The Rorke's Drift VC Discussion Forum
(View Discussion Rules)

** IMPORTANT MESSAGE TO ALL USERS **

PLEASE NOTE: This forum is now inactive and is provided for reference purposes only. The live forum is available at www.rorkesdriftvc.com/forum

(Back To Topic List)

Date	Original Topic
16th May 2002	Red Devils at Isandlwana By Peter Quantrill I was privileged to conduct the Para Regt's Free Fall Team staying at Isandlwana Lodge around the battle-field.It has always been of intrigue to estimate the time taken to climb the Eastern face,which one assumes is the route taken by the OP's posted on 22 Jan. The more normal route these days is via a track on the Western side. At 1530 Hrs on 13 May, six of the men volunteered the climb,led by Capt.Stuart Russel.The Start-Line was the central point of the road East of the hill.The objective was to climb the Eastern central rock face and thence to the summit.Private Steve Candish of 2 Para was the first to the top in a time of 9 minutes! Agreed they were not carrying the Martini or dressed in serge uniforms,but nevertheless a remarkable effort. One can only presume that fully armed, a reasonable time would be in the order of perhaps 20 minutes. They incidently found what looked like a piece from an old clay pot which is undergoing analysis.
Date	Replies
16th May 2002	Dave Nolan Peter, Interesting reconstruction - but on what historical evidence do you base your assertion that there were lookouts on the summit of the mountain on 22nd January 1879? I have come across no contemporary reference to a post up there. Dave
16th May 2002	Peter Quantrill Dave, There are two primary source reports.The first is Wilsone Black's report written from Rorke's Drift on 28 June 1879."A soldier of the 24th was found close under the precipice,head down,with shattered skull,showing that he had fallen or been hurled from the top" The second is more positive. It is Cochrane's report written from Pietermaritzburg on 8 February 1879,(PRO 32/7713 56316) "Constant reports came in from the hills to the left,but never anything from the men on top of the Sandlwana (sic) hill that I heard". This would seem to prove conclusively that men were indeed posted on the summit. Hope this helps. Peter
16th May 2002	Dave Nolan Peter, Thanks for coming back so quickly! - As you infer, the first one does not show that an OP was up there - just that someone was up there at the time the Zulus had taken over the camp, perhaps trying to escape - or would a good beating with a knobkerrie (or two!) give a similar effect to a fall from a height? but the second is good - interesting that they appear to have made no report and therefore had no bearing on the course of the battle, even if they were up there! With Cochrane reporting 'men on top of the Sandlwana (sic) hill', any idea why the official map (Narrative of the Field Ops) doesn't show an OP up there? Thanks, Dave
17th May 2002	Peter Quantrill Dave, Lt.Walter James, R.E. Intelligence Branch, sketched the Isandlwana Maps on 18 March 1879 from post battle reports without having been in S.A. The layout description of the videttes,Cavalry outpost lines,and Infantry outpost lines,were detailed in a report by Clery dated 7 Feb 1879 from Helpmakaar. When the camp was set up there was no O.P. on top. It was only on the morning of the 22nd that they were probably sent up,and yes ,they probably did make a report which resulted in Melvill taking action."About 12.30 the Adjutant of the 1st 24th arrived on the hill with an orderfor the line to retire,slowly firing,as another large force had appeared in our rear." This is Essex's report on the withdrawal orders to Cavaye and Mostyn, and was probably motivated by the O.P. who had a commanding view of the rear. At the risf of boring readers,Ron Lock and I will,after 4 years of research,be publishing, yes, another book on the subject titled " Zulu Victory -- The Epic of Isandlwana and the Cover-Up" Definitely not a coffee-table effort! We like to think it may well cover new territory. Ron has written the the battle Chapters and I the Cover--Up. It is due out shortly and will be published by Greenhill. We have already published a compilation of Newspaper reports of 1879 called the Red Book to which reference has already been made on this site. Profuse apologies for the commercial. Peter
17th May 2002	Alec Weston Peter, A very interesting hypothesis about the OP. However, some years ago I climbed to the top of Isandhlwana and was very suprised to discover that I could not see beyond the edge of the plateau - in fact, I could see no more of the plateau than anyone in the camp as the top of Isandhlwana was well below the level of the plateau. For this reason, I'm not convinced that there was an OP there, what would have been the point? It would have been very troublesome to relieve the men up there and I also suspect that there would have been more reports or mention of them had there actually been an OP there. I look forward to your new book, I hope you are both ready for the flak from the 'we own the Zulu war' coterie that dominate this site- unless you are already among their members . Alec
