Could The British Have Won At Isandlwana

More Answers On Could The British Have Won At Isandlwana

Could the British have won at Isandlwana? – FindAnyAnswer.com

The Zulus had outmanoeuvred Chelmsford, and their victory at Isandlwana was a decisive defeat of the British invasion that forced the main British force to retreat out of Zululand until a far larger British army could be shipped to South Africa for a second invasion. Secondly, how did the British won at Rorke’s Drift?

Would the British Army have won the Battle of Isandlwana if … – Quora

The British commander then allowed himself to be lured away by a Zulu diversion, dividing his troops, leaving the camp at Islandlwana vulnerable to the Zulu main force. Modern weaponry would have increased the Zulu casualties but would not have won the battle. The British were out-thought and then outfought. 1.1K views View upvotes Kerrin Evans

How could the British have avoided defeat at Isandlwana?

Answer (1 of 3): By following Standard Operational Procedures in constructing a defence perimeter around their camp and reinforcing it with wagons. By not dividing their force by allowing the Zulus to lead them on a diversion, before the main attack on the camp. By maintaining a tighter firing li…

Battle of Isandlwana – Wikipedia

The British Army had suffered its worst defeat against an indigenous foe equipped with vastly inferior military technology. Isandlwan resulted in the British taking a much more aggressive approach in the Anglo-Zulu War, leading to a heavily reinforced second invasion, and in the destruction of King Cetshwayo ‘s hopes of a negotiated peace. Contents

How could the British win the Battle of Isandlwana? – SpaceBattles Forums

This was a major factor in why the victory at Isandlwana accomplished nothing for the Zulu strategically. The inability to follow it up in any decisive manner precisely because they could not take a well fortified camp, and weren’t going to try again. Kambula only happened because the British were once again invading deep into Zululand. 15 Marlowe

If the British had won at Isandlwana – 1879 Zulu war

If the British at won the day at Isandlwana, I take it that would have been the end of the Zulu War of 1879. Would Cetewayo have surrendered? There would have b. WWW.1879ZULUWAR.COM . Film Zulu Quote:Lieutenant John Chard: The army doesn’t like more than one disaster in a day. Lieutenant Gonville Bromhead: Looks bad in the newspapers and upsets …

Could Isandlwana End Differently – History Forum

The British at Isandlwana advanced out of their camp to fight the Zulus. This separated them from their ammunition resupplies. Had they remained in camp, the riflemen could have been resupplied more easily. The British held off the Zulus as long as their ammunition lasted and only collapsed after their ammo was exhausted. BlackViper Ad Honorem

How many British were killed at the Battle of Isandlwana?

People also ask, could the British have won at Isandlwana? The answer is yes, over 1,000 Britishtroops armed with assault rifles, squad machine guns, mortars and light artillery would haveshattered the Zulu Force, no matter how bad the deployment or arrogant the commander. As it was the Zulus suffered between 3,000-4,500 casualties.

Effects of a British Victory at Isandlwana | alternatehistory.com

The British learned a great many lessons through the defeat at Isandlwana (having enough ammo at hand, setting up lagers when possible, etc), so perhaps those won’t be taken to heart if they manage to survive the battle. Also, any ideas about how this would affect the British public and government’s opinion of the war?

Would a Roman legion have been more successful at the Battle of …

So, we’re going to take the Battle of Isandlwana, 22 January 1879, and drop in a full Imperial Roman Legion to replace the British forces of the No. 2 and No. 3 column and their native allies. First, we’ll look at the Zulu forces, then at the Roman Legion, and then look at the battle and how the Romans might have fared in place of the British.

12 Facts About the Battle of Isandlwana – History Hit

It was one of the worst defeat ever suffered by a modern army against a technologically inferior indigenous force By the end of the day, hundreds of British redcoats lay dead on the slope of Isandlwana – Cetshwayo having ordered his warriors to show them no mercy. The Zulu attackers also suffered – they lost somewhere between 1,000 and 2,500 men.

Battle of Isandlwana – British Battles

Casualties at the Battle of Isandlwana: 52 British officers and 806 non-commissioned ranks were killed. Around 60 Europeans survived the battle. 471 Africans died fighting for the British. Zulu casualties have to be estimated and are set at around 2,000 dead, either on the field or from wounds.

Isandlwana: The defeat that stunned Victorian Britain – BBC News

Isandlwana: The defeat that stunned Victorian Britain By Hamilton Wende South Africa 25 January 2014 Alamy The battle of Isandlwana in 1879 – in which a force of 20,000 Zulus annihilated a British…

3 Popular Myths of Isandlwana – 1879 Zulu War – Military History Matters

2. Ammunition failure One particularly persistent legend has it that the British were overrun at Isandlwana because of a failure of ammunition supply, either through the parsimony of regimental quartermasters, or because their ammunition boxes could not be opened – an idea which, of course, effectively excuses a number of deeper military errors.

