rorkesdriftvc.com Forum Index


rorkesdriftvc.com
Discussions related to the Anglo-Zulu War of 1879
Reply to topic
mike snook 2


Joined: 04 Jan 2006
Posts: 920
Reply with quote
Robert

Don't you give up or I'll have nobody to argue with! Hope things are going well for you. You will always have the advantage that your bloodline contains a rich vein of courage.

As ever

M
View user's profileSend private message
Copycats.
TonyJones


Joined: 31 Aug 2005
Posts: 188
Location: Essex
Reply with quote
Dear all,
my definition of copying stems from my schooldays when some kid who sat next to me in maths was continually looking at my answers to 'copy' the correct ones.I think maybe what Graham has mentioned about 'copying' could more accurately be refered to as 'duplication' of the facts.This duplication is perfectly acceptable when there are a limited number of sources of information available,as is the case with our chosen subject.Once again,it would be unreasonable to expect any author who has embarked on any general work on AZW matters not to duplicate facts about any campaigner just because a previous author has written the same facts.Usually the 'duplicated' facts are added to and this is progress.As my AZW bookshelf has now grown from what was just a copy of the ZULU VHS to include practically anything AZW I can get my hands on,I don't mind and have actually enjoyed reading duplicated facts with the additions included about a particular subject-sometimes its nice to be on familiar ground.When I have read something blatantly wrong about matters 593,letters have been sent to authors who have written in good faith about 593,to explain to them why this is not so,to help them avoid writing this again.It usually gains a letter of thanks and I don't think any author minds this.Gorton Historian,Sid Riley,whose cousin married into the Jones family,had wrote an account on Gorton news online that contained facts about 593 that had been handed to him orally and which included a few errors.When I sent him the updated material his response was grateful and he appreciated the acknowledgement of his efforts and work and we have since become the best of friends.Such bonds are forged by co-operation and help.I'm sure in 100 years time,AZW matters will still have plenty of mileage left in them and a new generation of writers and readers will have their say about facts which will still possibly be duplicated.

Tony.
View user's profileSend private messageVisit poster's website
Coll
Guest

Reply with quote
Robert

As Mike says, don't give up on Anthony's role at Isandlwana and the tactics he used on the day.

There are some (well me and Michael Boyle) who, although we are aware of Durnford's flaws, don't reckon he did everything wrong.

His strategy was sound, but it was the unexpectedly huge opposing Zulu army of determined, courageous warriors, that caused it to fail.

I'm not saying Durnford was the only hero of the battle, however, as every man defending that camp was - No question about that !

I know how it looks, when reading about the battle, but if keeping an open-mind, in order to question, rather than accept all the facts, there is room for doubt, on how bad his decisions and actions really were.

Our numbers are few, but it don't mean we're wrong ! Wink

Make a stand.

Coll

PS. The same goes for the incident at Bushman's Pass. He was put in a ridiculous situation, which was could only end badly.


Last edited by Coll on Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:36 pm; edited 1 time in total
robert_durnford


Joined: 18 May 2006
Posts: 8
Location: Wimbish/Reading
Reply with quote
I already have made a stand - following a chance encounter with Col. Snook in the RMAS library I wrote my War Studies paper on Durnford, and whether he should have been blamed for the defeat. It wasn't too bad as a first effort (if I say so myself!) but I am aiming to revise it. I am working my way through some more material, including RWF Droogleever's book which should hopefully aid my understanding.

Who knows, there could be a second volume to follow on from Edward Durnford's defence of his brother!
View user's profileSend private message
mike snook 2


Joined: 04 Jan 2006
Posts: 920
Reply with quote
Coll
He put himself in a ridicuous situation on both of the occasions he exercised a field command. Very Happy

Robert

Good luck, but I suspect you will be a bit busy for the next few years! I spent most of my first two years in the army on extra pickets!! On one occasion I received the generous award of 14 consecutive extra pickets for having the impertinence to have a thumb-print in the bull on the back of my otherwise immaculate Sam Browne belt whilst carrying the Regimental Colour. Only one man in the whole world could see it - the regimental sergeant major who stands directly behind the colours as part of the escort, and is unfortunately best friends with the adjutant as you know. Take great care around RSMs and adjutants would be my advice!! But fortunately I think they tend to be rather less severe these days!

