The Rorke's Drift VC Discussion Forum
(View Discussion Rules)

** IMPORTANT MESSAGE TO ALL USERS **

PLEASE NOTE: This forum is now inactive and is provided for reference purposes only. The live forum is available at www.rorkesdriftvc.com/forum

(Back To Topic List)

Date	Original Topic
24th June 2001	Blood River, Rorke's Drift and Adendorff By George Hi all, The Boar�s 1838 Blood River victory over the Zulus was mentioned on another thread here at the forum. Although I have but one resource, �Washing of the Spears�, that battle does demonstrate the power of concentrated volley from a well-fortified position. The Boars probably remember that event to this very day. Lt., James Adendorff was a Boar, a colonist, and was commissioned in the Natal Native Contingent. He was known to be present at both Rorke�s Drift and Isandlwana on January 22nd, 1879. How far might we speculate by adding these facts together? Certainly, Adendorff was aware, at least by legend, of the Boar victory at Blood River. In his past, perhaps he had actually taken part in various small skirmishes demonstrating defensive position. Perhaps not, but one can readily imagine a somewhat detailed, though embellished, oral tradition passing the by during Boar Sunday encampments. Adendorff perhaps did not perceive a good defensive position from the onset at the Isandlwana disaster. The doomed British force was not concentrated, nor were the wagons fortified, as a Boar would have done. He was one of the few to escape. Once at Rorke�s Drift, how much of an influence was Adendorff in Chard�s decision to stand and hold? Adendorff certainly knew that the British force had a chance from well-defended ground, but did Chard? Adendorff had witnessed the results of being caught in the open earlier in the day. He also had intimate knowledge of Blood River. In his book �The Washing of the Spears�, Donald Morris is skeptical of Adendorff�s motives, and even presence, at Isandlwana and the Drift. He ends his comments on Lt. James Adendorff with this. �My suspicion that Adendorff did not stay � is based on an analysis of all the sources listed for both battles. Space precludes a review of the evidence, which I hope to publish separately.� I don�t know if Morris ever did publish this �evidence�. References on this site have led me to believe that Adendorff was present at the battle. His ultimate survival, and Rorke�s Drift successful defense, may have been due to his knowledge of that 1838 Boar victory at Blood River. One could go on. Certainly �the enemy of my enemy is my friend� is a condition closely describing the Boar/British relationship before, during and long after the Zulu wars. Perhaps Adendorff�s participation was simply a British �non-news item�, given the day. The consideration of Blood River, however, could place Adendorff as playing a more major role in the successful defense at Rorke�s Drift. Best, G.
Date	Replies
24th June 2001	John Young George, The Adendorff issue is received some air time, previously on this forum. "Boer" means farmer in Dutch. Adendorff's forebears appear to have been German, possible from one of the German Legions used by the British Army. But the family were farmers, so therefore might have been termed "Boers", by virtue of that fact. Indeed, there were English, French & Irish Boers to name but a few. Don't forget that there were also Britons suchas Alexander Biggar in the field at the same time as Blood River, who'd mobilized a "commando". A fact all to often ignored. John