17th May 2002	Dave Nolan The maps in the Narrative of the Field Operations are by Captain Anstey and Lt Penrose RE, both of whom surveyed the field after the war and who would have had access to those involved and the reports following the battle. You will have to help me out here as I have not been lucky enough to visit the battle ground yet and can go only on the various maps I have seen of the battle, but wouldn't the companies to the North have sent messages back to the camp that the Zulus were moving around to the East - behind the camp - and this is the most likely reason for Melvill's reported action. I too have heard that a post on the mountain top would see little on the plateau and so wonder, like Alex, if one would have been put up there. I do hope that you present the hypothesis in your book as speculation, as you have done here, or it will just muddy the waters further rather than try to explain. I recommend the Red Book! Dave
17th May 2002	Peter Quantrill Alec and Dave, What was intended as an interesting snippet on the Red Devils is now expanding into something much larger.We are handicapped by a Publishers confidentially clause,which precludes us from disclosing the contents of the book. In addition,Ron is at the moment sitting on Hlobane, while I are currently talking to you! .We like to think,Alec,that we are not in any "camp",and that our book will be received openly and fairly for what it is--an effort of great love. ---and to show perhaps a different aspect to events.We expect,as is the case with all authors, constructive and fair criticism.To briefly address your point Alec, the fact is that primary source confirms that an an O.P. was situated on top of of the hill. Isandlwana is 1332 metres above sea level. Magaga Knoll( Barry) is 1365 and Tehelane Ridge (Cavaye/Mostyn) is 1281.The lookouts would certainly at some stage have picked up the right horn,looking west,north west. They would definitely have seen them emerge from the valley. Alec,we are also using a variety of maps,including Jame's three,showing 10.30, noon,and 1.00 P.M.The conjecture that I have used on the O.P. is mine alone, as this is Ron's portion of the book We have only reached conclusions through primary source material. The Cover-Up will enlarge on the roll of Clery,and the ruthless interrogation of His Lordship by Horse Guards. More than that, at this stage,we are bound by silence..Incidently,we have also made a 50 minute video,titled "Isandlwana-Zulu Battlefield", which,as John Young has mentioned,contains battle scenes from the 1918 film, Symbols of Sacrifice. Thank you both for your interest. Peter
17th May 2002	James Garland I have just been reading an account of the battle of Rorke's Drift by the Rev Otto Witt. Although I know it was largely discredited at the time it was written I have been studying it to see if it contains some truth. In it he talks of seeing part of the battle of Isandhlwana from the top of the Oscarberg at Rorkes Drift. Are there any readers of this site who have been to Rorke's Drift and who can say whether Isandhlwana can be seen from the Oscarberg?
18th May 2002	Alec Weston Peter, Thank you for your response - although I personally doubt that the British bothered to send patrols to the top of Isandlwana when it was much easier and far quicker to send them up on the edge of the plateau. Can I presume you are the same Peter Quantril of the Red Book? I bought one, number 109, believing the hype that it was compiled by both of you, only to later discover that you had merely had an original document reprinted. Still, never mind, but I do wonder at the significance of your e mail address 'Jackpot'. On to James' point, Yes, from the top of the Oskersberg one has a perfect view of Isandlwana. However, The Oskersberg completely blocks off the view of Isandhlwana from Rorke's Drift so B Company would have had no idea of events at Isandlwana until much later. I hope that helps. Alec
18th May 2002	Alan Critchley Alec, could it be that Chard had given some inkling of possible forthcoming events at Isandhlwana since he visited there in the morning of the 22nd. and saw many Zulus on the move. Was this why Spalding rode off the Helpmekaar for reinforcements? Would he have done this unless he thought there was an indication from this report of imminent danger? Alan P.S. My copy of the Red book is number 30.
18th May 2002	Andrew Banks Alec et al, An interesting discussion. I can't remember what the number is of my copy of the Red Book, but I would like to thank Ron & Peter for getting it re-published to allow it the wider forum of the modern age. AMB PS. As I recall, Ron always made it quite clear that it was a reprint of an earlier work.
19th May 2002	Alec Weston Peter, I agree with you, and you have raised some very interesting points. Chard and Spalding both knew of the threat, but did Bromhead and B Company? It looks as though Chard knew of the threat, told Spalding who went off to Helpmakaar, but it does seem that, for some reason, Bromhead took little action until the reports came in. I may be wrong. Alec
19th May 2002	Brenda Lock Alec - just to put your mind at rest Re: Jackpot. Jackpot is the nickname of Peter Quantrill's wife. I can confirm that she is a Jackpot and Peter really hit it when he found her! Peter has taken over her computer, hence the address!
