The Battle of Isandlwana

The battle of Isandlwana was the major opening clash of the Anglo-Zulu War and one of the greatest African victories over European forces in history. Only twice has the scale of the victory at Isandlwana been surpassed on the continent of Africa. It was during the Victorian Era when the British Empire seemed to many to be the most permanent and indestructible force in the world, yet, British forces suffered a stunning if not crushing defeat at the hands of an army of Zulu warriors armed mostly with primitive spears and shields. To this day the battle of Isandlwana ranks as the worst defeat ever suffered by the British army at the hands of a native, indigenous force. The clash had its roots in the efforts of colonial officials to unite, under the banner of the British Empire, the disparate peoples of southern Africa, particularly the Boer Republic of South Africa and the Kingdom of Zululand. However, British agents met their match in the Zulu King Cetshwayo who, since coming to the throne, had expanded his influence at the expense of the Boers, outwitted British negotiators and enlarged and modernized his army, resurrecting the tried and true methods of the great King Shaka while also starting to provide his warriors with firearms. These were few and largely antiquated but were a start.

King Cetshwayo

British and Boer settlers accused the Zulus of encroaching on their land and when British agents demanded that King Cetshwayo disband his army in response to this the King decided on war to expel the British invaders. As in most of these cases there are two sides to the story. According to the British they launched a military expedition to defend their own and Afrikaner territory from Zulu raids while according to the Zulus the British intentionally provoked a conflict in order to conquer their country and they were doing no more than defending themselves against an invasion. In any event, a British army marched against the Zulus led by Lord Frederic Thesiger, 2nd Baron Chelmsford. His plan was for a 3-pronged invasion of Zululand with the largest central column under his own command, numbering 7,800 men. On January 11, 1879 they crossed the Buffalo River into Zulu territory. His force was mostly British troops but also included several hundred men (mostly Zulus themselves) of the Natal Native Contingent under European officers. There were some irregular cavalry, a six gun field artillery battery and a battery of Congreve rockets. It was, by any standard, a formidable force.

However, in their haste, the British had set off during the rainy season and this bogged down the columns, slowing their advance and gave the Zulus amble time to react. The British had hoped the Zulus would be dispersed harvesting their crops but the invasion happened to coincide with a routine muster of the army so that it was possible for the Zulus to react immediately to the oncoming threat. King Cetshwayo was alerted to the British presence and dispatched an army of about 24,000 warriors to intercept them. The Zulu warriors, led by Ntshigwayo kaMahole, greatly outpaced the British and undertook careful screening measures to ensure that they were not sighted by their enemy. In no time at all they were within striking distance of the British column under Lord Chelmsford which had pitched camp at Isandlwana on January 20. Greatly overconfident, the British failed to entrench or take any precautions for an attack. Lord Chelmsford was more concerned with the logistical problem of supplying his army in a vast wilderness than he was with defense.

The British then committed one of the most obvious mistakes in dividing their forces in the face of a numerically superior enemy. When troops of the Natal Native Contingent spotted one of the Zulu scouting parties Lord Chelmsford took about half of his British regulars and hundreds of local troops in pursuing this small band which naturally led them away from the main Zulu army. This left the British camp even weaker, exposed in open country with a large army of confident, determined and experienced Zulu warriors within easy striking distance. The British camp was guarded by only about 1,700 men under Lt. Colonel Henry Pulleine, an officer with no combat experience and with the support of only two artillery pieces.

In contrast, the Zulu princes were quick to recognize that they had caught their enemy at an extreme disadvantage and immediately seized the initiative and gave orders for an attack using classic Zulu tactics. On January 22, 1879 the Zulus came forward using about 10,000 to 15,000 men of their total strength of about 20,000. Colonel Pulleine deployed his few troops into a thin semi-circle to meet the on-rushing Zulus. Some British units, such as the rocket battery, were taken by surprise and overrun almost immediately. The Zulus fanned out in their classic “buffalo” formation and their center was held off for a time, taking considerable casualties due to the rapid, disciplined volley-fire of the British regulars with their modern rifles. However, the “left horn” of the Zulu “buffalo” made a determined and tenacious attack and soon had the British right flank crumbling away. Colonel Anthony Durnford and his men on the right flank had been the first to come under attack and finally his men were forced to retreat in the face of the Zulu onslaught. This allowed the African warriors to get around the fire of other nearby units and overwhelm them. Colonel Pulleine finally ordered his men to fall back to their camp, which the regulars at least accomplished in good order.

