Historical inaccuracies in the film Zulu

The fy|1964 historical war film "Zulu", which depicts the Battle of Rorke's Drift between the British Army and the Zulus in January 1879, during the Anglo-Zulu War, contains a number of factual errors. [ [http://www.rorkesdriftvc.com/zulu.htm Summary of factual errors and links to others] ] Writer-director Cy Endfield consulted with a Zulu tribal historian for information about the attack from the tribe's oral tradition, but other details of the event are incorrect, and the behavior of specific persons departs from known facts. [Stafford, Jeff [http://www.tcm.com/tcmdb/title.jsp?stid=96684&category=Articles "Zulu" (TCM article)] ]

The regiment

*The 24th Regiment of Foot is described as a Welsh regiment: in fact, although based in Brecon in south Wales, its designation was the "24th (The 2nd Warwickshire) Regiment of Foot". It did not become the South Wales Borderers until 1881. Of the soldiers present, 49 were English, 32 Welsh, 16 Irish and 22 others of indeterminate nationality. [ [http://www.rrw.org.uk/museums/brecon/fact_sheets/3.htm Information from Regiment of Wales] ] [ [http://www.rorkesdriftvc.com/zulu.htm Several inaccuracies pointed out in Rorke's Drift VC.com] ] [ [http://samilitaryhistory.org/vol044gc.html South African Military History Journal Vol 4 No 4] ]

*The song "Men of Harlech" features prominently as the regimental song; it did not become so until later. At the time of the battle, the regimental song was "The Warwickshire Lad". There was no "battlefield singing contest" between the British and the Zulus. [ [http://www.rorkesdriftvc.com/myths.htm Rorke's Drift vc.com myths] ]

*The British infantrymen of the Anglo-Zulu War did not wear sparkling white pith helmets. They were stained a tan colour (with tea or coffee) without helmet plates, and the bright scarlet uniforms were always covered in dust making them appear brown. [ [http://www.concierge.com/cntraveler/articles/5823?&pageNumber=2&articleId=5823&pageNumber=2 Reference to tea stained pith helmets] ]

Chard and Bromhead

*Gonville Bromhead was partially deaf, a disability not mentioned in the film. All the characters in the film pronounce Bromhead's name as it is spelt. In reality it was pronounced 'Brumhead'.

*The seniority of Chard over Bromhead (measured by their dates of commission) was three years, not three months as in the film. Also, there was no dispute over command. Lieutenant Chard was left in charge, due to seniority, by Major Henry Spalding well before the battle. Spalding rode off to get reinforcements, but his motives have been questioned. [ [http://www.rorkesdriftvc.com/vc/chard.htm Biography of John Chard] ]

*Both Chard and Bromhead are portrayed as being intelligent and able officers. In reality, Chard was widely regarded as inefficient if not actually incompetent, and had a reputation for laziness.{see 'Zulu' by Saul David pp230} Bromhead was a popular officer within the 24th, acquiring the nickname 'Gunny,' however he never seems to have been trusted with any meaningful responsibilities (possibly because of his deafness). It was for this reason that his company was selected to guard Rorke's Drift, a position it was never imagined would be attacked.Fact|date=May 2008

*The building of defensive ramparts and initial defence of Rorke's Drift was organised by Acting Assistant Commissary James Langley Dalton. His distinction was rewarded with the Victoria Cross, presented a year after the battle. The film gives most of the credit to Lieutenants Chard and Bromhead. The real Dalton had retired in 1871 as a Quartermaster Sergeant after 22 years of service in the 85th Regiment of Foot of the British Army before volunteering for the Commissariat and Transport Department. The film, however, portrays Dalton as something of an effete character, who does little that might be called heroic. This makes his award seem something of a mystery. In reality, much of the credit for the defence of the mission station must in fact go to Dunne and Dalton of the commissariat department.

*During the period when the mission station is fortified, the wagons used in the barricades are seen to be tipped over onto their sides. In reality, they remained upright, and the gaps between were plugged with biscuit boxes and mealie bags (Chard had placed them this way so that the Zulus would have to climb over the wagons to engage the British soldiers standing behind them, thus giving the defenders more time to shoot).

