rorkesdriftvc.com :: View topic

Posted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 7:31 pm

Pardon if this has already been discussed in the earlier forum...

While reading a recent book which show old photographs of the Little Big Horn battlefield, the scene of Custer's demise, it was noted that some of the grave markers were not always in the same place through successive years. When some photos have been compared it's been shown in some cases that the markers were moved to another position years after the photos were taken. Questions cropped up even to where Custer actually fell based on the photographs. Now looking at the Isandhlwana battlefield, has there or is there any controversy today about the Isandhlwana grave markers along those lines going on at the LBH? I guess the question I'm asking is where we 'see" the dead today, is that where they were actually before? On another question, is archaeology finished at Isandhlwana or can there be more to do?

Posted: Thu Apr 27, 2006 10:48 am

Rich

The really crucial difference between LBH (which I have visited on a number of occasions, greatly enjoyed and would recommend to anybody looking for something a bit different for their summer hols this year), and Isandlwana, is that at LBH you have individual markers, whereas the cairns in Zululand cover completely variable numbers of bodies. We are told that 'typically' they cover 5 or 6 bodies though I am unclear on the origins of that remark and don't necessarily accept it as a particularly worthwhile rule of thumb. As I'm sure you know bodies were scraped up from the general area of a cairn and then 'interred' beneath a pile of rocks - so they offer only the roughest guide to who (or more properly how many) died where. Also of course they do not per se distinguish between dead NNC and dead Brits of the various kinds. You have to know the battle and to follow the units from point to point, based on the source evidence, in order to arrive at what are 'balance of probability' judgements as to who/what is buried where.

Over the years, some cairns have been broken down and grave robbed, (which is why we take a very dim view of Isandlwana souvenirs being offered for sale), and many of the bones have been washed out by the rains/subsidence and have been re-buried under 'non-original' cairns. Many bodies were of course dragged about the battlefield by vultures, dogs, jackals (and possibly even hyenas) in the long spell they lay unburied. Oh and of course there are mythical cairns to consider - such as the ones I always like to tease Ron and Peter about, which they say used to be on the Tahelane Spur, and I and others insist never were.

Lots of people are deluded by the cairns at Isandwlana, take them too literally and as a result draw erroneous conclusions on the course of the battle. I've stood there and listened to them doing it! Plenty of cairns have been 'lost' over the years and some of the existing ones may be spurious. It's difficult to know. One mustn't look at the cairns without being familiar with what I like to call the pre-interment sources - people like Archibald Forbes and Wilsone Black in particular. Forbes gets quoted a lot, but Black is probabaly the more important source. I put both of Black's reports as appendices to LWOTF to make them more readily available to the modern AZW readership. Well worth a serious hour or two's study and contemplation the night before visiting the Isandlwana battlefield.

Regards as ever

Mike

PS. I am aware of the 'extra' markers that accidentally got emplaced at the scene of the Custer fight instead of the Reno fight and distort the picture somewhat.

Posted: Thu May 04, 2006 7:38 pm

Evening all,

While not all tour guides will tell you some of the wild stories that are unfortunately produced by some of my colleagues on Isandlwana, it is true that some of them have wild ideas on the battle, and sell it to unsuspecting clients at exorbitant prices. That does not mean that we all do it. I have in the past taken umbrage at what was said on this forum, but Mike Snook is correct in saying this. While I know that not all cairns are original, and that many have been lost through various kinds of attrition processes, I have not yet had the couriage to "know" how many people and who are buried under what cairn. That is sadly impossible, and only the dead will know where everyone is now. All the more reason to respect the site, which we members of the Moth try to do. Not like the anonymous bastards who have yet again (on Sunday) destroyed the markers around the RA memorial.

Yours under the tin hat
Johnny Hamman

Posted: Fri May 05, 2006 12:50 am

Johnny

I was interested to hear that you are with the Moths of the Dundee. It was the Moths of Dundee that organised the walk along Fugitives Trail that I took part in the the 80's. Do they still do this?

