Post by simon darkshade on Dec 30, 2020 4:33:01 GMT
Zulu discipline was very good for "native standards" and they had decent tactical comms. In the heat of battle, it didn't quite all turn out as planned, with some units getting distracted in the general chase. Those who fought at Rorke's Drift were the 'loins of the buffalo' as compared to the head and horns which engaged at Isandhlwhana.
You are very right on the issue of officers not knowing how to use them. Lt. Col Pulleine wasn't the most able commander, what with his paid commission and no combat experience, but Durnford was quite alright, if a bit gung ho.
Steve, the British lines were overextended, partially due to the need to support Durnford's mounted troops. There wasn't sufficient infantry for a proper battle in line, although there were enough troops to hold a laager defence. However, Chelmsford's reasons for not laagering his wagons (need to maintain the supply chain) make it very unlikely for it to occur.
Lordroel, the Zulus will take losses, but it is a very difficult battle for the British to win given the same numbers and limitations.
You are very right on the issue of officers not knowing how to use them. Lt. Col Pulleine wasn't the most able commander, what with his paid commission and no combat experience, but Durnford was quite alright, if a bit gung ho.
Steve, the British lines were overextended, partially due to the need to support Durnford's mounted troops. There wasn't sufficient infantry for a proper battle in line, although there were enough troops to hold a laager defence. However, Chelmsford's reasons for not laagering his wagons (need to maintain the supply chain) make it very unlikely for it to occur.
Lordroel, the Zulus will take losses, but it is a very difficult battle for the British to win given the same numbers and limitations.
