Visiting the battlefield of Blood River 

I am also an English speaking South African who is directly descended from Andries Pretorius on my mothers side.

Indeed. The zoology undermined their own credibility by massacre of Piet Retief and other innocents

That’s great thanks. I’m glad you liked it

Thanks Harold / it’s not a battle I know in great detail but I enjoyed learning.

Especially if you consider that the Battle of Isandlwana took place in 1879 and the Zulu defeated a larger professional British army with better weapons than was available to the Boers.

@@petero7937 Hi Peter, thanks for the comment. Hope you and your family have a very blessed Christmas holiday season!

Glad it was helpful!

Cheers Andy!

The explanation is very simple! The incompetence at Isandlwana was the decision not to laager. Compare Isandlwana with Rorke's Drift where some rudimentary defences, quickly built, allowed a British company to hold off a much much bigger Zulu force. I don't think the Zulus ever defeated a colonial force within a properly defended position and I also think the Boers lost every time they were caught in the open by the Zulus?

@@gap9992 Well, I´ve read Isandlwana failed because Lord Chelmsford was a dead loss. He couldn´t even think properly. 7.000 men and not even he knew where was the bulk of Zulu Army.

British army was 2000, but the force they led and which was under them was much bigger. They had colonial troops and police as well as Xhosa and Zulu soldiers totalling more than 2500.

@@davethorstry6700 Ok.. but if we compare British in Isandlwana.... and Boers in Blood River.... 19th Century was Royal Navy´s century... but the Victorian Army.....

Thanks Jess- so it sounds like it is usually closed which is a real shame.

Anything wrong with that?

It's the fault of western medicine. The number of blacks swelled to beyond carrying capacity. They had developed no technology beyond the spear. And they had no jobs because they never created any. Today, expert looters of shopping malls while their leaders live like bloated parasites

Yes that is what many Voortrekkers believe though as the British learned during the AZW the Zulus generally do not favour fighting at night.

@@redcoathistory Yes because they actually fought with a bit more honor.

@@royjameson2097 Is fighting at night dishonourable?

@@royjameson2097 honor has nothing to do with fighting at daylight or night. It has everything to do with tactics, intelligence and being smart.

Yes, it was quite sad.

@@redcoathistory At least those Afrikaner monuments are still there.

Gol Kas that is true. To be fair, South Africa like India, have done a fairly decent job of maintaining there old monuments even for ‘enemies’ like the British...

@@redcoathistory That's good to hear. In my hometown in eastern macedonia, in Greece we have a big statue of Mohamet Ali( he was born here), the ruler of Egypt even though he was not a philhelleen(aka a friend of Greeks). History is history and we must respect it.

@@golkas9971 Agree completely!

Thanks - yes some older films I believe but you would need to google them as I don't recall the names.

Thanks, Theo! Maybe we will bump into each other on the battlefields some time!

@@redcoathistory that would be fine, lol i wil look out for a Redcoat!

Very true. Fantastic marksmen.

Good question - According to my research: "There was no standard firearm available but the majority of Voortrekkers were armed with a muzzleloader very similar to the "Brown Bess" issued to British troops at this time. Some would have had better quality firearms. Many would also be in possession of "elephant guns", i.e. large calibre weapons unsuitable for firing from the saddle but deadly when fired from rests. The average musket if carefully loaded with a well fitting ball probably had a range of some 250 metres."

@BANASTRE TARLETON Hi - I'm interested to know more. Please share your sources. Thanks

@BANASTRE TARLETON there was definitely no women or children involved go and read our history.

@@redcoathistory There were plenty of examples of the muskets used by the Voortrekkers on display in the museum next to the Church of the Vow in Pietermaritzburg. I have not visited that museum for years. Unfortunately it's in the center of town which today has a massive parking problem as well as a very high crime rate. Unlike when I was a kid.

Just in the later first Boer war and still later second Boer war, the Boers had no standardized arms as in a army. Each had his own firearm being just plain farmers. Some had only shot guns. In this battle it was the same but mostly muzzle loaders of the period.

ngiyabonga! Yes, I hope the rains come soon.

Hi Peter, are you sure? I thought this was a specific convoy of wagons for battle...Not general family transport.

@@redcoathistory Christian it seems I owe you an apology , after some research I found indeed you are quite correct . I was thinking of weenen where the women and children where slaughtered by the Zulus . Yes it was a battle laager with men only and servants at blood river . It's been a long while since I visited the site and the voortrekker monument and time has erased my brain a little 😉 that's my excuse and I'm sticking to it 😂

@@redcoathistory having said that I have just found images of women reloading rifles in the battle on a website . So what is one to believe ?

@@redcoathistory the movie ,"they built a nation 1938" confirms the fact that it was a war laager 👍 sorry for my ignorance

@@peterrooke5336 No need to apologise...I am sure that a few wives may have followed their husbands. I appreciate you caring enough to check - it is only through such actions that all of us can increase our knowledge. Please do keep in touch and continue to comment - it keeps me on my toes!

Hi Coerie- my understanding is that this was a military commando and that at Blood River wives and children weren’t there. Pls supply a reliable source if I am wrong so that I can learn more.

@@redcoathistory Without the wives and older children of the men reloading the muzzle loaders the voortrekkers would not have been able to successfully defend their position against the Zulus as the break inbetween shots would have given the Zulus ample time to overrun the voortrekkers. With the wives and children reloading the weapons meant that they could provide enough firepower to repel attack after attack by the Zulus.

Pls send me the source for that information 👍🏼

@@redcoathistory did you get the link I sent you?