I have very vivid and stark memories of that day. When we set off from Dunedin it was very misty but it cleared as we reached Isandlwana, as if the ghosts were clearing the way for us so that we could see the cairns under which they were buried. Very moving and it still stirs deep, provocative memories even now.

Dawn

Posted: Fri May 05, 2006 5:17 pm

Dawn,

Yes, our next walk is on June 4, 2006. Anyone of you who are reading this, and who will be in Dundee on June 4, are welcome to join us. This will cost you the princely sum of R15, as we will be crossing private land after we cross the Buffalo at Fugitive's Drift. I am the curator of the Moth Museum in Dundee, and I have been instrumental in trying to revive the Walk, after it petered out due to lack of interest. I took this up with our current Old Bill, Dudley Fleischmann, and he have sorted this out with David Rattray. I am a new tour guide in Dundee ( 1 year now) and I am very concerned with the Isandlwana site and surrounds, especially the FT, as vandalism seems to be on the increase now. I am a Moth, due to my 13 years of service in the armed forces of Namibia and South Africa, and I take the military heritage seriously. That is why I am very perturbed at the evidence I have recently unearthed, showing some (two I can name) tour guides of many more years experience than me, spouting all kinds of rubbish about the battle, and making men like Mike think we are all like that.

Greetings under the tin hat
Johnny Hamman

Posted: Sat May 06, 2006 1:17 am

Johnny

Sad to hear interest in the walk petered out but pleased to hear that you are reviving it. To anyone who is thinking of going, I recommend it. It is a little arduous but my mother-in-law came with us (she was about 60 at the time) and she managed it. And Johnny, do you still have the braai at Rorke's Drift at the end?

I still have my certificate somewhere, I must dig it out.

Dawn

Posted: Sat May 06, 2006 9:46 am

Johnny

Thank you to the MOTHs for keeping an eye on the battelfields. Where there has been vandalism, it might be worth letting the Defence Section of the British High Commission in Pretoria know. They like to keep an eye on markers and monuments and war graves. You'll be able to get the postal details off an internet search. I can't remember for the life of me the name of the road.

Separately, elsewhere on the forum, I have posted on the view incorrectly attributed to me; for some reason you and whoever wrote the Courier piece seem to think I have a downer on Dundee tour guides. I cannot ever recall offering an opinion on the subject and quite honestly haven't given it a whole lot of thought. People have to make a living it seems to me. The remark above is not a reference to tour guides. I was actually talking about unguided members of the public with a cursory knowledge of the battlefield on a bit of a DIY trip.

Mike

Posted: Sat May 06, 2006 10:35 am

Mike,

I have seen the piece, and I know who the writer is. I know it seems a little sharp, but it was intended as tongue-in-cheek to get reaction on the subject, and not really as an attack on you or anyone else, for that matter. You will see that the writer questions the tour guide industry too, as I asked him to.

Yes, I did think in the beginning that you had a downer on tour guides, as you said, but after some of my experiences the last few months, I cannot really blame you. I even referred some clients to your book as further reading!! It also does not really matter now who said what about tour guides in general. I have heard some of the most fantastic stories dished up to especially Uk tourists, and some stories like the fact that that Boers were using dum-dum ammunition in 1899, or shelling tents with red crosses on them, which was in contradiction with the Geneva Convention of 1899. I did not know we had a Geneva Convention at that time, but maybe it is just me. Similarly, I have heard people telling clients that there are one man buried under this cairn, five under that, seven here, and so on...

It just amazes me that people can know these "facts", and even sell it. I would never grab stuff like that out of the air, simply to make up a story for a client when we are on site. It is unprofessional. I will definitely not critizise any tour guide on this forum, as I prefer to do my own thing and let them be. They can make fools of themselves in their own good time, as they definitely do not need my help. You can check this with Tourism Dundee. It is time that this industry is given a makeover as far as our presentation is concerned. There are some very hardworking guides here who do their best to present a pleasant experience to our visitors, but then there are some people who respect nothing.

