Durnford was he capable. 4

That's a good point 24th,  would you please repeat the orders
in full, in order to refresh us, then as you say we will be able
to ' crack on '.                                                       xhosa

Dave, Chard.

It has been said many times on the forum that you have to read the order of the 22nd along with the previous orders that Durnford received from LC to make sense of the whole thing. Don't forget that LC wanted Durnford and Bengough to form a sort of pincer movement to flush out the Matyanas and drive them towards LC, where it was hoped that they could be defeated. Bengough was part of Durnford's column, and LC wanted Durnford to detach him so that he could take a different route to Durnford so that they could both form this pincer movement against the Matyanas. Also don't forget that LC had already told Durnford that he wanted him to support him. Now comes the big mistake made by LC. He gets a message from Dartnell and assumes that he has found the main body of the zulu army, so he splits his force and sets off to confront them. He fails to leave any proper written orders for both Pulleine and Durnford, this is left to Crealock and Clery, who, between them, fail to give proper information to both Pulleine and Durnford. The order Durnford receives on the 22nd is informing him that LC is moving off, and that Durnford should move up to the camp with all his force, AND, it also tells Durnford that Bengough should be making his own way via a different route. Now, what is Durnford to make of this order? There is no mention of him taking command of the camp, there is no mention of him reinforcing the camp, and there are no fresh orders waiting at the camp for Durnford on his arrival, however, he and Bengough have been ordered to support LC in the action against the Matyanas, so to all intents and purposes, this is why he is being called up to the camp, so that he can be close by in order to support LC. Look at the order of the 22nd, there is no mention of any change to Durnford's previous orders, there is no mention of LC going to reinforce Dartnell, there is no mention of what he is suppose to do on arrival at the camp, and with no further orders awaiting him there, he has to follow what he has already been ordered to do, and that was to support LC. The fault lies with LC for not making the orders clear, and also with Clery and Crealock for taking matters into their own hands, and then realising after the event that LC had left himself wide open through the hap-hazard way that he gave his orders. There then followed a cover up, a rigged court of enquiry and a web of lies and deceit to get LC off the hook and put the blame onto the scapegoat Col Durnford, after all, he couldn't say anything to defend himself could he, he was laying dead with the others at iSandlwana.

Orders received on the 19th Jan. issued prior to the one Durnford received on the 22nd.

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

The word "But" is important. LC wants Durnford cooperation against the Matyanas. But will send fresh instructions on the subject. Of course we know the situation at Isandlwana had changed. Half the colum was being moved to a different location, depleting the numbers in the camp. LC ordered Durmford to the camp with all the forces under him. Obviously to compensate for numbers missing. Makes sense in that the supplies for no3 column were at Isandlwana.

24th, you have the same source i was demanding from ctsg.
how could that be? where is it from please.              xhosa

'I shall want you to co-operate against the Matyanas BUT will send you fresh instructions on this subject', BUT he never did. The orders of the 22nd are not fresh instructions on the subject of the Matyanas, they just tell Durnford to move up to the camp, so as far as Durnford is concerned, the action against the Matyanas is now under way as there is no Mention of any change to the operation against the Matyanas, and they also mention Bengough's movement, further reinforcing Durnford's belief about this. LC should have made sure that either Clery or Crealock wrote down the orders in the way that he wanted to convey them to Durnford, but he failed to do this, and through not making his orders clear enough, it was left up to Clery and Crealock to inform Pulleine and Durnford, and they both made a mess of things due to LC's indecisiveness and his mad rush to get to Dartnell and what he thought was the main zulu army.

The orders on the 22nd are fresh, because they come after the one issued on the 19th.

In the order,issued on the 22nd, the order explains what is happening. The subject of the Matyanas is mentioned but Durnford is not required to do anything apart from moving to the camp. LC & Glyn were attacking the Matyanas.
Perhaps if the camp wasn't attacked Durnford, may have received further orders, but for the time being, stay in the camp.

Here's what you said on the subject four years ago. It is followed by a few thousand posts that you might want to skim and I am sure you will be able to answer your own question.

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

Steve

Like you say, 4 years ago! Opinions change.

Well, like I say, it's all there. You never know, you might change your opinion again.

Steve

24th.