The Witts

There are several errors concerning the Swedish missionaries, the Witts. In the film, Witt is depicted as a middle aged widower, a pacifist and drunkard, who has an adult daughter called Margareta. In reality, Otto Witt was aged 30, and had a wife, Elin, and two infant children. Witt's family were at Oskarsberg 30 km away at the time of the battle. On the morning of the battle, Otto Witt, with the chaplain, George Smith and Surgeon-Major James Henry Reynolds had ascended Shiyane, the large hill near the station, and noticed the approach of the Zulu force across the Buffalo River. Far from being a pacifist, Witt had cooperated closely with the army and negotiated a lease to put Rorke's Drift at Lord Chelmsford's disposal. Witt made it clear that he did not oppose British intervention against Cetshwayo. He had stayed at Rorke's Drift because he wished "to take part in the defence of my own house and at the same time in the defence of an important place for the whole colony, yet my thoughts went to my wife and to my children, who were at a short distance from there, and did not know anything of what was going on". He therefore left on horseback to join his family shortly before the battle. [http://rapidttp.com/milhist/vol104fh.html Journal of South African Military History Society Vol 10 No 4] ]

Weaponry

*The officers are shown using Webley Mk VI .455 revolvers which were not introduced until 1915 (36 years after the events depicted in the film) instead of the Beaumont-Adams revolvers that Bromhead and Chard actually used. However, the British officer of the time was allowed to use any sort of sidearm he wished, as long as it fired .455 ammunition. Officers often privately purchased Webley top-break revolvers (in 1879 not yet officially adopted for service) somewhat similar in appearance to the Mk VI Webley. These [http://www.earmi.it/armi/atlas/74.htm Webley models] had been put on the market during the 1870s - such as the Webley-Green army model 1879 or the Webley-Pryse model. So the Webley model Mk VI was not yet developed when the film was set, but the design is typical of Webley revolvers of the period and can be seen as an example of artistic licence.

*Several men can be seen using Lee-Enfield Mk. I bolt-action rifles instead of the historically correct Martini-Henry. [ [http://www.rorkesdriftvc.com/myths.htm Rorke's Drift vc.com myths] ] Apparently, they ran out of .450/577 blanks during filming - close observation shows that, in many cases, the actors are simply dry-shooting the empty Martini-Henrys and simulating the recoil, with the gunshot sound effect dubbed in later.

*None of the rifles used by the Zulus were taken from dead British soldiers after the Battle of Isandlwana, as NNC Lieutenant Adendorff in the film suggests. The Zulus attacking Rorke's Drift were largely older and married regiments. Their assignment at Isandlwana had been to cut off retreat and they had not been on the battlefield itself. Most of their firearms were obsolete Brown Bess muskets, purchased decades earlier from traders, including James Rorke.

*Whenever a Zulu falls to the bullets from Martini-Henry rifles in the film, they drop dead with small wounds visible and with only little trickles of blood (as when 612 Williams shoots a Zulu in the hospital who is in the act of stabbing Private Hook). But wounds inflicted from the heavy .45 ins lead bullets would create massive gaping holes and much tissue damage. Presumably, the film-makers would not wish to show this to an audience at the time.

The men of the regiment

*Many of the men, including Bromhead and Chard, had full beards at the time of the battle. The film depicts them as largely clean shaven, with some sporting carefully-tended moustaches or sideburns.

*Surgeon-Major Reynolds is played by Patrick Magee as a middle-aged South African. In actuality Reynolds was a thirty-five year old Irishman. During the Battle of Rorke's Drift, Reynolds went round the barricades, distributing ammunition and tending to wounded there, something that is not shown in the film. [ [http://www.rorkesdriftvc.com/vc/reynolds.htm Brief bio of James Reynolds] ]

*Private Henry Hook VC is depicted as a rogue; in fact he was a model soldier who later became a sergeant; he was also a teetotaller. While the film has him in the hospital "malingering, under arrest", he had actually been assigned there specifically to guard the building. [ [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/wales/3419343.stm BBC News site] ]

*Conversely, Corporal William Allen is depicted as a model soldier; in fact, he had recently been demoted from sergeant for drunkenness.

