rorkesdriftvc.com Forum Index


rorkesdriftvc.com
Discussions related to the Anglo-Zulu War of 1879
Reply to topic
Custer Of The West - Identical Mt Isandlwana In Background ?
Coll
Guest

Reply with quote
I'm sure that I've mentioned this elsewhere, but I've just recently saw the 'Custer of the West' movie poster again on the Movie Goods site, and after clicking to enlarge the image, I can't believe just how similar the drawing of the mountain at the back of the battle scene looks like Mt. Isandlwana !

What really is incredible, with comparisons made between Custer and Durnford is, Custer (Robert Shaw) is located in about the same area from the mountain in the poster, as Durnford was in his last stand at Isandlwana !

Not really difficult, therefore, to look at the poster and imagine it showing a depiction of the battle at Isandlwana, with Durnford in place of Custer and N.C., N.M.P., and 24th men instead of the 7th Cavalry, with Zulus replacing the Indians.

http://www.moviegoods.com/movie_product.asp?master_movie_id=2791

Does anyone else see the similarity, or is it just me ?

Coll
Martin Everett


Joined: 01 Sep 2005
Posts: 786
Location: Brecon
Reply with quote
Dear Coll,

I am not sure why you seem to keep refering to the American Indian wars on a site devoted to the AZW. However I decided to look up my own reference books on George Armstrong Custer, and I quote:

It is highly ironic that Custer's Last Stand - an affair involving a mere 250 dead, precipated by the idiot conceit of one of the worst commanding officers ever to mishandle a regiment - should be as well known to the man in the street as Hastings, Waterloo, or the D-Day landings. To place the incident in its correct perspective, it might be as well to preface this entry by remarking that in January 1879 the Zulus wiped out 1,450 British and Natal infantry at Isandlwana; that in March 1896 the Abyssinians killed some 5,300 Italian soldiers at Adua; and that as recently as July 1922 the Rif Berber tribesmen of Moroocco killed General Silvestre and more than 12,000 of his Spanish troops at Anual. Even as a blunderer Custer does not rate very high.

I think that says it all. Do you really wish your hero, even with his undoubted flaws, to be compared with glory seeking GAC?

_________________
Martin Everett
Brecon, Powys
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mailVisit poster's website
Coll
Guest

Reply with quote
Martin

One book does not a unanimous opinion make. Rolling Eyes

May I ask what reference book you viewed ?

I've referred to Gen. Custer and the LBH for, I think, for specific reasons, especially with the recent 'Custer's Last Stand' drama-documentary.

This topic was comparing LBH to Isandlwana, as checking the internet I found a movie poster, I consider to be one of the best, which happened to be 'Custer of the West', on looking at it, the illustration showing a remarkable similarity to both Mt. Isandlwana and Durnford's Stand.

Perhaps only in my eyes though.

The other 2 recent topics I made comparison, were, as mentioned above, the 'Custer's Last Stand' drama-documentary, which I feel was filmed well enough, to wish to have such a programme made about Isandlwana, including scenes between Durnford and Pulleine, in an attempt to show the lack of clear communication between them, about orders, command of the camp and their tactics during the battle. The more human aspect of the engagement.

Lastly, the defence formation employed by dismounted horsemen, such as those of Custer's 7th Cavalry, and how they would deploy in the process of being surrounded, or actually surrounded.

All relevant, I feel, to the AZW, as LBH does remind me very much of Isandlwana, Custer of Durnford, and I don't think I'm the only one to say so.

I would really have liked to know more about Maiwand, as there is much similarity also, between it and Isandlwana, but only having found out about it recently, plus knowing very little of the details, I have to go with what I do know. Therefore - Gen. Custer and LBH.

As for the last sentence of your post, as long as facts weren't contorted all out of proportion, I wouldn't mind if Durnford was compared to Custer, if he ended up being as well-known as him.

You're still reading my posts though ! Wink

Coll
John Young


Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 1020
Location: Lower Sheering, Essex
Reply with quote
Martin,

Coll isn't the only one to make reference to the Anglo-Zulu War and the American-Indian wars, don't forget Professor James O. Gump's The Dust Rose Like Smoke: The Subjugation of the Zulu and Sioux. In which the author draws parallels on both the campaigns and those involved.

John Y.
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mail
Coll
Guest

Reply with quote
John

Thanks for reminding me of that title, as I seem to recall it being mentioned previously in another topic.

I'll try to get a copy soon.

Coll
Rich
Guest

Reply with quote
Coll..just an fyi....Yes the "mountain" in the poster does look like Isandhlwana. My hunch really is that the fellows who made the poster knew about the geography of that area. Montana was the area where the Custer massacre occurred and it does have rock formations called "buttes"... i.e. isolated mountains with steep sides. That's what I think those guys put in the poster. I tell you I'd certainly be surprised if they knew about Isandhlwana around here but that's my opinion.

Martin:
You know they love their Custer and "Custeriana" around "these parts". Doesn't matter one bit that the old boy got killed up there by the LBH. You know in a way he even could be compared to Capt Scott who froze to death near the South Pole at the beginning of the century. Both died without "victory" as such and are flying high today as heroes in their respective "commands" even though there's talk that they bumbled themselves into something they couldn't extricate out of.
Steven Sass


Joined: 31 Aug 2005
Posts: 18
Location: Milwaukee, WI USA
Reply with quote
Martin,

I usually look to you for bits of information I would never hope to find re: the AZW and hold your opinion in the highest esteem. However, your reply to Coll and the source you cite, makes me want to pull my hair out!!