19th May 2002	Peter Quantrill Alec, I think that I have already indicated on the 17th that Ron and I compiled the Red Book. My e-mail [email protected] is a derivation of my wifes name Jacqueline,so nothing sinister I'm afraid. The familly all refer to her as Jackpot, a term of endearment. The Times English Dictionary,Collins Edition 2000,defines"Compile" "To make or compose from other sources." This is precisely what we have done. Two other notable compilations were extracts from The Graphic and The Illustrated London News,titled "The Zulu War Of 1879", both compiled by that doyen on matters Zulu, Lt.Col. S.B. Borquin,of whom Ian Knight writes in his acknowledgement in "The Anatomy Of The Zulu Army" "I could never have attempted a work such as this without the help over the years of the great expert on Zulu history, culture and language,S.B. Borquin" I might add that the Red Book is not a copy of S.B.'s---indeed S.B., on the many occassions Ron and I have had the privilege of enjoying in-depth discussions with him,have been complimented by him on our efforts in producing the Red Book.Ours is compiled from local newspaper reports,some 352 pages in all. So Alec it was not an original document copied,but a compilation of rare press reports. Finally,if you do not believe that an O.P.was situated on top of the hill on the morning of the 22nd,then you are disbelieving the account of an officer present througout the battle,namely Cochrane. Peter
19th May 2002	James Garland Peter and Ron, I enjoyed "The Red Book" . It's not often that we get books containing so much source material. I spent months studying it. If either of you are planning on publishing more of the same from other contemporary newspapers I for one will be buying it. Don't let anyone put you off.
19th May 2002	Dave Nolan Peter Maybe "reports came in from the hills to the left,but never anything from the men on top of the Sandlwana (sic) hill that I heard" because there was no OP on top of the hill and Cochrane was mistaken - what other references are there to corroborate him? What were Cochrane's movements before the battle? - he was Orderly Officer to Durnford, so presumably he arrived with Durnford's column so would not have been involved in the placing of the 24th's OPs and would not have been in the camp itself for particularly long. I found the Red Book a mine of information, and you are to be praised in bringing out information that otherwise difficult to access - especially those of us out of SA. Dave
19th May 2002	Alan Critchley If anyone is interested in obtaining copies of 'The Red Book', I would be able to assist. Alan [email protected]
19th May 2002	Julian Whybra When Durnford joined Pulleine for lunch a picquet which Durnford had posted on the top of Isandhlwana reported that the Zulus were retiring everywhere. One body was retiring eastwards and Durnford decided to prevent it linking up with the Zulus with whom Chelmsford was engaged. Lieut. Higginson NNC was the intermediary for this information, having posted the picquet under Durnford's instructions. Read the primary sources.
19th May 2002	James Garland It seems to me that it would be inconceivable not to put a picquet on top of Isandhlwana. The great historian Lieut. Col. Alfred Bourne used to decide these sort of questions by reference to the " inherent military probability" . Add to this the two references quoted on this topic and I reckon there was a piquet on Isandhlwana.
20th May 2002	Peter Quantrill Julian is absolutely correct.What he has stated, is mentioned in our book covered by Ron in the battle chapters.The confidentiality clause precluded me from quoting.I therefore quoted an alternate primary source to substantiate the presence of the picket. Back to the original point! 9 minutes to climb the Eastern rock face. The Red Devils have undertaken to try and improve on that nex year! --- I will try and get feedback on the clay pot piece. To those who enjoyed the Red Book,thank you for your encouragement. Peter
20th May 2002	Dave Nolan So we are saying that Durnford took charge in the camp and started posting vedettes of the 24th Regt? (Julian above) - The source quoted by Peter is clear that it was a soldier of the 24th who was found having been thrown off the top (I still wonder if he had been 'kerried lower down, not as sensational a story I am afraid) As for 'military probability' - if we apply this to its ultimate there is no military way that the Zulus should have won - Chelmsford wouldn't have split his force, Pulleine/Durnford(?) would have formed a tighter defensive perimeter etc. Julian - please cite sources if you use them rather than just the brusque 'read the primary sources', not all of us live in the academic world and have the time to track these down - we are just enthusiasts rather than historians. Dave
20th May 2002	Julian Whybra The original question posed was whether there was a picquet on top of Isandhlwana not whether Durnford took charge of the camp and not whether the picquet was from the 24th. You have two sources stating that there was such a picquet, one of them being by the officer ordered to place it there and who relayed its messages. What more do you need? I would have thought that the primary source was rather obvious - Higginson's own accounts of course (PRO WO 33/34 p.276 and a report in private hands). As to the composition of the picquet I would infer that it was from the NNC though one cannot be sure; it could have been from one of the colonial mounted units. It is most unlikely it was from the 24th. Dave, I apologize for the brusqueness, I was writing at 11.40 at night after I'd finished work for the day; if readers are going to correct contributors, it is necessary to do so from a position of knowledge. The existence of this picquet was referred to and sources given way back in 1965 in David Jackson's article (Isandhlwana- the sources reexamined). The wisdom of putting a picquet on top of Isandhlwana is irrelevant to the argument (at the time they would not have known whether it was higher than the plateau and it does at least give a view to the west), the question was either they did or they didn't place the picquet - and they most definitely did!
