I’m very lucky to have visited Isandlwana and Rorke’s Drift last month. It has been a goal of mine since watching Zulu and Zulu Dawn. A feeling of awe at both places.
This was such a great video! You have a teaching style and performance that is absolutely top notch. Proud to say I was one of your first few hundred subscribers and you’re past 45k now!
Well done again Chris. As an American I have always likened this to the defeat of Custer at the Little Big Horn in 1876. Very similar mistakes were made although Custer wasn’t encamped like these men. Nevertheless, they used many similar excuses including defective ammunition by the US Army which proved to be false. Also, elements of the 7th Cavalry were able to hold out in defensive positions much like the defenders of Roarkes Drift. In the end it was actually the beginning of the end for both the Zulu and the Native Americans
Indeed, both Durnford and Custer spread their forces far too thin. Rifles (carbines) used were fairly similar in performance. The quality of marksmanship was not. The British soldiers were well trained. Many of Custer's soldiers had received next to no training. There also appear to have been some serious personality issues between Custer and some of his officers, Reno and Benteen in particular.
The one big similarity was they were both defeatef stealing land from indigenous people only for the army to return and subjugate the natives to apalling lives. I suppose that was how it was done then and perhaps I'd have approved but it never sits right with me today.
@@kiwigrunt330not so sure about the Markmanship differences between the British Army and the 7th Cavalry. The Zulus had rifles but the Tribes that fought Custer had them too and they had better rifles than the Single Shot US Army Rifles. They had repeating lever action rifles and knew how to use them for hunting and in warfare.
Well done,this is the best that I've ever heard this battle described. As an Englishman living in Soutj Australia I was surprised to hear of Adelaide born Edgar Anstey's body being returned to Britain for burial,or that he was Australia's first casualty overseas, this is not something that we were taught in schools here. Certainly interesting to know.
Darren, I'm glad you enjoyed it. I will need to get my facts right but I think his family were british and he was born in Australia whilst his family were working / serving there. Hence why he ended up being buried in Woking.
@@TheHistoryChap ,I'm trying to find this information online myself, it's proving to be a bit difficult, but I'm sure that I'll get there. Thankyou once again.
Both underestimated the indigenous troops, overestimated the capacity of a First World Army, divided their troops and did not obtain sufficient intelligence about the strength and locations of the enemy. Both the Native Americans and Zulus had rifles. Both the British and American commanders were actually afraid that they would not encounter the enemy. The British troops were actually more experienced than Custer's troops that included a large number of recruits.
I used to wargame the Zulu War many moons ago. Being a young, inexperienced tactician, I fell into the trap of overextending my ammunition supply lines much as was depicted in 'Zulu Dawn'. It took me four or five games to learn my lesson. Great fun, regardless. Thanks for another interesting and informative video!
Hi love this video it’s great to listen to the history of the uk and the empire, I remember the first time I watched Zulu with my dad, I couldn’t stay still! Loved stanly baker and Michael Caine. Loved this and thank you!
Thank you Chris. Your videos are always brilliantly informative and expertly delivered with your wonderful narration. My attention captivated.! Well done, and look forward to the next.!
Thank you so much for this video! I got big into the Zulu wars after watching the Zulu movie, and this along with all your other Zulu war history videos help make sense of the conflict!
Rhys, thanks for your kind comments. I know it took a while to get to the battle but I like to share what I have found out about why battles happen in the first place. Plenty more videos coming your way.
With the help of maps and photographs, this presentation is certainly much better than the first, albeit longer, video. Showing maps puts the events in context and the photos show the main participants, both giving viewers excellent information regrettably not provided in the initial documentary. Well done, History Chap, keep up the good work! What about doing videos about the Indian Mutiny, and/or the two 19th century British - Afghan wars?
Fantastic video Chris , thanks for that, i’m a painter of figurines for more than 35 years and i never get tired of painting zulu’s and britisch colonial soldiers, hope to see more video’s of your fantastic channel 👍
Have you ever thought about a live event? That would be brilliant!!!!! Your channel is a total go to! For me! And how about some history chap T shirts!!! Keep up the great work!
Paul, I'd love to do a live event. I deliver talks to various organisations here in the UK but it would be brilliant to gather some of my YT audience together either in person or virtually.
As a black South African I'm proud of the way we acquitted ourselves against the British numerous time. Both the Zulus and the Boers fought gallantly against the aBrits at Colenso, Rourke's Drift, Majuba, Spion Kop, Isandlwana and other skirmishes. The rivalry continues on the cricket and rugby fields to this day Bayede. Salute
Just a shame the British and South Africans were not always on the same side (although the SA actions in WW1 and WW2 are worth telling in their own right).
Another fantastic, presentation Chris . One of the major factors contributing to the loss must surely been the overwhelming superiority in numbers , 20 to 1 roughly . One could imagine , 400 yards away , charging Zulu’s could cover that distance in a minute , a rifle man could fire off 10 shots in that time , you could soon have a lot of Zulu’s on your hands , and then you are into hand to hand combat , and history demonstrates who had the upper hand .
Not only that the true size of the attacking Zulu force was not really known until it was too late. Much of the Zulu force was out of vision for the majority of the battle. At least from the camp. Reports of Zulu numbers in the hills that day were circa 4,000-7,000. Even after the impi was discovered around midday it was still not evident to Pulleine the actual size. From the camp position, the Zulu right horn was not visible, while the left horn was distant. Not was the chest rushing forward in one huge mass. The Zulus made good use of the tall grass, dongas etc and kept going to ground in the cover.
As a South African now living in the US, this battle has always fascinated me, I also see alot of similarities between the battle of Isandlwana and Custer's last stand at the battle of Little Bighorn.
The myth about ammo boxes is disproven by the very large numbers of broken ammo box screws lying around on the battlefield to this day. The specially designed quartermasters security keys were only necessary to undo the ammo boxes outside of combat and the system was designed to prevent unauthorised access to ammo. The field manual of the times instructs soldiers on how to quickly open the ammo boxes by striking the lid in a certain way with the butt of their Martini-Henry rifles which breaks the soft brass screws as intended. I have seen a demonstration of this on a mint condition ammo box and a mint unissued Martini-Henry of the period. It took less than 3 seconds to open the box and strip back the ring pull foil covering the ammo. Myth busted.
Agree, lack of ammunition and over-zealous quartermasters was a myth which conveniently washed over infantry mistakes and Zulus out-thinking and out-fighting the British.
@@TheHistoryChap Chelmsford had ample cause to come up with as many excuses as possible that the defeat wasn't his fault. Mind-blowing that after getting away with it all those years ago, we're still stuck picking apart all his smokescreens and excuses and lies over the campaign to this day.
I'm no expert,But I don't know how the British didn't notice how close the Zulu warriors had gotten to the camp. Didn't they post watches on the highest point in the area? Roving patrols fanned out on flanks front and rear?
Marvellous video may we be the best I've seen on the subject and I've seen quite a few over 40 years.... Some splendid insights, highly recommended. Please make more videos on the Battle of Isandlwana.
Another great video 👍🏻 the myth of the lack of screwdrivers was put to rest when metal detectors kept finding screws bent at around 90 degrees around the battlefield, an original wooden ammo box was sacrificed in proving a downwards butt strike from the martini Henry on the box placed on its end removed the lid, and bent the screw exactly like the other’s found on the camp ground. To me the real problem was the rolled brass cartridge cases, you can bend them by merely squeezing with fingers! The black powder fouled the barrel and breech, sustained firing meant the cases were getting stuck in the breech and the ejector not capable of removing it, the squaddie didn’t have an issued tool for removing the case and so was forced to improvise with the only other tool they were issued with………their bayonet!
@@lyndoncmp5751 yes and it was a tool mainly for disassembly and cleaning purposes, would’ve been like trying to dig out a Swiss Army knife from a pocket and opening the correct tool to extract a stuck round, with minimal leverage due to the short length of the tool. Much quick to use a bayonet with increased leverage. Yes could unscrew a flat headed screw from the ammo box, but again if you’ve ever used a multi tool to undo a tight flat headed screw then you’d realise while it is perfectly possible it is time consuming and fiddly, much quicker and more time efficient to smack the bit of a rifle against a wooden ammo box that’s foil lined. It explains the finds on the battle ground ie the bent ammo box screws
John Whittle, Yes that is true of course. Just pointing out that the myth that the British army was so incompetent that the troopers didn't have the tools to open up ammo boxes is just that. A myth. Every trooper had a tool in his kit which could do it.
Hello Chris, your channel has become a great favorite of mine and I thoroughly enjoy each video. One of the aspects of your presentations I really appreciate is the lack of bias towards your "home" nation, which I would think is really difficult to do. I always find you give equal treatment to both sides fairly and justly, calling both triumphs and failures. I also have my degree in History and military history is my favorite history to study. As you seem to focus on 19th century conflicts, I wonder if you've ever given thought to casting your gaze across the Atlantic and making some videos about that little American war in 1812. :) Cheers from Virginia in the USA and thank you.
Thanks for your support. I do try to walk the middle path...there are always two sides to any story. I always remember my son asking me (when he was little) whether the Zulus were goodies or baddies. I told him it depended on whether you were a Zulu or one of their enemies! The War of 1812 is on my hit-list so please make sure you subscribe so you don't miss it.
I think Chris G. has a very special talent for this because of his upbringing in South Africa, which is a multi-ethnic, multi-cultural environment where people have to learn at an early age how to get along with each other. He is graced with a multi-faceted worldview that is quite unique, hence his channel will keep growing. His approach is non-judgmental, which is very refreshing!
Once again Chris brilliantly described so interesting.i have a couple of other ideas you might be interested in,Sicily 1943 and the charge by the Australian lighthorse on Bathsheba in October 1917 which was amazing
An absolutely brilliant description of this famous Zulu victory with your usual high calibre presentation. I think I stated the following in a post on another of your superb Anglo-Zulu War documentaries. The Zulu regiments who performed so heroically and were so devastating at Isandlawana would take horrific heavy casualties at the Battle of Khambula on 28th March 1879. At the Battle of Khambula the Zulu war cry was "We are the boys from Isandlawana". As always wishing you continued success in all your endeavours. By the way historian Ian Knight who is such an authority on this conflict was asked by family members to view some old military material found in an attic. It transpires that Ian Knights great great grand uncle Pte Thomas Cooper 24th Foot was KIA at Isandlawana! You will have to do do the Battle of Maiwand which was as you know another colonial defeat for the British in July 1880 during the 2nd Anglo-Afghan War. Any fellow fans of Sherlock Holmes knows that Dr. John Watson was wounded at this battle. Any one in Reading in the England will have seen the magnificent beautiful monument "The Maiwand Lion" dedicated to British fallen in particular the 66th Regiment of Foot who later became the Royal Berkshire Regiment. This regiment made a heroic last stand also.