I think we must be reading different orders, I can't find anywhere that it mentions the Matyanas, or where it says that Durnford is not required to do anything apart from move to the camp, nor anything that says he should stay in the camp. I think you might be interpreting the order of the 22nd in your own way when it's supposed to run concurrent with his previous orders. The problem is through LC not properly dictating to his staff officers what he intended to say to his No2 Column commander, and between them (LC, Clery and Crealock), they made a real mess of things.

"You are to march to this Camp at once with all the force you have with you of No. 2 Column.

Major Bengough’s battalion is to move to Rorke’s Drift as ordered yesterday. 2/24, artillery & mounted men with the General & Colonel Glyn move off at once to attack a Zulu force about 10 miles distant.
J.N.C.
If Bengough’s battalion has crossed the River at Hands Kraal it is to move up here (Nangwana Valley).”

Okay it doesn't say Matyanas it says Zulus.

It's the first line of the Order, that concerns Durnford. The rest, is just bringing him up to speed with what the others are doing.
LC was ensuring there was enough men left at the camp, in the event it should be attacked. That's why the order to Pulleine was to defend the camp.

It all went wrong when Durnford took command. If Durnford had stayed put in the camp as ordered looking after his own command, would the Zulu's have attacked. They were hidden in a valley 5 miles away. That was until Durnfords men fired on them.

All the time we don't agree on the order issued on the 22nd Jan. How can we move forward. We will all be going around in circles.

Hi Dave, all your fault mate.
There was only one order and that's been reproduced countless number of times.
No agreement required it is what it is.

Have a great New Year

Cheers

Correct but the argument exsitsts because of the contents of that order. To me the order is as clear as day. " Move to the camp"
Others believe it was a continuation of the order Durford received on the 19th.

Long time back I gave a simple example of a divided instruction. It wasn't understood then so lets try again.

Your at work, possibly your a messenger, the boss sees you early in the morning grabs your arm and says: " later today I want you to go to the stores and bring back some stationary, pens, pads, erasers etc. But I will tell you when.'
About 3 in the afternoon he happens to spot you again and says: " Ah yes go to the stores for me."

What do you do? Go to the stores and wait there for the whole day? Just go there then come back? Or would you obey the instruction you were given earlier in the day: " later today I want you to go to the stores and bring back some stationary, pens, pads, erasers etc. But I will tell you when.'

Im pretty sure you would follow the orders you received earlier, or explain to the boss that you thought you only had to go to the stores and wait there.

What do you reckon Dave? How long would you keep your job if you did the later?

That's about the easiest explanation I can come up with.

See my point?

Cheers

Spot on Springy.

The following extract is from Snook's book "How Can man Die Better". I think it is a good analysis of Chelmsford's decisions before dawn on 22 January, and sets out Snooks view that Chelmsford did NOT intend Durnford to stay and defend the camp when he issued his order.  

Snook is no supporter of Durnford, but I believe his view of what Chelmsford had in mind so far as much needed scouting capacity is concerned, has the ring of truth about it. And that's what Durnford did.

Incidentally, it also supports the quote Frederic picked up from LWOTF, that the battle was already lost following decisions made at that early hour of the morning.


"Chelmsford had already earned a reputation amongst the staff for snap decision-making and, sat on the edge of his camp bed he made just such a decision now. A flying column would march to Dartnell's succour with the dawn...............A guard force centred on Pulleine's 1/24th would have to be left behind to protect the camp................The plan was hastily made in true Chelmsford style, entirely without consultation with his staff or subordinate commanders. In it Chelmsford took on his shoulders alone, the responsibility for the further sub-division of Column 3 in the near, but as yet unfixed presence of the enemy..............Once divided across a distance of 20 kms there could be no possibility of rapid reunification.

Before dismissing Clery to get the enterprise underway, Chelmsford added a second peremptory instruction: Durnford's No 2 Column was to come up immediately from Rorke's drift to Isandlwana...............Although it is often stated that Durnford was ordered up to supplement the guard force at the camp, it is apparent that, as far as Chelmsford was concerned, any tactical grouping which contained a few companies of regulars armed with Martini-Henry could safely be regarded as invulnerable.

