rorkesdriftvc.com Forum Index


rorkesdriftvc.com
Discussions related to the Anglo-Zulu War of 1879
Reply to topic
Private David Jenkins
peterw


Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 865
Location: UK
Reply with quote
News from the National Army Museum:
http://www.nam.ac.uk/press/lost-Welsh-hero-finally-has-his-day

There is not enough detail in the press release for me so perhaps someone who has followed this more closely can explain.

Peter
View user's profileSend private message
Martin Everett


Joined: 01 Sep 2005
Posts: 784
Location: Brecon
Reply with quote
Peter

If you do a search on this site on 'Jenkins' - you will find 'New RD Defender' which will give you the background to this story. It has also been publicised in 'Soldier' magazine. Now over 3 years old.

This NAM press release is to boost the latest exhibition at NAM and their aim to get the public to rank battles fought by the British Army. My initial thoughts is that 'cheapens' (if that is the right word) warfare. Takes no consideration of those killed or injured. Men in all these battles fought desperately to stay alive and achieve the objective set. It is turning warfare into an entertainment - like a European Cup match.

_________________
Martin Everett
Brecon, Powys
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mailVisit poster's website
peterw


Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 865
Location: UK
Reply with quote
Martin

Many thanks.

Peter
View user's profileSend private message
Alan
Site Admin

Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 1418
Location: Wales
Reply with quote
Martin,
I think the word is 'trivialise'.

_________________
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mailVisit poster's website
peterw


Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 865
Location: UK
Reply with quote
Here's the original thread referred to by Martin:
www.rorkesdriftvc.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=343

Peter
View user's profileSend private message
The Scorer


Joined: 27 Nov 2006
Posts: 324
Location: Newport
Reply with quote
View user's profileSend private message
Bill Cainan 3


Joined: 19 Feb 2011
Posts: 105
Reply with quote
Hi All

As Martin has said, this was all resolved in 2005, but of course the NAM have now picked up on it as a "new" discovery, and have included a few inaccuracies in their report (which has in turn, been picked up by The Western Mail). I have copied all the details we have on David Jenkins to the NAM (on their request), so hopefully, they will be correct from here on.

His Bible wasn't presented to the NAM but to us in the Regimental Museum here in Brecopn. It is now on display in "Firing Line" in Cardiff.

Bill
View user's profileSend private message
Alan
Site Admin

Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 1418
Location: Wales
Reply with quote

_________________
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mailVisit poster's website
Wobblefilms


Joined: 13 Sep 2005
Posts: 23
Reply with quote
And this article on the BBC website

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22039080

It also said there may be 15 other soldiers who were at the battle but no on the official role, is that correct or just speculation?
View user's profileSend private message
Peter Ewart


Joined: 31 Aug 2005
Posts: 1797
Location: Near Canterbury, Kent, England.
Reply with quote
Wobblefilms

The original rolls of the defenders present (Chard's, Bourne's, others & later amendments to these) have long been known to have contained several discrepancies. Subsequent research - as well as speculation - has since led to alterations in the form of additions and deletions and this has continued since 1879. Modern research in a variety of sources has been much more thorough but it remains (and probably always will) a "work in progress."

Many books & media outlets - obviously quoting out of date publications - still refer to around 139 defenders, including the sick, but the current calculation of a figure in the mid-150s (I forget the exact number but I believe it still allows for a margin of two as a result of uncertainty or disputes) is produced by Julian Whybra in his England's Sons, which also describes a number of spurious claims. I haven't got the latest version (it is periodically updated) so I could be out of date myself by a man or two. Considerably detailed research obviously goes into all these efforts from modern historians on the battle in recent years - Lee Stevenson, Ian Knight, Julian Whybra and others - and I believe there is some measure of agreement on the present number, down to the nearest one man or so. It probably takes a great deal to get through these researchers to have a "new" man accepted, just as it does to remove one.

Peter
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mail
Bill Cainan 3


Joined: 19 Feb 2011
Posts: 105
Reply with quote
Everyone

Thanks Peter, a good summing up,

The garrison at RD was provided by B Company 2/24th and we are pretty solid (as you would expect) on the men in that Company. And of course, this Company would have figured prominently in Bourne's roll, him being the CSM. Chard, would obviously not have known many of the men in the 24th. The problems arise when you look at all the others present - men detached from the 1/24 to assist with the stores; patients in the hospital; men "passing through"; and temporary visitors (eg Padre Smith, Dunne, Dalton, etc). All we can do is weigh the evidence and make a judgement. Sometimes, the evidence is fragmentary and our judgement comes out as a rough percentage probability. Julian's "England's Sons" is a very good start to looking at the issue, and of course Julian regularly updates including all of the latest information that comes to light.

Bill
View user's profileSend private message
Julian whybra


Joined: 03 Sep 2005
Posts: 436
Reply with quote
Re ĎThe Forgotten Survivor of Rorkeís Driftí (DT 6.4.13), Pte, Jenkinsís great-grandson is a trifle late in discovering his relative fought in the battle. Not only did Lady Butler know in 1880, when participants were sent to her to be sketched, but The Times (Oct 1879), the Regimental Record of Services, Jenkinsís own letter home (29.1.1879) which was published twice in local newspapers, and a fellow soldierís letter home all record his presence there. He was also introduced to the King as a Rorkeís Drift veteran (South Wales Daily Post & Herald of Wales, both July 1904). All this has been known to the Regimental Museum of the Royal Welsh for some years. A Roll compiled by Lieut. Chardís Driver Robson left out at least thirteen men (possibly three more). A complete Roll can be found in ĎEnglandís Sonsí available from the Museum (published 2004 - nine years ago!).
View user's profileSend private message
Martin Everett


Joined: 01 Sep 2005
Posts: 784
Location: Brecon
Reply with quote
As this story seems to run and run - it is only good for the hard work put in by Julian and especially Bill at the Regimental Museum.

We always knew that there was a Jenkins at RD but he was a 1/24th man - of course what non-military people do not readily understand is that he would not have been on first name terms with B Coy 2/24th who he had probably never met before.

_________________
Martin Everett
Brecon, Powys
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mailVisit poster's website
Bill Cainan 3


Joined: 19 Feb 2011
Posts: 105
Reply with quote
All

To follow on from previous posts, we have in our archives "The Records of the 1/24th 1689-1905 and 2/24th 1804-1813". this is essentially a handwritten daily diary.

In 1879 there is the following entry:

"At the gallant defence of Rorke's Drift under Lieuts Bromhead & Chard, the following men of the 1/24th Regiment were present:

Sergeant E Wilson
Private P Desmond
Private Nichols
Private D Horrigan
Private D Jenkins
Private Paton
Private Beckitt
Private W Roy
Private W Waters


Notes:
Paton = Payton
Beckitt = Beckett

So, with regard to Pte D Jenkins, there you have it. I do realise that this entry could raise questions about other men. What I would say to that, is read Julian Whybra's excellent "England's Sons" for the latest position.

Bill
View user's profileSend private message
Mark Hobson


Joined: 18 Sep 2005
Posts: 105
Location: Halifax
Reply with quote
Sloppy homework all round by the NAM then. I guess any 'new' Rorke's Drift discovery is bound to generate publicity, but you'd expect a more professional approach to research. These things no doubt go in cycles and this same story may pop up again a few years down the line.
View user's profileSend private message
Private David Jenkins
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
All times are GMT  
Page 1 of 1  

  
  
 Reply to topic