John, thanks so much for taking the time to comment. Kambula is on my list of future videos but I have now added Maiwand. In fact the wholse British army in India is a treasury of forgotten stories.
@@TheHistoryChap Hi Chris. I am delighted to hear that you will be doing the Battle of Mons. WW1 means so much to me as my grandfather served in this war. I have visited the Western Front numerous times over the years and visited the graves,monuments and memorials. It is so poignant to witness the Menin Gate ceremony. There was so much bravery displayed by the BEF during the retreat from Mons. However one display of heroism that stands out for me is the gallant rearguard action by the Irish regiment the Royal Munster Fusiliers at Etreux. There is a beautiful Celtic Cross monument there now. No doubt you have seen that most beautiful poignant painting titled "The Last Absolution of the Munsters". It shows Irish soldiers from this regiment with heads bowed solemnly as the regimental priest on horseback blesses them. I would highly recommend it to fellow subscribers to view this absolutey moving painting. It stirs up so many emotions. Just a historical footnote to this beautiful painting. The priest in the painting is Father Frank Gleeson from Co.Wicklow,Ireland. He would later be chaplain to the Free State/National Army in Ireland during the Irish Civil War 1922-1923. I love the story of "The Angel's of Mons" since I first heard it as a child. Obviously I am really looking forward to this documentary. As always wishing you continued success in all your future endeavours.
Another very compelling presentation, Chris. Always excited to see a new notification appearing at the top of my screen, alerting me to another of your videos. 🥳👍 Once the News broke, back home, of the shocking defeat at Isandlwana, I’d be fascinated to know what justification was given to Her Majesty’s Government & to Queen Victoria herself, for Lord Chelmsford’s invasion of Zulu territory in the first place. One presumes that King Cetshwayo was scapegoated as “the villain of the piece”, despite his Nation being invaded without justification… with his well trained Impis being portrayed as “weapons of mass destruction” 🤔 that needed to be hunted down & eliminated. Not that such examples of flagrant & falsified propaganda have ever been concocted in recent times, by any particular well known national leaders… or similar shenanigans resorted to in days gone by, by our own Empire - thereby contributing to its unflattering international reputation as “Perfidious Albion.”🤞🤥🇬🇧 It’s sad to think how many of our brave & loyal soldiers perished in so many foreign lands over the years, especially in certain campaigns that one struggles to justify on purely moral grounds, although - at the other extreme - wholesale & indiscriminate bashing of the British Empire has become an equally reprehensible modern day obsession in certain quarters, by political activists & ideologues who have a malign & very obvious ulterior motive of their own, rooted in their desire to propagate deceptive & abhorrent Marxist ideologies that seek to shape the present & control the future, by flagrantly distorting the narratives of the past.
Thanks for that very lengthy comment. I appreciate you taking the time to put down your thoughts so clearly. I wholeheartedly agree with your sentiments in the second paragraph.
I think yuu raise a fascinating question. The Quantrill book deals with the aftermath in an interesting manner. Chelmsford essentially seems to have got away with it on one level. He was able to rre-organise and when operational necessity of avenging the humiliation caused London to send all the military forces they had deliberately withheld in 1878 he won the war with only a couple of minor embarrassments in the Second Invasion. What cannot be overlooked is that he was a personal friend of the Queen, who spoke frequently on his behalf to Disraeli. Having said that, the Army made sure he never saw a field command again. You sense partly due to Isandlwana and partly because teh he nead of the Army from 1882 was the same Wolseley whose dreams of South African glory were stolen by Chelmsford Most of the blame was dumped oh his slimy unpopular if clever Secreatry Crealock who was blamed for the poisonous atmosphere between Chelmsford's staff and the 24th
@@glynquigley4364 Thank you for that interesting explanation & perspective, Glyn. Excuse my ignorance, but what is “the Quantrill Book” that you refer to? I’m not familiar with it & if it was mentioned in Chris’s video, my memory isn’t the best (even when it was “at its best” it wasn’t “the best!” 😂) & I don’t recall it.
@@the5thmusketeer215 Thanks for the comment. The Quantrill book is "Zulu Victory" by Ron Lock & Peter Quantrill. It suggests the 24th were rubbish, Durnsford was not to blame at all and highlights the cover up.
Having visited this battlefield, I saw that this hill was very defensible if it had been properly done, I asked my battlefield guide/historian how long it took for the zulus to get to the British line once they came over the skyline, I was told 20 minutes, enough time to get the troops in to the slope, however the artillery and the Rocket troop were some of the first to be over run. it is an awesome place to visit.
The Battlefield Band perform a song called The Beaches of St Valery which is all about the 51st Highland Divisions rearguard action away from the men trapped on the beaches at Dunkirk.I know you have a long list but would love you to tell the story of that action and the brave men who took part. Really enjoy listening to your history, just wonderful, thank you!
@@TheHistoryChap It was one of your best. I have really enjoyed the Boer War, Crimea, and Zulu videos. What about a video on Jackie Fisher and modernizing the British navy prior to WWI
Thank you for subscribing, much appreciated. Drop me a line via my website and tell me what stories you would love to hear in the future. www.thehistorychap.com
Great video I've read lots of books on this one is on your bookshelf it's a fascinating subject one thing I read was british soldiers started shaving after this battle due to jaws being removed from there dead comrades thought as trophys
I had the possibility to visit the site and see the cairns... It was something that I had never previously experienced, also not in the cemetaries in northern France.
Excellent work! I wondered often after learning of this battle if the British used their famed battle square during this battle or they didn’t have time. Great courage on both sides.
Not to split hairs but wouldn’t the rate of Fire have been rather more than 3 rounds a minute? Having said that I love and appreciate your videos sooo much! Please keep them going
Another great production, Chris. There would be sufficient material for a whole series of vids if you were to research the evolution of the Zulu kingdom from Shaka's time onwards 😀
it's the one that got me into the subject. Ian Knight and Adrian Greaves have written some great books about Isandlwana and the Zulu Wars in recent years.
@@TheHistoryChap Ian Knight who is such an authority on the Zulu War was asked by family members to check out military material that was found in an attic. It transpires that his great great grand uncle Pte Thomas Cooper was killed at Isandlawana.
@Coll Maxwell Ian Knight the historian who is such an authority on this war wrote an excellent book on this conflict in conjunction with the National Army Museum(UK) a number of years ago. It is excellent. The cover of the book is based on the ribbon of the Zulu War Medal or to give the medal its correct title the South Africa Medal. Ian Knights great great uncle Pte Thomas Cooper 1st Battalion(Royal Warwickshire Regiment) was KIA st Isandlawana.
I have just discovered your channel and as a lover of history, I intend to watch every video. Do you only do videos about older times and older wars? I find the apartheid period extremely tragic but still interesting. Do you make videos about this era?
Thanks for the interesting video. I'm due to watch Zulu Dawn again soon as I watched Zulu again a week or two ago. UI think Chelmsford has much to answer for splitting his forces without knowing where the Zulus were. I think they could have used the cavalry better. Wasn't Durnford's force mainly cavalry? I believe until the battle they were back in Natal.
@Coll Maxwell They are mounted on horse so they are cavalry (even if they are mounted infantry i.e. not expected to fight on horseback). They would be able to cover ground a lot faster than infantry on foot.
All indications were that the Zulu main impi was in the direction Chelmsford rode out to. There were no reports of large numbers of Zulus anywhere else until the morning of the 22nd. What Chelmsford did was militarily sound. Even modern military strategists, those who are unbiased, agree. The recon patrol requested assistance, fearing an attack by the main impi in the morning. They spend a terrifying night in the hills ten miles south east. Chelmsford did not ignore their request, nor send out a token force. Instead he sent a strong force out and kept a strong force back, to act only on the defensive and to be reinforced by Durnfords men. There is little wrong with this, seeing as the recon patrol got him into this quandary. If only Durnford did as he was ordered. Get to the camp and stick to the orders Pulleine was given. He didn't though and the rest is history.
Durnfords mounted riflemen, the Natal Native Mounted Contingent had the highest survival/escape ratio out of any unit at Isandlwana. Out of 7 officers, including Durnford although he was technically RE, and 257 men only 1 officer and 27 men were killed. That is a circa 90% survival rate. This is above and beyond any other unit in the battle. While the Edendale Troop was competent and fairly disciplined section, the rest of the NNMC was not and fled on their horses en mass as soon as the battle swung against them.
WOW! I have learned so much about this battle. It seems like there is a constant thread to battles where one side gets wiped out and that is the lack of really good recon, and splitting your troops up in enemy territory. Almost sounds like another battle that took place in the United States in 1876.
Joe, I think it was Napoleon who said that the best general is the one who makes the fewest mistakes (or words to that effect). If I may be so bold, I think Custer was even more reckless than Chelmsford.
The British had decent recon. Zulus were seen ten miles south east of the camp on the 21st. They were also seen north east of the camp at first light on the 22nd. No decent sized Zulu force got within miles of the camp without being seen. Also, pretty impossible to detect the main impi northeast of the camp before the 22nd when it wasn't even there yet. It arrived just before dark on the 21st. As I said, elements of it were seen at first light on the 22nd, the camp was informed and a stand to order was given by Pulleine at around 8.00 am. Chelmsford didn't split his forces in the classical sense. He sent one half out, and kept one half back. He didn't send both halves out blindly searching for Zulus. And he sent that one half out because the recon patrol requested assistance after getting itself into trouble and thinking they had encountered the vanguard of the Zulu impi. It was a sound military decision by Chelmsford given the situation at the time. He ordered the camp to act strictly on the defensive as well as ordering Durnford up to reinforce the numbers there. If only Durnford did what he was ordered to do instead of looking for action chasing out after retiring Zulus.
@@lyndoncmp5751 I agree that it would have helped if he reinforced the camp like ordered. On further analysis, it would have been difficult to overcome the number of enemy they were facing and being in the open. If there would have been some defenses like at Rourke's Rift the losses may have been lowered and they may have been able to hold out.
Joe Ritchie, I believe the camp could have held out even without barricades like at Rorkes Drift. There were around 600 British infantry and nearly 400 mounted riflemen. If these had been concentrated right in front of the tents the firepower probably would have been too much for the Zulus. Don't forget, wherever the firing WAS concentrated, the Zulus could not get through it. Less than 200 mounted riflemen stopped the entire Zulu left horn, and 5 companies stopped the Zulu chest. With a thousand rifles concentrated more closely together the Zulus would have had serious problems. 1,000 men covering the front, close to the tents, from the north shoulder of Isandlwana hill to Mahlambakosi in the south even if, say, 200 or so had to peel off later on to cover the rear at the Saddle when the Zulu right horn starting appearing there would have given the Zulus incredible punishment. It could also be argued the Zulu right horn might not have even pushed it if their left horn and chest were being held at bay far in the distance. Concentrated firepower, and being close to the ammunition supplies probably would have prevailed, at least until Chelmsfords force returned to sandwich the Zulus. 👍
Well done for this vid! Ahhh arrogance blinds pride!! Happens alot! My comparison to this is what happened to Gen. Custer and the battle at Little Big Horn. They got wiped out as well!!
