rorkesdriftvc.com Forum Index


rorkesdriftvc.com
Discussions related to the Anglo-Zulu War of 1879
Reply to topic
A/E Coy 1/24th
Julian whybra


Joined: 03 Sep 2005
Posts: 437
Reply with quote
In an earlier discussion which was locked it seemed to me that the original question which was asked over the correct identification of Cavaye's coy being A or E was not fully answered and left in the air as if there still remained some lingering doubt about it. There is in fact no such doubt. Contributors' quoting a secondary source (Greaves) as the reasoning behind the choice of A or another (Laband) as the source of E is totally unsatisfactory in itself. The early errors of Morris's pioneering work resulted in its statements (including "Cavaye i/c A coy") being endlessly replicated without thought.
If one goes back to the primary sources - in this case three surviving privates of the 1/24th, Williams, Bickley, and Wilson, who mention the despatch of Cavaye's coy, it will be found that not only is Cavaye named by them but they refer to the coy as E or as no. 5. Their reports are all in the National Archives W.O. 33/34 (the precise refs. can be found in England's Sons) as well as in Holme and at Brecon.
To dig up this old chestnut is not to advocate the benefits of an hermeneutical approach, it is to muddy the waters and draw attention to works which are less than informative and less than well-researched. Perhaps I could say the popular-history-reading public deserves what it gets. Whatever you feel about that remark, history and the brave men of the 24th and the Zulu impi deserve better.
View user's profileSend private message
A/E Coy 1/24th
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
All times are GMT  
Page 1 of 1  

  
  
 Reply to topic