go hunting its a pointer to him not wanting to be bothered with taking over the camp from Pulleine. Why on earth would action man, not meant in a derogatory fashion, want to be a camp commander when there were Zulus a foot.

Cheers Mate

springbok9 wrote:

I do indeed Fredric
Theres been so much discussed that I felt it would be in everyones interest to just put it down for comment.
Maybe you could repost to see what the forums comments would be.

Cheers

Springbok,
You have already written on this forum a theory that DURNFORD had taken command during the battle.
After his return of the donga, it was (for you) DURNFORD and not PULLEINE who had ordered the retreat of the line.
You have quoted the "narrative":"On this it would seem that Colonel Durnford determined that the forces under his command should adopt a more compact formation and ordered the 'Retire' to be sounded. This was done, and the time of its occurence appears to have been just prievious to the rush of Zulus that penetrated the line."
So for you, DURNFORD had assumed command between 10h30 and 11h30 and during the battle...

Springbok, i like dancing and you are the conductor!    
Amitiés

 

Its making me dizzy!.   

xhosa2000 wrote:

Its making me dizzy!.   

Bonjour les,
I have a presentiment that Frank soon ended his puzzle on the duet DURNFORD-PULLEINE at Idandhlwana.
Maybe an article, i hope!!!
Cheers.

To put it in plain English..( like wot i speak ) Pulleine was in command..end of!
Durnford danced in the donga till the line collapsed and the retire sounded...
cue, horror and confusion...of course everybody was issuing, shouting.
bellowing orders! take your pick..colonels, majors, captains, lieutenants, also
sergeants, corporals, do you get my drift, there is no such thing as a quite
battle! whatever,whoever, did, said, what! did not matter at that juncture!
survival had become the name of the game! to simplistic? i strongly suggest
not! they were getting a close up and personal view of the Zulu! they continued
to underestimate them even after this massacre brought about by the incomp-
etence of their c in c!

Very sorry dear Frederic, we crossed posts! yes an article!
and yourself? why not you.?   

Why not indeed.   

xhosa2000 wrote:

Very sorry dear Frederic, we crossed posts! yes an article!
and yourself? why not you.?   

It's a joke        
i am laughing at this idea, especially in English!!!       
You are really a good friend!!!
Amitiés.
Frédéric

Pulleine was in command of the camp, he had been getting reports of zulu activity in the area since around daybreak, and he had done bugger all about it. He had hours in which to do something, but didn't, what the hell could Durnford have done in the hour or so that he was at the camp, that Pulleine had had hours in which to do something. Durnford did however have the common sense to try to find out what these zulus were up to, he posted lookouts, he sent men out to recce the area to gather better information on the situation, he did more in the time he was there than Pulleine had hours in which to do this. Pulleine could and should have at least tried to organise some sort of defences, he has empty wagons he could have used, he could have made use of the terrain and the deep dongas in the area and organise some defences, jeez, he had hours to do this, what was Durnford supposed to do in an hour what the inept Pulleine could not do in the many hours he had?

springbok9 wrote:

Why not indeed.   

For example, i have not the talent to conceive a new plausible theory on the command of the camp at Isandhlwana!!!.  
I am wainting impatiently your article on this subject, seriously!!!  
Cheers

I don't think that's the issue really. By posting the way I have done I was hoping to explore just the one point rather than digress into what could have been done and what wasn't. I reckon that's a whole new thread.
But to take you up on one point:
"Pulleine was in command of the camp". You've taken a very definite stand on that point, what leads you to it?

Cheers

Frederic, no joke my friend, if you write it in your mother tongue first,
it can be translated into english.. i am friendly with nice people..
you know sometimes i am not so nice! alas its a question of Dr Jekyl
and Mr Hyde with me!      

xhosa2000 wrote:

Frederic, no joke my friend, if you write it in your mother tongue first,
it can be translated into english.. i am friendly with nice people..
you know sometimes i am not so nice! alas its a question of Dr Jekyl
and Mr Hyde with me!      