Great video. Whats your opinion on Zulu Dawn? I recently picked it up from a charity shop after seeing it years ago and i thought it wasa lot better on a second viewing.
Norman, as I watched Zulu when I was about 5, I will always love it more. However, Zulu Dawn is closer to the real events (although with plenty of "Hollywood" moments). Zulu Dawn is centrered around Vereker, who was actually a real character but died in the camp and not at the drift with Coghill and Melvill.
I would not dismiss Smith -Dorrien's statements of fact about the screws in ammo boxes, being a detriment. It was only one of the factors he noted about the logistical problems with ammo supply to the line units during this battle. You may want to go read/re-read his "Memoirs of 48 years of Service" That he was relieved in WWI by higher Britsh officers/command , I consider the highest compliment, and only adds more validity to what he said earlier about a different war , different battle, he was in. Simply put, Sir Horace Smith-Dorrien is beyond reproach, so are his statements. A great man and a great British officer.
I have just read Isandlwana by Adrian Greaves and now reading Roark´s Drift by the same author. Usually a debacle is a consequence of various reasons, not just one. I think there were errors from Chelmsford, Pulleine and Durnford. Only one less mistake it may be another story. Congratulations for the video.
I dont see what Pulleine did wrong. The only thing I can fault him on was not striking the tents as the battle progressed but apart from that he was obliged to support his superior officer, Durnford. His firing line wouldn't have been kept out so far and for so long if not for that.
@@lyndoncmp5751 He did not laager the camp according to the regulations for the zulu campaigne. Defense line was inadequate. He must preserve the camp not to Dunford. He must have detected so many zulus so near the camp.
Alejandro, There were no regulations to laager the camps during the first invasion. That was a regulation for the SECOND invasion. The only regulation for camps in the first invasion was for partial entrenchments, but the ground at Isandlwana was deemed too stony to dig entrenchments, and the camp was due to be moved soon anyway. The camp at Isandlwana was a kilometre wide. Impossible to laager anyway, and in addition the wagons were required to bring up more supplies from Rorkes Drift. Pulleine DID defend close to the camp during the early morning false alarm. The 24th Foot were ordered by Pulleine to 'stand to' right in front of the tents when thousands of Zulus were reported between 7.00 and 8.00 am. Then Durnford arrived, ignored his own orders to just get to the camp and orders Pulleine was given to act on the defensive and he rode out on the attack, obliging Pulleine to support him. That's why Pulleine kept his firing line out so far for so long, to support Durnford. It was Durnford who made the big tactical mistakes at Isandlwana.
You have demonstrated just how effective a well scripted, presented and illustrated talk can be on Utube. It's like listening a "Mark Felton" of the British Victorian wars, without any footage, only better (sorry Mr Felton).
Great job I am not British but always enjoy reading the stories of British battles and great generals and brave soldiers who give their lives for the crown
3 rounds per minute volley fire was good for muzzle loaders. The Martini-Henry breech loading rifle volley fire rate was 12 rounds per minute. Apart from me being pedantic I really enjoyed the video. Thanks.
How Can Man Die Better by Col Mike Snook is the best work on the actual battle. I find all the other works spend too much time on the before and after, while the battle itself is rushed through.
Great video! I'm new to your channel and I'm enjoying the content. British military history has always interested me. I watched an interesting documentary by Ian Knight where they using Martini Henry rifles, tested to see if they jammed. Only after a short period of firing the rifles jammed. So if this was the case it would explain a lot more of what went wrong. It would have forced them into hand to hand combat. This seems more likely than the ammunition boxes not being opened quick enough or distributed to the lines.
@TheHistoryChap The documentary is called "The Mystery of Isandlwana" Its very interesting and sheds new light on what happened at the Battle. Definitely one to watch. They found bent screws at the lines. So the ammo boxes were given to the men, they bashed them open with their rifle butts.
Excellent run-through. Bottom line is that if Durnford did as he was ordered to and just got to Isandlwana to reinforce its numbers and adhered to the orders that Pulleine had, which were to act on the defensive and protect the camp, the disaster probably wouldn't have happened. Durnford poked the wasps nest and brought the battle on. The Zulus weren't planning to attack that day but Durnford forced their hand by going maverick, chasing off out after them looking for action. Even if the Zulus did attack that day, then far tighter defensive positions with more concentrated firepower close to the camp (nearly 1,000 rifles) probably would have held them off. This was Pulleine's preferred tactic, as shown by the morning false alarm, before Durnford arrived and changed the entire scenario. Cheers. Good stuff. 👍
By the way, I do think it occurred to Chelmsford that the camp might be attacked. That's why he ordered Pulleine to act strictly on the defensive and immediately ordered Durnford there. If he didn't think there was any chance of a possible attack on the camp, why did he order that? He actually acted with a degree of caution there. Durnford, by the way, already told Pulleine he wasn't going to stay in camp when he arrived, so his decision to ride off was made before the claim he rode out to go to Chelmsfords aid. Not that any Zulus were reported moving in the direction of Chelmsford to the south east anyway. They were retiring to the northeast, not in Chelmsfords direction. 😉.
Question on the uniforms. Why were some in classic Red and others in the dark tunic? What are the similarities, if any, between the warrior societies of Zulu and Sparta?
Re. the uniforms. The blue tunics were patrol tunics - bit like (rather posh) work overalls. That accounts for why some were wearing red and others weren't. As for your Zulu & Sparta question, I really don't know.
I would be interested in an indepth explanation of who was "at fault" for the British defeat. It's an interesting tug of war between Chelmsford, Pullein. And Durnford who to lay the blame upon.
@Coll Maxwell LOL quite true of course. But I had in mind a more narrow tactical analysis. Historical military massacres usually have a certain "What If" quality about them. So I guess what I'd like to know is if there was some plausible alternate history where the British forces successfully defend the camp from the Zulu attack based on some different tactical choices the British command may have made. Was it REALLY a mistake for Durnsford to throw his troops out to the right of the camp? Were the infantry battalions REALLY spread out too far? Need the defeat of the British forces in the camp have been quite so total? Or was the Zulu army simply too good, too numerous, and the terrain too unfavourable to the British to avoid a military catastrophe no matter what command decisions were made.
Tactically Durnford was largely to blame at Isandlwana. 1,000 rifles in tighter more concentrated firepower would probably been enough to hold off the Zulus. Pulleine's preferred tactic was to defend right in front of the tents, as shown by the morning false alarm. Durnford arrived and upset the apple cart. Durnford forced Pulleine's hand by riding off and telling Pulleine he expected to be supported. Pulleine was thus obliged to keep his firing line out as long as Durnford defended the far flung donga. Had Durnford not defended the donga and retreated to camp, Pulleine would never have kept his firing line out there so long. Durnford, incredibly, tried to get Pulleine to send two companies of the 24th Foot out after him when he decided to chase after Zulus and then there is his decision to order the poor rocket battery out there to support him. It had no choice but to follow him out and it became the first section to be overrun and annihilated. There is absolutely no defending Durnfords poor decision making tactically at Isandlwana. Even more incredulous Durnford made zero preparations to establish where his OWN ammunition wagon would be located when it arrived in camp. This is just mind boggling.
"Was it REALLY a mistake for Durnsford to throw his troops out to the right of the camp" Yes it was. It was ok for a temporary delaying action but Durnford decided to make it a permanent stand. The 24th Foot could cover his left flank (Durnford obliged Pulleine to support him) however his right flank could not be covered and sooner or later the Zulus would have started maneuvering around to outflank him in the open undefended ground to his right (his south), which is what they did start doing. It was an untenable position and a fatal decision. Durnford himself was overheard to mutter something along the lines of being "too extended". He knew himself he'd made a grievous error.
I remember a documentary about the Zulu-Anglo Wars, The Grandson of a Zulu warrior who fought in the 2nd battle of Iswandlawa was speaking. Against the Boers, the left 'horn' of the buffalo formation attacked first (before the right horn was ready) thus causing the Zulus to suffer heavy losses and eventually lose the battle.
Re the ammo supply, the NCOs in charge would not issue ammo to units not their own, being old serving soldiers (old sweets) who were given a non exercising task/position as a rewartd for long service and good conduct. Because of the problems of lack of screw drivers and the toughness of the ammo boxes, changes were made to the boxes so that they could be very quickly opened without the needing to have screw drivers
It was so horrible Lord Chelmsford blamed a dead officer for the disaster. For an administrator, Pulleine even though he spread his ranks thin, did at least deploy his men to make a stand against the oncoming Zulus; it was better than not doing anything at all. THANK YOU SO MUCH for mentioning Smith-Dorrien. If I recall correctly, he learned a valuable lesson from the battle in regards to the ammunition boxes as to how important it was to get them open to get ammunition to the men to keep the enemy at bay. I am against the British for starting the war, however, there were certain things about the conflict I liked hearing. At Isandlwana, I was pleased to hear that the British opened fire on the Zulus at a range of 600 yards, an appropriate range for the rifle they were using. I am critical of the fact that at the Battle of Le Cateau, a battle fought by British forces under Isandlwana survivor Smith-Dorrien, the British waited until the Germans were 250 yards away before firing on them. The Zulus attack plan could not have have been better executed. They kept their enemy distracted at the front while half of their force slipped in behind the British position and attacked from the rear, a strategy used by European armies in previous wars. As for Lt. Pope, I liked that he in military principle, he moved his company to cover the gap between the main British line and Durnford. Hey Chris, although it doesn't relate to this video, would you agree if I were to say that Sir Evelyn Wood was arguably the most able of Sir Garnet Wolseley's subordinates?
Nathan, once again thanks for taking the time to comment. Sir Evelyn Wood was a fantastic commander who rarely put a foot wrong in his career. Maybe I need to do a video about him. One day you and I need to meet for a coffee or pint and talk history!
@@TheHistoryChap Thank you for your reply! The History Guy did a video on Sir Evelyn Wood but I welcome one from you. I live in America so I would have to go over to England somehow which I may not be able to do for quite some time but I very much welcome the offer and would like to do so some time in the future.
@Coll Maxwell I didn't know about the sketch and haven't seen it. It is surprising a major engagement in Wood's career wasn't mentioned in books about him. Thank you for telling me. It sounds like Wood and Buller were both at fault for Hlobane.
