you are currently viewing: Discussion Forum
 
 

 
 

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)

DateOriginal Topic
4th February 2004Historical accuracy and the Media
By Mark Hepworth
Recently a Welsh politician (Rhoddri Morgan?) visiting South Africa claimed that wounds between the Welsh and Zulus were finally being healed. If the defenders of R.D. consisted of various nationalities then why are the Welsh claiming the defence as their own? Also, why is the Warwickshire regiment always described as the South Wales Borderers? Just thought I'd ask..
DateReplies
4th February 2004John Young
Mark,

Just to assure you, that you are not alone. I felt exactly the same, when I heard the comments attributed to the Leader of the Welsh Assembly.

In one of my lectures at Chatham, recently, I corrupted a line from 'Zulu', and stated, "That is was a English regiment, with a few foreigners from Wales in it." I did broach the Monmouthshire question as well, for good measure.

John Y.
5th February 2004Steven Etchells
It's not surprising the Welsh claim it as their own - they don't have many claims to fame.
5th February 2004Alan Critchley
"Here they come again!!!!"
5th February 2004John Young
Alan,

It could be worse. The poet John McCrae, perhaps best known for his work, 'In Flanders Fields', wrote a poem entitled 'Isandlwana'. In that work he wrote:
'The English flowers he likes the best
That I bring from Brecon Town.'

English flowers...from Brecon Town? I may well be that the flowers were smuggled in from the English county of Monmouthshire.

John Y.
5th February 2004Steven Etchells
It sounds a bit suspect, a man taking flowers to another man.
5th February 2004John Young
Steven,

Come now this is the enlightened 21st Century.

Best you have a look at the full text:
http://www.englishverse.com/poems/isandlwana

John Y.
5th February 2004Mark Hobson
The Welsh do have a claim to fame. At the moment they have the only inland sea of Great Britain.
6th February 2004Martin Everett
Dear All,

Lets bring this nonsensical debate to a close. I was privileged to be a guest at the events in KZN. There are a number of fundamental points to make to various armchair critics:

1. Dering's Regiment, the 24th Foot, now the Royal Regiment of Wales has served in the British Army for over 300 years. The battalion is currently on duty in Iraq. It is a very testing time for the young Welsh soldiers. The Regiment has a history, which is second to none. The changes of titles of regiment reflect changing roles of the British Army during those 300 years.

2. The Regiment today recruits in mainly South Wales and therefore has the support and encouragement of people of Wales – and of course the members of the Wales Assembly Government. True it has only recruited in Wales since 1873. In the 19th century as in most regiments its recruits came from areas such as Ireland, Manchester, London, Liverpool and Scotland. Therefore, during the Zulu campaign the 2nd battalion only had about 30% of soldiers who were Welsh born. The percentage was less in the 1st Battalion. But it is the Royal Regiment of Wales that wears the honour of the Wreath of Immortelles bestowed by Queen Victoria after the actions at Isandhlwana and Rorke's Drift.

3. Stanley Baker who made Zulu in 1964 was ardent Welshman and his film suggests that every defender of Rorkes Drift was Welsh and sang Men of Harlech. These points have been argued on this Discussion Forum endlessly and do not, I believe, require further analysis and debate. It is only the uninformed that seem to be unable to distinguish between a commercial film and the reality.

4. On the battlefield on Saturday 24th January 2004, there were many distinguished people present. The speeches lasted from 10am until 4pm – a vey long session! Among the distinguished people present, which included many politicians were – The Deputy President of South Africa, The Premier of KwaZulu Natal, Prince Mangosuthu Buthelezi (Prime Minister of the Zulu Nation and also Minister of Home Affairs in the National Government, i.e. ranked no. 3) and of course important of all was the presence of King Zwelithini Goodwill kaBhekuzulu and many senior members of the Zulu Royal family. The British Deputy High Commissioner was present as well as Colonel of the Royal Regiment of Wales. It was therefore appropriate that the First Minister for Wales was present to represent the people of Wales. All the speeches given were scripted and of course given in English and Zulu. In contrast Welch First Minister Rhodi Morgan gave his speech from the heart and with no prepared notes both in English and Welsh. It was a memorable occasion for all those present and it certainly reinforced the strong bond between the British and Zulu peoples.
Long may it be so.

