rorkesdriftvc.com Forum Index


rorkesdriftvc.com
Discussions related to the Anglo-Zulu War of 1879
Reply to topic
Ammunition boxes at Rorke's Drift
Rob D


Joined: 01 Sep 2005
Posts: 93
Location: Melbourne Australia
Reply with quote
Hi
I have a vague recollection of finding, some time ago, a reference to ammunition boxes at Rorke's Drift being opened (or at least having the lid screws removed) well in advance of any need to resupply the firing line.
When I looked for this reference in the material I have at hand I couldn't find it and an Internet search has also proved fruitless so far - I can't find any details about when the ammunition boxes were opened, or by whose orders.
Can anyone point me in the right direction?
I'm looking for a primary source or a first-hand account.
Rob
View user's profileSend private message
Re: Ammunition boxes at Rorke's Drift
Kiwi Sapper


Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 125
Location: Middle Earth & Home of Narnia; (Auckland, New Zealand)
Reply with quote
Rob D wrote:
Hi
......... a reference to ammunition boxes at Rorke's Drift being opened (or at least having the lid screws removed) well in advance of any need to resupply the firing line................


There lived a "thinking man" Smile

_________________
It was a confusion of ideas between him and one of the lions he was hunting in Kenya that had caused A. B. Spottsworth to make the obituary column. He thought the lion was dead, and the lion thought it wasn't.
View user's profileSend private message
Peter Ewart


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

You are quite right - so your memory is not at fault! The source is Dunne.

In his "Reminiscences of Campaigning in South Africa 1877-81" which appeared in the Army Service Corps Journal of February 1892, he described Bromhead's orders for the preparations of the defence, including the outposts thrown out, striking of tents, serving out ammunition and the following of Dalton's suggestions for the barricade. Then he added:

Other preparations were also made: a water barrel was filled and brought inside, and several boxes of ammunition were opened and placed in convenient places.

Dunne's account has been used by a number of authorities since its rediscovery, notably in Ian Bennet's Eyewitness in Zululand (Greenhill, 1989) which is based on Dunne's published reminiscences and covers both the defence of R/Drift and the siege of Potchefstroom, Dunne being the only man who was present at both. Others to have quoted specifically from Dunne's account include Barry C Johnson in his biography, Hook of Rorke's Drift (Bartlett's Press, Birmingham, 2004).

So although thirteen years had elapsed before he put pen to paper, the account is, at least, a first hand one.

Peter
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mail
Rob D


Joined: 01 Sep 2005
Posts: 93
Location: Melbourne Australia
Reply with quote
Peter
Thank you very much for your reply - I'm glad I didn't just imagine the reference but I did obviously forget to save it at the time.
I have since found some extracts from Dunne's account on another site:
http://www.1879zuluwar.com/t196-w-a-dunne-assistant-commissary-rorke-s-drift-defender-22nd-23rd-jan-1879

KS
You're right - someone at Rorke's Drift was thinking.
Rob
View user's profileSend private message
Peter Ewart


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

Pleased to have helped. Yes, someone was "thinking" but, in preparing the ammunition in that way, surely they were only routinely doing what they were paid for and trained for. There was undoubtedly an air of urgency about the preparations and the effect of their natural shock at the news they'd just heard would be felt, but with officers, 24th NCOs and Dalton at hand I doubt if the preparation of reserve ammo, among other necessary but routine tasks, was something which could possibly have been overlooked. No doubt ditto at Centane and Isandlwana, both in different - and the latter eventually more urgent - circumstances, as presumably also at Inyezane, Khambula, Gingindlovu, Ulundi etc. I suspect any account of these battles - especially if by a military man - which omits to mention details such as the preparation of reserve ammunition would not at all necessarily suggest such a step had been omitted.

Thanks for the link. Looks as if some of Dunne's account has been used, although a much fuller version is found in Bennett's work (above post) and, obviously, in the ASC Journal itself. I suppose Dunne & Reynolds would join Chard (x 2) and Smith in forming the four (five counting Chard's two) most lengthy, detailed and reliable accounts of the defence, although Chard's and Smith's are out on their own as a result of their detail and comparative accuracy, and the fact that they were produced so soon afterwards, one for official requirements (and soon widely published) and the other for wide publication anyway. Those written in later years, however detailed (and there are certainly some additional gems contained of course) will always carry the stigma (too strong a word?) of being written after the author had been exposed to other published accounts. Hook's various accounts are such a case - each one of his five or six accounts differed a little (naturally) and some added further info, but one can never be sure whether as the result of reminders from seeing other published accounts by then or from newly remembered memories - both probably. More importantly, whereas Chard & Smith were not only educated to a far higher level than Hook, their accounts were not filtered through - and possibly garbled by - reporters, interviewers and editors, as Hook's undoubtedly were.

