Coll
Guest
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2007 3:44 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
I've read the book in the original topic heading once, and feel that Paul Williams isn't exactly 'taking sides' with Custer and/or Durnford. He is comparing their last two battles and the men themselves.
Although I have compared Durnford to Custer on several occasions, thinking Durnford should be as known to the British as Custer is to the Americans. Now I think you would need to reverse this comparison.
Meaning - a person/or people who are LBH enthusiasts and Custer admirers, reading a book like this, Isandlwana previously being unknown to them, as well as Durnford, to see if they agree on the men's last actions and characters being similar, but also, if a legend like Custer - ACW hero, Indian fighter - can be realistically compared to a British R.E. officer, who had not previously been glorified in a previous war.
I hate this term, but I can't phrase it any other way -
I see Durnford as the British version of Custer, which is something I probably will be the only one to say.
Some historical figures are known and judged on what they did last, as I mentioned above, this time being LBH and Isandlwana, their private lives less so, by the majority of non-military enthusiasts.
This is such a case - both men have their defenders of their actions in their last battles, but also those who would accuse them of causing the defeats.
This book as well as 'The Dust Rose Like Smoke' could draw both LBH and Isandlwana enthusiasts together in many interesting debates, at least, opening the discussion out to a wider audience.
Coll
|
|