*Colour Sergeant Bourne (1854-1945) is depicted as a big, hardened, middle-aged veteran; in fact, he was of smaller stature and, aged 23, the youngest colour sergeant in the British Army. [ [http://www.rorkesdriftvc.com/defenders/bourne.htm Biography of Frank Bourne] ] He was called 'The Kid' by his men. [ [http://www.rorkesdriftvc.com/defenders/tran.htm From Frank Bourne's account broadcast by the BBC in 1936] ] Sergeant Bourne would not have worn medals on his duty uniform. Moreover, Green's costume has the chevrons on the wrong arm.

*The role of Padre George Smith ["Ammunition" Smith] is completely ignored. [ [http://www.rorkesdriftvc.com/defenders/smith.htm Brief bio of George Smith] ]

*The real Sergeant Maxfield, as in the film, was delirious with fever. However, he was too weak to leave his bed and was stabbed to death by Zulus while the other sick and injured were being evacuated from the room.

*Private Cole was assigned to defend the hospital, not the perimeter. He was killed when he ran out of the hospital alone, possibly due to claustrophobia. Since he was killed by a bullet to the head, his last words in the film are unlikely to be authentic.

*Corporal Christian Ferdinand Schiess was significantly younger than the actor who portrayed him. At the time of his death in 1884 – five years after the battle – he was 28 years old. [ [http://www.rorkesdriftvc.com/vc/schiess.htm Brief bio of Christian Schiess] ]

*Private Hitch was shot through the shoulder, not the leg.

The Africans

*The attack on the mission station was not ordered by King Cetshwayo, as the audience is led to believe in the film. Cetshwayo had specifically told his warriors not to invade Natal, the British Colony. The attack was led by Prince Dabulamanzi kaMpande, the King's half-brother, who pursued fleeing survivors at Isandlwana across the river and then moved on to attack Rorke's Drift.

*Captain Stephenson, and his detachment of cavalry, claim to have come from "Durnford's Horse" when they ride up to the mission station. In reality, they were members of the Natal Native Horse, mainly composed of black riders, who had survived the Battle of Isandlwana and had ridden to Rorke's Drift to warn and aid the garrison there. The story of the black Natal Native Contingent troops' desertion is true. However, as Witt had already left, he was not responsible for their departure. They left of their own will, with Stephenson and his European NCOs. [ [http://africanadrenalin.com/isibindiafrica/rorkes_drift.htm Isibindi Africa] ] These deserters were shot at and one of the NCOs, Corporal Anderson, was killed. Stephenson was later convicted of desertion at court-martial and dismissed from the army. The uniforms of the Natal Native Contingent are inaccurate; NNC troops were not issued with European-style clothes.

Others involved

*The column of British irregular cavalry seen briefly in the film was actually at Rorke's Drift. However, Chard ordered them to leave after finding that they had little ammunition of their own. [ [http://africanadrenalin.com/isibindiafrica/rorkes_drift.htm Isibindi Africa] ]

Ending

*The ending of the film is somewhat fictitious. There was no Zulu attack at dawn on January 23 1879, which in the film led to the singing of "Men of Harlech". There was only sparse fighting with a few remaining Zulus. The Zulus did not sing a song saluting fellow warriors, and they did not depart peacefully. They departed at the approach of a British relief column. [ [http://www.rorkesdriftvc.com/myths.htm Rorke's Drift vc.com myths] ] [ [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/wales/3419343.stm BBC News site] ]

*The film omits the killing of wounded Zulus by British soldiers after the battle. There has been speculation that many may have been bayonetted, clubbed or shot in the battle's aftermath. (This was common practice if a small force prevailed over a much larger one, as it would have been unable to guard all the prisoners.)

ee also

*Zulu (film)
*Zulu Dawn

Notes

External links

*
*
*