6th February 2004Mark Hepworth
Martin's points are all well said. I have no nationalist axe to grind. However, I do find that our main information sources take this ludicrous film from the sixties as their basis in fact for the Zulu wars. Stanley Baker may have been an "ardent Welshman", whatever that is, but his mean minded and hypocritical vanity project still stands as the truth today. The film is anglophobic and patronising to the Zulu people and it does bug me. And why should the Welsh people glorify an ill judged colonial campaign in the first place?
7th February 2004Robert Jones
For the same reasons as the English glorify it!!!
7th February 2004John Young
Robert,

Call me old-fashioned, but I use a term which appears to have fallen by the wayside. To me most of the defenders of Rorke's Drift were British soldiers, and it was a British victory.

I may play Devil's Advocate over some things on this site, including the then claim to Monmouthshire, but let's leave the home nations clashes to the rugby field.

John Y.
7th February 2004Mark Hepworth
Apologies if I have upset the Welsh Nation. It's just that the historical truth of an important period has been clouded and few appear to question what they read and hear.
I don't really care if they sang "Men of Harlech" or not. I suppose the public must be entertained and "Zulu" certainly did that.
Speaking of which Lawrence and the boys shall thrash all comers this campaign.
7th February 2004John Young
Mark,

Which Lawrence, T.E. or Sir John?

John Y.
8th February 2004Robert Jones
Mark
You haven,t upset the Welsh Nation and what you say about the film is entirely true---I beg to differ on the rugby though---Lawrence and the boys haven,t met the Welsh yet!!!!!
9th February 2004Sheldon Hall
"Mean minded and hypocritical vanity project"? "Anglophobic and patronising to the Zulu people"? Justify yourself, sir! In what ways?
9th February 2004John Young
Sheldon,

Not on the point you raised, but another.

Are you going to mention the fact that the singing of 'Men of Harlech', whilst native foes attack a mission was cribbed from 'Apache Drums'? Only that time they sang it in Welsh!

John Y.
9th February 2004Mark Hepworth
Sheldon,
Mean minded 'cos it uses an historical situation, where more than likely all concerned were scared to death, to lambast the English and blame them for all colonial crimes committed by the British.
Hypocritical as it praises and glorifies the Welsh participation in a war forced on the Zulus, while blaming others for starting the whole thing.
Vanity project as who starred as the gallant commander? And lied to the world about the Welsh being the only ones there so as to put backsides on seats. First rule of Hollywood, as Cy Endfield would have well known, is that you never praise the British.
Anglophobic? The script speaks for itself. "bloody Englishman", "foreigners from England", "You damned English" and so on ad nauseam.
Patronising to the Zulus. They are merely the exotic fall guys (literally). The "noble savages", and all the other patronising cliches you may think of, permitted to look fierce, sing a bit and die as the occasion demands. You may have gathered that I'm not too crazy about the film.
Hope that's cleared that up.
Actually with Jonny crocked it's not looking so rosy for the rugger.
10th February 2004Peter Ewart
I really hesitate to get involved in the English/Welsh topic with regards to R/Drift (I really do!) and I certainly see the defenders as British rather than English, Welsh or whatever, but something Mark has raised does tempt me ...

Not sure if I'm just playing devil's advocate here (and am undoubtedly over-simplifying matters) but in considering who was primarily to blame for a war in which the Welsh presence at R/Drift has, for whatever reason, been over-done since 1964, we might - even if rather ungraciously - consider it predominantly an English victory in an unwarranted war imposed upon the amaZulu by, of all people, a Welshman; indeed, by a chap born not much more than a "stone's throw" from those very barracks at Brecon (albeit with some impeccable English antecedents).

I've had a quiet word with King Zwilitheni and he has agreed to re-direct his war reparation claim to the new Welsh Assembly in Cardiff. Just one of the drawbacks of devolution, I suppose ...

Don't all shoot at once!!!

Peter
10th February 2004John Young
Peter,

Well said, I wonder when someone was going to point the finger at the man from Breconshire. No doubt the family ironworks made a tidy profit from the campaign as well.

John Y.
10th February 2004Sheldon Hall
John,
I will indeed be mentioning APACHE DRUMS (I'm glad someone else has seen it!), though I'm not sure it's a direct crib. It's still a remarkable affinity, though!

