Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Boer War

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 5>
Author
Nick1986 View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
Mighty Slayer of Trolls

Joined: 22-Mar-2011
Location: England
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7940
  Quote Nick1986 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Boer War
    Posted: 04-Mar-2012 at 20:41

As this photo demonstrates, some of the Boers' soldiers were very young. One of the British generals was shot dead by a 12 year old boy
Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains!
Back to Top
Nick1986 View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
Mighty Slayer of Trolls

Joined: 22-Mar-2011
Location: England
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7940
  Quote Nick1986 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Feb-2012 at 19:29
The Kaiser was also involved in the Boer War: he provided the farmers with Mauser rifles, doubtlessly to test them in the field
Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains!
Back to Top
JAJ View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 03-Oct-2011
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 29
  Quote JAJ Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Feb-2012 at 02:20
Sorry, have no knowledge of WWI - apart from the throwing of horrendous numbers against the Germans without winning any ground. However, despite this, much needed reforms had started in the War Office. In Queen Victoria's day, her cousin Prince George, Duke of Cambridge, was an arch conservative and die-hard, who opposed any reform on principle. British officers, so far as he was concerned, were gentlemen and sportsmen, but entirely wanting in military knowledge; something he deemed unnecessary. Their drubbing at the hands of the Boers was not considered too serious as the Boers were considered a backward rabble. It took the mighty disciplined German army to convince them they had a problem, that their army was minute and led by incompotents, and that their navy was not going to be the be-all and end-all of defence. Until 1900 the British navy could take on any two navies in the world simultaneously. When the Kaiser targetted huge increases in the German navy, and with an already enormous mighty and efficient army led by Prussian army officers (now that was terrifying) the British knew that time was of the essence. The Kaiser hid his machinations so clevery behind his Secret Service allocation of two hundred and fifty thousand pounds a year, but he meant business.
Back to Top
Nick1986 View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
Mighty Slayer of Trolls

Joined: 22-Mar-2011
Location: England
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7940
  Quote Nick1986 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Feb-2012 at 19:16
Even during WWI British soldiers marched shoulder to shoulder towards the waiting German machine guns. They couldn't run as they were weighed down by equipment and were forbidden from taking cover as the officers believed it was cowardly
Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains!
Back to Top
JAJ View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 03-Oct-2011
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 29
  Quote JAJ Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Feb-2012 at 23:39
Hahahahahah. I found your post really funny, Nick. Yes, it seems that the British caution of change realy gets in the way of their progress. And even though the Brits had gone into khaki for the Second Boer War, their modus operandii had not altered since the Crimea. Hence the shudderingly awful start start to the Boer War when men were marched shoulder to shoulder to their deaths, against an elusive and fleet-footed Boer army who were creating the blueprint of modern warfare. It took the close cooperation and friendship of Winston Churchill and King Edward VII to start the modernising of the War Office.
Back to Top
Nick1986 View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
Mighty Slayer of Trolls

Joined: 22-Mar-2011
Location: England
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7940
  Quote Nick1986 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Feb-2012 at 19:19

Despite the lessons of the Indian Mutiny the British insisted on wearing bright white topis, webbing and red coats on campaign and only adopted khaki after the First Boer War of 1880. They'd have been better off wearing a big sign on their chests saying "shoot me"
Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains!
Back to Top
JAJ View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 03-Oct-2011
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 29
  Quote JAJ Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Jan-2012 at 20:43
At the time of the Boer War, the Boers were mostly farmers with little or no education, with only a spoken language but no written language and with no schools or universities. English speaking and German speaking schools opened in Johannesburg in the early 1900s and 'High Dutch' was taught alongside English in schools until the 1920s when Afrikaans was added. The Boers had strong moral ethics, but many thought that these did not apply if they were dealing with the British or the blacks, both of whom they considered reprehensible races. They considered that the British had coralled them in the centre of the nation, trying to prevent their expansion and many British were patronising and demeaning in their dealings with the Boers. It was said that President Kruger would not allow Cecil Rhodes' name to be uttered in his presence. As a gold mine owner, Cecil Rhodes probably felt much the same about Paul Kruger who pirated the gold mines and expelled an American Jewish Rabbi for giving public expression to his opinion of the persecution of the Jews and the Catholics in the Transvaal. (New York Times May 7th 1900) (The racial discrimination against Jews became especially difficult because most of the gold mine owners were Jewish.)
Back to Top
Nick1986 View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
Mighty Slayer of Trolls