A much greater worry to him than the strength of the force at Isandlwana was the painful immobility of No 3 column and the difficulty he had in scouting this part of Zululand to his satisfaction.................In order to make safe and timely progress towards the king's kraals, he had to be confident that the immediate area of the column was not concealing any lurking amabutho.......... He was keen to make Durnford's native cavalry more readily available; five additional troops of horsemen would prove invaluable in scouring such vexatious ground."

Copyright Col M. Snook. How Can Man Die Better. Greenhill Books 2005.

Steve

The fact that we armchair generals with the benefit of hindsight and the internet and numerous scholarly works cannot agree on the orders shows how badly written they were. LC was in a rush to get at the Zulus and never paid attention to detail. He fires off confusing orders and leaves no clear chain of command. If you used aviation error theory to analyse this you would have a field day.
The responsibility for the disaster was LC's. Durnford was not a military genius but was certainly handed a set of cards heavily stacked against him.
Similarly with Pulline.

rusteze wrote:

The following extract is from Snook's book "How Can man Die Better". I think it is a good analysis of Chelmsford's decisions before dawn on 22 January, and sets out Snooks view that Chelmsford did NOT intend Durnford to stay and defend the camp when he issued his order.  

Snook is no supporter of Durnford, but I believe his view of what Chelmsford had in mind so far as much needed scouting capacity is concerned, has the ring of truth about it. And that's what Durnford did.

Incidentally, it also supports the quote Frederic picked up from LWOTF, that the battle was already lost following decisions made at that early hour of the morning.


[

Before dismissing Clery to get the enterprise underway, Chelmsford added a second peremptory instruction: Durnford's No 2 Column was to come up immediately from Rorke's drift to Isandlwana...............Although it is often stated that Durnford was ordered up to supplement the guard force at the camp, it is apparent that, as far as Chelmsford was concerned, any tactical grouping which contained a few companies of regulars armed with Martini-Henry could safely be regarded as invulnerable.

A much greater worry to him than the strength of the force at Isandlwana was the painful immobility of No 3 column and the difficulty he had in scouting this part of Zululand to his satisfaction.................In order to make safe and timely progress towards the king's kraals, he had to be confident that the immediate area of the column was not concealing any lurking amabutho.......... He was keen to make Durnford's native cavalry more readily available; five additional troops of horsemen would prove invaluable in scouring such vexatious ground."
[/i]
Copyright Col M. Snook. How Can Man Die Better. Greenhill Books 2005.

Steve

Bonjour Steve,
Interesting thoughts.
This deduction seems logic for the reasons given by SNOOK (and others reasons).
The problem for me is the testimony of CLERY :
"The General (...) also added, "Order up Colonel DURNFORD with the tropps he had to reinforce the camp"
CLERY wrote also to PULLEINE that "Colonel DURNFORD has been ordered up from Rorke's Drift to reinforce the camp".
Maybe, CLERY misunderstood the instructions given by CHELMSFORD?
(with the exception of CRELAOCK and CHELMSFORD /I.E  Thesis: DURNFORD was ordered to take command of the camp), From memory, there is no other witness who claims that DURNFORD was ordered to reinforce the camp.
I note that the order given by CREALOCK to DURNFORD didn't mention "reinforce the camp".

Just an incredible hypothesis?

Cheers
Frédéric

I wondered when some knowledgeable member would finally cut
through all the bullshine and get to the heart of the matter, so
there we have it! excluding Durnford for the moment, we can now
see why the camp was doomed from the start.. his lordship was 
thought to be if nothing, meticulous in his planning, the mistakes
he goes on to make are of the most basic kind! 1. he fails to 
scout adequately his theatre of operations,2. he neglects to make
adequate provision for the defence of the camp should it be 
attacked whilst he went to the aid of Dartnell. 3. he divides his
force before he knows the disposition of the enemy. all very basic!
he takes out half his force thinking he might well meet the whole 
Zulu army, yet leaves all the ammunition behind.. now even with 
hindsight, that is more than strange!!.

If indeed his lordship had found the enemy army at Mangeni and
he did ' have the battle he sought '. how long would it have took
to get the reserve ammunition back to him, in normal conditions,
assuming the Zulu did not harass  and attack the column flying
to relieve him?..i find this all very odd.                       xhosa

Les,
I am sure i have made one or several errors somewhere.
Cheerd

Hey Frederic, your usually on the right track..your insights
at first used to surprise me! not any more..you have a
mind of a researcher in my humble opinion, you don't ' fire
from the hip (lip) like me.no. we can all see your posts are
thoughtfully prepared.

