Why were British troops slaughtered at Isandlwana

Trooper1854 said:
The thing was, the European forces didn't just underestimate the Zulus once, at Isandlwhana, but at subsequent battles leading up to the final battle at Ulundi where they finaly did form a square with artillery and gattling guns. But, by then the Zulu army had lost some of its fighting spirit. They were tired of the war, and knew they couldn't win.
Ultimately its a war that should never have been fought.
Click to expand...

Same as the Boer War, another lesson that the British learned and then forgot during WW1.
 
The Zulus launched a disciplined and co-ordinated attack on an over confident, ill prepared opposition. Numerous factors were involved, including the expert way the Zulus were able to deceive the British/European force into their where abouts and numbers.
The chain of command on the Bitish side was fragmented and confused.
The man left in charge of the camp had never heard a shot fired in anger.
Lord Chelmsford was arrogant and over confident. He failed to observe his own field directives and ignored what his scouts were telling him because it did not agree with his own views.
The reasons go on and on. We were beaten because we though we were fighting a bunch of savages armed with only spears.
One of the most telling eyewitness testemonies from a survivor was how the Zulus had observed how the artillery crews would step away from the gun before firing. They would then hit the ground to minimise the effect of the shot on them.
 
Fine analysis - anybody else see similarities between Lord Chelmsford and this action - and Gen. Braddock’s expidition in the French and Indian War?
 
muscogeemike said:
Fine analysis - anybody else see similarities between Lord Chelmsford and this action - and Gen. Braddock’s expidition in the French and Indian War?
Click to expand...

You can add so many other military leaders to a list of commanders who have made similar mistakes, right upto and including the most recent of conlicts.
We underestimate our enemy.
We forget lessons from previous conflicts.
Suddenly we incur avoidable losses and then we run around implemented earlier procedures, and tactics like we've had a vision!
 
muscogeemike said:
Fine analysis - anybody else see similarities between Lord Chelmsford and this action - and Gen. Braddock’s expidition in the French and Indian War?
Click to expand...

Sorry Mike, I have no idea regarding the French and Indian War. As a boy at school I had enough to contend with trying to remember British History, what prince married who, what year, how old they were, what did they have for breakfast, when did they die and how many children did they produce.

It must be remembered that although only junior officers, Lt's Chard and Bromhead fought the Battle of Rorkes Drift with far more professionalism then senior officers at Isandlwana.

Lt Chard died of cancer in 1897 in Taunton Somerset, a month before his 50th birthday.

Until 2003, the bravery of Lt. Chard was commemorated by the South African Army with the John Chard Decoration.*

Stanley Baker owned Lt Chards VC from 1972 until his death in 1976

Lt Bromhead died in India of Typhoid Fever on 9 February 1891, at the age of 45, at Camp Dabhaura
 
A sad end to Rorkes Drift was Corporal Schiess.

He was 22 years old, and a corporal in the Natal Native Contingent, South African Forces during the Zulu War. On 22 January 1879, at Rorke's Drift, Natal, Corporal Schiess, in spite of having been wounded in the foot a few days previously, displayed great gallantry when the garrison had retired to the inner line of defence and the Zulus had occupied the wall of mealie bags which had been abandoned. He crept along the wall in order to dislodge one of the enemy and succeeded in killing him and two others before returning to the inner defences.

Schiess was the first man serving with South African Forces under British Command to receive the VC.

After the volunteer forces were disbanded, he failed to find work, even from British authorities. In 1884, he was found on the streets of Simons Town near Cape Town suffering from exposure and malnutrition. The Royal Navy found him, gave him food, and offered him a passage to England on board the Serapis. He accepted, but became ill during the voyage and died. His remains were buried at sea at approximately 13°00′S 07°24′W . (Just off the coast of Angola) It is unknown if there was a portrait of Corporal Schiess. According to some, in Lady Butler's painting of "Rorke's Drift" he is shown lying at left against the mealie bags.

His Victoria Cross is displayed at the National Army Museum (Chelsea, England).
 