20th May 2002	Dave Nolan Julian, Thank you for responding and confirming my thoughts on whether a picquet of the 24th was placed on the hill. I had concentrated on whether the picquet was a 24th Regt one because Peter had answered my original query with two sources - one by Cochrane and the other by Wilsone Black saying a dead MAN OF THE 24TH was found at the bottom of a precipice - As these two were cited as support for a picquet on the hill, I took it that a picquet OF THE 24TH was inferred. If Cochrane posted that picquet on the hill then that assumes he could command the 24th i.e. Durnford had taken over command of all the camp. That is the reason the questions went that way. Had the original response not included the reference to the 24th being on the hill then I would have been happy with that. I am now happy that there may well have been a NNC/Colonial picquet up there, ordered by Cochrane, as you have supported that well. I also take task with your point that readers are trying to 'correct' others. I realise that this may be your agenda on this site having first started your posts to 'correct' a recently published book but, I can assure you that my queries have been in the form of a debate - as shown by the fact that I disbelieved any picquet on the hill originally and can now accept that there may well have been an NNC/Colonial one there. Let us keep this forum for debate not petty 'correcting' Rant over (for the moment) Dave
20th May 2002	Bill Cainan Peter Well done, a small bit of news that has resulted in quite an interesting exchange. One of the problems that all of us face in looking at Isandlwana, is that primary source material is relatively scarce and quite often the minutiae of everyday military life is just NOT recorded. The situation is then compounded by the death of many of the British participants, particularly those on the firing line. This leaves us with the intepretation of the few sources that do exist, and of course intepretation can vary !!! Is this not the very attraction of looking at Isandlwana ? As to the posting of a sentry/picquet on the top of the Mountain - yes, of course it makes military sense as it is by far the highest ground adjacent to the Camp. But do you need to post piquets at all ? The same argument would apply to posting piquets on the plateau. Those of us who have had the dubious pleasure of posting sentries/picquets will know that they are invariably only as good as their briefing. What exactly do you tell them to do ? Who do you chose to post as picquets ? The NNC are the obvious choice as they would have been no more encumbered by kit than the Red Devils Free Fall Team ! The men of the 24th were not ideally kitted out for mountain scrambling ! What COULD you see from the top of the rock ? Well, you have a good view to the West (the route to and from Rorke's Drift): you can look North to the ridge where Mostyn & Cavaye initially deployed; you can look to the North East at the southern edge of the plateu; you can look East to the Conical Hill and slightly beyond; and you can look South for quite a few miles. What WOULD you have seen ? Well it obviously depends on the time you were posted and how long you stayed up there. If you were up there early enough you would have seen the smoke from the firing of Mostyn & Cavaye at the Zulu Right Horn. You would have seen Younghusband deploying to assist in their withdrawal from the ridge. You would have seen Raw and his Troop falling back from over the plateau and taking his place in the firing line. You would have seen the Right Horn edging around the back of the mountain and Shepstone's gallant defence. You would have seen the Zulu centre sweep over the plateau. You might possibly have seen the demise of the Rocket Battery (if you had a telescope) and would probably have seen the movement of the Left Horn and the engagement with Durnford. What use would all of this have been to Pulleine ? It would probably have only confirmed the enormity of the calamity that was overwhelming him. Most of the information he could probably have seen for himself (with the exception of the Right Horn behind the mountain). Conclusion ? What if the picquet had written down EVERYTHING they had seen, put it in a bottle and hidden it on the top of the rock - what a primary source that would be ! Or what if they had had a heliograph to converse with Chelmsford ? But let's be realistic - Isandlwana was just a camp site on the long road to Ulundi where Chelmsford would fight the one and only battle ! What could possibly happen at Isandlwana ??? Sorry, I only meant to write a few lines ! Bill
20th May 2002	Julian whybra Dave, forgive me, I don't mean to correct you, but if you re-read my entry for earlier today you'll find that it was Higginson at Durnford's order (not Cochrane as you state) that both posted the picquet in question and relayed its messages. I can also assure you that my agenda does not involve correcting anybody (why, wouldn't we all have a field day starting with Donald Morris proceeding right up till now!). Bill is right in his previous comment, that history is about the interpretation of facts and about opinions centred around events. Most writers will attempt to do that and when it is necessary to speculate, will make it quite clear that that is what they're doing. It is very unprofessional to invent (without any basis of truth) - it might make exciting reading but it is not good history. Neither it is easy to sit back at one's computer, read someone's comment which affirms that something didn't happen (when I know that it did) and not to inform (rather than 'correct') them of the existence of evidence to the contrary - the website is about the exchange of information after all (I could quite happily sit back, not bother, and let contributors get on with it). I am happy to share information about Isandhlwana but the spread of disinformation, inaccuracies, 'lies, lies, and statistics' is not part of the 'light, liberty, and learning' in which I was instructed to view history. Ditto about the rant.