In early afternoon there was a solar eclipse but the impressive phenomenon seemed to have no effect on the battle. The Zulus swarmed around the camp, forcing the British troops into an ever tighter formation until they were literally fighting back-to-back. When they ran out of ammunition they met spears and shields with bayonets or swung their rifles like clubs. The British were wiped out, the Union flag was captured though at least one regimental flag was saved when an officer grabbed it and fled on horseback. The Zulus had been given orders to spare any civilians and this saved the life of a few officers who were not wearing the red uniform the Zulus identified with British soldiers. For the rest, there was no mercy, which was traditional in Zulu warfare. Of the 1,700 British and supporting forces engaged only about 400 survived. Most of the men of the Natal Native Contingent who were captured were executed afterwards as traitors by the Zulus. Some bodies were mutilated afterwards, which made for shocking news in Britain, but was simply in keeping with the local custom of taking trophies after a victory. Hard numbers are difficult to obtain on the part of the Zulus involved but it is estimated that about a thousand were killed in the battle with probably twice as many being wounded.

Lord Chelmsford and his force, alerted to the battle, returned late in the day but found nothing left and proceeded on to the mission station at Rorke’s Drift. The battle of Isandlwana was a stunning blow to the pride of the British Empire. The invasion of Zululand was totally defeated and had to be given up entirely. The Zulus had won a great victory and successfully defended their homeland. However, being so isolated, the victory gave them no long-term strategic advantage. It would be only a matter of time before the British attacked again, with more men, more caution and a greater determination to have their revenge. For a time though, after news of the epic Zulu victory spread, British positions throughout South Africa fell into near-panic at the fear that the Zulus might follow-up their success with a large-scale invasion south. However, King Cetshwayo was no fool and gave strict orders to his army against crossing the border. He wanted it made clear that they were fighting a defensive war only and would remain on their own territory. He hoped to avoid a full-scale war with Britain but, though the Disraeli government in London fell, that hope was in vain. The British high command feared that if the defeat at Isandlwana did not go unanswered it might encourage native wars and rebellions in other parts of the British Empire.

The war would go on, Britain would win and though the Zulu kingdom would survive (even to this day) it would never again be an independent, sovereign nation. Still, the battle of Isandlwana had an immense impact on the native peoples of southern Africa. The image of British invincibility had been destroyed and the British gained a healthy respect for the abilities of the Zulu warriors and would never underestimate them or be so careless again. Lord Chelmsford blamed his subordinates for the defeat, though the mistakes were his own, but he was saved from potential disgrace by the favor of Queen Victoria who gave him a chance to redeem himself in the following campaign. As would later be done with the battle of Adowa in East Africa, the battle of Isandlwana would be remembered for generations and used by African nationalists as an illustration of the prowess of their people in their campaign against European colonial rule and in favor of independence. In time, many more Africans other than the Zulus would come to regard the battle of Isandlwana as “their” victory.

Monarch Profile: King Shaka of the Zulus

Probably no other Zulu monarch is as famous as King Shaka, and with good reason. Through his innovative military tactics and successful wars of conquest he made the Zulus the dominant power in southern Africa during his lifetime. Starting with a tribal nation of 1,500, King Shaka conquered an empire with a population of over 250,000 by the time of his death. Because of his actions, however controversial, Zulu power was maintained for fifty years after his death. Shaka was born in 1787, the firstborn but illegitimate son of Chief Senzangakhona and Nandi by a woman of lower social status. Because of the circumstances of his birth Shaka had a pretty rough life and this is sometimes cited as a possible reason for his harsh policies and ruthlessness later in life. His very name, Shaka, has been translated by some as an insulting term. However, it seems all of this had a profound impact on young Shaka and implanted in him a great ambition, a desire to surpass all others and, it must be said, a degree of insensitivity. Considering how he had been treated in his most vulnerable years it is not surprising that he would become rather insensitive to the suffering of others.