Mark,
Your comments raise a lot of issues, but I'll try to answer a few of the charges in brief:
(1) Does ZULU really 'blame' anyone directly for the war? It's extremely vague on the causes of the whole thing, as various other people have complained, and leaves open the possible interpretation that it was the Zulus who started it with Isandlwana (which some might consider a worse sin than blaming the English). If blame is directed at the British (by inference of the various comments made by Hook or Adendorff, for instance), it's the military ethos - or colonialism - as a whole which is seen to be at fault, rather than any one ethnic group.
(2) Arguably the film glorifies both the Welsh/British AND the Zulu participation in the battle, but I don't see it as hypocritical to celebrate courage while deploring the fact of war (or this war) itself.
(3) Does ZULU really suggest that 'the Welsh were the only ones there'? Chard, Bromhead, Adendorff, Reynolds, Dalton, Bourne, Windridge, Maxfield, Allen, Hook, Hitch, Hughes, Howarth, Schiess, Cole and the company cook aren't shown as Welsh are they? (Even if some of them are played by Welsh actors.) Of the principal characters, only Owen, Thomas, the Joneses and Williams are portrayed as Welsh - whatever Owen says about it being a Welsh regiment (note that none of the CHARACTERS refers to the regiment as the South Wales Borderers, only Richard Burton's narration). If putting backsides on seats was a consideration in the ethnic identity of the troops, I would have thought characterising them as English would have been the more logical move!
(4) Hollywood has a long history of praising the British, especially in colonial/imperial situations (check out GUNGA DIN, LIVES OF A BENGAL LANCE, THE CHARGE OF THE LIGHT BRIGADE, etc). ZULU continues this tradition, albeit with a note of ambivalence appropriate to the changed ideological climate of the 1960s.
(5) As an actor and first-time producer Stanley Baker cast himself in the lead role partly to raise finance for the project, not just for vanity's sake. Indeed, so keen was he to get the film made he was willing to sacrifice the star part to another well-known actor if it meant getting financial backing - but I think I'll save this one for the book! In any case, Baker does remarkably little camera-hogging for a star-producer and often cedes the limelight to others.
(6) The characters say a lot of things which shouldn't be taken at face value - not every statement made by a character need be shared by the filmmakers or taken by the audience as the gospel truth. In any case, the examples you quote are intended (by both characters AND filmmakers!) as humorous or ironic and it's rather oversensitive of you to take them as serious assertions about the English (I'm English too, by the way).
10th February 2004Mark Hepworth
Sheldon,
Fair enough to all the points you raise. However, the film has entered the public conciousness in such a way so as to reinforce the myths. Ask any Welshman you like about Rorkes Drift and they'll tell you what happened and who was there. I guess I may be oversensitive (English/Geordie living in Edinburgh) but the script does have a certain acid to it which is unmistakable, particularly as it was written by John Prebble, who had his own agenda I'm sure. I hate going down the nationalistic road but the truth should be told and "Zulu" quite simply doesn't tell the truth. Or, if you like, the focus is shifted in such a way so as to blur the truth. I can't quite bring myself to forgive Stanley for changing things the way he did. It's not humorous or ironic to blatantly slag off the English (a diverse people in any case) so I hope he was very happy about it.
Hollywood has a long history of anti British/English films, not that I care, and Cy Endfield probably inherited this. Read the script. The reasons for the the non Welsh interference could be that the facts got in the way. Hence, "Men of Harlech" and not "The Warwickshire lads".
If I were Zulu and heard myself descibed as a "fuzzie" I would be raging. But hey, it was intended to be humorous and ironic so that's OK. Would that be oversensitive?
Finally, sorry to be so over the top about a mere film but something should be said about its distinctly dodgy-dossier like agenda.
I like the idea about Welsh reperations to Kwa Zulu Natal though...
11th February 2004Julian Whybra
My great-grandfather's cousin, Elijah, in the 1st battalion was killed at Isandhlwana. He was born in Sutton, Essex (just north of Southend) about as far eastwards from Wales as you can get. In the 18th century the family lived in north Essex and in the 17th and 16th centuries in south Cambridgeshire. Before that all the earliest references I have relate to the family being a Cambridgeshire one. I don't demand that the 24th be seen as English or British but I do expect history and public perception to reflect the contemporary historical fact that it was a regiment of the British army which then recruited from its depot in Warwickshire...not in Wales. Whatever the situation with the RRW is now is irrelevant. And I do object to attempts by politicians, Hollywood directors, and commercial entrepreneurs to hijack an event and to make it their own by warping history or to put it another way, lying. Enough of that goes in on television and in schools as it is. Something deep inside me says that Elijah & co. (be they English, Welsh, or whatever) would have objected too.
11th February 2004Sheldon Hall
I'm a Geordie too! I can see that this topic has the potential to be a long-runner, but here goes...

Both Mark and Julian seem to be blaming the film for its own success - and for the credulousness of the general public which believes that what it sees in films is the literal truth (see for example earlier postings demanding to know why Bourne - ie Nigel Green - didn't get a VC when what they really have in mind is an Oscar).