20th May 2002	A M Banks Back to the PARA chap...9 mins to get to the top is some going! What was the time of day? [I'm thinking of the heat factor]
20th May 2002	Stuart Russell As Peter said in his original post, the time was 1530 hrs, quite hot, but we'd been in SA for a month by this time, and for the short duration of the climb, I felt the altitude above sea level more than the heat (or am I getting old?) Greetings Peter, I've read with interest the discussion that your post about our ascent of Isandlwana has provoked. It caused me to look at the video footage I took from the top. Sadly, I was concentrating too much on filming the immediate battlefield rather than looking at it from how effective a picquet would've been. Anyhow, I'll copy the little footage that I have and post it off to you. It was Cpl Dane Richardson who found the pottery. I'll speak to him in the morning and get him to have it analysed, we'll keep you informed. I have read the views regarding the issue of a picquet on Isandlwana with some interest. I have to say that having seen the ground that can be overlooked from the top, if I'd been ordered to remain in the area for more than 30 minutes, I'd have posted a picquet there without a doubt (probably would have dug in too!) Thanks again for looking after us so marvelously on our visit. I hope we can make it again next year (by parachute maybe?)
21st May 2002	Julian Whybra Can I ask the Army whether anyone went to the top by the long route i.e. up the lion's back from the north, and how long it took?
21st May 2002	Peter Quantrill Julian, In case Stuart is freefalling,may I take the opportunity of responding. I asked all six volunteers to attempt the central East face only. Perhaps next year if they come out,we might try North, South and West to get time comparisons. Peter
21st May 2002	A M Banks The RMP/RLC took about 25 mins to amble up the west face in 2001. We'd not realised there was a time to set! However, now that the Infantry have started the clock, next time.....! Good to hear that the Red Devils enjoyed their trip. Will we get to see the film of your free-fall next time?
21st May 2002	Peter Quantrill A.M.B, I may be biased,but being an ex-Gurkha,the only way to beat the Red Devils is to bring out a team from RGR. Now that would be a competition! In the old days the Gurkhas were unbeatable in the "Kud" race, i..e, up the hill AND down. Any bets? Stuart,I hope you are not reading! Peter
21st May 2002	Stuart Russell Peter, Next time I'll drink less red wine the night before and do it in shorts & trainers instead of jeans & shoes! For those interested, a report on the Red Devils Team Training 2002 in SA will appear on our website in a few days, with some impressive aerial photos of Formation Skydiving and Canopy Formation. I hope this isn't classed as advertising, but you can find our website at www.reddevilsonline.com
22nd May 2002	Peter Quantrill In Edward Durnford's book, " A soldier's Life in South Africa",he states," When Sir Evelyn Wood was in Zululand with the ex-Empress of the French,their camp was pitched a short distance to the west of Isandhlwana; and from this camp a white man ascended to the top of the hill in twenry minutes" Peter
22nd May 2002	Peter Quantrill Correction----"twenty-seven minutes"
23rd May 2002	Susan Cromwell Gentlemen, This interesting correspondence and speculation confirms my own belief that no one really knows what happened at Isandlwana or even at Rorkes Drift. Has the point been missed, even with all the above contributions from such knowledgeable people? I haven't seen any reference from any of you to the cairn high up on Isandlwana. I saw this cairn about twenty years ago and it was to the left of the cave where the last 24th soldier is supposed to have held out. I expect it is still there. The gentleman who took me there, the curator of the battlefield, Mr George Chadwick, believed it was the grave of this soldier. He also mentioned that the skull had been smashed by knobkerries. This cairn is also indicated on the map of Isandlwana cairns produced following the war by Mr Boast on behalf of the British authorities. It indicates one body if I remember correctly. I suggest to you all that this cairn so high on Isandlwana is the grave of the last 24th soldier and not of someone thrown off the top. Such a body would have been seriously smashed and would, I suspect, have merited considerable comment by those who found it beyond just mentioning that the skull had been damaged. Food for thought? I will be interested in your collective views. Susan Cromwell.
23rd May 2002	Alec Weston Dear Susan, I am impressed! Your information, which I have never heard of before, tends to confirm my own belief that there was never an OP on top of Isandlwana. It just doesn't make sence as protection of the camp was not a priority and it would have been difficult to get people up and down its steep face. I am intrigued by cairn indicated on the Boast map - has this ever been published, or has George Chadwick ever confirmed this in any papers? Can I presume this soldier of the 24th is the same one featured on the cover of Ian Knight's magazine, 'There will be an awful row at home'? If you have any more information like this, please let us have it. Alec.
23rd May 2002	Julian Whybra The existence of the cairn is well-known and is indeed documented on Boast's map. I imagine that no-one has mentioned it so far because the discussion has been solely about the presence of a picquet on the summit, not about the last of C coy. Alec, I must seriously ask you, whether you believe Higginson to have lied in his statements that he was ordered to set up a picquet by Durnford, that he did so, and that he relayed messages from it? I am also intrigued, Susan and Alec, to know why you feel that the presence of the 'Last of the 24th's' cairn has any bearing on the presence of a picquet on the summit. Alec, for your information, you can obtain a photocopy of Boast's map from the Killie Campbell. I also have a photo of the cairn in question which I shall try to find for you.