Joined: 22-Mar-2011
Location: England
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7940
  Quote Nick1986 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Jan-2012 at 19:36
Originally posted by JAJ

Ah! Very delicate ground here. But if I can just interject, I see that Bulldog has said 'sympathisers/traitors', so I'm guessing, but it would seem they're the same animal, sympathisers if you were a Boer, and traitors if you were British. Also, apparently it was a point of honour for many Boers to take an oath of alliegence to Queen Victoria to allay suspicions so that they could go on doing exactly what they had been doing. I realise that this is a contentious statement and one which I could not prove; nevertheless it seems to crop up a lot as a general statement and comes under the belief of 'where there's smoke there's fire.' But if it could be proved, those who took part would be traitors, no matter how noble their motives.

Good point, especially when taking into account the oath-breaking
Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains!
Back to Top
JAJ View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 03-Oct-2011
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 29
  Quote JAJ Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Jan-2012 at 21:33
Ah! Very delicate ground here. But if I can just interject, I see that Bulldog has said 'sympathisers/traitors', so I'm guessing, but it would seem they're the same animal, sympathisers if you were a Boer, and traitors if you were British. Also, apparently it was a point of honour for many Boers to take an oath of alliegence to Queen Victoria to allay suspicions so that they could go on doing exactly what they had been doing. I realise that this is a contentious statement and one which I could not prove; nevertheless it seems to crop up a lot as a general statement and comes under the belief of 'where there's smoke there's fire.' But if it could be proved, those who took part would be traitors, no matter how noble their motives.
Back to Top
Nick1986 View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
Mighty Slayer of Trolls

Joined: 22-Mar-2011
Location: England
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7940
  Quote Nick1986 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Jan-2012 at 19:59
By whose definition would they be "traitors"? Many may never have considered themselves British subjects, being of Dutch descent


Edited by Nick1986 - 18-Jan-2012 at 20:00
Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains!
Back to Top
Bulldog69 View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 29-Aug-2011
Location: South Africa
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 53
  Quote Bulldog69 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Nov-2011 at 05:29
Unfortunately it suffers from the main draw-back of any fixed fortification: the Boers would quickly have found out about it, and simply avoided it. As they were generally unencumbered with artillery / wagons, they could avoid the beaten track much more easily than the British. Also bear in mind that there were plenty of traitors / sympathisers who would keep the Boers informed as to every move of the British - it is small wonder that the Brits often dealt with such people harshly.
Back to Top
Nick1986 View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
Mighty Slayer of Trolls

Joined: 22-Mar-2011
Location: England
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7940
  Quote Nick1986 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Nov-2011 at 19:16
Thanks Bulldog. If there were no other roads that blockhouse would guarantee control of the pass
Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains!
Back to Top
Bulldog69 View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 29-Aug-2011
Location: South Africa
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 53
  Quote Bulldog69 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Nov-2011 at 08:44
There are several 'preserved' blockhouses one can visit in South Africa. An especially good one is beside the N1 (main Johannesburg - Cape Town highway) a few hours outside of Cape Town - might even be the one in the photo. It was evidently built to protect the old iron railway bridge which is still visible next to it.
Also in the Cape is an even more interesting fortification. Near Montagu, one will see signs for the 'Old English Fort 1899'. The setting for this is incredible, as it is perched on top of a knife-like ridge of rocks which blocks a valley. There is a tunnel through this obstacle (not sure if it pre-date the fort or not, but I would assume so) and the fort utterly dominates this. It is built of local stone and cement, with rifle loop-holes and an amazing vantage point. It is small - about the size of a single garage, with no roof (though there was probably one back in the day - probably housed a section.
 