I could post from French and other's the sequence of order's
from Chelmsford via Crealock, Clery..(not Glyn , who was not
involved ) but all surely know them?..                         xhosa

Frederic

Am I right in thinking that the first we hear of Clery's order to Pulleine is at the Inquiry - and then it is verbal, as remembered by him. So no original written version exists and we cannot ask Pulleine of course.

Chelmsford does not find out that Clery has issued the order until 23rd January, and he is then greatly relieved (because he had forgotten to do it himself).

So what are we to think? Is Clery being careful at the Inquiry not to lay any blame on the General? Did he miss-hear what the General had said in the first place? Did the reference to Durnford coming up to "reinforce the camp" (if it was said at all) mean he was to improve the 3rd columns ability to scout the area around it with his mounted men(as Snook seems to think )?

Unless something new turns up I guess we can only speculate.

Steve

What does anybody think Durnford was doing when he 
left the camp.........could it be scouting        xhosa

xhosa2000 wrote:

I wondered when some knowledgeable member would finally cut
through all the bullshine and get to the heart of the matter, so
there we have it! excluding Durnford for the moment, we can now
see why the camp was doomed from the start.. his lordship was 
thought to be if nothing, meticulous in his planning, the mistakes
he goes on to make are of the most basic kind! 1. he fails to 
scout adequately his theatre of operations,2. he neglects to make
adequate provision for the defence of the camp should it be 
attacked whilst he went to the aid of Dartnell. 3. he divides his
force before he knows the disposition of the enemy. all very basic!
he takes out half his force thinking he might well meet the whole 
Zulu army, yet leaves all the ammunition behind.. now even with 
hindsight, that is more than strange!!.

If indeed his lordship had found the enemy army at Mangeni an
he did ' have the battle he sought '. how long would it have took
to get the reserve ammunition back to him, in normal conditions,
assuming the Zulu did not harass  and attack the column flying
to relieve him?..i find this all very odd.                       xhosa

Excluding Durnford as you say, the question has to be, would the Zulu's have attacked the camp.

Just been looking at Keith Smith's "Dead Was Everything", which, as others have said, is rather good.

In part of his essay starting on page 133 he talks about the reports submitted by senior officers on their actions on 22 January to Colonel William Bellairs who was Deputy Adjutant General.

This was not part of Chelmsford's Inquiry. Nevertheless a huge amount of manoeuvring was going on, not least to transfer some blame onto Glynn. One of the submissions that went from Chelmsford to Bellairs on 20 February contains the following.

"On arriving at the camp of No.3 column (Isandhlwana), I myself explained personally to Colonel Glynn that I did not wish to interfere in any way with the Command of the column, but that of course I should be only too glad to talk over with him all matters connected with it........."

Now, isn't that pretty much what Durnford said to Pulleine when he arrived at Isandhlwana?

Steve

rusteze wrote:

Just been looking at Keith Smith's "Dead Was Everything", which, as others have said, is rather good.

In part of his essay starting on page 133 he talks about the reports submitted by senior officers on their actions on 22 January to Colonel William Bellairs who was Deputy Adjutant General.

This was not part of Chelmsford's Inquiry. Nevertheless a huge amount of manoeuvring was going on, not least to transfer some blame onto Glynn. One of the submissions that went from Chelmsford to Bellairs on 20 February contains the following.

"On arriving at the camp of No.3 column (Isandhlwana), I myself explained personally to Colonel Glynn that I did not wish to interfere in any way with the Command of the column, but that of course I should be only too glad to talk over with him all matters connected with it........."

Now, isn't that pretty much what Durnford said to Pulleine when he arrived at Isandhlwana?
Steve

Where's the source that shows what was discussed between Durnford and Pulleine inside the tent!

You tell me Dave. I'm doing all the work Here!

Steve

Dave, lets recap.. the war was forced on the Zulu they 
were the next in line! it was understood before the 
previous war was concluded that the ' Serious menace
of Zulu aggression must be checked '. paraphrasing 
Frere there! The Zulu knew they were next in line and
the Zulu King did every thing in his power to prevent it
by peaceful means..that lasted till John Dunn laid it on
the line to him in no uncertain terms. even when the 
King understood that nothing he could do would prevent
the British from invading..he still after ferocious debate
with his Induna's and inner circle, decided that this would
be a defensive war not aggressive! he would stop the 
british army where it lay and send it back into Natal...