@@coerievantonder3491 Hi Coerie, no I didn't. Just an FYI I think you may be conflating Blood River with the earlier battles...none of the research I've seen suggests that women and children were at Blood RIver. Here is a clip from the SA Military History Society article on the battle: "Serving under Commandant A.W. Pretorius was Karel Landman as his deputy while there were six other commandants: J.H. de Lange, (Hans Dons), J. Potgieter, P.D. Jacobs, S. Erasmus, J.J. Uys and L. Meyer. With them moved a force of 464 Voortrekkers plus three English settlers, Parker, Joyce and Capt. Alex Biggar. The latter had moved up from Port Natal in the company of Karel Landman and had with them approximately 120 Port Natal Bantu and Biggar's scots cart. They joined the commando at Skiet Drift. It is probable that there were 64 wagons with the commando but as these were almost empty the span of oxen for each wagon probably numbered no more than ten, but there must have been a few spare oxen. They probably totalled some 650 in all. In all probability most of the Voortrekkers, who were all mounted, had two horses. One could guess at a total of some 750. To handle the wagons and spare horses, agterryers ("after riders" to lead the horses), drivers and leaders would be necessary. With two per wagon and approximately 100 agterryers to ride some spare horses and lead the others, as well as at least one driver and one leader per wagon, the Coloured and Bantu servants must have numbered about 230. It is certain that most of the Voortrekkers had two guns with them while it is known that Pretorius had brought a small ship's cannon. There was at least one other large cannon but some evidence points to a third, i.e. "Ou Grietjie". The range of the latter two, when firing grape-shot, pieces of iron as well as stones, was probably not more than 300 or 400 metres, but at least Potgieter's cannon must have had a range of ap proximately 3 000 metres when firing balls. It is interesting to speculate on the strength of the commando. If the figures given above are accepted, there were 475 Europeans and approximately 340 Coloureds and Bantu, giving a total of approximately 815. With 650 oxen and 750 horses there were 1 400 animals in all."

Let them try this is a site where the Boer nation made a covenant with God so it means a lot to my people.

Kathy in right here with you

@@kathywhitcombe9595 Haha, you’re just a silver tongue devil. It was a pact with the devil 👿. The site should be destroyed.

Hi Don, I am not an expert on the battle but my understanding is that this was a military commando that fought the Zulus and didn't include women and children. If I am wrong then apologies but I would appreciate a reliable source so that I can be sure and know better for next time. Thanks, Chris.

@@redcoathistory thanks for the follow up. I checked further myself and I was wrong. There were infact many Zulu attacks on the Voortrekkers when they were traveling with family and all supplies. In these cases the women often played a key role in reloading guns etc. They were fighting for their collective survival as the Zulus would kill everyone, including children and animals. However in the case of Blood River the Boers went out in a large group of around 470 armed men plus some 200 servants purposely to engage the main Zulu army. I got interested in this history reading James Michener's 'The Covenant' - a great book about the entire history of South Africa. Anyway, a great site you have. I've subscribed and will keep watching.

Thanks a lot for clarifying mate. I haven’t read that book but it sounds great - I will get hold of a copy 👍🏼

60 000+ sharp edged sticks. Thats 15 000, strong, fit, masculine, fast, skillful hunter warriors who knew the area and who were used to their sticks from a young age. Oh and 15 000 shields. Thats 15 000 troops against a few couple hundred. If it were the british theyd lose. The boers were too smart i havr a lot of respect for them. I dont mean this in an arrogant way, but i am proud of the boers, they were one of a kind sharp shooting killers. Zulus stood no chance. Too smart, to good, and God were behind them. If God is with you noone can defeat you.

Isandlwana

@@Jp-wr2mq "if it were the british theyd lose" aight

Sticks? Nevermind. As someone who has actually faced a Zulu Impi on numerous occasions during the rioting and political unrest of the 1980's I can tell you "sticks" are no laughing matter. I know of many incidents where a Zulu armed with a stick has beaten the crap out of an anc member armed with an AK.

@@johnbaines2969 Yeah. Isandlwana. Where the Brits would have won if only they had taken the advice of their local Colonial scouts and laarged up.

Interesting comment. I intend to visit there next year from Brisbane Australia

@@rayh7264 Isandlwana and Rorke's Drift are also in the vicinity. I'd suggest visiting there too.

@@gregbeyer9507 that’s my main intention as well whatever else is in the vicinity. Thanks for the tip. 🙏

Why is it supposedly "unwelcoming"? Because it is white Afrikaners, therefore it is must be "unwelcoming", right?

@@pre-dawnraid9037 No. It's because nobody seemed pleased to have visitors. There were no smiles, no happy greetings. I was made to feel as if I was trespassing.

Rubbish and you would know it if you actually researched and learnt about it. This battle happened after the Zulus had slaughtered many Boer companies who were trying to negotiate land peaceably. The Zulu king Dingaan reneged on an agreement and then slaughtered the company just like he betrayed and stabbed his owner brother in the back.

Amazing at the utter trash uniformed people will spout. Zulus already had guns, gun running by the British was a big thing. They did not invade as your nation did. They went and found vast areas uninhabitated land which had long been identified as such, , and for the sake of good neighbourlyniss, went to Dingaain the Zulu king and PURCHASED the land which he did not even own. After this they lived in peace with the Zulus and had military pacts with them until Brits came and upset it for their subsequent mass INVASION and sugjucation of Zululand for no valid reason. If you knew the vastness of Zululand itself, you would know that they could not of possilbly been anywhere else. Finally they, the Zulu, themselves were shortly arrived from the Afrcan interior having been pushed their by expansion. As did the other blakc nations that settled SA. Get educated,