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)

Date	Original Topic
18th April 2003	Isandlwana Ammunition Controversy By Sally I know this had been discussed before, but some claim there was no shortage of ammo at Isandlwana, others, that part of the reason for the disaster was that the reserve ammo didn't reach the troops. either because they couldn't get the box's open, or because of the chaos the 'runners' couldn't get to the ammunition depot. My understanding is that sodliers carried 20 rounds of ammunitoin in their pouches, plus a reserve of (70?) in their Ball Bags. It is documented by survivors at Kambula and Ulundi that these Ball Bags broke with the resultant loss of the reserve ammunition. In Zulu Victory (Quantrill and Lock) they state that the same thing happened at Isandlwana, with the troops rushing around and doubling up everywhere, the Ball Bags broke, hence the lack of extra ammunition. But because there were no survivors at Isandlwana this problem was not documented at the time.
Date	Replies
18th April 2003	T Boy All this talk of broken ball bags makes my eyes water!!
18th April 2003	Richard Waters Sorry, had to laugh!
18th April 2003	Joseph Interesting theory about the ball bags... can anyone shed some insight? Too funny T Boy. I believe they carried 40 rounds in the ammo pouches (20 per) and then the rest in the Ball bag perhaps...
22nd April 2003	Peter The ammunition controversy has been extensively debated over the years so perhaps there is nothing new to add. One either holds the view that there was no meaningful shortage or that there was a shortage. In either case the outcome remains the same. New evidence provides a platform for further debate. It was common cause that the firing line was in possession of 70 rounds per man. The 30 rounds carried in the satchel or ball bag were however not secure. The ball bag, because of its poor constrcution or possibly poor design caused rounds to fall out as the troops doubled into battle stations. The moment the action commenced, the entire firing line had on balance of probability perhaps something of the order of 60 rounds or less per man. This represented a substantial reduction which in the case of Mostyn and Cavaye was perhaps critical. No one of course survived the report this. They did however at Kambula, Gingindlova and Ulundi where the ball bag received universal condemnation. What occured at the last three mentioned battles must have been more pronounced at Isandlwana in view oif the distances involved. Zulu Victory covers the matter comprehensively following disclosure of fresh primary source evidence concerning the satchel/ball bag
22nd April 2003	Peter The ammunition controversy has been extensively debated over the years so perhaps there is nothing new to add. One either holds the view that there was no meaningful shortage or that there was a shortage. In either case the outcome remains the same. New evidence provides a platform for further debate. It was common cause that the firing line was in possession of 70 rounds per man. The 30 rounds carried in the satchel or ball bag were however not secure. The ball bag, because of its poor constrcution or possibly poor design caused rounds to fall out as the troops doubled into battle stations. The moment the action commenced, the entire firing line had on balance of probability perhaps something of the order of 60 rounds or less per man. This represented a substantial reduction which in the case of Mostyn and Cavaye was perhaps critical. No one of course survived the report this. They did however at Kambula, Gingindlova and Ulundi where the ball bag received universal condemnation. What occured at the last three mentioned battles must have been more pronounced at Isandlwana in view oif the distances involved. Zulu Victory covers the matter comprehensively following disclosure of fresh primary source evidence concerning the satchel/ball bag
28th April 2003	Adrian Whiting The 1871 pattern valise equipment allowed the soldier to carry twenty rounds, in two ten round packets (termed bundles) in each ammunition pouch - one either side of the waistbelt locket, so forty rounds altogether. A further thirty rounds were carried loose in the expense pouch. An additional ten rounds were commonly carried in the valise (worn on the back) itself, but this item was not usually worn unless soldiers were in marching order - not the order of dress prescribed for action. The expense pouch does tend to lose rounds if you move when it is not secured by its closing strap, and with thirty ball rounds in it it is quite a weight, hence the possibility of the carrying strap (singular) breaking. The subsequent 1882 pattern valise equipment dispensed with the expense pouch. This equipment enabled forty rounds to be carried in each of two pouchs, thus equating to eighty rounds on the soldier in person, but the rounds were still in their wrappers. The equipment instructions directed the soldier to place loose rounds in the coat or trouser pocket from which to load the rifle !