Peter
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mail
Rob D


Joined: 01 Sep 2005
Posts: 93
Location: Melbourne Australia
Reply with quote
Peter
Actually the link I posted earlier appears to have used information from this web page:
http://www.dnw.co.uk/medals/auctionarchive/searchcataloguearchive/itemdetail.lasso?itemid=9944
dated 1996 which contains more by and about Dunne - I didn't check to see if his medal group sold, or for what price.
I agree that it would seem to be only logical to make reserve ammunition ready with a firefight in the offing, especially in a situation like that at Rorke's Drift where the garrison knew that it was facing a much larger and very determined enemy.
However, Chelmsford made such a point of stressing reserve ammunition supply (and screwdrivers) in the second invasion that I was interested to see what was done prior to the whole "ammunition supply problems causing the defeat at Isandlwana" issue.
Unfortunately, Dunne's account was written after that theory became widespread - which might have colored his narrative or caused him to stress something which was merely standard practice.
WRT other accounts, I quite liked Hitch's, in both of which Bromhead calls him "Mate". Did Hitch misremember or did the shared danger break down the formality of the Victorian-era army? Now that would have been a nice touch in Zulu.
Rob
View user's profileSend private message
Peter Ewart


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

Thanks for the further link, which seems also to quote partly from Dunne's published reminiscences and also to draw on Bennett's work for some of the biographical detail.

Yes, the mention of screwdrivers in later instructions (was it Chelmsford or was it in the subsequent WO updated instructions? - I can't remember) are intriguing in some ways. The vague claims about the soldiery running out of ammunition (or not being resupplied properly) emanated from quite early accounts (i.e. in 1879) although generally from those who weren't there, and were picked up by authors of works on the war (Wilmot etc?) quite soon. In the absence of evidence to the contrary we seem to have a consensus among reliable historians today that all that would normally have been expected to have been done on with regard to ammunition supply preparations was probably done at each engagement, including Isandlwana. Your point about the possible reasons behind Dunne's mention of the boxes is well made - was it just a routine remark or was he making a point because of his awareness of what else had been published in the interim?

Hitch's claim to have been referred to as "mate" by Bromhead is certainly strange and has always seemed so to me! Who knows? Again, all we do do know is that these survivors' accounts appearing in local papers were only published after the usual editing and sifting by reporters and editors - perhaps almost rewriting. On the other hand, Bromhead was considered to be a particulartly modest and genial type by some who knew him well.

Peter
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mail
Rob D


Joined: 01 Sep 2005
Posts: 93
Location: Melbourne Australia
Reply with quote
Peter
The account published in the South African Military History Society's Journal Vol 2 No 6 (dated December 1973 and available online here http://samilitaryhistory.org/vol026mb.html) appears to be a direct copy of Hitch's own written account, viz:
"Bromhead seemed very sorry when he see me down bleeding so freely, saying, 'Mate, I am very sorry to see you down.' "
Seems to rule out journalistic licence.
Rob
View user's profileSend private message
Peter Ewart


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

Yes, that's the account from the letter in his scrapbook I believe, nowadays in the custody of the museum at Brecon. Although written in later life it is (presumably) in his own hand and follows fairly closely (with obviously some additions and omissions) his earlier account which appeared in the Cambrian in June 1879 when he'd arrived home on the Tamar. The 1879 piece, unlike (apparently) the one in his scrapbook, was definitely told to a reporter who clearly put things into his own words, even though the bulk of the account may well be as Hitch told it, or very close to it.

I agree that it's quite remarkable that - in each account - Hitch refers to Bromhead's use of the word Mate when addressing him. In both accounts, although the quote is quite different, it was Bromhead's reaction to Hitch's wounding, so Hitch clearly believed the term had been used and remembered it. Yes, I think it quite likely that Bromhead - after standing in the front line with Hitch and a couple of others for an hour or more in a desperate fight, and with Hitch possibly saving B's life at one time - seems to have used the term in a rather "mellow" example of an officer speaking to a wounded private. The occasion & the circumstances seem to have played their part & Bromhead perhaps felt he could use the term without risk of discipline or respect being lost. Given Bromhead's apparent complete lack of "side" it almost seems in character!

Hitch clearly appreciated it & also mentioned Bromhead's concern for his condition afterwards at RD, so GB was the obvious person to ask for a testimonial when he faced life in civvy street back home, while GB was still in S Africa, just as others sought similar ones from Chard and even Chelmsford. GB's testimonial (Nov 79) was generously worded.

I haven't seen the scrapbook letter so must take it at face value. Experience would still lead me to enquire whether it is certain that it is in his own hand, or had possibly been dictated to another (equally uneducated!) friend or relative and whether the old press cutting from the Cambrian was also at hand when the letter was written or dictated, and used as a prompt (which could taint the originality of the letter). Just my natural caution with primary sources, particularly one written so long afterwards. (Will sound like nit-picking to some, but I see it as all part of the evaluation process into apparently primary sources).

All in all, though, it's seems a pretty good source on the face of it, doesn't it? At least he didn't claim that Bromhead told him: "We need you Mate, damn it, we need you!" Bromhead may have called him Mate but I don't think he'd ever have said "damn." Smith was listening!

Peter
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mail
Rob D


Joined: 01 Sep 2005
Posts: 93
Location: Melbourne Australia
Reply with quote
Peter
I agree, and would assume that the account's provenance and authenticity was confirmed either at the time it was accepted into the Brecon museum's collection, or when Professor Boucher wrote the article for the SAMHS Journal.
And I'm sure that Smith would have heard far worse than "damn" on that occasion - though perhaps not from an officer.
Rob
View user's profileSend private message
Ammunition boxes at Rorke's Drift
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