Experts find site of Zulu siege

BBC ^ | 22 Aug 2006 | Stephen Stewart

[Marius3188]

British soldiers fighting the Zulus experienced appalling conditions similar to the muddy killing fields of World War I, it has emerged.

Archaeologists have revealed details of soldiers' battle for survival during a bloody siege in the Anglo-Zulu War.

The colonial war in 1879 was dramatised by Michael Caine in the film Zulu.

Historians lacked detailed evidence of the troops' daily lives, but a team of experts from Glasgow have now uncovered a forgotten British fort.

The site at KwaMondi, Eshowe, in South Africa, has been hailed as a treasure trove of historical information which sheds light on the heroism and skill of the Royal Engineers.

The group from Glasgow University was headed by Dr Tony Pollard, star of the popular BBC's Two Men in A Trench series, and used metal detectors to survey the site.

The fort was built by the British army following the invasion of Zululand in January 1879 and was besieged by a huge Zulu force for more than two months.

Dr Pollard, Dr Iain Banks and their team brought to light the endeavours of men such as Captain Warren Wynne, who built the fort and surrounding roads under the threat of an overwhelming Zulu attack.

They also discovered that heavy rains during the siege turned the fort into a polluted quagmire leading to an outbreak of typhus which killed large number of men.

Iconic locations

Dr Pollard said: "During the rains of January to March, the interior of the fort would have been very wet and prone to waterlogging.

"The presence of 1,700 men and their horses would quickly turn the soil into a muddy mess, little different from the mud that their sons and grandsons would face in the trenches of Flanders.

"The artefacts provide an insight into the lives of men who lived in the fort for the duration of the siege.

"They show the value of metal detecting as a technique and also of the less well known sites that have been pushed into the background by iconic locations such as Rorke's Drift or Isandlwana."

Dr Pollard said the story of the fort provides a testament to the skill of the Royal Engineers and particularly of Captain Warren Wynne.

He added: "It is a story without the stuff of legend but nonetheless a story of achievement under difficult and testing conditions; the remains of the fort are a memorial to the men who built and served under such trying circumstances.

"My favourite find is undoubtedly a Martini Henry bullet converted into a plumb bob.

"You can imagine the row when it was discovered there wasn't one in the tool box and Wynne the engineer commanding one of his men to make one - if he didn't make it himself.

"Its also interesting archaeologically to have something designed to kill transformed into something constructive."

Before arriving at Eshowe, the relief column under Lord Chelmsford fought off a 12,000-strong Zulu force.

[RobbyS]

Anyway, British Courage at it's finest.

Reserve that for the Fields of Flanders. Men walked into a hail of bullets , leaning forward as if facing a strong wind.

[PzLdr]

If you can ever get to Aberdeen Proving Grounds in Maryland [U.S Army Ordnance School], they have a large field museum of all sorts of Armor, including a Panther, Tiger, King Tiger, Anzio Annie, and the first nuclear cannon. Some the tanks were cut in half lengthwise, and covered with molded metal grating so you can see inside.

[an amused spectator]

I'm there! That would be a real treat.

[osagebowman]

Ping; movie version of 'Men of Harlech'

[bcsco]

Television (and film) has had its successes, but also many failures, from the historically accurate perspective. But, I suppose it has to do with the goal of the director/producer; to entertain or to inform.

[Tallguy]

I too was struck by that seeming contradiction. I guess when you are throwing up a hasty fortification you can't spend too much time thinking about such things as drainage.

[bcsco]

I think we were using trapdoor Springfields back then.

We were; the 1873 model, both rifle and carbine in .45 cal.

Actually, the military tested the Springfield against the Winchester and Spencer, and found the Springfield to be superior in accuracy. Military practice still relied on volley fire at the time, and it was felt that single shot weapons with volley fire could superior to the possibility of greater firepower (through the use of repeaters), if in the hands of America's existing foe; the American Indian. And, it was generally held that the Indian did not hold a significant supply of repeating arms. this was disproved in 1876 at the Little Big Horn.

[91B]

Kipling tells us about that campaign as well:

Here's to you old fuzzie-wuzzie
With your home in the Sudan
You're a poor benighted 'eathen
But a first class fightin' man.

[ZULU]

Some outfit made a shooting repro of the trapdoor springfield years ago. I heard the originals had problems with blow-out from the door in the breech.

If I had the money back then, I would have bought one of the repros. I think the cartridge was a .45/70.

Another gun I'd like to get is the Sharpe's Buffalo gun. There is an outfit in Montana that makes good repors of them that run well over $1,000 and they have a waiting list. I think some Italian fiorm makes a repro of them that is of less quality but cheaper. I think they came in .45, .50 and .54 with different powder charges.

Really like that movie "Quiggly Down Under".