By the time he was in his mid-teens, Shaka joined the warrior corps of Chief Dingiswayo of the Mthethwa and was known for his personal bravery, warrior skill and intelligence. He honed these talents under the guidance of Chief Dingiswayo, becoming an ever better military leader and increasingly ambitious. When Shaka’s father died in 1816 Chief Dingiswayo sent him back to the Zulus to assume power. Shaka succeeded in making himself King of the Zulus and immediately took retribution on all those who had been cruel to him and his low-born mother during his childhood. Also, upon assuming power, King Shaka immediately instituted new and innovative military reforms based on his previous experience with the Mthethwa. He organized his warriors into a regimental system and replaced their light throwing spears with heavier thrusting spears and larger more effective shields made of animal hide. He also trained his warriors to use their shields as offensive weapons to pull aside the shields of their enemies to expose their bodies to a stabbing attack. These new tactics were to serve Shaka quite well in future conflicts.

One of the most important changes Shaka made was in the discipline and training of his warriors. Often harsh methods were used to instill total obedience in his men so that they would follow orders without question and function as an organized team rather than simply a mob of individual warriors. He raised the physical fitness, resilience and stamina of his men by forbidding sandals and training them to run barefoot over fifty miles a day, regardless of the terrain. Years after Shaka was dead, foreign observers would marvel at the absolutely incredible speed and stamina of the Zulu armies who could move faster and more effectively on foot than almost any other soldiers in the world. The Zulu king also made use of young boys to carry supplies and so gain first-hand experience at the art of war so that when they came of age they would be fully prepared to take their place as warriors. King Shaka also developed the famous “buffalo” formation for organized attacks. It should be remembered that this was almost unprecedented in Africa at the time when the wild charge was the standard, time-honored tactic for any battle. King Shaka established his own and very effective strategy and because of the discipline and training he instilled in his men he was able to carry it out. The King could stand off on a hillside to gain an overall view of the battlefield and military situation, controlling the battle via messengers, while his warriors advanced in four ranks. The first would meet the enemy head-on, with a second force in reserve while the third and fourth divisions would fan out (like the horns of a buffalo) to encircle the enemy, thus allowing them to be destroyed completely. He also made sure to keep his reserve force out of sight so they would not became panicked or, alternatively, become too aggressive and join the fight prematurely.

In the initial wars fought by King Shaka these innovative tactics were far more complex than anything the other tribes he confronted could deal with and they were defeated quickly. Once beaten Shaka had no qualms about massacring his enemies, however, he usually gave them the choice of joining his army and any who did so left behind their previous affiliations and became Zulus, accepted in every way as if they had been born to that nationality. They were then trained as the Zulus were and joined the ranks like anyone else. Because of this policy, within only his first year as King, Shaka increased the number of his warriors from 350 to 2,000; quite a respectable force for that time and place. He was soon put to a greater test in 1818 when he joined his old teacher Dingiswayo at the battle of Gqokli Hill, an extremely hard fought defensive battle in which Dingiswayo was killed and King Shaka himself was almost defeated. It was a hard-won victory though and Shaka was sobered enough by the experience that he went back to his previous ways of making war on smaller tribes and clans to increase the size of his army. However, less than a year later he avenged the death of his mentor by inflicting a crushing defeat on the Ndwandwe in a fierce battle at the Mhlatuzi fords which lasted two days. In another new strategy unseen in Africa till that time, King Shaka applied the “scorched earth policy” toward his enemies, totally devastating their territory so as to leave nothing upon which the survivors could sustain themselves.

For the next ten years King Shaka launched numerous wars on almost every neighboring tribal nation in southern Africa, earning a reputation as a frighteningly effective conqueror. His innovative tactics and, it must be said, brutal treatment of his enemies, made him the most powerful monarch in the entire region. At the height of his power King Shaka ruled over a Zulu empire that stretched from Tanzania to the Cape Colony. He gained a domain of about two million square miles and gained a “body count” of about two million dead enemies doing it. He became so powerful that when an English doctor was brought in to treat him after he was wounded in battle he proposed exchanging ambassadors with the British monarch. There would have been no harm in that but he also allowed in British trade and businessmen for which later generations of Zulus might be critical of him. However, at that time, given what he had accomplished, it is understandable that King Shaka might have felt a bit over-confident or even invulnerable. Ultimately, King Shaka was his own worst enemy and while no other power had managed to beat him on the field of battle, his own brutal leadership was to ensure his downfall.