Last edited:
Quite a few of the Rorke's Drift defenders had sad ends.
One of the Jones VC killed himself, unable to live with the memories of the battle, Post Traumatic Stress we know it as now.
Another had to sell his VC and still ended up in the Poor House and then a pauper's grave.
Some had good lives;
Private Hitch was invalided out of the Army and becam a taxi driver.
Private Hook made it to Sargeant Major.
Colour Sargeant Bourne retired as a Lieutenant Colonel.
Corporal Allen had a sucessful military career.
But nearly all of them suffered with some form of post traumatic dis-order.
 
if I remember correctly, Private Hook's wife thought he had been killed, sold all his possessions and remarried. What a bummer lol.

As a matter of interest, Ronald Hook of Gloucester, whose father had known Henry Hook well, served in the Parachute Regiment in World War Two and was among the first wave of Allied airborne troops to land on D-Day. Two of Ronald Hook's sons (Timothy and Andrew) served in the Royal Navy. Andrew Hook fought in the Falklands War.
 
No apology necessary to Winston, I'm sure; he would enjoy your involvement - he was up to his neck in Africa campaigns himself, as a young man, always an adventurer, as you no doubt aware. As it happens, he was also one of my local MPs, the incumbant at Woodford, east London.

I actually seem to have missed the Zulu Wars, although my studies as a kid were from 1760 - up to the causes and events leading up to WW1, 1914. Political and Military.

So you will understand why this thread has intrigued me. Cheers.
 
Last edited:
BritinAfrica said:
Sorry Mike, I have no idea regarding the French and Indian War. As a boy at school I had enough to contend with trying to remember British History, what prince married who, what year, how old they were, what did they have for breakfast, when did they die and how many children did they produce.

Perhaps we “colonials” remember Gen. Braddock more since his advisor (who he refused to heed) was a militia LTC named George Washington.
Click to expand...
 
muscogeemike said:
Perhaps we “colonials” remember Gen. Braddock more since his advisor (who he refused to heed) was a militia LTC named George Washington.
Click to expand...

Its the same all over Mike you get officers who refuse to take advice from those who know the situation, not only in the British and US Armies, but armies around the world.

I remember we had a 2nd Lt who knew it all, he tried taking a compass bearing from inside a vehicle. When I tried to put him right, I as a mere Corporal was ignored. He thought he knew better, until he got us well and truly lost. Only then did he ask my advice. When we got back to our location questions were asked by the OC. The 2nd Lt was firmly put in his place and told that he is not running the section, but there merely as an observer and there to learn. I had similar problems with an officer cadet.
 
BritinAfrica said:
Its the same all over Mike you get officers who refuse to take advice from those who know the situation, not only in the British and US Armies, but armies around the world.

I remember we had a 2nd Lt who knew it all, he tried taking a compass bearing from inside a vehicle. When I tried to put him right, I as a mere Corporal was ignored. He thought he knew better, until he got us well and truly lost. Only then did he ask my advice. When we got back to our location questions were asked by the OC. The 2nd Lt was firmly put in his place and told that he is not running the section, but there merely as an observer and there to learn. I had similar problems with an officer cadet.
Click to expand...

Officer Cadets are meant to be guided and learn during exercises, whenever we encountered one pulling rank or barking at the men in our troop, we simply let him fall through or fail miserably in different tasks, untill he got the point.
If the cadet on the other hand leveled with the men, he would be granted the oportunity to become a leader instead of a hopeless brass-to-be. :firedevi:
 
BritinAfrica said:
Its the same all over Mike you get officers who refuse to take advice from those who know the situation, not only in the British and US Armies, but armies around the world.

I remember we had a 2nd Lt who knew it all, he tried taking a compass bearing from inside a vehicle. When I tried to put him right, I as a mere Corporal was ignored. He thought he knew better, until he got us well and truly lost. Only then did he ask my advice. When we got back to our location questions were asked by the OC. The 2nd Lt was firmly put in his place and told that he is not running the section, but there merely as an observer and there to learn. I had similar problems with an officer cadet.
Click to expand...

Absolutely agree - I had no intention to imply the U.S. is any more or less stupid, bullheaded or stubborn than anybody else.
The ability to screw up knows no boundaries - national, ethnic or religious (or sexual for that matter).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top