23rd May 2002	Bill Cainan Well, this topic is taking some interesting turns. The presence of a single dead redcoat at the base of the hill with his head crushed by a knobkerrie - who was he ? He was probably from Younghusband's C Company (as Julian has indicated) as it was this Company that retreated up to the shoulder. However, was he a wounded man, left behind when Younghusband made his last charge down the hill, and subsequently despatched by a Zulu "mopping up party". Or was he the last survivor who had fought on from his cave to eventually be ejected ? Or was he one of C Company had fled to the top of the hill only to jump (or be thrown) from the top ? Any of these is possible. As to the question of Higginson setting up the picquet on Durnford's orders - this is more intriguing. In support of Julian's quoted sources, I would add the following: Higginson was a Lt in Capt Krohn's 6th Company of the 1/3 NNC - which was part of No 3 Column Now what was left of No 3 Column in Insandlwana was commanded by Lt Col Pulleine. Durnford, of course, commanded commanded No 2 Column which contained 1/1 NNC. Although Senior Officer present I do not believe Durnford actually took command of the camp (a subject that has been done to death on this site). However, he was undoubtedly the most experienced senior officer there and would have been recognised as such, especially by the officers and SNCOs of the NNC. Krohn's Company (with Higginson) was essentially the camp reserve and would have been posted near the camp area. - the nearest formed uit to the hill. I believe that Durnford, with his experience, was considerably more uneasy about the situation that Pulleine, and was concerned with getting as much intelligence as possible. The posting of additional picquets then follows on naturally. You can well see Durnford riding up to Krohn's Company, spotting Higginson, and ordering a picquet to be sent to the top of the hill. Higginson would I'm sure, have obeyed without hesitation, probably not even considering Durnford's jurisdiction (anyway if a full Colonels tells a Lieutenant to do something ..... !). Almost certainly Higginson would have sent men from his own company to form the picquet. Whether a white NCO was sent with the picquet would depend on how important Higginson considered Durnford's order to be. Now to go back to Peter's very first point. In February of this year I scrambled from Youngusband's cairn to the cave (as per the Last Survivor) in about ten minutes - but I was dressed as an infantryman of 1879 and I was carting a Martini Henry rifle. As an ageing Sapper it never even crossed my mind to race to the top of the hill - but then again I suppose that's why God invented the infantry ! Bill
23rd May 2002	Julian whybra PS I forgot, RT Moynan's painting 'The Last of the 24th - Isandhlwana' is indeed on the cover of There'll be An Awful Row...edited by Ian Knight.
23rd May 2002	Julian Whybra And, Bill, Higginson was also the adjutant and therefore responsible for relaying orders and messages.
26th May 2002	Dave Nolan Peter, Could you advise me in what way your 'Red Book' is 'compiled' by your good selves. The book is a marvellous mine of information and the historian in me needs to know when it was originally compiled as am now given to understand that it is a reprint of an extremely scarce compilation of newspaper reports compiled and published by the editor of The Natal Mercury shortly after the conclusion of the Anglo Zulu War, not something recently 'made or composed from other sources' by yourselves as you appear to indicate above. So the date of compilation would be 1879 and not 2000/01 - and also if you are not the compilers but the editor of the Mercury was, in 1879, then a totally different historical perspective has to be put on the book - it is compiled from a nineteenth century viewpoint and not a twenty first century one. Thanks, in advance, if you can clear this up. Dave
26th May 2002	James Garland Dave, Have you actually opened your copy of the red book? It contains a compilation of newspaper reports nothing more nothing less. There is no accompanying commentary. Therefore how can it possibly be compiled from a nineteenth century or twenty first century viewpoint. There is no view point it's a series of contemporary newspaper articles. Your comment is as daft as saying an exact copy of Dicken's "Oliver Twist" published in 2001 is written from a 21st century viewpoint. I am currently compiling articles from the Illustrated London News without commentary. I daresay someone has done so before. If they have I will no doubt be accused of repeating someone elses compilation from a 21st century point of view.
