History of the Zulu war and its originColenso, Frances E. (Frances Ellen)
History
History of the Zulu war and its origin
Colenso, Frances E. (Frances Ellen)
Zulu War, 1879
The above message is undoubtedly that mentioned by Captain Gardner
as having been despatched from the camp at or soon after twelve
o’clock. (P. P. [C. 2260] p. 81.) And there still remains the fact
that, not only as regards Colonel Harness, does there appear to be an
unaccountable omission in the “statement”[146] alluded to, but also
we find mention of only _one_ message from the camp; whereas other
messages are _known_ to have been received, and to have been in the
possession of the Assistant Military Secretary.
Here also we must allude to Sir Bartle Frere’s despatches of January
27th, and February 3rd and 12th. In the first he says: “In disregard
of Lord Chelmsford’s instructions, the troops left to protect the
camp were taken away from the defensive position they were in at
the camp, with the shelter which the waggons, parked, would have
afforded....” We know that the troops did the best they could, left
as they were by their general in an open camp—we know they had
no “defensive position”—and we know that the waggons were _not_
“parked,” but drawn up in rear of their own camps.
Sir Bartle says, February 3rd: “It is only justice to the General to
note that his orders were clearly not obeyed on that terrible day at
Isandhlwana camp.”
And on February 12th, he says: “It is impossible to shut one’s eyes
to the fact that it was, in all human probability, mainly due to
disregard of the General’s orders that so great a disaster occurred”
(a little qualifying his sweeping assertion of February 3rd).
But yet again Sir Bartle returns to the charge, and says, June 30th:
“It is difficult to over-estimate the effect of such a disaster as
that at Isandhlwana on both armies, but it was clearly due to breach
of the General’s order, and to disregard of well-known maxims of
military science.”—(P. P. [C. 2454] p. 138).
On what grounds Sir Bartle Frere bases those assertions we know
not—no known orders were disobeyed—and, in spite of the special
pleading in these despatches, we must come to the conclusion that
Sir Bartle Frere’s remarks were penned in utter ignorance of facts,
and that the accusations concerning “disregard of well-known maxims
of military science” should have been applied, _not_ to the soldiers
who fell at Isandhlwana, but to those who placed them in that fatal
position.
CHAPTER XIV.
RORKE’S DRIFT—HELPMAKAAR—COURT OF INQUIRY, ETC.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account