There's an unacknowledged problem here about how we define "the truth" in a work of drama - how literal do you want to be? Where does legitimate dramatic licence (if you agree that there is such a thing) shade into a lie? Aspects of any event must be fictionalised (or imagined) in order to be dramatised - is that lying? Bromhead didn't look like Michael Caine - is that a lie or an irrelevance? Do artists have the same responsibilities as historians or are they engaged in a different activity entirely? These are not rhetorical questions and need careful answers...

Granted that Baker saw ZULU as a Welsh Western, was drawn to the subject for that reason and has helped propagate a myth that the regiment was Welsh, the film itself shows the defenders to be of mixed origin and the English characters outweigh the Welsh by three to one. Most of the former I find quite sympathetic, so I don't regard the film as "slagging them off". Incidentally, Julian, am I wrong in thinking that the 24th began to recruit from Wales and/or the border areas in 1873? And would a writer having little more detailed information at his disposal than this (it was more than 40 years ago) not then be entitled to make certain assumptions about the company's likely ethnic composition? And if we now know that his assumptions were incorrect, should we blame him or the progress of historical research since? Prebble, incidentally, was well aware of the regiment's subsequent change of name to the SWB, but did not think it important enough to make an issue out of it.

Final point: Mark, you still seem not to grasp that statements made by a character in a film need not be endorsed by the film or its makers. Bromhead's remark about fuzzies (historically and ethnically inaccurate, but more authentically Victorian colloquial references to other races would no doubt be even more offensive) is a case in point. The comment, like his other remarks about "cowardly blacks", is designed to show his (very English?) ignorance of who and what he's up against. He is not at this point in the story a sympathetic figure, and the audience is not invited to share his reactionary views. The comment is not meant as humorous (unlike Windridge's "you dozy Welshman!" remark to Pvt Thomas, something you strangely omit from your catalogue of ethnic abuse) or ironic, but it is consistent with the "acidic" treatment of the military which Prebble (an Englishman) and Endfield did indeed bring to the script, in all its various versions, and which was toned down somewhat in the film itself.

Despite being a graduate of the University of Warwick, I don't know "The Warwickshire Lads". What's it go like?
11th February 2004Mark Hepworth
Actually my original point was that the Welsh claimed the defence as their own, which seemed strange as it wasn't in fact a Welsh regiment and the defenders were of various backgrounds. The film simply spun out the myth as it became more well known and popular. Perhaps it's as well to say that some admire the film and others don't, and leave it at that.
Sheldon, I have managed to grasp that even if filmakers and sciptwriters don't endorse dialogue, they are the ones with the final decision on who says what and when. Bromhead was upper class English therefore he gets to be the rabid reactionary. Yawn. How original. So the salt of the earth squaddies were all liberal humanist in their outlook? Yeah right! As for "Dozy Welshman" it doesn't balance the slant of the film which is obvious to anyone who watches with an open mind. Baker, Endfield and their chums knew exactly what they meant with this piece of sixties fluff.
What I would like is for the film to be consigned to the dustbin of film history where it belongs and for the real truth to be told. Not much to ask for I would have thought. I doubt if Mr Morgan and the rest would appreciate this though.
"The Warwickshire Lads" was a regimental song of the period apparently. Don't know how it goes.
12th February 2004John Young
Mark,

The words of 'The Warwickshire Lad', can be found on: http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~snelling/warkl2.htm and you can here it there too.

The tune is played in 'Zulu Dawn', when 'Durnford' rides up to 'Chelmsford', and goes into "I know each one by name..." speech. Tut, tut, Sheldon for missing a film fact, now you're going to have to do a book on 'Zulu Dawn'.

Isn't James Booth's 'Hook' nothing but a parody of McNally's character in 'Apache Drums'? The good-for-nothing who comes good in the end. Just to show I've seen it!

John Y.
12th February 2004John Young
Mark,

The words of 'The Warwickshire Lad', can be found on: http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~snelling/warkl2.htm and you can hear it there too.

The tune is played in 'Zulu Dawn', when 'Durnford' rides up to 'Chelmsford', and goes into "I know each one by name..." speech. Tut, tut, Sheldon for missing a film fact, now you're going to have to do a book on 'Zulu Dawn'.

Isn't James Booth's 'Hook' nothing but a parody of McNally's character in 'Apache Drums'? The good-for-nothing who comes good in the end. Just to show I've seen it!