To begin with, Custer had a spotless record in the ACW, never losing a battle and arguably saving the Union at Gettysburg, by defeating the vaunted JEB Stuart in his dash to the Union rear. Furthermore his success at the Battle of Washita is often maligned by Custer haters. At this point I'll leave it at that but if necessary will quote chapter and verse to prove my point. At LBH he used standard accepted tactics for a force on the offensive and just because Benteen was too cowardly to get himself in position to close the trap is no fault of Custer's. Keep in mind as well, he already had the deck stacked against him when he named in testimony before the US Congress, the brother of President Grant in a corruption scandal in which he was cheating the Sioux and other tribes out of what was promised them. As this was the genesis of the negative publicity machine, the real attempt to blight his character in earnest can be traced to the funeral of General Alfred H. Terry, 29 December 1890, in that the Reverend T.T. Munger was used as a funnel for remarks made by Terry's brother-in-law, Col. R.P. Hughes, asserting non specific remarks regarding Custer violating orders, showing a general disobedience and rashness in the loss of his command. However for a good settlement of the issue of orders obeyed or not, Robert J. Ege, in his missive "Settling the Dust," takes Terry's orders line by line and compares them with Custer's actions.

Furthermore to base the significance of a battle in the portrait of history by how many were killed, I will say politley, is simplistic at best. I suppose if one is hung up on numbers it would be best looked at from a stand point of ratios. In some assessments Custer is outnumbered approximately 4000 to approximately 250 or about 16:1, not the same but not too different as Isandlwana. By that line of reasoning, surely Pulleine would have to qualify as a first class bungler, and a bungler as such that he had no previous battlefield victories and therefore no credibility in the command of troops in the first place.

I certainly understand this isn't a Custer site but certainly similar, but off topic discussions are often held to the benefit of all. However when one delivers such a damning judgement based on one quote from an unnamed source, I sense either a casual statement which will hopefully be accepted at face value or a challenge. Whilst my knowledge of the AZW is admittedly pitiful, if anyone wishes to throw down the gauntlet regarding Custer or LBH, I would be happy to duel! Twisted Evil

For what it's worth...

Cheers,

Steven
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mail
mike snook 2


Joined: 04 Jan 2006
Posts: 920
Reply with quote
I have looked into Custer and LBH quite extensively and have been to the battlefield a few times - a long way for us limeys to go, believe me, but well worth the trip.

The quote that Martin cites is certainly not balanced. I rather fancy that it might be quite hard to revert from being a divisional commander to being a regimental commander, and the state of the regiment was much to do with the presence as field officers of two other former regimental commanders who no doubt thought they knew best - 'Colonels' Reno and Benteen, a major and a captain respectively in their substantive ranks. One or the other, Reno I think, but Steven will know, had even been a brigade commander in the war. So you have at least three big egos in one small regiment. Only one of them, however, was the commanding officer whose ego, as a matter of form, has the right to predominate. It was his regiment. The other two were duty bound to suppress theirs.

All I suspect have been rather unfairly whipped in history, and of course Custer as the most prominent Indian fighter of the age, today gets quickly swept up in the retrospective political correctness of the whole Native American thing. Reno was sent to do an impossible thing at one end of the valley and was forced to withdraw, for which he has been rather unfairly labelled a coward, a word which any historian or writer should think very carefully about before having the impertinence to use. Perhaps it would be acceptable in a VC holder or a Congressional Medal of Honour holder, but most authors should tread carefully in this particular domain. That said it was not a well conducted withdrawal and as the commander he can be fairly criticized for that at least.

The thing that struck me about LBH is how difficult it is to see anything of the valley until you get right up close. In terms of tactics and mode of warfare, and this often overlooked, the Sioux and Cheyenne fought at LBH in a manner in which they had never fought before. Custer, as a soldier who knew his enemy, was right, I think, to expect that they would scatter in all directions when pressed in the vicinity of their lodges. It didn't happen - they stood and fought which was pretty much without precedent in that sort of scenario. Could it have been anticipated that they would - well that was the whole numbers thing - he was warned and he made a decision, which is what commanders are paid to do.

Custer was honest, utterly fearless, struggling with resources in a badly under-funded post war army, had a number of difficult and disloyal customers on his 'team' and was trying his best. He made errors of judgement. I think attempts to make the connection between him and Durnford don't really hold water, in that Custer was a hero with nothing much left to prove. Durnford was brave, but had an awful lot to prove, as much to himself - as to anybody else - that the hostility of colonial Natal was unfair - that he had been right about Bushman's River Pass all along - and that he was a good fighting soldier. The trouble was, he wasn't right about Bushman's River, and the man in command doesn't have to be a good fighting soldier, he has to be a good fighting officer - to think straight at all times, no matter what the scenario, and to come up with a winning solution. Durnford didn't get that bit. He could not control his judgement or his emotions when excited. Plenty of people in history have been like that. The secret is to weed them out in such a fashion that they never end up commanding an important battle - Lord Chelmsford are you listening?!!

If anybody wants to run off on Durnford, do it in a general way, because unless outrageously provoked, I'm a bit bored with Durnford and don't particualry want to join in. Steven is right to suggest that poor old Custer gets a raw deal - but there is learned writing about which treats him fairly - the trouble is you don't tend to find such books in the high street that readily.

As ever

Mike
View user's profileSend private message
Rich
Guest

Reply with quote
Boy just think if we had all that back-stabbing, innuendo and character assassination that goes on with George Armstrong Custer on Lord Chelmsford. Now that would certainly add another chapter to AZW controversy to wrestle with and spice things up. Chelmsford and Custer appear to have very different personalities on the surface. At this point though Chelsmford can't hold a candle to him in terms of sheer charisma, dash and elan. And not everybody gets to be a brigadier general at 23.
Custer Of The West - Identical Mt Isandlwana In Background ?
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