Re: And More !!! . |
The Scorer
|
My "local" VC holder is Colour Sergeant John Byrne, 68th Regiment of Foot (later the Durham light Infantry). He was awarded his VC in the Crimea for two acts of heroism, and then the DCM during the New Zealand Wars. He might have been the first to have been awarded a bar to the VC, but as his companion (Sgt John Murray) was awarded the VC, he had to accept the DCM instead. Colour Sergeant Byrne, although not a native of Newport, South Wales, is buried in St Woolos Cemetery, not far from Messrs Lyons, Murphy and Saxty. He was working in the town (ironically in 1879) when he committed suicide following an argument during which he shot and wounded a local youth. He was buried in an unmarked grave, which was only discovered in the 1980's and marked with a stone arranged by the Durham Light Infantry. It is thought that Sgt Murray features in the first of the Sherlock Holmes books ("The Sign of Four") when he's mentioned as being a fellow soldier of Dr John H Watson. |
||||||||||||||
|
Peter Ewart
|
Sheldon
I agree. It is difficult to see why Dr Hale has bothered to compare and contrast a feature film with the results of his historical researches on the Norwegian & Swedish mission fields in Natal & Zululand. He is an academic and a theologian and it is difficult to see how any common ground would be found between his researches and the film. As you say, the article was published in 1996, just a few years after his PhD on Witt, and also at the same time as his VRS compilation on the correspondence of the Norwegian missionaries (which I find excellent)mentioned in my post. His tirade against the film seems both bizarre and unnecessary and I think the explanation is that - having studied the life and work of Witt in the archives of the various Norwegian & Swedish missionary societies (the two countries being under the same crown at the time) - he simply wanted to correct the portrait of Witt which appeared in the film, as well as "defend" the Scandinavian mission field's activities and personnel, which clearly he thought had been slighted or, at least, misrepresented; if not in character then at least in historical detail. In doing so, he appears to have overlooked that he is dealing with Hollywood (or Baker & Endfield's version of it) and not a historical account. Yes, I also smiled at the footnote "easily the most detailed ..." etc)! I think it possible that Witt did intend the mission to be known as Oscarberg as well as the crag itself, as this is reflected in his correspondence. However, he had hardly been there five minutes when the AZW broke out and the crossing point had long been known in Natal as Rorke's Drift and continued to be so afterwards. It was also always likely that the nearby buildings - only a few hundred yards away - would retain the same name, as they did and have. There is no reason why his mission should not have been known to the SMS as Oscarberg but retain its British (Irish?!) name in the minds of the colonists - as it did and has. Even St Augustine's, some further distance away on the other side of the river, was known also in this country as "the Rorke's Drift mission" from the 1880s onwards. So it looks a bit of a fussy point on Dr Hale's part. I haven't seen Dr Hale's PhD on Witt but do refer often to his VRS effort from 1996, which is very useful indeed and gives every appearance of being very well researched, as one would expect from someone with his impressive collection of doctorates. I think the article in the SAMHJ, though, rather pointless. Sapper - he does explain in detail the meaning of "pietistic" in his VRS publication! Peter |
||||||||||||
|
The Defeat Of History |
|
||
Powered by phpBB © 2001-2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Style created by phpBBStyles.com and distributed by Styles Database.
phpBB Style created by phpBBStyles.com and distributed by Styles Database.