Worth noting on the subject of blaming Pulleine for spreading his troops out too thinly: the formation Pulleine adopted was set out by Chelmsford in his 'Instructions for the Consideration of Officers Commanding Columns when Entering Zululand', written December 1878. A copy of which was found on Durnford's body. That's what I read in Saul David's 'Zulu', anyway (pages 129-130) No doubt the distance between British lines and camp did nothing to help the flow of ammunition. P.s. Unpopular opinion, Zulu Dawn is way better than Zulu... P.p.s. Great video!
Totally agree. I have always preferred "Zulu Dawn" to "Zulu" as well. It is the sheer scale of the movie. The uniforms in terms of tunic and pith helmets are more accurately depicted for soldiers on campaign. In "Zulu" the scarlet tunics are pristine and the white helmets are gleaming white and in parade ground condition. An interesting piece of movie trivia in relation to "Zulu Dawn". As you know the movie was made on location. In the movie the invasion force crossing the Buffalo River are actually crossing from the former Zululand into Natal. Obviously the opposite happened in real life. The film makers at the time thought it would be more dramatic on screen for the invasion force to go up the hill into Natal from the former Zululand.
@@johnroche7541 fantastic trivia! I never knew that! You're right, the scale of the movie is great, you really get a sense of the size of the Zulu impi and its ability to manoeuvre at speed. I also like it for being more historically accurate to the battle than Zulu is to Rourke's Drift. I heard when they made Zulu they weren't able to pay the Zulu extras due to apartheid laws in SA, so they left behind the herd of cattle as an unofficial payment. Some other war movie trivia, the 1970 film Waterloo (also fantastic) remains the record holder for most extras in authentic costume. 15,000 of them! As a result, another war movie of great scale!
@@davsto6375 Thank you for your reply. Absolutely love Waterloo. Crikey the scale is unreal. If these movies were made now they would be ruined with CGI. It is the thousands of extras that make them so realistic. I have 2 pieces of movie trivia in relation to both "Waterloo" and "Zulu". Sadly Jack Hawkins was suffering from throat cancer during the making of the movie "Waterloo" and his voice is that of a vocal impersonator which was added in later. If you see the movie again you will notice it. In relation to "Zulu" Terence Stamp was first choice to play Bromhead which part eventually goes to Michael Caine.
@@johnroche7541 I could never place what was wrong with his voice, now I know! I live in fear that one day these movies will be remade to modern standards
Thanks for sharing. The distance didn't seem to hinder the ammunition flow although I have read that having all the tents still erected did. I guess we will never really know for sure. Glad you enjoyed my video.
I presume you are talking about the one after WW1 (that led to the Free State)? It would be great to do, but I am aware of some of my Irish friends sensitivities and will need to script it carefully.
@@TheHistoryChap The Anglo-Irish War or Irish War of Independence 1919-1921 will be so sensitive even though it happened just over 100 years ago. From a military point of view there was two things that stand out. The famous Thompson sub machine gun made it's military debut in Dublin in June 1921 when a British troop train was attacked. One soldier from the Royal West Kent Regiment was killed due to grenade fragments. This regiment had only been deployed in Ireland a few hours as it had literally come from duties in Silesia. The Thompson machine gun came to late to be used in WWI. Two Irish-Anerican soldiers who had served with the AEF in WW1 arrived in Ireland to sell a consignment of the guns to the IRA. The American authorities captured a consignment of around 500 at Hoboken,New Jersey. However a couple got to Ireland. The IRA were first to use this iconic weapon in a conflict. Despite the numerous books and documentaries dedicated to this weapon it omits the fact it was used by the IRA first. Another military innovation from the Irish War of Independence would be the emergence of thev IED.
In fact, out of the 1500 British troops at isandlwana, only about 500 of them were actual redcoated troops From those six companies of infantry from both the (1/24) and (2/24). The rest of the force consisted Of mainly 500 men from the NNC (natal native contingent) and colonel durnfords 300-400 mounted infantry along with major Francis Russell's rocket battery There was also captain Bradstreets 100 mounted infantry. And those two 7-pounder field guns Along with 70 gunners from the Royal Artillery.
Much has been made of the Zulu "Horn of the bull" tactic as if no one had ever encountered it before. But in fact it was a standard attack tactic dating back thousands of years. The Greeks had used the same mode at Marathon! It can be adopted at the squad level, platoon level and company level and just means one third attack on the right and one third attacks on the left while the remaining third hold the center, thus it's called the three point attack. Out flanking the opposing force on one or both flanks has been used at Hastings, various American Civil War battles, and many battles since. The military version of a mortal sin remains the rule: "never split your forces in the face of your enemy" and boy was Chemsford a sinner!
@Coll Maxwell The idea that you can outflank your enemy actually has it's roots in hunting! This was the way our stone age ancestors hunted large game and they simply adapted it for warfare. That the British officers didn't appreciate the Zulus is part hubris and part racial bigotry. But then what could anyone expect when all it takes to be a British army officer was money and the right family connections.
Chelmsford didn't split his force in the classic sense. He sent one half out and ordered the other half to stay put, to act on the defensive and to be reinforced by Durnfords 260 mounted riflemen, the rocket battery etc. He didn't send both halves of his force blindly out searching for Zulus. Chelmsford only sent half his force out in the first place because the large, mostly NNC, recon patrol requested assistance. This recon force got itself into difficulties the day before by deciding to engage a large number of Zulus late in the day and had to spend a terrifying night isolated in the hills. They expected to be attacked by the Zulus at any moment. A rider was sent back to camp in the middle of the night asking for help from Chelmsford. Chelmsford actually acted in a reasonably sound manner. He did not ignore the request for help leaving them to their fate. Nor did he send out a half baked token force ten miles further into Zulu territory in the direction of where circa 2,000 Zulus had just been encountered. Instead Chelmsford acted quite logically. He decided to send a strong force out and keep a strong force back, which was only to act on the defensive and would be reinforced by Durnford. What were the alternatives given the situation and information at the time? I have no superior tactical answer. Do you?
@@lyndoncmp5751 Normally a general would keep his entire force concentrated and moving toward where he thought the enemy would be. Since he believed the Zulu were to the east he should have moved his entire army east. I do not have any sympathy for a commander who bases his actions on incomplete intelligence, it's his job to know for sure. Ignorance after the fact is no excuse!
![Noob To Max With DRAGON REWORK In Blox Fruits [FULL MOVIE]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LnBMOinoOvA/mqdefault.jpg)
I’m very lucky to have visited Isandlwana and Rorke’s Drift last month. It has been a goal of mine since watching Zulu and Zulu Dawn. A feeling of awe at both places.
Thanks for sharing
I have been there Jesus came when I called him he took a lot of souls up to heaven with him
This was such a great video! You have a teaching style and performance that is absolutely top notch. Proud to say I was one of your first few hundred subscribers and you’re past 45k now!
Jonathan, so glad you are enjoying my videos. Thank you for your ongoing support.
Onwards and upwards!
Well done again Chris. As an American I have always likened this to the defeat of Custer at the Little Big Horn in 1876. Very similar mistakes were made although Custer wasn’t encamped like these men. Nevertheless, they used many similar excuses including defective ammunition by the US Army which proved to be false. Also, elements of the 7th Cavalry were able to hold out in defensive positions much like the defenders of Roarkes Drift. In the end it was actually the beginning of the end for both the Zulu and the Native Americans
Tom, maybe I need to do a head-to-head comparing the two battles?
Durnford and Custer do seem quite similar both making grave tactical errors. They even kind of looked the same with their flamboyant appearances.
Indeed, both Durnford and Custer spread their forces far too thin. Rifles (carbines) used were fairly similar in performance. The quality of marksmanship was not. The British soldiers were well trained. Many of Custer's soldiers had received next to no training. There also appear to have been some serious personality issues between Custer and some of his officers, Reno and Benteen in particular.
The one big similarity was they were both defeatef stealing land from indigenous people only for the army to return and subjugate the natives to apalling lives. I suppose that was how it was done then and perhaps I'd have approved but it never sits right with me today.
@@kiwigrunt330not so sure about the Markmanship differences between the British Army and the 7th Cavalry. The Zulus had rifles but the Tribes that fought Custer had them too and they had better rifles than the Single Shot US Army Rifles. They had repeating lever action rifles and knew how to use them for hunting and in warfare.
Well done,this is the best that I've ever heard this battle described.
As an Englishman living in Soutj Australia I was surprised to hear of Adelaide born Edgar Anstey's body being returned to Britain for burial,or that he was Australia's first casualty overseas, this is not something that we were taught in schools here. Certainly interesting to know.
Darren, I'm glad you enjoyed it.
I will need to get my facts right but I think his family were british and he was born in Australia whilst his family were working / serving there. Hence why he ended up being buried in Woking.
@@TheHistoryChap ,I'm trying to find this information online myself, it's proving to be a bit difficult, but I'm sure that I'll get there.
Thankyou once again.
@@darrenmarsh8830 I live maybe 5 mins from St John's in Woking, I'll see if I can report back if I can find his headstone
Thankyou to both of you, I'd love to hear a bit of this (sort of) local South Australian history.
Both underestimated the indigenous troops, overestimated the capacity of a First World Army, divided their troops and did not obtain sufficient intelligence about the strength and locations of the enemy. Both the Native Americans and Zulus had rifles. Both the British and American commanders were actually afraid that they would not encounter the enemy. The British troops were actually more experienced than Custer's troops that included a large number of recruits.
I used to wargame the Zulu War many moons ago. Being a young, inexperienced tactician, I fell into the trap of overextending my ammunition supply lines much as was depicted in 'Zulu Dawn'. It took me four or five games to learn my lesson. Great fun, regardless.
Thanks for another interesting and informative video!
Amazing what war gaming can teach you.
Thanks for sharing.
Absolutely fantastic, Chris! Your delivery and attention to detail is second to none and I always look forward to seeing your presentations.
Plenty more on the way. Just finishing script telling the story of Coghill and Melvill trying to save the Queen's Colour.
Informative and highly entertaining,as always. Thanks so much Chris.
My pleasure. Thanks for watching.
Another splendid story Sir. I enjoyed it immensely. Two thumbs up.
Glad you enjoyed it. The story of Melvill & Coghill trying to save the Queen's Colour at Isandlwana will be out either Friday or Saturday.
Hi love this video it’s great to listen to the history of the uk and the empire, I remember the first time I watched Zulu with my dad, I couldn’t stay still! Loved stanly baker and Michael Caine. Loved this and thank you!
Thanks for watching my video. If you haven't already, please subscribe to my channel so that you don't miss future videos.
Thank you Chris.
Your videos are always brilliantly informative and expertly delivered with your wonderful narration.
My attention captivated.!
Well done, and look forward to the next.!
Many thanks for watching. I'm glad that you are enjoying.
Another hugely informative and entertaining presentation Chris! Keep them coming please!
Will do. Thanks for watching.