This link contains a photo and map info:
http://www.panoramio.com/photo/1537320
 
Back to Top
Nick1986 View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
Mighty Slayer of Trolls

Joined: 22-Mar-2011
Location: England
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7940
  Quote Nick1986 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Nov-2011 at 19:13

In response to Boer attacks on the railways, the British built these blockhouses: fortified stone towers very similar to the type found in Northern England. Besides the stone structures, the British also built many temporary blockhouses from corrugated iron
Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains!
Back to Top
Bulldog69 View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 29-Aug-2011
Location: South Africa
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 53
  Quote Bulldog69 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Nov-2011 at 08:00
Have commented on the Voortrekker thread.
Back to Top
Nick1986 View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
Mighty Slayer of Trolls

Joined: 22-Mar-2011
Location: England
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7940
  Quote Nick1986 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Nov-2011 at 20:17
Originally posted by Bulldog69

Another interesting modern 'myth' is the PC-inspired push to claim that the Boer War was not the 'white man's war' that everyone at the time accepted it was.

Like most revisionist history, this is based more on modern attitudes and efforts to appease certain political groups than any sort of historical reality. Those who claim it was not fought as a 'white man's war' use a couple of photos showing Africans in uniform, wearing bandoliers and holding rifles and seem to think this is enough. No one has ever denied that Africans served as scouts and such like throughout the war and on both sides, but the fact is that the two Boer Wars were fought very differently to every other colonial war. In the Zulu War and the Sudan Campaign, for example, the Imperial forces were largely locally raised regiments with just a core of British units - at Omdurman, eg, only a third of the 'British' forces were indeed 'British'. In the Boer War, no such large scale raising of non-white troops happened and no battle saw non-white regiments play a leading role.
If one looks at the British ORBATs at any of the major battles of the Second Boer War (Colenso, Spion Kop, Paardeberg, Belmont, Talana Hill, Elandslaagte, Wagon Hill etc etc), one will not see a single non-white regiment there. Compare this to the ORBATs at other British colonial battles such as Magdala, Omdurman, Isandlwana, Khartoum or whatever.
 
Also, the British turned down repeated offers of assistance from both the Basutho and the Zulus.
 
Similarly, General Napier's raid on Abyssinia saw large numbers of (non-white) Indian Army troops deployed. Indeed, the majority of Napier's forces were Indian, not British. This quite simply didn't happen during the Boer War and the Indian units of the Indian Army (it had British units too) were not deployed to South Africa. One imagines the magnificent Sikh and Gurkha regiments would have been splendidly suited to serve in the Boer War, but this did not occur.

Equally, during the dozens of wars the Boers fought prior to the Boer War, the Boers made lots of use of Swazi and other African warriors, with these black allied units often outnumbering the Boers themselves.

So even though thousands of Africans played an important role during the war, there was certainly a determined and consistant effort by both sides to fight the war in a very different way from other colonial conflicts.

Welcome back Bulldog.Smile As a South African, maybe you can help me with this topic. I'd like to find out more about the Boers' ancestors, the Voortrekkers:

http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=30519
Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains!
Back to Top
Bulldog69 View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 29-Aug-2011
Location: South Africa
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 53
  Quote Bulldog69 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Nov-2011 at 04:23

Another interesting modern 'myth' is the PC-inspired push to claim that the Boer War was not the 'white man's war' that everyone at the time accepted it was.

Like most revisionist history, this is based more on modern attitudes and efforts to appease certain political groups than any sort of historical reality. Those who claim it was not fought as a 'white man's war' use a couple of photos showing Africans in uniform, wearing bandoliers and holding rifles and seem to think this is enough. No one has ever denied that Africans served as scouts and such like throughout the war and on both sides, but the fact is that the two Boer Wars were fought very differently to every other colonial war. In the Zulu War and the Sudan Campaign, for example, the Imperial forces were largely locally raised regiments with just a core of British units - at Omdurman, eg, only a third of the 'British' forces were indeed 'British'. In the Boer War, no such large scale raising of non-white troops happened and no battle saw non-white regiments play a leading role.
If one looks at the British ORBATs at any of the major battles of the Second Boer War (Colenso, Spion Kop, Paardeberg, Belmont, Talana Hill, Elandslaagte, Wagon Hill etc etc), one will not see a single non-white regiment there. Compare this to the ORBATs at other British colonial battles such as Magdala, Omdurman, Isandlwana, Khartoum or whatever.
 
Also, the British turned down repeated offers of assistance from both the Basutho and the Zulus.
 
Similarly, General Napier's raid on Abyssinia saw large numbers of (non-white) Indian Army troops deployed. Indeed, the majority of Napier's forces were Indian, not British. This quite simply didn't happen during the Boer War and the Indian units of the Indian Army (it had British units too) were not deployed to South Africa. One imagines the magnificent Sikh and Gurkha regiments would have been splendidly suited to serve in the Boer War, but this did not occur.