Thank you "Jekill" (is he the Kind?) for your generous proposition...
Amitiés.

Fredric
Don't let him kid you, he isn't Jekle and Hyde hes more Morecombe and Wise .       

Nice one Frank! but still there is apparently two of me!   
Fredric..Robert Louis Stevenson..Jekle was the nice one!
a brief extract of the synopsis..

Utterson takes the document home, where first he reads Lanyon’s letter; it reveals that Lanyon’s deterioration and eventual death were caused by the shock of seeing Mr. Hyde take a potion and metamorphose into Dr. Jekyll. The second letter constitutes a testament by Jekyll. It explains how Jekyll, seeking to separate his good side from his darker impulses, discovered a way to transform himself periodically into a deformed monster free of conscience—Mr. Hyde. At first, Jekyll reports, he delighted in becoming Hyde and rejoiced in the moral freedom that the creature possessed. Eventually, however, he found that he was turning into Hyde involuntarily in his sleep, even without taking the potion. At this point, Jekyll resolved to cease becoming Hyde. One night, however, the urge gripped him too strongly, and after the transformation he immediately rushed out and violently killed Sir Danvers Carew. Horrified, Jekyll tried more adamantly to stop the transformations, and for a time he proved successful; one day, however, while sitting in a park, he suddenly turned into Hyde, the first time that an involuntary metamorphosis had happened while he was awake.   

Martin      

Hi springy.

Yes, I do think that Pulleine was in charge of the camp, Clery wrote to him saying so. And when Durnford arrived, Pulleine said that he was sorry he had arrived because he (being the senior officer), would now take over, but Durnford said no, he was not going to interfere, and that he wasn't staying at the camp. Technically, yes, Durnford might well have been deemed to be be in command while he was there, but when he rode off to see what the zulus were up to, he was not, and therefor Pulleine was in command. Like I said in the other thread, if LC had intended that Durnford was to reinforce the camp, that would have put him in charge being senior officer, however, LC sent an order back to the camp addressed to Pulleine not Durnford, does this not say that LC didn't intend that Durnford take command, and that he wanted him close by to support him in his move against the Matyanas.

Who mentioned Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers, oh! sorry, did you mean the two Ronnies.    

springbok9 wrote:

I don't think that's the issue really. By posting the way I have done I was hoping to explore just the one point rather than digress into what could have been done and what wasn't. I reckon that's a whole new thread.
But to take you up on one point:
"Pulleine was in command of the camp". You've taken a very definite stand on that point, what leads you to it?

Cheers

The subject is "Pulleine was in command of the camp".
Personally, I have definite stand only on the result of the battle after the arrival of DURNFORD at the camp (scout the area or "fight" in the thought of DURNFORD is not the problem for me: same result /discovering of the zulu army / attack of the camp)

Seriously, your theory disturbs me...
Your theory reminds me some assertions on similar subjects by others authors, in particular Julian Whybra.
I am going to study seriously this subject at home with my notes and my books. 
I hope this evening.
Amitiés.
Frédéric

Hi Martin
Cant fault what you say but how would you respond to my points 4 re Raws instructions and 6. Either Durnford was being badly incorrect and rude or assumed he was in command, bit of a dicotamy there and I really do wish I could spell that bloody word.
Now the part that really disturbs me, your quote below.
"and that he wanted him close by to support him in his move against the Matyanas. "
This is a point that Ive spent a lot of time pondering, you see IF that was indeed part of Chelmsfords plan then Durnford was in the wrong by shooting of up the Quabe Valley. He did not have solid valid intell supporting that move, just the word of one Carbineer, Bullock I believe. Its just to similar to the 14th January charge down to middle drift for my liking. And I do understand your going to say the situation had changed, but it really hadn't except in retrospect.
Cheers

Mr M. Cooper wrote:

Pulleine was in command of the camp, he had been getting reports of zulu activity in the area since around daybreak, and he had done bugger all about it. He had hours in which to do something, but didn't, what the hell could Durnford have done in the hour or so that he was at the camp, that Pulleine had had hours in which to do something. Durnford did however have the common sense to try to find out what these zulus were up to, he posted lookouts, he sent men out to recce the area to gather better information on the situation, he did more in the time he was there than Pulleine had hours in which to do this. Pulleine could and should have at least tried to organise some sort of defences, he has empty wagons he could have used, he could have made use of the terrain and the deep dongas in the area and organise some defences, jeez, he had hours to do this, what was Durnford supposed to do in an hour what the inept Pulleine could not do in the many hours he had?