Thank you so much for this video! I got big into the Zulu wars after watching the Zulu movie, and this along with all your other Zulu war history videos help make sense of the conflict!
Rhys, thanks for your kind comments. I know it took a while to get to the battle but I like to share what I have found out about why battles happen in the first place.
Plenty more videos coming your way.
Check out the movie "Zulu Dawn" which depicts the the Battle of Isandlawana and has an all star cast.
What a fantastic history lesson, thank you very much.
My pleasure. Thank you for watching.
With the help of maps and photographs, this presentation is certainly much better than the first, albeit longer, video. Showing maps puts the events in context and the photos show the main participants, both giving viewers excellent information regrettably not provided in the initial documentary. Well done, History Chap, keep up the good work! What about doing videos about the Indian Mutiny, and/or the two 19th century British - Afghan wars?
Indian Mutiny is on my hit list along with other 19th century actions in India. The Tibet expedition might make an appearance too.
As always a fascinating video. You bring the personalities to life , which make the stories come alive.
Thank you for your kind words.
Thanks for your hard work. I enjoyed watching this very much . Cheers Simon
My pleasure. Thanks for watching.
“History turns on very small wheels, doesn’t it?” . How marvelous!! Great work as always
Very kind of you. Thanks.
Hi Chris I managed to go to Isandlwana a few years ago the battlefield is kept immaculate , and so peaceful . Cheers
Thanks for sharing.
Fantastic video Chris , thanks for that, i’m a painter of figurines for more than 35 years and i never get tired of painting zulu’s and britisch colonial soldiers, hope to see more video’s of your fantastic channel 👍
Plenty more videos coming. Make sure you subscribe (if you haven't already)
Have you ever thought about a live event? That would be brilliant!!!!! Your channel is a total go to! For me! And how about some history chap T shirts!!! Keep up the great work!
Paul, I'd love to do a live event. I deliver talks to various organisations here in the UK but it would be brilliant to gather some of my YT audience together either in person or virtually.
Awesome video Chris,so truthfully detailed history,as a lover of both the Zulu(1964) & Zulu Dawn(1979) films,keep them coming mate,cheers
Malcolm, thank you for your kind words of support.
As a black South African I'm proud of the way we acquitted ourselves against the British numerous time. Both the Zulus and the Boers fought gallantly against the aBrits at Colenso, Rourke's Drift, Majuba, Spion Kop, Isandlwana and other skirmishes.
The rivalry continues on the cricket and rugby fields to this day
Bayede.
Salute
Just a shame the British and South Africans were not always on the same side (although the SA actions in WW1 and WW2 are worth telling in their own right).
@@TheHistoryChap True. Thanks for great video
Another fantastic, presentation Chris . One of the major factors contributing to the loss must surely been the overwhelming superiority in numbers , 20 to 1 roughly . One could imagine , 400 yards away , charging Zulu’s could cover that distance in a minute , a rifle man could fire off 10 shots in that time , you could soon have a lot of Zulu’s on your hands , and then you are into hand to hand combat , and history demonstrates who had the upper hand .
Not only that the true size of the attacking Zulu force was not really known until it was too late. Much of the Zulu force was out of vision for the majority of the battle. At least from the camp.
Reports of Zulu numbers in the hills that day were circa 4,000-7,000. Even after the impi was discovered around midday it was still not evident to Pulleine the actual size.
From the camp position, the Zulu right horn was not visible, while the left horn was distant. Not was the chest rushing forward in one huge mass. The Zulus made good use of the tall grass, dongas etc and kept going to ground in the cover.
Thanks for sparking a debate.
Hello Chris, great video mate, I love the Zulu War and the battles of Isandlwana and Rorke's Drift, you really are the best, Lee.
Lee, that's very kind. Thanks.
As a South African now living in the US, this battle has always fascinated me, I also see alot of similarities between the battle of Isandlwana and Custer's last stand at the battle of Little Bighorn.
Thanks. Yes a lot of similarities (except for scale of losses)
In other simpler words ..... south Africa didnt take s..t from the British...😂😂
Finally, the story and just what I have wondered. Thanks.
Thanks for watching.
Marvellously narrated , you really are an inspiration , thanks so much , brilliant....
Thank you.
Great presentation!! History is also written by the victors. You did them all proud!!
Glad you enjoyed it. Thanks for watching.
The myth about ammo boxes is disproven by the very large numbers of broken ammo box screws lying around on the battlefield to this day. The specially designed quartermasters security keys were only necessary to undo the ammo boxes outside of combat and the system was designed to prevent unauthorised access to ammo. The field manual of the times instructs soldiers on how to quickly open the ammo boxes by striking the lid in a certain way with the butt of their Martini-Henry rifles which breaks the soft brass screws as intended. I have seen a demonstration of this on a mint condition ammo box and a mint unissued Martini-Henry of the period. It took less than 3 seconds to open the box and strip back the ring pull foil covering the ammo. Myth busted.
Agree, lack of ammunition and over-zealous quartermasters was a myth which conveniently washed over infantry mistakes and Zulus out-thinking and out-fighting the British.
@@TheHistoryChap Chelmsford had ample cause to come up with as many excuses as possible that the defeat wasn't his fault. Mind-blowing that after getting away with it all those years ago, we're still stuck picking apart all his smokescreens and excuses and lies over the campaign to this day.
I'm no expert,But I don't know how the British didn't notice how close the Zulu warriors had gotten to the camp.
Didn't they post watches on the highest point in the area?
Roving patrols fanned out on flanks front and rear?
Marvellous video may we be the best I've seen on the subject and I've seen quite a few over 40 years.... Some splendid insights, highly recommended. Please make more videos on the Battle of Isandlwana.
Thanks. You might enjoy this one too:
ruclips.net/video/K41pKWzKyeU/видео.html
Another great video 👍🏻 the myth of the lack of screwdrivers was put to rest when metal detectors kept finding screws bent at around 90 degrees around the battlefield, an original wooden ammo box was sacrificed in proving a downwards butt strike from the martini Henry on the box placed on its end removed the lid, and bent the screw exactly like the other’s found on the camp ground. To me the real problem was the rolled brass cartridge cases, you can bend them by merely squeezing with fingers! The black powder fouled the barrel and breech, sustained firing meant the cases were getting stuck in the breech and the ejector not capable of removing it, the squaddie didn’t have an issued tool for removing the case and so was forced to improvise with the only other tool they were issued with………their bayonet!
John, thanks for sharing. The ammo myth was just a smokescreen to explain how they British had lost rather than acknowledging that the Zulus had won.
@@TheHistoryChap the Zulus also say that some of their warriors were using drugs to help them fight, similar to Viking beserkers
British troops had a tool kit which came with the Martin Henry. It would have opened any ammo box. Mike Snook explains this well.
@@lyndoncmp5751 yes and it was a tool mainly for disassembly and cleaning purposes, would’ve been like trying to dig out a Swiss Army knife from a pocket and opening the correct tool to extract a stuck round, with minimal leverage due to the short length of the tool. Much quick to use a bayonet with increased leverage. Yes could unscrew a flat headed screw from the ammo box, but again if you’ve ever used a multi tool to undo a tight flat headed screw then you’d realise while it is perfectly possible it is time consuming and fiddly, much quicker and more time efficient to smack the bit of a rifle against a wooden ammo box that’s foil lined. It explains the finds on the battle ground ie the bent ammo box screws
John Whittle,
Yes that is true of course. Just pointing out that the myth that the British army was so incompetent that the troopers didn't have the tools to open up ammo boxes is just that. A myth. Every trooper had a tool in his kit which could do it.
Hello Chris, your channel has become a great favorite of mine and I thoroughly enjoy each video. One of the aspects of your presentations I really appreciate is the lack of bias towards your "home" nation, which I would think is really difficult to do. I always find you give equal treatment to both sides fairly and justly, calling both triumphs and failures. I also have my degree in History and military history is my favorite history to study. As you seem to focus on 19th century conflicts, I wonder if you've ever given thought to casting your gaze across the Atlantic and making some videos about that little American war in 1812. :) Cheers from Virginia in the USA and thank you.
Thanks for your support. I do try to walk the middle path...there are always two sides to any story. I always remember my son asking me (when he was little) whether the Zulus were goodies or baddies. I told him it depended on whether you were a Zulu or one of their enemies!
The War of 1812 is on my hit-list so please make sure you subscribe so you don't miss it.
I think Chris G. has a very special talent for this because of his upbringing in South Africa, which is a multi-ethnic, multi-cultural environment where people have to learn at an early age how to get along with each other. He is graced with a multi-faceted worldview that is quite unique, hence his channel will keep growing. His approach is non-judgmental, which is very refreshing!
Once again Chris brilliantly described so interesting.i have a couple of other ideas you might be interested in,Sicily 1943 and the charge by the Australian lighthorse on Bathsheba in October 1917 which was amazing
Bathsheba already on my list but Sicily 1943 is a great idea (esp. as my grandad was there!)
@@TheHistoryChap there is a great book about Sicily by James Holland well worth a read
An absolutely brilliant description of this famous Zulu victory with your usual high calibre presentation. I think I stated the following in a post on another of your superb Anglo-Zulu War documentaries. The Zulu regiments who performed so heroically and were so devastating at Isandlawana would take horrific heavy casualties at the Battle of Khambula on 28th March 1879. At the Battle of Khambula the Zulu war cry was "We are the boys from Isandlawana". As always wishing you continued success in all your endeavours. By the way historian Ian Knight who is such an authority on this conflict was asked by family members to view some old military material found in an attic. It transpires that Ian Knights great great grand uncle Pte Thomas Cooper 24th Foot was KIA at Isandlawana! You will have to do do the Battle of Maiwand which was as you know another colonial defeat for the British in July 1880 during the 2nd Anglo-Afghan War. Any fellow fans of Sherlock Holmes knows that Dr. John Watson was wounded at this battle. Any one in Reading in the England will have seen the magnificent beautiful monument "The Maiwand Lion" dedicated to British fallen in particular the 66th Regiment of Foot who later became the Royal Berkshire Regiment. This regiment made a heroic last stand also.
John, thanks so much for taking the time to comment. Kambula is on my list of future videos but I have now added Maiwand. In fact the wholse British army in India is a treasury of forgotten stories.