Of course the british had their own agenda! there's from the 
beginning was to be a punitive war utilizing a scorched 
earth policy! Cetshwayo sent his army to confront the five
arms of the british invasion concentrating and focusing on
the huge lumbering third or central column as the biggest 
and most immediate threat..so after this long winded reply, 
Durnford or no! yes they would have still attacked the camp.
                                                                         xhosa

Dave the source for what you mentioned can 
be found it lots of places, ie, PP's, Blue Book's,
and in loads of book's..i would post them but
some one else can i'm sure. oh and when LC
told glyn that he did'nt wish to interfere, that
turned out to be not the case! he was usurped 
at almost every turn, every thing went through
asst military sec ( a made up position ) Crealock,
Glyn was reduced to the more mundane dutys
which ordinarily his own orderly officer would 
have taken care of..                              xhosa

No it can't be found in those books or any books what took place in the tent, no one knows. I believe Strafford supposedly heard part of the discussion. Whatever did take place it was Durnford who ended up taking command.

xhosa2000 wrote:

Dave, lets recap.. the war was forced on the Zulu they 
were the next in line! it was understood before the 
previous war was concluded that the ' Serious menace
of Zulu aggression must be checked '. paraphrasing 
Frere there! The Zulu knew they were next in line and
the Zulu King did every thing in his power to prevent it
by peaceful means..that lasted till John Dunn laid it on
the line to him in no uncertain terms. even when the 
King understood that nothing he could do would prevent
the British from invading..he still after ferocious debate
with his Induna's and inner circle, decided that this would
be a defensive war not aggressive! he would stop the 
british army where it lay and send it back into Natal...

Of course the british had their own agenda! there's from the 
beginning was to be a punitive war utilizing a scorched 
earth policy! Cetshwayo sent his army to confront the five
arms of the british invasion concentrating and focusing on
the huge lumbering third or central column as the biggest 
and most immediate threat..so after this long winded reply, 
Durnford or no! yes they would have still attacked the camp.
                                                                         xhosa

Going back to the cause of the Zulu war. Will only complicate matters. Let's deal with the order issued to Durford on the 22nd Jan.

K dave, a tad ungracious but fine, but if you look with
your eyes you will see the last sentence answered 
your query. and while i have you in mind you saying
that nobody knows what happened regarding the
conversations in the tent..is only the case if you dont 
have access to the information, Chelmsford, Crealock,
and Clery had their say. the only one who never talked
about it was Glyn, but i'm sure your aware of that..
                                                                 xhosa

Oh you meant Durnford and Pulleine..oop's 

Oh yes Durnford's order's dave, which one's did you 
have in mind, the actual order or Crealock's revised
from memory?                                         xhosa

Sorry mate, I won't get into a discussion with you. Your attidude yesterday was way out of order. When someone doesn't agree with you, you get stupid, even as far as claiming Springbok and CTSG had formed an alliance. So would appricate if you didn't reply to my posts. You showed your true colours yesterday, and you have a habit of taking the discussions of topic.

rusteze wrote:

You tell me Dave. I'm doing all the work Here!

Steve

Sorry, Steve, I am actually thé only adult with 3 devils children. I am hidden un thé water clos et to write this post

That's fine dave. although you realize we were! in discussion! 
but i will feel free to correct you from time to time..       xhosa

Frederic

Condolences my friend. I have three as well, but old enough not to bother me! My grandson does demand my attention.

Steve

[quote="xhosa2000"]Hey Frederic, your usually on the right track..your insights
at first used to surprise me! not any more..you have a
mind of a researcher in my humble opinion, you don't ' fire
from the hip (lip) like me.no.

Thanks for your kind word. But it was not the case. I made too many  errors and I'm not quite rigorous and meticulous ....and i have many many many things to learn on this battle. I need to      


we can all see your posts are
thoughtfully prepared.
Not the last one, i am afraid! (not prepared at all)
It's a mistake...My memory is often in fault.
I am sure my hypothesis (about CLERY) is a herisy.
Historians should have already mentioned this possibility, don't you think?