As ever
MRS
View user's profileSend private message
Coll
Guest

Reply with quote
Robert

That's fantastic news. Now that is a book I'd look forward to reading ! Very Happy

Can I pre-order several copies ? Wink

Mike

More to do with the orders he was given - on both occasions ! Confused

Coll


Last edited by Coll on Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:38 pm; edited 1 time in total
mike snook 2


Joined: 04 Jan 2006
Posts: 920
Reply with quote
No Coll. Because that's an excuse - the great flaw in the pro-Durnford argument. After orders comes the exercise of military judgement and tactical common sense. Why must every thread eventually turn to Durnford - we were talking quite sensibly about historigraphy, slip ups and that sort of thing. I suppose its my fault for even mentioning him. It's another great divide in historigraphy perhaps, but maybe just once we could talk about something else! Please.

As ever

Mike
View user's profileSend private message
Coll
Guest

Reply with quote
Mike

My apologies if my posting meant for Robert and my answer to your own comment has caused annoyance to you. Not my intention.

However, I must say that I haven't been involved in every thread, especially recently, apart from topics that I started myself, mostly in the TV/Film Forum, where, even there, apparently my making comparisons between Isandlwana and LBH also appear to be getting objected to.

As an amateur AZW enthusiast, being an admirer of one of the participants in the Battle at Isandlwana, which reminds me of LBH, means they will be the subjects I write mostly about.

So, if writing about Durnford, the role he played at Isandlwana and making comparisons with Custer and LBH are objected to -

What is left for me, as an enthusiast, to write about on this site, if I know nothing else, with most other aspects having been covered previously ?

Coll
Alan
Site Admin

Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 1530
Location: Wales
Reply with quote
Coll,
you write about whatever you want. We're not limited to space here, and nobody is obliged to read anything they don't want to. You keep it coming.

_________________
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mailVisit poster's website
Interesting points .
Sapper Mason


Joined: 05 Sep 2005
Posts: 333
Location: ANGLESEY
Reply with quote
It warms my heart to see such red-bloodied comments on this forum which make the position very clear . Having never written a book perhaps my critiques should be looked at in a different way ( ? ) . There will never be a book that is 100% accurate and i am at best an amateur genealogist , not a historian military or otherwise . I am the first to admit a large proportion of my own research has come from family sources which maybe other authours are not privvy to . The odd and minor error will creep in and while such authors as Mike Snook abound with folk like Peter Ewart to cast eyes over any comment or discussion then the future bodes well for more accurate reporting of data on participants of the Zulu war . I look at data through the eyes of a novice and strive to portray what i write with as much accuracy as is possible . Maybe when i am drawing my pension i will be a lot better at this research business and thank those who give advice and point out errors and such . The words i submit are all my own and not a collective opinion of any group , organisation or any other body i may be associated with , Graham .
View user's profileSend private message
Coll
Guest

Reply with quote
Robert

I apologised to Mike, when I should have done the same to you. As I feel I put you in an awkward situation by responding to your post, which Mike had already replied to.

Alan

Thanks. However, I'd very much appreciate if you deleted my postings above, (including this one), which were well-intentioned, but were, indeed, intrusive upon the ongoing discussion.

All

I hope this thread continues, as I don't want to spoil the very thing I enjoy.

Coll
'Updates' vs 'Out-of-date'.
TonyJones


Joined: 31 Aug 2005
Posts: 188
Location: Essex
Reply with quote
Dear Graham,
I think the jist of your debate can be expanded in both directions to distinguish from 'duplication of facts',from known sources,such
as service records,GRO etc,which we all need to quote from to give a piece of work its validity-to steer away from these facts would make for some very stilted pieces of work-and the presentation of 'pieces of information' which have been quoted from covenient research rather than accurate research,which then become re-utilized in other works.On one such occassion I questioned the quoted facts in a recent newspaper article about 593 and proved about 25% of them to be incorrect via a conversation with a reporter of the said newspaper.The same facts appeared again a few months later and once again I challenged these misquotes and asked for a chance to present my own facts to the readers.The article was 'shelved' due to the fact that the editor didn't see it neccessary to include my up-to-date research,because they had already recently featured two articles about 593-it's a cruel world in the media.I still have a plan 'B' to meet up with the reported who entertained my call,to present my facts some time in the future from a different angle.Sometimes it's necesary to persevere until there is an outlet to present updates and new facts,sometimes even against opposition or resistence.

Tony.
View user's profileSend private messageVisit poster's website
Welcome to the Genealogy forum
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 3 of 3  

  
  
 Reply to topic