@@TheHistoryChap Hi Chris. I am delighted to hear that you will be doing the Battle of Mons. WW1 means so much to me as my grandfather served in this war. I have visited the Western Front numerous times over the years and visited the graves,monuments and memorials. It is so poignant to witness the Menin Gate ceremony. There was so much bravery displayed by the BEF during the retreat from Mons. However one display of heroism that stands out for me is the gallant rearguard action by the Irish regiment the Royal Munster Fusiliers at Etreux. There is a beautiful Celtic Cross monument there now. No doubt you have seen that most beautiful poignant painting titled "The Last Absolution of the Munsters". It shows Irish soldiers from this regiment with heads bowed solemnly as the regimental priest on horseback blesses them. I would highly recommend it to fellow subscribers to view this absolutey moving painting. It stirs up so many emotions. Just a historical footnote to this beautiful painting. The priest in the painting is Father Frank Gleeson from Co.Wicklow,Ireland. He would later be chaplain to the Free State/National Army in Ireland during the Irish Civil War 1922-1923. I love the story of "The Angel's of Mons" since I first heard it as a child. Obviously I am really looking forward to this documentary. As always wishing you continued success in all your future endeavours.
Splendid lecture.
Very much enjoyed it - as always.
Keep up the good work,THC !
Many thanks for your support.
A cracking story well told. Thank you. :)
My pleasure. I am putting final touches to script for Melvill & Coghill and I think you will enjoy that one too.
Absolutely fantastic mini documentary. Any chance of one or two about the Indian Mutiny?
Thank you.
Yes, Indian Mutiny is coming your way soon.
Make sure you subscribe to my channel so you don't miss it.
Thank you Chris. Very enjoyable.
Glad you enjoyed.
Another very compelling presentation, Chris. Always excited to see a new notification appearing at the top of my screen, alerting me to another of your videos. 🥳👍
Once the News broke, back home, of the shocking defeat at Isandlwana, I’d be fascinated to know what justification was given to Her Majesty’s Government & to Queen Victoria herself, for Lord Chelmsford’s invasion of Zulu territory in the first place. One presumes that King Cetshwayo was scapegoated as “the villain of the piece”, despite his Nation being invaded without justification… with his well trained Impis being portrayed as “weapons of mass destruction” 🤔 that needed to be hunted down & eliminated. Not that such examples of flagrant & falsified propaganda have ever been concocted in recent times, by any particular well known national leaders… or similar shenanigans resorted to in days gone by, by our own Empire - thereby contributing to its unflattering international reputation as “Perfidious Albion.”🤞🤥🇬🇧
It’s sad to think how many of our brave & loyal soldiers perished in so many foreign lands over the years, especially in certain campaigns that one struggles to justify on purely moral grounds, although - at the other extreme - wholesale & indiscriminate bashing of the British Empire has become an equally reprehensible modern day obsession in certain quarters, by political activists & ideologues who have a malign & very obvious ulterior motive of their own, rooted in their desire to propagate deceptive & abhorrent Marxist ideologies that seek to shape the present & control the future, by flagrantly distorting the narratives of the past.
Thanks for that very lengthy comment. I appreciate you taking the time to put down your thoughts so clearly.
I wholeheartedly agree with your sentiments in the second paragraph.
I think yuu raise a fascinating question. The Quantrill book deals with the aftermath in an interesting manner. Chelmsford essentially seems to have got away with it on one level. He was able to rre-organise and when operational necessity of avenging the humiliation caused London to send all the military forces they had deliberately withheld in 1878 he won the war with only a couple of minor embarrassments in the Second Invasion.
What cannot be overlooked is that he was a personal friend of the Queen, who spoke frequently on his behalf to Disraeli. Having said that, the Army made sure he never saw a field command again. You sense partly due to Isandlwana and partly because teh he nead of the Army from 1882 was the same Wolseley whose dreams of South African glory were stolen by Chelmsford Most of the blame was dumped oh his slimy unpopular if clever Secreatry Crealock who was blamed for the poisonous atmosphere between Chelmsford's staff and the 24th
@@glynquigley4364 Thank you for that interesting explanation & perspective, Glyn. Excuse my ignorance, but what is “the Quantrill Book” that you refer to? I’m not familiar with it & if it was mentioned in Chris’s video, my memory isn’t the best (even when it was “at its best” it wasn’t “the best!” 😂) & I don’t recall it.
@@the5thmusketeer215 Thanks for the comment. The Quantrill book is "Zulu Victory" by Ron Lock & Peter Quantrill. It suggests the 24th were rubbish, Durnsford was not to blame at all and highlights the cover up.
@@glynquigley4364 Thank you for that, Glyn. I might well look out for that book; sounds like it could be an interesting read. 🤔
Having visited this battlefield, I saw that this hill was very defensible if it had been properly done, I asked my battlefield guide/historian how long it took for the zulus to get to the British line once they came over the skyline, I was told 20 minutes, enough time to get the troops in to the slope, however the artillery and the Rocket troop were some of the first to be over run. it is an awesome place to visit.
I visited years ago and it felt eerie. I felt the same at Culloden.
The Battlefield Band perform a song called The Beaches of St Valery which is all about the 51st Highland Divisions rearguard action away from the men trapped on the beaches at Dunkirk.I know you have a long list but would love you to tell the story of that action and the brave men who took part. Really enjoy listening to your history, just wonderful, thank you!
Thanks for sharing and I will add to my list which, as you say, is long (& getting longer!)
Thank you. Another of your fascinating talks. How on earth do you manage to get so many key images to support the story? Are they all copyright?
Glad you enjoyed.
You are getting me hooked on your videos. I love your content and vast knowledge on these subjects. Above all, I love your delivery. Well done.
Thanks for your support
Thank you for sharing your research
Michael, thanks for watching. I hope that you enjoyed it.
Two books about the battle and the Zulu War are faced out on Chris's bookcase. That's the way. Excellent video
Many thanks, Keith.
@@TheHistoryChap It was one of your best. I have really enjoyed the Boer War, Crimea, and Zulu videos. What about a video on Jackie Fisher and modernizing the British navy prior to WWI
New subscriber here. This was an excellent presentation of the staggering British defeat at Isandlwana. Looking forward to more great videos.
Thank you for subscribing, much appreciated. Drop me a line via my website and tell me what stories you would love to hear in the future. www.thehistorychap.com
Great video I've read lots of books on this one is on your bookshelf it's a fascinating subject one thing I read was british soldiers started shaving after this battle due to jaws being removed from there dead comrades thought as trophys
Yes I have read that too in Adrain Greaves' book: "Isandlwana".
Dispels the myth that the Zulus only mutilated to release the spirits.
So sad for you that Her Majesty has passed on. I am a bagpiper and I played Flowers of the Forest after I learned of it. My condolences brother.
Thank you for your kind words.
I had the possibility to visit the site and see the cairns...
It was something that I had never previously experienced, also not in the cemetaries in northern France.
Thanks for sharing.
Very interesting and well narrated video. I congratulate you for the work.
Thanks for watching my video & pleased you enjoyed it
Excellent work! I wondered often after learning of this battle if the British used their famed battle square during this battle or they didn’t have time. Great courage on both sides.
Brave men on both sides indeed.
Not to split hairs but wouldn’t the rate of Fire have been rather more than 3 rounds a minute?
Having said that I love and appreciate your videos sooo much! Please keep them going
Plenty more coming your way
In Adelaide, South Australia, we have the suburb of Anstey's Hill. In the suburb of Mitcham, we have Smith-Dorrien Street, and Pulleine Street.
Interesting. Thanks for sharing.
Another great production, Chris. There would be sufficient material for a whole series of vids if you were to research the evolution of the Zulu kingdom from Shaka's time onwards 😀
oooh great idea! Thank you
Just finished reading The Washing of the Spears, fantastic book 📖
it's the one that got me into the subject. Ian Knight and Adrian Greaves have written some great books about Isandlwana and the Zulu Wars in recent years.
I’ll have to give those a read as well, thanks!
@@TheHistoryChap Ian Knight who is such an authority on the Zulu War was asked by family members to check out military material that was found in an attic. It transpires that his great great grand uncle Pte Thomas Cooper was killed at Isandlawana.
@Coll Maxwell Ian Knight the historian who is such an authority on this war wrote an excellent book on this conflict in conjunction with the National Army Museum(UK) a number of years ago. It is excellent. The cover of the book is based on the ribbon of the Zulu War Medal or to give the medal its correct title the South Africa Medal. Ian Knights great great uncle Pte Thomas Cooper 1st Battalion(Royal Warwickshire Regiment) was KIA st Isandlawana.
Informative as always. Thank you.
My pleasure.
Incredibly informative as usual
Glad you enjoyed my video.
I have just discovered your channel and as a lover of history, I intend to watch every video. Do you only do videos about older times and older wars? I find the apartheid period extremely tragic but still interesting. Do you make videos about this era?
Hi, thanks for getting in touch. My passion is for telling stories from British history so Apartheid is out of scope (although fascinating).
Very good presentation. I really enjoyed it.
Thanks for watching my video.
Fantastic! History turns on very small hinges; I will remember that quote!
Glad you like that quote.
@@TheHistoryChap It is a keeper.
I enjoy your lectures et presentations.
Thank you very much.
Excellent video, History Guy.
History Chap.
@@TheHistoryChap right
Do as many as you like. Love them
Neil, thanks for your support.
Brilliant, loved every minute, cheers
Glad you enjoyed. Thanks for watching.
Thanks for the interesting video. I'm due to watch Zulu Dawn again soon as I watched Zulu again a week or two ago. UI think Chelmsford has much to answer for splitting his forces without knowing where the Zulus were. I think they could have used the cavalry better. Wasn't Durnford's force mainly cavalry? I believe until the battle they were back in Natal.
Very good point about the under-use of cavalry.
Enjoy Zulu Dawn
@Coll Maxwell They are mounted on horse so they are cavalry (even if they are mounted infantry i.e. not expected to fight on horseback). They would be able to cover ground a lot faster than infantry on foot.
All indications were that the Zulu main impi was in the direction Chelmsford rode out to. There were no reports of large numbers of Zulus anywhere else until the morning of the 22nd.
What Chelmsford did was militarily sound. Even modern military strategists, those who are unbiased, agree. The recon patrol requested assistance, fearing an attack by the main impi in the morning. They spend a terrifying night in the hills ten miles south east.
Chelmsford did not ignore their request, nor send out a token force. Instead he sent a strong force out and kept a strong force back, to act only on the defensive and to be reinforced by Durnfords men. There is little wrong with this, seeing as the recon patrol got him into this quandary.
If only Durnford did as he was ordered. Get to the camp and stick to the orders Pulleine was given. He didn't though and the rest is history.
Durnfords mounted riflemen, the Natal Native Mounted Contingent had the highest survival/escape ratio out of any unit at Isandlwana. Out of 7 officers, including Durnford although he was technically RE, and 257 men only 1 officer and 27 men were killed. That is a circa 90% survival rate. This is above and beyond any other unit in the battle.
While the Edendale Troop was competent and fairly disciplined section, the rest of the NNMC was not and fled on their horses en mass as soon as the battle swung against them.
thank you for the amazing video!
thank you for watching it.
always appreciate coverage of south African history.
Glad you enjoyed. Thanks for eatching.
