rorkesdriftvc.com :: View topic

Posted: Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:49 am

Why was the Prince Imperial not buried where he died? I understand he was connected to Royalty but would it not have been a sign of respect not only to the Prince Imperial himself but to the others that fell in battle.
I also understand that his mother visit the site where her son died would it not have been more appropriate if see was actually paying respects to spot where he was interned.

And why was he returned to England and not France.

Posted: Sat Aug 23, 2008 12:05 pm

Peter,
much information on the Prince Imperial is here:
http://www.rorkesdriftvc.com/prince_imperial.htm

Posted: Sat Aug 23, 2008 12:29 pm

Harman

You might want to look at Ian Knight's book, With His Face To The Foe. This is a full and lucid account of Prince Napol�on Eug�ne Louis Bonaparte's life, and in my view one of Ian's best books.

I assume you have already looked at the references to the Prince Imperial here on this site and in the old forum?

Regards,

Paul

Posted: Sat Aug 23, 2008 12:35 pm

I have to agree. I had limited space in my first year accomodation at Uni and that book was one of only a few AZW works I took.

Your best bet is to follow Paul's advice, Peter.

Cheers,

Glenn

Posted: Sat Aug 23, 2008 1:47 pm

Dear Harman , Smile

,
When you delve into the life & times of the , " Last Napoleon " you will see an definite story , worthy of a film . The names Eugenie & Beatrice come up in this story and with our Royal Family , also the name , Lt Carey , often refered to as a scapegoat in some quarters for causing / blame for the death of the Prince Imperial . If you ever go to Woolwich before they rip it`s historical heart out and make flats there you will see the rotunda where the Princes body rested on the way to Chislehurst , another name which comes into this rich vein of history , John Young has some defined articles on the Prince Imperial , i won`t spoil the story by telling why the Royal person was transported to England , it`s a grand story in it`s own right , enjoy your voyage of discovery , " Sapper " Wink

Posted: Sat Aug 23, 2008 5:06 pm

Hello everybody and Harman, you might want to read Donald Featherstone's ' Captain Careys Blunder ' although it focuses on the scandal it's quite a good read.regards Leslie

Posted: Sat Aug 23, 2008 5:17 pm

Thanks for the replies.
I must admit I have not really researched the Prince Imperial.
But I will take a look at some of the reference books you mention. And thanks for the link Alan.

Posted: Sat Aug 23, 2008 6:01 pm

So on Sunday the 1st June someone called Harrison gives the prince permission to verify some point on his maps with a small escort and they travelled toward Blood River.
At the same time Harrison was on another mission in the same area saw a small party of Zulu�s which he mentioned to the prince but the prince says they will be OK and Harrison agrees.
So off they go. They take a bit of time out to allow the prince to do some drawing.
Jahleel Carey suggests that they mount but the Prince asks for more time. A Zulu guide reports that he has seen a Zulu taking an interest in their party. When they go to mount they find the horses have strayed which takes quite a while to gather them up.
So when the prince is ready he gives the order to mount. Then the attack occurred and we all know the out come.

Extracts from John Young�s account The Last Napoleon Above

Why Lieutenant Jahleel Brenton Carey was found guilty of cowardice (His trial at the end was overturned).

What happened to Harrison he gave permission for the prince to leave. He saw the Zulus. Should he not have insisted that they call it off until the area was safe.

And what was Lieutenant Jahleel Brenton supposed to have done, die with the prince?

It was the prince who delayed matters when Lieutenant Jahleel Brenton care suggested they leave.

And why were the horses not tied up so they were ready in the event of a quick escape if needed.

I take it the Prince was in charge of this party it seems to me that his soldiering skills were up to much.

Posted: Sat Aug 23, 2008 6:21 pm

HARMAN wrote:

I take it the Prince was in charge of this party it seems to me that his soldiering skills were up to much.

Just to say that while it was Carey's defence that Prince Imperial was 'in charge', that was not in fact the case.

Paul

Posted: Sat Aug 23, 2008 6:26 pm

I would liken Carey being 'in charge' much in the same way as Glyn was in charge of his column.

Posted: Sat Aug 23, 2008 6:35 pm

Wouldn't you say, though, that it was more that Carey deferred to Louis' social status as PI than a question of actual command, as between Glyn and Chelmsford?

Posted: Sat Aug 23, 2008 6:47 pm

On what grounds was Carey�s the trial over turned.

Posted: Sat Aug 23, 2008 6:59 pm

I'm working from memory here, but my understanding is that there was a question as to whether the members of the Court-Martial had actually been sworn in, which subsequently led to the findings of the Court being overturned. Carey rejoined his regiment and died in Karachi; if I remember correctly, Ian Knight felt that the stories about Carey subsequently being ostracised were overstating the case.

Also, the death of the Prince was such an international incident that there may have been an anxiety in some circles about whether court-martialling Carey would be seen as making a scapegoat of him.

Posted: Sat Aug 23, 2008 7:04 pm

Who was Harrison and what happened to him.

Posted: Sat Aug 23, 2008 7:08 pm

Harman

If you haven't already checked it out, there is an interesting thread in the old forum discussing the question of Carey's innocence or guilt: http://www.rorkesdriftvc.com/discussion.php?topid=1387&forid=1.