I could post from French and other's the sequence of order's
from Chelmsford via Crealock, Clery..(not Glyn , who was not
involved ) but all surely know them?..

Many thanks, but i have already translate in French the order from CHELMSFORD via CREALOK to DURNFORD.

Amitiés

Frédéric

xhosa2000 wrote:

What does anybody think Durnford was doing when he 
left the camp.........could it be scouting        xhosa

Less,

As i have said previously, i am not ready to write about DURNFORD the 22 January (lack of knowledge)
Cheers

Frédéric

springbok9 wrote:

Long time back I gave a simple example of a divided instruction. It wasn't understood then so lets try again.

Your at work, possibly your a messenger, the boss sees you early in the morning grabs your arm and says: " later today I want you to go to the stores and bring back some stationary, pens, pads, erasers etc. But I will tell you when.'
About 3 in the afternoon he happens to spot you again and says: " Ah yes go to the stores for me."

What do you do? Go to the stores and wait there for the whole day? Just go there then come back? Or would you obey the instruction you were given earlier in the day: " later today I want you to go to the stores and bring back some stationary, pens, pads, erasers etc. But I will tell you when.'

Im pretty sure you would follow the orders you received earlier, or explain to the boss that you thought you only had to go to the stores and wait there.

What do you reckon Dave? How long would you keep your job if you did the later?

That's about the easiest explanation I can come up with.

See my point?

Cheers

Springbok

So my boss see's me in the morning and tells me he wants me to go to the stores, but he will tell me when !
He see's me again at 15:00hrs and tell's me to go to the stores.

Well, he told me in the morning, that he would tell me when to go to the stores, and true to his word he told me to go when he saw me again in after noon at 15:00hrs.
Am I missing something.

ymob wrote:

xhosa2000 wrote:

What does anybody think Durnford was doing when he 
left the camp.........could it be scouting        xhosa

Less,

As i have said previously, i am not ready to write about DURNFORD the 22 January (lack of knowledge)
Cheers

Frédéric

Ymob, take your time, don't be pushed. Post when your ready. Your doing okay.

impi wrote:

ymob wrote:

xhosa2000 wrote:

What does anybody think Durnford was doing when he 
left the camp.........could it be scouting        xhosa

Less,

As i have said previously, i am not ready to write about DURNFORD the 22 January (lack of knowledge)
Cheers

Frédéric

Ymob, take your time, don't be pushed. Post when your ready. Your doing okay.

xhosa2000 wrote:

What does anybody think Durnford was doing when he 
left the camp.........could it be scouting        xhosa

But it does not take 5 whole troops, a rocket battery and 2.5 companies of NNC infantry to conduct a reconniassance.

Impi

Yes your missing something. Read Springbok again.

Steve

Good point Impi.

"From "Our South African Empire" By William Henry Parr Greswell, 1885 -

"No matter whether it was Lord Chelmsford who had miscalculated, or Crealock who had malingered, or poor Durnford who had forgotten his instructions, or Carey who had lost his head, the result was the same. Sir Bartle Frere was arraigned before the bar of English opinion..." [Reffering of course to Crealock's 'mis-remembered' order for AWD "Move up to Isandhlwana camp at once with all your mounted men and rocket battery. Take command of it."

"The Leisure Hour", 1882, "Isandhlwana ; A Visit Six Months After the Disaster" "by A.N. Montgomery, J.P., Late Commandant I.N.N.C., Formerly Captain Royal Fusiliers"

"I think no impartial judge can throw blame on Lord Chelmsford for the disaster. The plan of campaign had been laid out with as great care as those for Abyssinia or Ashantee. The general feeling was that the major-general was over cautious. Bets had been freely made that not more than five white white men would be killed in any action. The preliminary skirmish with Sirayo possibly made him think that those who said the Zulus would never attack in the open, nor by day-light, and would confine themselves to the bush fighting of the old colony, had some reason. Corespondents described actions there in this this style : " Hot work! Fifty of the enemy killed. One man of ours bruised by a fall form his horse!"

Do we know, how many men were at Isandlwana prior to Durnfords arrival ?

CTSG
Before you set too much store by your Leisure Hour posting you should read "Captain Montgomery's Secret" in Keith Smith's book Dead was Everything.

Steve