King Shaka was a harsh sovereign and a very superstitious man who was known to have people put to death, in horrible ways, for the seemingly random crime of “smelling” like a witch. His arbitrary cruelty became much worse after the death of his beloved mother in 1827. No one felt safe from his random punishments which might range from the torture and execution of one person to the complete massacre of entire villages. The people began to live in fear of him and the army became more discontented as well as they were kept constantly at war, moving ever farther from their homes and families on behalf of a king who no longer joined them in battle. They also had a big problem with one of the rules King Shaka enforced on his warriors which was to totally abstain from sexual relations. With a frightened population and a frustrated army King Shaka could not hope to survive for long. Finally, on September 23, 1828 Shaka was assassinated by two of his half-brothers at the age of 41. They claimed that he died in a cowardly fashion, begging for his life but, of course, we have only the word of his murderers on that score.

In any event, the place in history for King Shaka was secured long before the day of his death. He was certainly not a kind man but he is not celebrated or remembered for his actions as a ruler. What he is remembered for is his military leadership. Setting aside his character, he was undoubtedly a great warrior, perhaps the greatest and most successful conqueror sub-Saharan Africa has ever known. He took the Zulus from being a small, relatively minor local nation to become the dominant power in all of southern Africa. Even those who killed him knew better than to try to go back to the way things were and the system of organization, the tactics and the strategies he developed, served the Zulus well for many years to come before their final defeat at the hands of the British. Yet, even then, the greatest victory of the Zulus over the British at the battle of Isandlwana, would not have been possible without the earlier innovations and standards for military excellence set by King Shaka.

The Battle of Rorke's Drift

It was on this day in 1879 that one of the most famous little battles in British history began at the remote mission station of Rorke’s Drift in what is today South Africa when around 150 British troops were attacked by upwards of 4,000 Zulu warriors in the Anglo-Zulu War. The astounding thing is that, despite those seemingly hopeless odds, the British were victorious. The forces of Queen Victoria at Rorke’s Drift were led by Lieutenant John Chard of the Royal Engineers and Lieutenant Gonville Bromhead of the 24th Regiment of Foot. The Zulus were led by Prince Dabulamanzi kaMpande. The battle was supposed to have been a simple ‘mopping up’ operation on the part of the Zulus after they had wiped out a British column of over a thousand men at the battle of Isandlwana in the worst defeat suffered by a European army at the hands of a non-European foe prior to being surpassed by the Italian defeat at Adowa who were later surpassed by the Spanish defeat at Annual in 1921. The heroism of the British forces at Rorke’s Drift was, therefore, something badly needed for the morale of the British Empire after suffering so devastating a loss. Not only did the handful of men at the isolated mission station repulse repeated attacks by a vastly larger enemy, they forged a record of courage that remains unsurpassed in British military history to this day. Since the institution of the Victoria Cross in 1856, the highest award for battlefield heroism the British monarch can bestow, more were earned at Rorke’s Drift (11) than in any other engagement to date.

That was how I first became aware of the action at Rorke’s Drift as my history professor at the time was an avowed Anglophile whose special area of expertise was the history of the Victoria Cross. Most people probably know about it thanks to the classic 1964 film “Zulu” starring Stanley Baker and Michael Caine. The movie actually has a royal connection as the man playing Zulu King Cetshwayo was one of his relatives, Chief Mangosuthu Buthelezi who later became famous as a political leader and a somewhat controversial one at that for his strident anti-communism and break with the African National Congress. The film famously contains a number of historical inaccuracies but is entertaining for all of that and correctly shows the daunting odds and courage displayed by both sides in the battle. The little outpost had heard, of course, about the annihilation of the column under General Lord Chelmsford at Isandlwana but knew that it would be hopeless to try to retreat in open country slowed by the many sick and injured they would have to carry along with them. So, they decided to stay and fight it out at Rorke’s Drift, knowing it would be a fight to the death since, as was demonstrated at Isandlwana, the Zulus were not in the habit of taking prisoners, particularly when it came to British regulars.

The Zulus were mostly part of a reserve force that had seen no combat at Isandlwana and were fresh and eager. Added to this was the fact that the Zulus were of a time-honored warrior tradition, very fit and possessing incredible stamina. The British force, by comparison, consisted of a large number of wounded men, some men of the Natal Native Contingent were armed only with spears and their commanders would not have been considered top-notch at the time. Lt. Chard did not have the best reputation in the army, Lt. Bromhead was half deaf and their ranking NCO was the youngest in the army. They were, on the whole, better armed than their enemies who mostly fought with primitive melee weapons though a number did have rifles. The British were better trained in the art of modern warfare but the Zulus also had a primitive but quite effective system of command and control with established tactics that had worked for them in the past. Finally, given their immense numerical superiority there should have been no doubt that they would have defeated the little British outpost and that fairly quickly and completely. The redcoats hastily improvised the best fortifications they could with the space and materials on hand and then waited for the waves of Zulu warriors to come crashing down around them.

