[QUOTE=BritinAfrica;610614]Why were over 1000 British troops massacred at Isandlwana 22nd January 1879 against a force of 25,000 Zulu's (25 to 1 Zulu advantage) while Rorkes Drift 22nd to 23rd January 1879 with just over 100 troops held out against 4,000 Zulu's (44 to 1 Zulu advantage).
I have visited both battlefields and I have my own conclusions.
Historians have stated a number of reasons, among which are:-
(1)Lack of ammunition at the firing line.
(2)Difficulty opening ammunition box's which were screwed shut.
(3)Firing lines extended far beyond then they should have been.
(4)Lord Chelmsford should never have split his force to go searching for the Zulu
(5)Poor command by *Brevet*Lieutenant Colonel*Henry Pulleine.
(6)British commanders severely underestimated the Zulu capabilities.*
Recent discoveries have been made that disproves (1) and (2) , proof has been found suggesting the there was plenty of ammunition available, screws used to close the box's were bent suggesting that troops used rifle butts to smash open ammunition box's. Further proof has been found that the firing line extended far beyond then what was originally thought.
In my opinion (3) (4) (5) and (6) are mainly responsible. Could the outcome of battle been different if fought differently?
While it was a close run thing, Rorkes Drift held out with junior officers in command.
I'd be interested in other views.[/QUOTE
This is a very interesting post and it is obviously a specialist subject for you BritinAfrica. There is no doubt a lot of brave men died on both sides.
I never realised that some British soldiers escaped from the battle, I thought everyone on the British side was killed.
A very good post