John Y.
12th February 2004Julian whybra
The 24th recruited everywhere and anywhere but its regimental base was (then) not at Brecon.
12th February 2004Simon Copley
Do the Welsh care anymore? I bought a copy of the Western Mail on January 22nd and there was not one word about RD. John Fielding House in Cwmbran ( a residential home) has been demolished.

I think we're overlooking the fact that Bromhead is also a character who grows through the film, from the ignorant upper-class twit to a man who has utter respect for his opponents.

I think the film's real agenda is not pro or anti nationalist but pro the common man who gets caught up in great affairs and suddenly finds he's got to make the best of it (Because we're here lad, none else - I came here to build a bridge). This is a view expressed even by Bromhead. (Right now I wish I was a damn ranker...)

Chard (an Englishman) uses national sentiment and pride at an opportune moment to bolster the crumbling morale of the garrison. (Do you think the Welsh can't do better than that Owen? - leading to the best one-liner in the Script: "They've got a very good bass section mind, but no top tenors that's for sure) and so Men of Harlech rings out - the first song that Owen thinks of. Owen is picked to sing because he's a good singer, not because he's Welsh!!
12th February 2004Simon Copley
Do the Welsh care anymore? I bought a copy of the Western Mail on January 22nd and there was not one word about RD. John Fielding House in Cwmbran ( a residential home) has been demolished.

I think we're overlooking the fact that Bromhead is also a character who grows through the film, from the ignorant upper-class twit to a man who has utter respect for his opponents.

I think the film's real agenda is not pro or anti nationalist but pro the common man who gets caught up in great affairs and suddenly finds he's got to make the best of it (Because we're here lad, none else - I came here to build a bridge). This is a view expressed even by Bromhead. (Right now I wish I was a damn ranker...)

Chard (an Englishman) uses national sentiment and pride at an opportune moment to bolster the crumbling morale of the garrison. (Do you think the Welsh can't do better than that Owen? - leading to the best one-liner in the Script: "They've got a very good bass section mind, but no top tenors that's for sure) and so Men of Harlech rings out - the first song that Owen thinks of. Owen is picked to sing because he's a good singer, not because he's Welsh!!
12th February 2004Sheldon Hall
To change the slant of the discussion slightly: how much was generally known (ie to the non-specialist general public, Welsh or otherwise) about Rorke's Drift before ZULU came out? Did it help to create the myth of the "Welsh regiment" or was it repeating a long-held assumption?

For the record, I go along with all of Simon's comments. And I really must watch APACHE DRUMS and ZULU DAWN again...
12th February 2004Mark Hepworth
John,
Thanks for the pointer re "The Warwickshire Lad".
Sheldon,
My grouch with "Zulu" is mainly that it doesn't tell the truth. Will be sure to read the upcoming book though. Robert Graves mentions the Zulu war in the introduction to "I, Claudius" remarking on the cultural similiarity of Zulus and the germanic tribes of the Classical era. I imagine that it (Zulu War) was a well known campaign in the 'twenties and thirties. The Welsh connection could only be guessed at.
"Zulu Dawn" is worthy but as dull as ditchwater dramatically.
12th February 2004Peter Ewart
Warwickshire Lad - music on KLH website (see links).

In The Times today the report of a poll of MPs on their favourite film says ZULU came 5th (Dr Zhivago overall winner) and was top among the Tories, but only 140 or so voted - no doubt all the others too busy debating in the chamber - ha!) IDS went for ZULU - our great leader abstained ...

Good to see Sheldon mention "Lives of a Bengal Lancer" - Sir Charles Aubrey ("round-the-corner") Smith, eh? Founder of Hollywood CC & the only capt of Sussex CCC & England to be knighted. (For services to Anglo-American relations, in case you wonder).

His nickname described his curved bowling run-up. Reminds me - has anyone seen the description of a Zulu's version of a bowler's run-up (in the 1830s!) by AF Gardiner in his "Narrative of a Journey throught the Zoolu Country"?

Peter
16th February 2004Mike McCabe
I was also present at Isandlwana on 24 January, and was very surprised that Rhodri Morgan spoke at all. He was not included in the list of speakers that was distributed on the morning of the 24th to visitors as they arrived to take up their places. His speech was very wide of the mark, and appeared to consider as its audience the assembled media, rather than those politely listening to it. Then, perhaps it was the very beginning of a Welsh foreign policy towards Kwa-Zulu Natal. Or, was it just a means to get his travelling expenses recognised and paid by the long suffering taxpayers of Wales? Either way, the polite listeners were not burdened by having this rather 'windbag' speech translated into to Zulu.

MC McC