26th May 2002	Alan Critchley James, I love the word 'daft' although it's probably not PC these days. For those interested, 'The Red Book' is a compilation of articles from the Natal Press of 1879, not all to do with the Zulu War. There are no added comments and no vetting. If anyone is interested in obtaining one of the few copies available, please contact me. Alan [email protected]
26th May 2002	Dave Nolan James/Alan, To a historian the date of compilation and who the compiler is, is most helpful information. As for needing to know when a compilation was made, imagine a compilation put together about Osama Bin Laden, would the compiler have had a different point of view if it were compiled on Sept 10th 2001 or June 25th 2002? Would a compilation of Anglo Zulu War reports be different if they are put together by a newspaper editor in 1879 in order sell them to people who had direct experience of the conflict or by two enthusiasts for the benefit of, and sale to, knowledgeable fellow enthusiasts 120+ years later? I can't go into the viewpoint of Messrs Lock and Quantrill as I do not know them or their standpoint, beyond that which we share, of the 21st Century, but would a newspaper editor in 1879 have put anything in his compilation that was uncomplimentary to his own paper? Would he have only put stuff in that broadly agreed with his perceptions and prejudices? So, in order for a compilation to be properly understood it is helpful to know the viewpoint of the compiler(s) and the date of compilation. This is taught in school History classes these days. Alan - sorry - whoever the compiler was, the very nature of a compilation infers vetting. Please do not confuse history with antiquarianism. By the way, is this the longest running thread on this web discussion forum so far? Dave
26th May 2002	James Garland Dave, It all depends on whether the compilation is of all the newspaper reports relating to the Zulu War or just some of them. If the Red Book includes every reference to the Zulu War from the newspapers used then the compilers viewpoint is irrelevant. I am just pleased that someone went to all that time and effort. For anyone else who is interested The Colindale Newspaper Library has one of the largest collections of old newspapers in the world for visitors to study (including the newspapers used in The Red Book and many more). Alan and Dave, I'm sorry if the word daft is not PC. I thought I would use it as an old fashioned and gentler word than the modern alternatives. James
27th May 2002	Dave Nolan James, Glad you agree with me, 'daft' or not. Can we get back to the original question? - Is 'The Red Book' a facsimile of an 1879 compilation or is it a modern compilation from a variety of sources as appears to be the claim? Dave
27th May 2002	Alec Weston Dave, The Red Book is a re-print of an existing old document, copies of which can be found in the UK and more easily in South Africa. The book cover is heavily embossed in gold 'Compiled by Lock & Quantril' . They have then given it an interesting title that mimics the official Blue Books. As Lock and Quantrils publication was limited to only 500 copies, I am supprised there are any still available as I thought the source had dried up. It is a super book but I regret that some pages are missing. Alec
27th May 2002	Alec Weston Dave, In case I didn't make myself clear, the missing pages are from Locks/Quantrils publication - not the original. Their page 125 ends with the beginning of an account of Ntombe but 126 starts with the landing of the 3rd Battalion, see page 128 where is is again repeated. A bit of a muddle, but a good reference book nevertheless. I managed to get the missing pages via the site, anglozuluwar.com Alec.
28th May 2002	Ron Lock and Peter Quantrill In response to Dave and Alec's comments on the Red Book,we would like to point out the exact wording which carries our signatures. "We have named this reprint of a compilation of Natal Newspaper articles, originally published during the Anglo-Zulu War, 1879, The Red Book." This seems plain enough. We do not claim to be publishing anything other than something that has already been published by various newspapers,not just the Natal Mercury. Alec, we challenge you to find copies that are found " more easily in South Africa." We doubt the veracity of that statement. In 10 years of general research in KZN, we have only come across two others. The first is in the Warrior's Gate Museum,Durban, behind a glass case and not accessable. The other was damaged beyond repair when the Durban Light Infantry Museum underwent renovation some years ago. In any event,our intent is clear,namely to make available to those interested in the AZW, a fascinating window of opportunity to step back in time and read what is simply not available to the public. The response on the website seems to vindicate our efforts.You are right,there are not many copies left. We will give serious consideration to printing a second edition of unnumbered copies should demand prevail. Shared knowledge of the period is essential in arriving at a balanced viewpoint,and the Red Book provides both primary and secondary source material essential in understanding the policies and actions of those conducting military operations during that period. This exellent site should devote itself to healthy debate on the subject matter,namely the Anglo-Zulu War and the sharing of information in a gentle, compassionate and understanding manner,rather than seemingly irrelevant agendas which would appear to include point scoring on technicalities.
28th May 2002	Dave Nolan Ron/Peter I am sorry if my genuine historical query appeared to be 'point scoring' - I hope I have shown that it is necessary to know if the actual compilation 'from various sources' took place recently or 123 years ago. I am also very sorry if you feel that history is 'an irrelevant agenda'. Your phrase "We have named this reprint of a compilation of Natal Newspaper articles, originally published during the Anglo-Zulu War, 1879, The Red Book." is easily read that you compiled this book from the original newspaper articles rather than this being done in 1879, and then you reprinting the ensuing book. From what you have written above I can now that it was never your intention to give anyone the impression that you did no more than republish a previous publication, it was just the confusing phraseology that did that. As I have stated before the book is a great source of material on the Anglo Zulu War. As for 'point scoring' I think your comments about the availability of the original publication come well within that sphere. With this reply we break the half century mark! Dave
28th May 2002	Alan Critchley Dave, my turn to be pedantic. Does the 50th. entry constitute the breaking of the half century or am I doing it now? Alan [email protected]
28th May 2002	Julian Whybra I you're not sure Alan, I'm certainly doing it now. Re the Red Book, it is jolly useful; I've been trying for ages to get the original - though there is a copy in the British Library and in Cambridge Univ Lib for those that want to see it. I'm just looking forward to the day Volume 2 appears on the scene - a compilation from British newspaper reports perhaps??? Anyone fancy doing it???