The Zulus were not actually supposed to attack Rorke’s Drift. King Cetshwayo was no fool and realized that if he were to provoke a general war with the British Empire he would surely lose. He wanted to repel them from his claimed territory but gave orders against invading that of his enemies. As it turned out, the defeat at Isandlwana enraged British public opinion against the Zulus while the action at Rorke’s Drift inspired them that victory was possible and obtainable. Prince Dabulamanzi made the attack on the mission station on his own authority, being known for his aggressiveness and for being what we would today call a ‘war hawk’. After an initial clash with a small troop of the Natal Native Horse the cavalrymen retreated, leaving the men at Rorke’s Drift on their own. At that point most of the native troops there abandoned the post as well. At about 4:30 PM the Zulus came on, taking as much fire as the British could put out, in attack after attack before recoiling to catch their breath and try again.

The fighting was fierce and often hand to hand as the British fought desperately for their lives against wave after wave of Zulu warriors. For the redcoats, absolutely every casualty counted. As he lost men, Lt. Chard was forced to slowly give ground, abandoning his north perimeter wall and a few rooms in the buildings on that side to the Zulus. Still, in the best tradition of the British infantrymen, they kept order, maintained discipline, stood and gave fire until the enemy was right upon them and then fought them off with the bayonet. The fighting went on through the evening and into the night. Time and time again the British position was all but overrun but each time the heroic soldiers desperately fought their way back and held their ground. Crowds of Zulus were everywhere and the hospital had to be abandoned during the night as the two sides fought from room to room. Chard and Bromhead had improvised some interior lines and as their losses mounted pulled back more and more to maintain a defensible position. The Zulus, for their part, took very heavy losses but continued to attack with tenacious determination. As the night dragged on the British were finally reduced to a mere handful of men, many of them wounded, and they were almost out of ammunition. Mention must also be made of the medics, commissary men and the field chaplain who acquitted themselves just as heroically as the combat infantrymen, tending the wounded in the midst of battle, bringing up ammunition and taking part in the battle themselves.

When dawn broke the next morning it was clear the British could not withstand another attack. If the Zulus had come on once more in all likelihood they would have swiftly taken Rorke’s Drift and massacred the remaining survivors. However, the Zulus had lost about a thousand men killed or wounded so that even their feisty chieftain had to admit that the little mission station was simply not worth it. To the great relief of the British survivors the Zulus decided not to try again and retreated. Sometime after 8AM a British relief force arrived under Lord Chelmsford so that the work of clearing the field and burying the dead could commence. It had been one of the fiercest battles in the history of the British Empire, lasting only hours and not of immense strategic importance but seeing some of the most brutal and desperate combat imaginable. It also saw some of the finest acts of bravery and heroism in the annals of British military history. Eleven men received the Victoria Cross, the most ever given to the men of one regiment for a single action, and four received Distinguished Conduct Medals for conspicuous valor in the face of the enemy. Another man, by all accounts, would have received the Victoria Cross had he not died in the battle as there was no provision at that time for posthumous awards.

Today, I doubt few people outside of military historians in the UK are all that familiar with the action at Rorke’s Drift and most would probably, I am sad to say, feel uncomfortable or even ashamed about it. White Europeans fighting African natives, that’s just terrible and brings up all that history of colonialism and the British Empire that the modern “citizens” of the UK would prefer to forget about or apologize for. Of course, it is a false dilemma to say one must choose between being either a jingoistic racist or someone ashamed of your own history. I look at Rorke’s Drift and see a clash of two kingdoms, unfortunate, but each with a great military tradition behind them and each displaying the heights of courage and tenacity. Ultimately, as we know, the Anglo-Zulu War ended in an “Anglo” victory with the Zulus losing their independence. However, we cannot assume that would not have happened anyway as the British (and most other Europeans for that matter) have now left South Africa and the Zulu kingdom is still not exactly independent but they seem to be okay with that. When remembering Rorke’s Drift and the wider war there is no reason for either side to be ashamed. The British troops were doing their duty and they and the Zulus alike displayed matchless courage. Britain was ultimately victorious but the Zulus had given them a fight like few other non-European peoples ever did.