A British/Welsh Regiment's bad day!

Can't be sure, but I think both Negroid and Caucasian bones were found at various spots.
Am I right in saying the casualties were buried where they fell? Weren't there still zulu corpses lying there?

Regards,
Gordon

 

I had a burst of deep joy today Flash. I forced myself out in the cold to perchance meet a book provider of mine. Found him and while sifting through his latest offerings he said; “This of any interest?” Clutched in his mittened grasp was ‘Active Service Pocket Book’ – full enlarged version (940 pages complete with end maps), 1907. “I shall want a fiver for this?”

What thought I, around 40 sobs (or more) worth of book and this reprobate ‘wants’ a fiver? “Fair enough ‘ole son,” says I, “but I want these two other books in the price!” Naa, I want a fiver for the pocket book on its own.” – “Is it signed by Churchill then?” I added – “Err no, how about £5.25 for the lot then?” Hmm…had to think about that………about 0.002 of a second. “Yeah, go on then, as it’s you.”

Unfortunately, there’s no reference to burials, in the field or otherwise. My guess is the men in a situation like that were buried where they fell, with personal effects recovered as well as serviceable military equipment. Same for any European enemy dead.

One contemporary reference I found (not on this war but of the time): ”The dead were buried near where they fell by burial parties. The presence of dead and wounded did not improve the courage and morale of the remaining troops, so they were removed from sight as soon as possible.”

My guess is also native enemy were left where they lay unless they were cluttering or fuming the encampment when they might be piled into a pit, riverless ravine or burnt? If the force was moving on, their tribe may have recovered them or the wild animals got fed?

One rider to the above. There are mentions that the ground was too hard to dig-in close to the Isandhlwana rock. If the skirmish lines started at some 1 1/2 miles, much of that would have been on the plateau which was dig-able. Any killed on hard ground unsuitable for entrenching was also unsuitable for a grave - yes, unless they were covered by stones only? I would guess more likely the first to die, died on soft ground and any killed on the rocks were moved? Not personally having been there, it's just a guess?

No.9

[ 09. February 2004, 05:27 PM: Message edited by: No.9 ]

 

Gents,

Have you seen the National Geographic Documentary about this battle??? Complete with graphic lay out of the land, British and Zulu positions, graphic reenactment and the interview of the Zulu medicine man who explained the ferociuos Zulu stamina???

Don't know if the BBC and Nat. Geo. doc's are the same or if this post add anything to this story...I will check the NG site for info.

 

no9,
Any chance of that reprobate's phone no?!
Agree with what you said about burials-maybe they just covered the bodies on hard ground with rocks in lieu of smething more permanent? I also recall seeing pics of zulu dead (from another campaign) where they were just left lying, and Europeans were standing with one foot on the bodies Big Game Hunter style.
Steven, it sounds similar, but I've got the NG website bookmarked so I'll have a look later.

Regards,
Gordon

 

Hello Stevin, nope I did not even know that Nat'l Geographic ever did a special about that battle??? Would love to see it though.

On I think it's The Discovery Channel or either The Learning Channel, they have a 1 hr doc series that looks into correcting any myths through Scientific Methods--such as that show that Friend and I agree to disagree on--doing with The Red Barons death, Custer's Last Stand and The Alamo.

If there is a way to contact the producers of "Histories Unsolved Mysteries" I think that the Zulu War and in general, Isandulwana and Roarke's Drift, would both be great to do a show or two on.

 

If the reprobate had a phone number Flash, I wouldn’t have to forced myself out on a cold Sunday morning to perchance meet him would I? Then if he had that much nause he might get on the web and start pricing his books differently? He usually gets a load of cr@p and nothing is ‘mint’ but occasionally…….

If there’s something you’re after, specific title or in general, PM me and I’ll keep and eye open.

Stev, Carl, I view with interest such ‘look what we know’ programmes, however, they always seem to take the high moral ground instead of just the truth. Myths they could bust might be, Kennedy never made Kruschev back down it was the other way round – (why do you think no one seriously suspected the Soviets when JFK was shot, you don’t shoot you’re compliant mates); re the Anglo-Zulu wars, there are no myths just PC cr@p trying to make out the Zulus were something special. Do a true life expo of Shaka who was in reality just as much a b@stard as Stalin was. He started the Zulu wars wanting to take over all the other tribes and form a dictatorship. If all this wasn’t going on, the nation would not have been so weak and divided and such a target for the Europeans. After every battle he went round and had some of his men killed on the premise they didn’t fight hard enough. So the best chance the Zulu had of staying alive was to fight like a nutter and hope he’d survive, otherwise Shaka might probably kill him.

And, while they’re at it, lets clear up the bunk about Italy being defeated by a bunch of tribesmen with spears at Adua. Ras Menilek’s formal standing army was nearly 7 times bigger, equipped with better and more modern weapons including artillery which on the day were probably manned by Russian gunners. Italy knew most of this as they gave him the bulk of the money and weapons in the first place as they brought him to power! And, having beaten the Italian columns, which wasn’t hard as one had marched miles off course, another was ambushed in a ravine and none were able to bring their cannon into use, there was no point or need to walk among the wounded butchering them or setting fire to the grass to burn them alive and save time with the slaughter. The only thing ‘tribal’ about it was the barbarity which was shown to the Italian casualties who themselves never previously perpetrated any such acts. Just opinion but, whilst I disagree with the short term Imperial outcome of Mussolini’s invasion in 1936, the determination to blast them with armour, aircraft and anything else he could throw at them seems totally understandable – just like the comprehensive force used by the US against Iraq……twice!