Isandlwana: The defeat that stunned Victorian Britain – BBC News

The battle of Isandlwana in 1879 – in which a force of 20,000 Zulus annihilated a British contingent of 1,800 men – became a symbol to black South Africans that white domination was not inevitable …

Battle of Isandlwana and British Army’s Defeat – 554 Words – Free Essays

On January 22, 1879, The British army suffered a major defeat at the battle of Isandlwana in South Africa. Several factors contributed to this downfall. It was expected that since the British under Lord Chumsford had superior weapons, they would have easily won the battle.

How many British were killed at the Battle of Isandlwana?

Thereof, could the British have won at Isandlwana? The answer is yes, over 1,000 British troops armed with assault rifles, squad machine guns, mortars and light artillery would have shattered the Zulu Force, no matter how bad the deployment or arrogant the commander. As it was the Zulus suffered between 3,000-4,500 casualties.

The British Took On 30,000 Men & Lost: The Great Zulu Victory

The Battle of Isandlwana was the first major battle of the Anglo-Zulu War of 1879, which the British eventually won after this first initial and crushing defeat. The British invading force consisted of a few thousand British troops as well as colonial volunteer troops and local native levies, all under the command of Lord Chelmsford.

อังกฤษสามารถชนะที่ Isandlwana ได้หรือไม่?

คำตอบคือใช่ ทหารอังกฤษกว่า 1,000 นายที่ติดอาวุธปืนไรเฟิลจู่โจม ปืนกลหมู่ ครก และปืนใหญ่ขนาดเบา จะทำให้กองทัพซูลูแตกเป็นเสี่ยง ไม่ว่ากองกำลัง …

The Battle of Isandlwana and the Anglo-Zulu War of 1879

There, 150 British and colonial troops fought off wave after wave of attacks for ten grueling hours before the Zulus finally retreated. Eleven Victoria Crosses were awarded following the station’s remarkable survival. Isandlwana was a humiliating defeat for a British government that hadn’t even ordered the attack on Zululand in the first place.

Five Times the British Had No Choice But to Admit Defeat

Saratoga: Imagine an entire U.S. Army brigade surrendering to the Taliban, and now you grasp the impact of the Battle of Saratoga in 1777. A British force of 7,000 men had laid their arms before …

British at isandlwana vs union army – SpaceBattles Forums

Da Plauge DOC THAT CATCHES ALL DA NICE CHATS. Sep 4, 2019. #1. British at isandlwana vs Union army. The British army at the battle of Isandlwana lead by will be facing off against A union army lead by Brig. General John Buford. Force composition: British forces courtesy of wiki and their sources (with additional info on ammo and armaments by me):

Could Isandlwana End Differently – Historum | History Forum

I think the point of this thread is, ‘If the British had fortified their camp, not divided their force, and defended an enclosed circle so that there was no flank for the Zulus to turn then they might have won at Isandlwana. Roarke’s Drift was a much smaller battle but had similar force ratios.

Historical actors recreate bloody Battle of Isandlwana – Daily Mail

Historical actors dressed in military uniforms and traditional costumes recreate the bloody Battle of Isandlwana where 20,000 Zulu warriors attacked 1,300 British soldiers in the first clash of …

Rorke’s Drift photos show scene of Zulu battle in 1879 – Mail Online

Isandlwana: The aftermath of the battle which took place hours before Rorke’s Drift and had a very different outcome, with more than 20,000 Zulus overrunning the British camp at Isandlwana …

Isandlwana: The defeat that stunned Victorian Britain – BBC

The battle of Isandlwana in 1879 – in which a force of 20,000 Zulus annihilated a British contingent of 1,800 men – became a symbol to black South Africans that white domination was not inevitable …

Effects of a British Victory at Isandlwana | alternatehistory.com

The British learned a great many lessons through the defeat at Isandlwana (having enough ammo at hand, setting up lagers when possible, etc), so perhaps those won’t be taken to heart if they manage to survive the battle. Also, any ideas about how this would affect the British public and government’s opinion of the war?

BRITISH HEROIC FAILURE # 5 – ‘Gallant Resistance’: Isandlwana II

For the remainder of the war, the British used Isandlwana as an excuse to massacre Zulus. Two months later, the British won a decisive victory at Khambula. In the battle itself, two thousand Zulus died, in contrast to a mere twenty-six British soldiers. The carnage continued afterwards: an enlisted man described how a patrol had discovered …

How the British lost the war at Isandlwana: Part Two

The real truth as to how they lost was hidden and protected with lies by Lord Chelmsford who led the war. On January 22 1879, at Rorke’s Drift which borders Natal Zululand, a small British army of 140 men fought for 12 hours against 3 000 Zulu warriors. The British won. Queen Victoria rewarded the soldiers with at least 11 Victoria Crosses.

[TMP] “Why the British lost at Isandlwana but won at Rorke’s Drift.” Topic

I have read many accounts, chats and had many discussions with others about this. Everyone centers on ammunition, stupidity, numbers, etc. My opinion is that the main cause of these outcomes was strategy and tactics. At Isandlwana, outnumbered 15 to one, the British formed up facing the main body of Zulus, the head of the Buffalo.