WOW! I have learned so much about this battle. It seems like there is a constant thread to battles where one side gets wiped out and that is the lack of really good recon, and splitting your troops up in enemy territory. Almost sounds like another battle that took place in the United States in 1876.
Joe, I think it was Napoleon who said that the best general is the one who makes the fewest mistakes (or words to that effect). If I may be so bold, I think Custer was even more reckless than Chelmsford.
@@TheHistoryChap I have to agree with you. Custer knew how many he was facing, and where they were, and still choose to execute his ill-fated plan.
The British had decent recon. Zulus were seen ten miles south east of the camp on the 21st. They were also seen north east of the camp at first light on the 22nd. No decent sized Zulu force got within miles of the camp without being seen. Also, pretty impossible to detect the main impi northeast of the camp before the 22nd when it wasn't even there yet. It arrived just before dark on the 21st. As I said, elements of it were seen at first light on the 22nd, the camp was informed and a stand to order was given by Pulleine at around 8.00 am.
Chelmsford didn't split his forces in the classical sense. He sent one half out, and kept one half back. He didn't send both halves out blindly searching for Zulus. And he sent that one half out because the recon patrol requested assistance after getting itself into trouble and thinking they had encountered the vanguard of the Zulu impi. It was a sound military decision by Chelmsford given the situation at the time. He ordered the camp to act strictly on the defensive as well as ordering Durnford up to reinforce the numbers there. If only Durnford did what he was ordered to do instead of looking for action chasing out after retiring Zulus.
@@lyndoncmp5751 I agree that it would have helped if he reinforced the camp like ordered. On further analysis, it would have been difficult to overcome the number of enemy they were facing and being in the open. If there would have been some defenses like at Rourke's Rift the losses may have been lowered and they may have been able to hold out.
Joe Ritchie,
I believe the camp could have held out even without barricades like at Rorkes Drift.
There were around 600 British infantry and nearly 400 mounted riflemen. If these had been concentrated right in front of the tents the firepower probably would have been too much for the Zulus. Don't forget, wherever the firing WAS concentrated, the Zulus could not get through it. Less than 200 mounted riflemen stopped the entire Zulu left horn, and 5 companies stopped the Zulu chest.
With a thousand rifles concentrated more closely together the Zulus would have had serious problems.
1,000 men covering the front, close to the tents, from the north shoulder of Isandlwana hill to Mahlambakosi in the south even if, say, 200 or so had to peel off later on to cover the rear at the Saddle when the Zulu right horn starting appearing there would have given the Zulus incredible punishment. It could also be argued the Zulu right horn might not have even pushed it if their left horn and chest were being held at bay far in the distance.
Concentrated firepower, and being close to the ammunition supplies probably would have prevailed, at least until Chelmsfords force returned to sandwich the Zulus.
👍
Excellent as ever mate👍👍
Thanks for your support
Well done for this vid! Ahhh arrogance blinds pride!! Happens alot! My comparison to this is what happened to Gen. Custer and the battle at Little Big Horn. They got wiped out as well!!
There are some similarities.
Fascinating and thank you 👍🏾 🖤
My pleasure, glad you enjoyed it.
Excellent. Well done Sir.
Glad you enjoted.
Great video. Whats your opinion on Zulu Dawn? I recently picked it up from a charity shop after seeing it years ago and i thought it wasa lot better on a second viewing.
Norman, as I watched Zulu when I was about 5, I will always love it more.
However, Zulu Dawn is closer to the real events (although with plenty of "Hollywood" moments). Zulu Dawn is centrered around Vereker, who was actually a real character but died in the camp and not at the drift with Coghill and Melvill.
Excellent...as always!
Many thanks.
Thanks. The Zulu wars fascinate moi.
More to come.
I would not dismiss Smith -Dorrien's statements of fact about the screws in ammo boxes, being a detriment. It was only one of the factors he noted about the logistical problems with ammo supply to the line units during this battle. You may want to go read/re-read his "Memoirs of 48 years of Service"
That he was relieved in WWI by higher Britsh officers/command , I consider the highest compliment, and only adds more validity to what he said earlier about a different war , different battle, he was in.
Simply put, Sir Horace Smith-Dorrien is beyond reproach, so are his statements. A great man and a great British officer.
Thank you for taking the time to comment.
Thanks so much for this
My pleasure. Thanks for watching.
I have just read Isandlwana by Adrian Greaves and now reading Roark´s Drift by the same author.
Usually a debacle is a consequence of various reasons, not just one. I think there were errors from Chelmsford, Pulleine and Durnford. Only one less mistake it may be another story.
Congratulations for the video.
Thank you. I like Adrain Greaves forensic analysis of the events.
I dont see what Pulleine did wrong. The only thing I can fault him on was not striking the tents as the battle progressed but apart from that he was obliged to support his superior officer, Durnford. His firing line wouldn't have been kept out so far and for so long if not for that.
@@lyndoncmp5751 He did not laager the camp according to the regulations for the zulu campaigne.
Defense line was inadequate. He must preserve the camp not to Dunford.
He must have detected so many zulus so near the camp.
Alejandro,
There were no regulations to laager the camps during the first invasion. That was a regulation for the SECOND invasion. The only regulation for camps in the first invasion was for partial entrenchments, but the ground at Isandlwana was deemed too stony to dig entrenchments, and the camp was due to be moved soon anyway.
The camp at Isandlwana was a kilometre wide. Impossible to laager anyway, and in addition the wagons were required to bring up more supplies from Rorkes Drift.
Pulleine DID defend close to the camp during the early morning false alarm. The 24th Foot were ordered by Pulleine to 'stand to' right in front of the tents when thousands of Zulus were reported between 7.00 and 8.00 am.
Then Durnford arrived, ignored his own orders to just get to the camp and orders Pulleine was given to act on the defensive and he rode out on the attack, obliging Pulleine to support him. That's why Pulleine kept his firing line out so far for so long, to support Durnford.
It was Durnford who made the big tactical mistakes at Isandlwana.
You have demonstrated just how effective a well scripted, presented and illustrated talk can be on Utube. It's like listening a "Mark Felton" of the British Victorian wars, without any footage, only better (sorry Mr Felton).
That’s very kind of you. Thanks.
Great job I am not British but always enjoy reading the stories of British battles and great generals and brave soldiers who give their lives for the crown
Thanks for watching.
fantastic many thanks 👍👍
My pleasure. Thanks for watching.
3 rounds per minute volley fire was good for muzzle loaders. The Martini-Henry breech loading rifle volley fire rate was 12 rounds per minute. Apart from me being pedantic I really enjoyed the video. Thanks.
You are more than welcome to be pedantic but just because it could fire faster didn't mean that they did.
I see behind you two books that i have also. Zulu rising and isandlwana. Yes definitely Lts. coghill and melville.
James, two great books. Thanks for the vote for Coghill and Melville.
How Can Man Die Better by Col Mike Snook is the best work on the actual battle. I find all the other works spend too much time on the before and after, while the battle itself is rushed through.
Great video! I'm new to your channel and I'm enjoying the content. British military history has always interested me. I watched an interesting documentary by Ian Knight where they using Martini Henry rifles, tested to see if they jammed. Only after a short period of firing the rifles jammed. So if this was the case it would explain a lot more of what went wrong. It would have forced them into hand to hand combat. This seems more likely than the ammunition boxes not being opened quick enough or distributed to the lines.
Thanks for sharing.
@TheHistoryChap The documentary is called "The Mystery of Isandlwana" Its very interesting and sheds new light on what happened at the Battle. Definitely one to watch. They found bent screws at the lines. So the ammo boxes were given to the men, they bashed them open with their rifle butts.
Very very good information.
Thank you for those kind words
Excellent run-through.
Bottom line is that if Durnford did as he was ordered to and just got to Isandlwana to reinforce its numbers and adhered to the orders that Pulleine had, which were to act on the defensive and protect the camp, the disaster probably wouldn't have happened. Durnford poked the wasps nest and brought the battle on. The Zulus weren't planning to attack that day but Durnford forced their hand by going maverick, chasing off out after them looking for action.
Even if the Zulus did attack that day, then far tighter defensive positions with more concentrated firepower close to the camp (nearly 1,000 rifles) probably would have held them off. This was Pulleine's preferred tactic, as shown by the morning false alarm, before Durnford arrived and changed the entire scenario.
Cheers. Good stuff. 👍
By the way, I do think it occurred to Chelmsford that the camp might be attacked. That's why he ordered Pulleine to act strictly on the defensive and immediately ordered Durnford there. If he didn't think there was any chance of a possible attack on the camp, why did he order that? He actually acted with a degree of caution there.
Durnford, by the way, already told Pulleine he wasn't going to stay in camp when he arrived, so his decision to ride off was made before the claim he rode out to go to Chelmsfords aid. Not that any Zulus were reported moving in the direction of Chelmsford to the south east anyway. They were retiring to the northeast, not in Chelmsfords direction. 😉.
Lyndon, thanks for adding your obvious interest and knowledge.
Cheers. Good stuff. Well presented 👍
Question on the uniforms. Why were some in classic Red and others in the dark tunic?
What are the similarities, if any, between the warrior societies of Zulu and Sparta?
Re. the uniforms. The blue tunics were patrol tunics - bit like (rather posh) work overalls. That accounts for why some were wearing red and others weren't.
As for your Zulu & Sparta question, I really don't know.
I would be interested in an indepth explanation of who was "at fault" for the British defeat. It's an interesting tug of war between Chelmsford, Pullein. And Durnford who to lay the blame upon.
@Coll Maxwell LOL quite true of course. But I had in mind a more narrow tactical analysis. Historical military massacres usually have a certain "What If" quality about them. So I guess what I'd like to know is if there was some plausible alternate history where the British forces successfully defend the camp from the Zulu attack based on some different tactical choices the British command may have made. Was it REALLY a mistake for Durnsford to throw his troops out to the right of the camp? Were the infantry battalions REALLY spread out too far? Need the defeat of the British forces in the camp have been quite so total? Or was the Zulu army simply too good, too numerous, and the terrain too unfavourable to the British to avoid a military catastrophe no matter what command decisions were made.
I will cover that in another video. Maybe also an in-depth on Chelmsford's career too.
Tactically Durnford was largely to blame at Isandlwana. 1,000 rifles in tighter more concentrated firepower would probably been enough to hold off the Zulus.
Pulleine's preferred tactic was to defend right in front of the tents, as shown by the morning false alarm. Durnford arrived and upset the apple cart. Durnford forced Pulleine's hand by riding off and telling Pulleine he expected to be supported. Pulleine was thus obliged to keep his firing line out as long as Durnford defended the far flung donga. Had Durnford not defended the donga and retreated to camp, Pulleine would never have kept his firing line out there so long.