Common knowledge. Pulleine was in command in the absence of Glyn.

As far as LC was concerned Pulleine was in command of the camp when he left! LC had never mentioned that Durnford should take command. The original order that wasn't sent to Durnford was for him to Strenthen the camp. Durnford took command possibly because he could, army protocol so to say. When he left it would have fell back to Pulleine. Although we know at stages during the Battle Durnford did interfere with Pulleine command.

Hi Impi
Why do you think Durnford would want to take command for a matter of a couple of hours or do you believe that it was automatic and the command devolved on him?

Cheers

Well we have eyewitness accounts that states he did take command. Army protocol of the day, seems to be the most appropriate answer senior officer?

Unfortunatly the majority of those that said he took command weren't part of the command structure and wouldn't be near the tent. So they are pretty second rate. The only person inside the tent was Cochran and outside at the door Stafford.
Your thoughts on my first two points?

Cheers

He did'nt take command for a couple of hours!
you are all using semantics to justify your own
posts, when the truth is really quite simple!!
he was reacting to overwhelming force, do you
all not think for a moment that Durnford did not
realize what was happening all around him! from
the time he retired from the donga i guess he
knew the game was up! how can anybody keep
throwing Pulleine's name about? there is no
official record of his movements! but i guess
if you all don't keep repeating the same old thing's.
this part of the debate would be done and dusted.
as indeed it is in reality. but i guess any old myth
will do for some.   

The eye witness accounts I have read are primary source, so I won't argue or speculate about that. Either way you have named two, that state he did take command. If he hadn't taken command why was he sending men out.

But I'm not really concern wether he did or didn't take command. He wasn't ordered to take command in the first place. And being in command of a mounted coloninal force, can't see that going down to well with the 24th.

So what point are you trying to make!

Xhosa wrote:

He did'nt take command for a couple of hours!

Can you elaborate ?

Perhaps we are going to hear the truth. I would like to know more Xhosa!

"retired from the donga".....read my post again, and instead
of thinking what you think to respond with, really read what
i wrote!! then again!, think about it, then post your thoughts..

In reply
The eye witness accounts I have read are primary source, so I won't argue or speculate about that. Either way you have named two, that state he did take command. No Didn't, I named two that were in hearing distance. If he hadn't taken command why was he sending men out. That was my question, sending the NNC from the ridge.

But I'm not really concern wether he did or didn't take command. He wasn't ordered to take command in the first place. Interesting comment, youve spent a fare amount of time argueing the point with Martin.And being in command of a mounted coloninal force, can't see that going down to well with the 24th.

So what point are you trying to make! That should be self evident in my opening post. Really just trying to promote a healthy debate.

By debate with Martin, was regarding Durnfords actions at Isandlwana. Martin was under the impression Durnford was acting on prior orders.

We also have understand, the conversation took place in a tent which has canvas walls. Wouldn't exactly be hard to hear a conversation coming from those within.

Sending out the NNC enhances the fact, that he was in command. Doesn't it.

xhosa2000 wrote:

"retired from the donga".....read my post again, and instead
of thinking what you think to respond with, really read what
i wrote!! then again!, think about it, then post your thoughts..

Doesn't really elaborate on Durnford's  taking command a couple of hours later.

I think you base all your knowledge on that book you have. As though its the be and end all of what took place at Isandlwana.

I doubt you have an explanation for your comment regarding "taking command a couple of hours later" so let's leave it there.