[bcsco]

A friend of mine has one of the repro trap-door Springfields. He lent it to me a few years ago when I did a presentation on the Little Big Horn at our Church's men's breakfast.

Yes, the original was in 45/70. The Calvary also carried the 1873 Colt Army Model revolver, also in 45/70 (it came to be known as the Peacemaker). Thus, the ammunition was common to both weapons.

For years, historians believed that a major contributor to the Cavalry's loss at Little Big Horn was because the Springfields were prone to cartridge jamming after repeated firing. The 1883-84 field surveys at the battlefield turned up little corroboration, although evidence did show it happened.

[bcsco]

I didn't mention it in my initial response but I'll mention it now. I have an original Winchester model 1886 in 40/82 (one of it original calibers). It shipped from the factory in 1895 according to Winchester. It's in fine condition, although there is a missing ejection mechanism that mounts on the left receiver wall (you can see the screw hole). This prevents the cartridge from actually ejecting although the slide 'presents' it sufficiently to top ejection opening.

Believe it or not, I bought it from a buddy during high school. He was looking for cash for the Junior Prom. I had a choice of this or a Parker 10 ga. double barrel. I paid $15.00 for the Winchester. That was LONNNNNNG ago.

[ZULU]

Yes, I read that story also about the alleged jamming of the trapdoor Springfields.

I also read that a lot of Custer's troops were foreigners and had never seen an Indian in battle before and we psyched out by them.

But at any rate, the fault lay with Custer for incredibly bad generalship.

Custer was a great fighting leader but a lousy tactician.
I read a book that came out recently on Gettysburg and Lee's real plans for that battle and why they didn't succeed.

The author credits Custer and his cavalry for attacking Stewart's forces which greatly outnumbered him, as they were attempting to assault the Union rear just behind the point where the Confederates were aiming their major offensive on the third day.

Stewart apparently didn't deploy his men in line and envelope Custer's men which he could have done as he thought it would have delayed his appearance. Custer's smaller force attacked in column, delaying Stewart's arrival and foiling the whole plan. Custer demonstrated his ability to fight and lead men in battle there, but he fought impulsively, without thinking.

He would have lead the Anglo-Saxon charge at Hastings which lost the battle were he there, and the Mongols would have LOVED to run up against a guy like him.

His "luck" ran out at the Little Big Horn and his impetuosity caught up with him - and his men, unfortunately.

[ZULU]

You chose - wisely. (Indiana Jones - The Last Crusade)

Did you try to find a replacement part for the gun, or do you prefer not to shoot it? Dixie Gunworks might it have it.

[bcsco]

I talked to a gunsmith familiar with the earlier Winchesters many years ago. He couldn't find a part. I haven't searched since. It now sits on my office wall below a repo .45 cal Hawkin. At one time I looked in to using 45/70 casings and necking them down to fit the 40/82. It could be done, but I really didn't want to fire it.

As for Custer, yes, he was impetuous. The Little Big Horn was a defeat in detail. He divided his command believing he could surround the encampment the same as he did at the Washita. Unfortunately, this encampment was considerably larger and in the mood to defend itself. His tactic allowed the Indians to take on two of the three divisions in detail, routing one and destroying the other. The third detail could do no more than join the remnants of the first and await aid from General Terry's column.

Many historians (I'm not an historian except for the armchair type) like to pile it on Custer. I'm not one of them. Yes, he did conduct a poor campaign but in his defense it can be said: 1) He was working with poor intelligence; 2) He was under the misconception that the Indian village had learned of his whereabouts; 3) He (as most of his generation) believed the Indians would rather flee than fight; 4) He had to rely on juniors who, for whatever reason - good or bad, had it in for him; 5) He did not disobey the implied or even expressed orders from General Terry as so many have alleged (I also have a copy of those orders on my office wall).

Be all that as it may, the Little Big Horn debacle was still, essentially, Custer's fault.

[justshutupandtakeit]

I'll have to see it.

[in the Arena]

Yeah, I guess we'll never know the reasoning. I assumed that the Royal Engineers would take the lay of the land into account when building the fortification, but hind sight is 20/20 lol... Thanks for the reply.

Jim

[PzLdr]

The Montana outfit is SHILOH Sharps. I had a lesser grade of the Quigley. .45-70, 34" barrel. Weighed about 13 lbs. Traded it for a 1959 Winchester .30-30 and a 28 guage O/U.

[bcsco]

Here's a photo of the Winchester and Hawkin rifles...

[Brit1]

Lets be thankful for 'small' mercies.

[higgmeister]

...the capture by the Americans of the Enigma machine for which two of our sailors gave their lives and also how two US flyers won the Battle of Britain for us...

We should all thank God every day that British tenacity carried the fight until we were dragged into the battle by our short-hairs.

[MadIvan you are missed.]