No.9

 

I agree with ya Nr 9, I agree with ya. That is partly why I disagreed with their explanations on the Red Barons death as well as their version of what happened at The Alamo. However, I did agree because of the Scientific and Forensic proof, about what they said about George Armstrong Custer and his last stand at the Little Big Horn.

 

Hello Carl, you know with the Red Baron episode, while everyone is deciding between Brown and the machine gunner, there may have been some obscure soul in the trench watching all this going on and popping off the odd snap shot? As sod law dictates (as it often does), this was the odd shot that hit the Baron?

I’m not sure if I’ve seen the Custer programme you mention. I’ve seen or listened to so many ‘revelations’ I can’t remember what was when? The ‘artists’ impression about the 7th gather around the top of one hill being spurred on by Custer in the centre was disproved a long time ago, for those who were willing to listen anyway.

Did you ever hear the one about Custer surviving the battle and ordered thereafter to assume a false identity and live in obscurity as more face could be saved out of the defeat if everyone thought he’d died a heroes death?

No.9

 

Hi Nr 9 I have to agree with your observations.

It could be possible that any of the so stated sources could have downed the Red Baron but, in my own opinion, I believe the perpetrator is most likely Captain Roy Brown based on the tumbling bullet which had to have been caused by a combination of events.

1) Air Resistance simply because of the act of flying.
2) Vibrations of the motor and the motor coverings (cowling?) where the MGs were also mounted.
3) Because of the motors vibrations, when the MGs were fired, the rounds could possibly have "tumbled" as could happen when a weapon is disturbed during the act of being fired.
4) A MGs barrel will have far faster and far greater wear and tear on the rifling in it's barrel, than that of a bolt-action rifle.

I do know of the famous painting of Custer that you are referring to. Yup, it has been discounted as far as accuracy but, it is by far, my favorite of all the paintings I have seen done of Custer's Last Stand.

Too bad that painting was just someones great imagination.

I do believe I did hear that before, about Custer surviving the battle and living under an assumed name.

In my own opinion, I do not believe that he survived for if he did, he certainly would not have left Libby Custer to live a lonely life and as he loveed her dearly, he would have had to have "made arrangements" of somekind, to have her at his side--somewhere.

 

Carl, your version of the Red Baron is as sound as any, perhaps it was suicide?

I agree about the Custer paintings. I remember one favourite with him in his buckskins and a pistol in each hand. Just an artists impression but still a good pic. Even now, in the light of all that’s been established, the myth side still endures. Look at the photo and caption below. Obviously a modern rendition but the author incorrectly states “220 markers” on the hill. Someone should ask him why there are only forty shown?



I was looking for the painting of ‘Custer’s last words’ but couldn’t find it?

I wonder if anyone said he survived the battle by disguising himself as a horse? Well, Comanche was the only known survivor on the field, though many omit to say that many of Reno and Bentine’s men weren’t killed?

I agree about Libby. A favourite film quote; “I knows what you love, honey, and it ain’t onions.”

No.9

 

A good quote to quote. From the excellent but far from truthful "They Died With Their Boots On" w/ Errol Flynn and my love of my life Olivia DeHavilland.

Could have been suicude. He COULD have missed his head from all the vibrations caused by his Fokker triplane.

The painting your possibly thinking about is also my fav rendition of Custer's Last Stand. His ever faithful scout (California Joe--as said in TDWTBO movie) was by his side reloading Custers pistols.

I wonder if this painting is as controversial as the painting of the Charge of the Light Brigade painting and the ever famous Alamo painting where it shoes good ol Davy Crockett with raised Ol Betsy using it as a club against the on-charging Mexican Soldiers.

At any rate--I love all three of these myth-starting paintings.

 

Here’s another:

“Well, I can’t imagine, ma’am, if I may say so, any pleasanter journey than walking through life with you beside me, ma’am.”



Though she worked so well with Flynn (the fastest man on three legs), they were both Warner ‘studios employees’, except for ‘Gone with the wind’.

‘Charge of the Light Brigade’ was another glorious ‘boys own’ film. As you say, not a documentary but good fun.


Wow, look who’s popped in!

(They have not reached our guns, believe me, they are not even in the valley")

Carl, are you sure it’s the Alamo painting you like or the Duke poster?


No.9

[ 11. February 2004, 03:33 PM: Message edited by: No.9 ]

 

Well done Nr 9, and I like The Dules poster better than the painting I was thinking of. How I wish I still had my 7th grade Textbook for my Texas History class.

Ahhhhh, Olivia DeHavilland (sigh) aint she beautiful--I think so...........

 

Let’s have a curtain call




FORCES PIN-UP

 

I just thought of something. If i had to choose between Olivia DeHavilland as she was then and Princess Madeleine as she is now, that would be probably impossible for me to do.

I think they are both the most beautiful two women to have walked on this Earth.