 

impi wrote:

Sending out the NNC enhances the fact, that he was in command. Doesn't it.

Not really, no. As I understand it Durnford was a column commander and the NNC were under his authority. Taking them out was definitely within his purview and in no way required taking command of the camp as they were not part of Pulleine's force to begin with.

As for hearing through the tent walls -- sure that could have happened. I'm not even sure that exchange took place inside a tent. There are multiple accounts and they seem to place it differently.

I think you base all your knowledge on that book you have. As though its the be and end all of what took place at Isandlwana.

I doubt you have an explanation for your comment regarding "taking command a couple of hours later" so let's leave it there and. ....well said, cant really fault your reasoning!

Add to that one book the other thousand or so, from 1871 and every decade to date. including
many of the years within those decade's, i quote extensively from the Drooglever thesis because
it is the most complete account of Durnfords life! i have, with the exception of one who must
remain nameless and that person has added to my knowledge more than any other.. as
for you i take the above as a plea to leave you alone, which i will gladly do, if you extend that
courtesy to me!

We know via Gardner that Durford was issuing orders.

"We had between 30 and 40 mounted men, and I asked permission to take them down in the plain, and check the enemy's turning movement. Lieutenant-Colonel Pulleine told me to do so, and I accordingly galloped them to the front, and lined the spruit running across the front of our camp. The Basutos who were previously retiring, formed line with us and the enemy halted and commenced firing from behind cover. Leaving the mounted men who were under Captain Bradstreet, I returned to Lieutenant-Colonel Pulleine who had previously told me to remain with him. Shortly afterwards, observing the mounted men retiring, I rode back to ascertain the cause. Captain Bradstreet told me he had been ordered to do so by Colonel Durnford, who soon afterwards told me himself that he considered our position too extended, and wished to collect all the troops together. But it was now too late."

I think we have to accept, there was no chain of command, at what point this broke down is anyone's guess?

Hi springy.

My take on all this is that Durnford was in command of his own independent No2 column, LC couldn't make his mind up at first what he wanted Durnford to do, however, eventually he discussed his plan to move against the Matyanas. LC arranged for Bengough to be detached from Durnford's column and to approach from one direction, whilst LC set off to confront the Matyanas, he wanted Durnford to support him by also moving against the Matyanas, and, along with Bengough, form a sort of pincer movement to drive the Matyanas into the waiting arms of LC, where they would be brought to battle and forced to surrender. The previous discussions, orders and instructions all seem to show that this is what LC had in mind.

Now we come to the confusion part.

Durnford had already been rebuked by LC, so I don't think he would be going to make the same mistake again in a hurry. When he got the order to go to the camp, the order also contained the movement of Bengough, and also stated that LC was heading off and would be around 8/10 miles distant, surely this would convey to Durnford that the move against the Matyanas was under way, and that he was being moved up to the camp to be close by to support LC in this action. On his way to the camp he is told by Chard of zulu activity in the area, so he wisely sends some of his men back to guard his wagon train. On his arrival at the camp he finds no fresh orders have been left there for him by LC, so would this not confirm that everything was going to plan as regards the action against the Matyanas, and that Durnford was still to support LC in that action?

Now we get to more confusion.