28th May 2002	Martin Everett One for James I do have a compilation of LIN articles about the AZW in the museum library. It has been done before.
28th May 2002	A M BANKS Ron & Peter, Would Greenhill or alike not be keen to publish an edition of the Red Book? Do you have any more copies? RMAS library doesn't have a copy. AMB
30th May 2002	John Greener Concerning Dave Nolan's question above, the question of compilation is easy to unravel when you read the original advertisment for the book. I'm a bit concerned about any re-printing of it in view of the original advertising. I probably was not alone in believing it was a limited edition. John Greener ------------------ Advertisment. The Red Book This is a treasure trove of material relating to the Anglo Zulu War, much of which has remained hidden for over 120 years and which has recently been unearthed. Named The Red Book, it is a compilation of 350 pages of various South African newspaper reports of the time and includes a kaleidoscope of editorials, news, anecdotes and primary source material which sets out in great detail, amongst other things, the battles of Isandlwana, Rorke’s Drift, Hlobane, Kambula and Ulundi. The compilers, author Ron Lock and Peter Quantrill, have taken particular care to maintain the integrity of the original material. The Red Book, size 8 x 12 inches, has been handsomely bound with a red hardback cover and gold lettering. It is a must for those interested in the Anglo Zulu War and will, undoubtedly, become a collector’s item. The print run of 500 copies will be numbered, 250 have been exclusively reserved for Society Fellows and Members and these will be the only copies offered in the UK. The cost of each book is �37.50, inclusive of postage and packaging UK (�40 overseas).
31st May 2002	Alan Critchley John, I'm in full agreement about your point. Limited edition means, forgive me if I'm wrong, limited edition. There were 500 copies printed and that was part of the original sales 'pitch'. The numbered limited print run means that the cost is that much higher. To reprint means that the charges incurred by the authors, origination for printing, distribution etc. would not be as extensive, not to mention the devaluation of the purchase of an original supposedly 'limited' edition. I for one would frown upon any suggestion of a reprint, especially since I have probably the remaining 55 or so copies to sell. I hope to contact Peter Quantrill and Ron Lock for their views. P.S. The size is 7.5 inches x 12 inches. Alan [email protected]
1st June 2002	James Garland As the original was printed 120 years ago the copyright has expired. Therefore limited edition or not there is nothing preventing any publisher from producing their own edition. Although it would not be very ethical to produce further copies in Ron Lock and Peter Quantrill's format. I have seen copies of classic novels produced as limited editions but I think this only refers to the particular binding and decoration. On other books they are released with illustrations that give them the right to be issued as limited editions. so if the Red Book were to be released by Greenhill with different covers and in a different size I don't think there will be a problem. in fact they could make some improvements. My only gripe about the excellent Red Book is that it is not always clear from which newspaper and on what date some of the articles are from. So lets see another edition with a few enhancements. I would buy it. James
2nd June 2002	Alan Critchley James, your points are noted but I stick to my ethical point of view. If you produce a limited edition of a compilation, by definition it is limited either in number or content. Changes to the cover, binding or foil blocking does not change the principle. It was promoted and sold on the basis of being a 'limited edition'. Alan [email protected]
2nd June 2002	James Garland Alan, I have just read the introductory page of the Red Book. Ron and Peter don't say that it is a limited edition. All it says is " Only the 500 copies of the first edition will be numbered". This quite clearly leaves it open to produce a second edition. Rather than being unethical to produce a second edition it appears to suggest that there will be one. In short Ron and Peter only stated that the first edition would be limited and numbered. I don't see any ethical objection to printing a second edition.
4th June 2002	John Greener James, I think there is a big difference. The advertisment stated that it was a limited edition. On the strength of this advertiment I guess many were sold, I certainly bought mine on the strength of the ad. To then put a different story in the introductory page of the limited edition that it isn't limited as advertised is not ethical. John
4th June 2002	James Garland Alan and John, You've sown the seed of doubt in my mind. You're probably right. But I would have paid the asking price whether it had been limited or not. With just 500 copies around I had better look after mine. James
5th June 2002	Ron Lock and Peter Quantrill Red Book---Limited copies. In our dialogue with Alan we explained the reasoning behind the book statement differing from the promotional blurb. This resulted in there being no problem in making additional copies available,if demand existed, through Rorke's drift website. However,to obviate any possibility of a misunderstanding and the questioning of ethics,we have reached a decision that we will not reprint any further copies May we please treat the subject as closed