Durnford, incredibly, tried to get Pulleine to send two companies of the 24th Foot out after him when he decided to chase after Zulus and then there is his decision to order the poor rocket battery out there to support him. It had no choice but to follow him out and it became the first section to be overrun and annihilated.
There is absolutely no defending Durnfords poor decision making tactically at Isandlwana. Even more incredulous Durnford made zero preparations to establish where his OWN ammunition wagon would be located when it arrived in camp. This is just mind boggling.
@@TheHistoryChap I look forward to it!
"Was it REALLY a mistake for Durnsford to throw his troops out to the right of the camp"
Yes it was. It was ok for a temporary delaying action but Durnford decided to make it a permanent stand. The 24th Foot could cover his left flank (Durnford obliged Pulleine to support him) however his right flank could not be covered and sooner or later the Zulus would have started maneuvering around to outflank him in the open undefended ground to his right (his south), which is what they did start doing.
It was an untenable position and a fatal decision. Durnford himself was overheard to mutter something along the lines of being "too extended". He knew himself he'd made a grievous error.
I remember a documentary about the Zulu-Anglo Wars, The Grandson of a Zulu warrior who fought in the 2nd battle of Iswandlawa was speaking.
Against the Boers, the left 'horn' of the buffalo formation attacked first (before the right horn was ready) thus causing the Zulus to suffer heavy losses and eventually lose the battle.
Thank you for taking the time to comment
Re the ammo supply, the NCOs in charge would not issue ammo to units not their own, being old serving soldiers (old sweets) who were given a non exercising task/position as a rewartd for long service and good conduct. Because of the problems of lack of screw drivers and the toughness of the ammo boxes, changes were made to the boxes so that they could be very quickly opened without the needing to have screw drivers
Thank you for taking the time to comment.
It was so horrible Lord Chelmsford blamed a dead officer for the disaster. For an administrator, Pulleine even though he spread his ranks thin, did at least deploy his men to make a stand against the oncoming Zulus; it was better than not doing anything at all. THANK YOU SO MUCH for mentioning Smith-Dorrien. If I recall correctly, he learned a valuable lesson from the battle in regards to the ammunition boxes as to how important it was to get them open to get ammunition to the men to keep the enemy at bay. I am against the British for starting the war, however, there were certain things about the conflict I liked hearing. At Isandlwana, I was pleased to hear that the British opened fire on the Zulus at a range of 600 yards, an appropriate range for the rifle they were using. I am critical of the fact that at the Battle of Le Cateau, a battle fought by British forces under Isandlwana survivor Smith-Dorrien, the British waited until the Germans were 250 yards away before firing on them. The Zulus attack plan could not have have been better executed. They kept their enemy distracted at the front while half of their force slipped in behind the British position and attacked from the rear, a strategy used by European armies in previous wars. As for Lt. Pope, I liked that he in military principle, he moved his company to cover the gap between the main British line and Durnford. Hey Chris, although it doesn't relate to this video, would you agree if I were to say that Sir Evelyn Wood was arguably the most able of Sir Garnet Wolseley's subordinates?
Nathan, once again thanks for taking the time to comment.
Sir Evelyn Wood was a fantastic commander who rarely put a foot wrong in his career. Maybe I need to do a video about him.
One day you and I need to meet for a coffee or pint and talk history!
@@TheHistoryChap Thank you for your reply! The History Guy did a video on Sir Evelyn Wood but I welcome one from you. I live in America so I would have to go over to England somehow which I may not be able to do for quite some time but I very much welcome the offer and would like to do so some time in the future.
@@TheHistoryChap It is amazing Sir Evelyn Wood had a long and remarkable military career despite his multiple ailments and injuries.
@Coll Maxwell Sir Redvers Buller was more involved in that engagement.
@Coll Maxwell I didn't know about the sketch and haven't seen it. It is surprising a major engagement in Wood's career wasn't mentioned in books about him. Thank you for telling me. It sounds like Wood and Buller were both at fault for Hlobane.
The Zulu spear is called iklwa or ixwa after the sound of it being pulled out of the victim .
Thank you for sharing.
Good job!
Thank you
Worth noting on the subject of blaming Pulleine for spreading his troops out too thinly: the formation Pulleine adopted was set out by Chelmsford in his 'Instructions for the Consideration of Officers Commanding Columns when Entering Zululand', written December 1878. A copy of which was found on Durnford's body. That's what I read in Saul David's 'Zulu', anyway (pages 129-130)
No doubt the distance between British lines and camp did nothing to help the flow of ammunition.
P.s. Unpopular opinion, Zulu Dawn is way better than Zulu...
P.p.s. Great video!
Totally agree. I have always preferred "Zulu Dawn" to "Zulu" as well. It is the sheer scale of the movie. The uniforms in terms of tunic and pith helmets are more accurately depicted for soldiers on campaign. In "Zulu" the scarlet tunics are pristine and the white helmets are gleaming white and in parade ground condition. An interesting piece of movie trivia in relation to "Zulu Dawn". As you know the movie was made on location. In the movie the invasion force crossing the Buffalo River are actually crossing from the former Zululand into Natal. Obviously the opposite happened in real life. The film makers at the time thought it would be more dramatic on screen for the invasion force to go up the hill into Natal from the former Zululand.
@@johnroche7541 fantastic trivia! I never knew that! You're right, the scale of the movie is great, you really get a sense of the size of the Zulu impi and its ability to manoeuvre at speed. I also like it for being more historically accurate to the battle than Zulu is to Rourke's Drift.
I heard when they made Zulu they weren't able to pay the Zulu extras due to apartheid laws in SA, so they left behind the herd of cattle as an unofficial payment.
Some other war movie trivia, the 1970 film Waterloo (also fantastic) remains the record holder for most extras in authentic costume. 15,000 of them! As a result, another war movie of great scale!
@@davsto6375 Thank you for your reply. Absolutely love Waterloo. Crikey the scale is unreal. If these movies were made now they would be ruined with CGI. It is the thousands of extras that make them so realistic. I have 2 pieces of movie trivia in relation to both "Waterloo" and "Zulu". Sadly Jack Hawkins was suffering from throat cancer during the making of the movie "Waterloo" and his voice is that of a vocal impersonator which was added in later. If you see the movie again you will notice it. In relation to "Zulu" Terence Stamp was first choice to play Bromhead which part eventually goes to Michael Caine.
@@johnroche7541 I could never place what was wrong with his voice, now I know!
I live in fear that one day these movies will be remade to modern standards
Thanks for sharing.
The distance didn't seem to hinder the ammunition flow although I have read that having all the tents still erected did. I guess we will never really know for sure.
Glad you enjoyed my video.
Brave Honorable Men.. everyone tht took part in this battle ,them with rifle and them with spear alike.
Thanks for taking the time to comment.
You could do H.M.S. Amethyest and the Yangtse story as you would do it a great justice
The actor Richard Todd who was in the movie "The Yangste Incident" was actually in the real event!
Great idea. Not many people will know about it.
Any chance of videos on Anglo Irish war?
I presume you are talking about the one after WW1 (that led to the Free State)? It would be great to do, but I am aware of some of my Irish friends sensitivities and will need to script it carefully.
@@TheHistoryChap The Anglo-Irish War or Irish War of Independence 1919-1921 will be so sensitive even though it happened just over 100 years ago. From a military point of view there was two things that stand out. The famous Thompson sub machine gun made it's military debut in Dublin in June 1921 when a British troop train was attacked. One soldier from the Royal West Kent Regiment was killed due to grenade fragments. This regiment had only been deployed in Ireland a few hours as it had literally come from duties in Silesia. The Thompson machine gun came to late to be used in WWI. Two Irish-Anerican soldiers who had served with the AEF in WW1 arrived in Ireland to sell a consignment of the guns to the IRA. The American authorities captured a consignment of around 500 at Hoboken,New Jersey. However a couple got to Ireland. The IRA were first to use this iconic weapon in a conflict. Despite the numerous books and documentaries dedicated to this weapon it omits the fact it was used by the IRA first. Another military innovation from the Irish War of Independence would be the emergence of thev IED.
In fact, out of the 1500 British troops at isandlwana, only about 500 of them were actual redcoated troops
From those six companies of infantry from both the (1/24) and (2/24).
The rest of the force consisted
Of mainly 500 men from the NNC
(natal native contingent) and colonel durnfords 300-400 mounted infantry along with major Francis Russell's rocket battery
There was also captain Bradstreets 100 mounted infantry.
And those two 7-pounder field guns
Along with 70 gunners from the Royal Artillery.
Much has been made of the Zulu "Horn of the bull" tactic as if no one had ever encountered it before. But in fact it was a standard attack tactic dating back thousands of years. The Greeks had used the same mode at Marathon! It can be adopted at the squad level, platoon level and company level and just means one third attack on the right and one third attacks on the left while the remaining third hold the center, thus it's called the three point attack. Out flanking the opposing force on one or both flanks has been used at Hastings, various American Civil War battles, and many battles since. The military version of a mortal sin remains the rule: "never split your forces in the face of your enemy" and boy was Chemsford a sinner!
@Coll Maxwell The idea that you can outflank your enemy actually has it's roots in hunting! This was the way our stone age ancestors hunted large game and they simply adapted it for warfare. That the British officers didn't appreciate the Zulus is part hubris and part racial bigotry. But then what could anyone expect when all it takes to be a British army officer was money and the right family connections.
Thanks for starting a lively little discussion.
Chelmsford didn't split his force in the classic sense. He sent one half out and ordered the other half to stay put, to act on the defensive and to be reinforced by Durnfords 260 mounted riflemen, the rocket battery etc. He didn't send both halves of his force blindly out searching for Zulus.
Chelmsford only sent half his force out in the first place because the large, mostly NNC, recon patrol requested assistance. This recon force got itself into difficulties the day before by deciding to engage a large number of Zulus late in the day and had to spend a terrifying night isolated in the hills. They expected to be attacked by the Zulus at any moment. A rider was sent back to camp in the middle of the night asking for help from Chelmsford.
Chelmsford actually acted in a reasonably sound manner. He did not ignore the request for help leaving them to their fate. Nor did he send out a half baked token force ten miles further into Zulu territory in the direction of where circa 2,000 Zulus had just been encountered. Instead Chelmsford acted quite logically. He decided to send a strong force out and keep a strong force back, which was only to act on the defensive and would be reinforced by Durnford.
What were the alternatives given the situation and information at the time? I have no superior tactical answer. Do you?
@@lyndoncmp5751 Normally a general would keep his entire force concentrated and moving toward where he thought the enemy would be. Since he believed the Zulu were to the east he should have moved his entire army east. I do not have any sympathy for a commander who bases his actions on incomplete intelligence, it's his job to know for sure. Ignorance after the fact is no excuse!
👍 As enjoyable as ever.
Glad you enjoyed it. Thanks for watching.