I could not see any cairn damage as far as I could ascertain, and the RA memorial is still intact, but all the markers are definitely gone. We will see on June 4 what cairns on the FT are damaged, if any.

Thank you for your thoughts on the Moths, Colonel. I will repeat them at our next meeting. As long as I am here, or able, I will drive the endeavour to protect these sites, not only AZW, but ABW as well. One of our ideals is Sound Memory, and I try to present the final moments of those men as best I can, even if we do not know it all. Only the dead know it all.

Yours under the tin hat
Johnny Hamman
Dundee

Posted: Sat May 06, 2006 11:07 am

Johnny,

Just as an aside on the main theme of the posting.

The origins of the 1st Geneva Convention of 1864, can be traced back to the actions of Henri Dunant at the Battle of Solferino, in 1859, during the War of Italian Unification. The same action that brought about the founding of The Red Cross.

The 1899 Convention that you mention does indeed mention 'expanding bullets', as well as 'asphyxiating gases', pity the Germans didn't play by that one in the Great War.

John Y.

Posted: Sat May 06, 2006 12:46 pm

Allow me as a tour guide as well, though different time and area, to say something. I've noticed lately that a couple of Companies dealing with NW Europe, have employed people whose expertise runs a whole spectrum of battles etc, and also some who seem to think they have found cheap holidays for themself and their knowledge is very limited, and worse also a small hint or revisionist history creeping in.

I've studied hard at my sphere and spent many years on it, and i still wouldnt like to say i was an expert, yet i see 6 day wonders who give lurid tales to 'window lickers'

Posted: Sat May 06, 2006 12:50 pm

Thank you for that, John Y,

I was vaguely aware of Henri Dunant and Solferino when I wrote that posting, but as I did that during my university years almost 30 years ago, my hands-on knowledge of the origins of the Rc and the GC were a little dim, to say the least. Am I correct in saying the 1899 convention is more commonly referred to as The Hague? This has nothing to do with the post's theme, but I am putting something together on the then existing Rules of War and international law implications and the application thereof in SA during the 1899-1901 war, as the Battle of Talana is mentioned in one incident.

Johnny Hamman
Dundee

Posted: Sun May 07, 2006 1:54 am

Johnny,

Czar Nicholas II called the International Peace Conference at the Hague of 1899, under the aegis of the 1864 Geneva Convention.

For a general, very brief, overview of the Laws of War, take a look at http://www.genevaconventions.org/

For a fuller look at the 1899 material and other 19th Century material, take a look at http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/lawofwar/lawwar.htm

Although the Conference took place over three months prior to the Battle of Talana, the Articles of the Convention did not come into force until nearly 11 months after it had been fought.

I hope you'll find them of some use for your research.

John Y.

Posted: Sun May 07, 2006 7:44 am

Thanks, John Y,

That was indeed very, very helpful. This history is not my usual remit, so many thanks for the heads up. I just found out that the Transvaal Republic was indeed a signatory to the Geneva Convention (they signed in 1896) but their Red Cross did not really get off the ground. They were, however, not signatories to the Hague Convention, but have agreed to conform to the rules, but not much came of it during the war.

Johnny Hamman

Posted: Sun May 07, 2006 12:22 pm

Dawn,

My apologies, almost missed your question re the braai afterwards at RD. The jury is still out on that, and seeing as it might be a bit cold, it may not happen. We will have to see.

Johnny Hamman
Dundee

Posted: Mon May 08, 2006 12:45 am

Yes, it could be a bit cold in June, I think our walk was in September or October, so it was a bit warmer. The river was in flood but we made it over in an inflatable, sadly not available in 1879.

The braai at the end was good as we could wander around Rorke's Drift at our leisure and try to visualise what it was like that day in January 1879. A welcome respite after the walk.

Good luck with it.

Dawn