Equally, during the dozens of wars the Boers fought prior to the Boer War, the Boers made lots of use of Swazi and other African warriors, with these black allied units often outnumbering the Boers themselves.

So even though thousands of Africans played an important role during the war, there was certainly a determined and consistant effort by both sides to fight the war in a very different way from other colonial conflicts.


Edited by Bulldog69 - 15-Nov-2011 at 04:35
Back to Top
JAJ View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 03-Oct-2011
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 29
  Quote JAJ Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Oct-2011 at 16:27
Hi Bulldog. Yes the Boer War was one where many 'firsts' were seen, including the newly invented X-ray machine. I'm pretty sure it was the first war where Listerene was used - hygiene was becoming increasingly important in surgery. A cinematograph team which had only been briefly trialled, took footage of the war. It was the first time telegraphists were used, who tapped into telephone lines to convey information. I'm pretty sure I've missed a few here.
Back to Top
Bulldog69 View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 29-Aug-2011
Location: South Africa
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 53
  Quote Bulldog69 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Oct-2011 at 07:03
Not the most 'PC' of anecdotes, but interesting nonetheless:
 
‘Among the marvelous escapes recorded, and these were not a few, was one of a negro who was shot through the brain by a bullet. The projectile passed through one temple and lodged into the other, yet the man still survived, and showed a decided intention to recover. There is an old story of a Jamaica negro who fell from a tree without injury, and when asked how he had escaped, he explained his good fortune by saying: ‘Tank God, me fall on me head!’. The invulnerability of the nigger cranium has its advantages’
South Africa and the Transvaal War, Vol.3, p.19

While accurate, the newly adopted, smaller .303 (or roughly equivilant 7mm round for the Mauser) rounds travelled much faster than those fired by the Martini-Henry style weapons the Lee Metfords and Mausers replaced and thus generally didn't tumble on impact. If these smaller round didn't strike bone, therefore, the bullet usually passed straight through the victim's body without doing too much harm. There are numerous remarkable takes of Tommies getting riddled with bullets but emerging relatively unscathed.

It is also noteworthy that Buller's field hospital contained an X-Ray unit which undoubtedly helped a great many wounded soldiers.


Edited by Bulldog69 - 25-Oct-2011 at 07:18
Back to Top
Bulldog69 View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 29-Aug-2011
Location: South Africa
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 53
  Quote Bulldog69 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Oct-2011 at 02:11
I enjoyed the story about the goats, but I must say it strikes me as somewhat apocryphal! The Boers were masters of propaganda - their efforts put those of Goebals to shame - and a consistant theme running through all their stories is how great they were at shooting, and how dreadful the British were.
As early as the aftermath of the Jameson Raid, the Boer propaganda machine went into overdrive - despite their forces having fought a 2 day running battle with the Raiders (and them having been driven off various positions, their forces having been scattered by cavalry charges on a couple of occasions and their snipers having been silenced by the Raiders' 7-lbers), somewhat improbably, the Boers reported just 4 men killed. This was completely at odds with eye-witness accounts from the Raiders (some officers reported wagon loads of dead Boers trundling away after the surrender) and a loose-lipped remark from one Boer commander (who admitted the Raiders' artillery had given his men a hammering).
Interestingly, after the surrender, the Boers challenged the Rhodesians to a shooting competition - which the Rhodesians won.
 
This general theme carried on through the Boer War - the Boers reported tiny casuality figures in all encounters (whether or not they were driven from the positions) and outrageously exaggerated British losses. Just a few months into the War, President Steyn of the Free State assured his men that the British had lost 160,000 men KIA - more than the British actually had in South Africa at that time.
Similarly, in one battle of the Guerilla War / Terrorist Campaign (I forget the name now and cannot check my books because I am work, but will edit this later) a force of 1200 Boers attacked British positions held by 550 men. Various attempts to take the British positions were driven off and broken up with machine gun fire and artillery, in a battle that started at 0300 hours and ended in the evening. Their attacks all having been thwarted, the Boers retired - claiming they had lost just 2 (!!!) men KIA during the 18 hour battle.


Edited by Bulldog69 - 25-Oct-2011 at 06:39
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 5>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.063 seconds.