Basically, they were at the end of their strength. The original impis (Zulu military unit) left their kraals about a week or so earlier in order to attack the British column. This they did at Isandlwana, destroying the column and inflicting severe casualties. But part of the Zulu force had not taken part in the battle and had to 'Wash their spears', or fight in battle before they were allowed to marry. Thus it was that the impi attacked Rorke's Drift. There, about 140 soldiers held off the Zulus for two days, killing about 500 Zulus in the process. The Zulus relented for their strength was sapped as they had not had much to eat for almost a week. When on campaign, the Zulu was trained to live off the land and to ignore hunger. After 2 days of fierce resistance, the Zulu general decided that enough was enough. That they were also impressed with the British defense was evident. But it was primarily the result of being tired, hungry and, having already had a victory, some apathy as to why the Zulus retreated.
2007-03-19 02:51:58
·
answer #1
·
answered by Bob Mc 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
The real answer was that only Roerk'e Drift was won by the British on Jan. 9th 1879, but the British were massacred at the Battle of Isandhlwana on January 22nd 1879. In this battle British, Natal, and native South African troops perished at the hands of the Zulu, and is counted amonst one of the worst defeats in British military history.
Although the Zulu won the Batlle of Isandhlwana, they lost the Zulu Wars, which had started around 1879. Shaka had introduced new fighting tactics to the Zulu tribes and was a brilliant leader. Cetshwayo kaMpande, his nephew, became leader of the Zulus after Shaka and was also a great leader. The British, however, while not having superior numbers, had superior weaponry. The Zulu had some rifles, but were not proficient in using them. The British used the rifles and standard enfile arrangement, as in Roerke's Drift, to defeat the enemy.
The war was all over by the middle of 1879. In July Cetshwayo was captured and exiled to London. He returned to South Africa on behalf of the British in 1883, but died within months, in 1884.
The two films are "Zulu" (1964) which shows the battle of Roerke's Drift, and "Zulu Dawn" (1979) which shows the battle of Isandhlwana.
2007-03-19 10:04:24
·
answer #2
·
answered by jcboyle 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I inferred that it was out of respect for the amazing fighting courage and skill of the British soldiers. Yes, they wanted the British out and yes they could have killed everyone in the fort. But they did not want it all bad enough to destroy the men that resisted them for so long and in such a gallant fashion. That is just my guess, they don't actually come out and say why directly.
The movie was based on a true story and the British did win the battle in reality. However, I do not know if the Zulus simply walked away in real life as they did in the movie.
It's too bad you didn't care for the movie, I think it's one of the best war films ever made. If you are a younger person you might try it again when you get a bit older. It really grew on me, particularly for the way they show respect for both sides.
2007-03-19 03:31:32
·
answer #3
·
answered by Raindog 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
It proved too costly
(This from history texts rather than directly from the film. The film, while largely being accurate has certain definite errors and omissions)
The Zulu impi involved had not been engaged at Isandlwana and did not have orders to attack the mission. But, under the rule of "the washing of the spears" Zulu males could not take a wife until they had killed an enemy, so their leader Prince Dabulamanzi took a chance to offer his men a quick and easy victory. That it wasn't.
The casualty figures vary according to source, but 17 British killed to 500 Zulus, seems close to the agreed figure.
You didn't like the film?
It's nicely balanced. There is the heroism, but don't forget the exchange between the two officers at the end. They hate it.
"Does everyone feel like this afterward?"
"How do you feel?
"I feel... sick.
"Well, you have to be alive to feel sick."
" You asked me, I told you. There's... something else. I feel ashamed. "
"You think I could stand this butcher's yard more than once? I came here to build a bridge!"
There have been many films that are far more unthinkingly "gung-ho" than this one.
2007-03-19 03:58:02
·
answer #4
·
answered by Pedestal 42 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
I think it was because the british had gatling guns.
2007-03-19 03:20:34
·
answer #5
·
answered by kicking_back 5
·
0⤊
2⤋
It was past their bed-time.
2007-03-19 03:18:59
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
4⤋