Durnford is informed of the zulu activity around the camp, he can see that Pulleine has done next to nothing about it, so he uses his own men to sweep the area to gather better information on these zulus, confusing reports are coming in about their movements, however, one report says that there is a large group of them heading in the direction of LC. He is now on the spot, what does he do about it. He recalls LC's rebuke and also that LC had stated that he would expect a column commader to disobey an order if something came to his notice that could be injurious to the column (or words to that effect), well, the report of zulus heading towards LC could well be very injurious to LC and the rest of the column he has with him if Durnford does not act upon this information, so he decides to set off and find out what these zulus are up to. Yes, he might be heading off in a different direction, but would that not be to get around to the far right to then sweep over towards the left and try to trap these zulus between himself and Barton and Raw who are sweeping over from the left? Nobody at the camp had any idea of the size of the zulu army that was hiding out of sight, and it would seem that the reported zulus heading in the direction of LC were in fact the left horn making its move and getting into position. When Durnford ran into them, he must have realised that this was going to be an attack on the camp, so he made a fighting retreat to slow down this left horn to give Pulleine the chance to form some defences back at the camp. Pulleine however, could not see the chance that Durnford was giving him to do something back at the camp, then of course Durnford began to run out of ammo and was also being outflanked on both sides, his position was becoming hopeless, so he had no option but to retreat from the donga and try to get back to the camp, find Pulleine and sort out some sort of defences. It does appear that he could not find Pulleine and so he must have then realised that the situation was hopeless, but men gathered around him, he gave away his horse and stood with the rest of the men in a forlorn last stand, and by doing this, he and the men that flocked to him, helped others to escape, so all credit for that.

So I don't think that Durnford was to blame at all, LC should have made his intentions clear and given proper clear orders to both Pulleine and Durnford. But he was that impatient to get to grips with the zulus that Dartnell had reported, that he couldn't be bothered to make sure that he had left clear and well defined orders or instructions, so the fault is definitely with him. He realised this, but 'The Wasp' (Crealock), found a way out by blaming Durnford.

Cheers mate.

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

It's not much different to your post on the other thread. Your now posting sarnario's.
On the 22nd Jan Durnford was not required to operate against the Matyanas. He had received a fresh order to move to the camp. Which he did! If he was so unsure of what was required of him, he could have sent a messager to LC, to enquire what he was supposed to do on his arrival.

and Chelmsford SHOULD of responded to Pulleine's first
note at 8.05 received at 9.30 by HP.

Dave.

I am replying to springy's post in which he asked me personally for this information, if you had read that, you would understand why I have posted the above in answer to him.

You say that Durnford was not required to operate against the Matyanas, but can you say who was supposed to have told him that? There is no order that I know of that informs Durnford about that, so how do you know this, unless of course you are making your own mind up about it.

Like I said in my post above, LC should have issued clear orders as to what he wanted both Pulleine and Durnford to do, he failed to do this, and that is where the confusion starts. Clery and Crealock were left to issue orders that LC himself should have made his own priority.

Martin you need to get a better understanding of what orders were issued, not what orders you think should have been and by whom!

Clery.

"The General first ordered me to write to Colonel Durnford, at Rorke's Drift, to bring his force to strengthen the camp, "

It makes know diffrence wether or not Clery had the rank to issued orders. LC ordered him to write the Order. If Durnford had received the order above he would have know what was required of him.
No mention of operating against Matyanas.

We know what order Crealock really sent, and again no mention of Durnford operating against Matyanas.

And we know, what order Crealock claims to have sent and again no mention of Durnford operating against Matyanas.

And I would have thought, LC would have been far to busy, to do everything himself, that's why he had staff under him.

Dave, it is you that needs to get a better understanding.

The order you quote that you say Clery was to write to Durnford was not sent because Crealock rightly stepped in and said that a major cannot issue orders to a column commander, ie; (Colonel Durnford), this is correct, it is going against all protocol, and LC should have known that, and this order was not sent, so therefor Durnford did not receive it.

The order Crealock sent also does not mention anything about Durnford not being required to operate in the action against the Matyanas.

The order that Crealock claims to have sent can be ruled out, because we know that he didn't send that, and that Crealock was a proven liar.

LC might well have been busy, however, junior officers cannot issue orders to senior officers, and it is up to the person in charge (LC), to make sure that any orders written at his dictation are then read by him, and are amended or corrected and signed by him, before being issued to the person they are intended for, it seems obvious that LC didn't bother to do this, and it also appears that the staff under him were not all that concerned about getting it right either, well, at least not until after the loss of the camp, and then after that, the big cover up began.

Whatever.    I'm sure there will be someone on here (x) who will agreed with the way you see it.