Did the British used artillery in Rorke's Drift?

[Incendio]

Apologizes for my ignorance because surely I am asking a dumb question.

I am reading the book Rorke's Drift 1879 'Pinned like rats in a hole' and in the Order of Battle in British side I saw Royal Artillery Bombardier T.Lewis, Wheeler J.Cantwell, Gunners A. Evans and A. Howard. I also saw the film Zulu (1964) and I don't remember the use of artillery (but it is also true that you can't trust a film). Did the British used artillery for this battle? and what about cavalry?

I am trying to remake this battle in Napoleon Total War with the same amount of units but it's impossible to beat 3000 zulu with only 140 men. How on earth only 140 men could defeat 3000 zulu? This is 21 zulu per british, a bigger ratio than Isandlwana.

[TWWolfe]

There was no artillery used at the battle, though there were men from the artillery branch fighting alongside the regular infantry since they needed all the help they could get., same with any cavalrymen who would have been there, they would have been dismounted and behind the barricades. The British had the benefit of being a well trained force fighting from behind defensive positions, against an enemy with mostly melee weapons. the rifles the Zulus had they weren't trained to use and generally didn't like using, which also made thier marksmen much less effective.

Its possible they held out because the Zulu's that attacked them weren't looking for a real fight, having gone into Natal against the kings orders, and being just a raid rather than something planned.

And honestly, the British lost at Isandlwana because they were overconfident, and didn't understand that the Zulu were a nation that had, by African standards, an incredibly well trained army, and even then the Zulu's casualties amounted to 1/5th of the total troops they commited.

[IrishBlood]

For such a disciplined army the Zulu's tactics were pretty abysmal in the Battle of Rorkes drift.

I'm pretty sure that if they had made one massed charge from all sides at night the Brit's would have been completely overrun, especially if they crawled as close as they possibly could before making said charge.

[Darkhorse]

While the British soldier of the period could achieve very high rates of aimed fire, and their standard arm for the period was powerful enough to go through 2 or 3 Zulu at surprising distances, Irish is right. Had the Zulu seriously tried to take the post in the beginning the battle would have resulted in another, albeit probably quite costly (perhaps even double), victory for the Impi.

I've always wondered what the outcome may have been had the NNH remained. Probably not a lot, as mentioned they'd have been pressed into manning the walls.

[24thRegiment]

For such a disciplined army the Zulu's tactics were pretty abysmal in the Battle of Rorkes drift.

I'm pretty sure that if they had made one massed charge from all sides at night the Brit's would have been completely overrun, especially if they crawled as close as they possibly could before making said charge.

From what I've heard the Zulu's couldn't have done their usual strategies as they would be useless on a defended post. Also Fancy seeing you here Irish!

[IrishBlood]

From what I've heard the Zulu's couldn't have done their usual strategies as they would be useless on a defended post. Also Fancy seeing you here Irish!

Lol, sadly the VV is my home away from home

That would make sense if the defenses had been formidable, but they weren't really. To my knowledge (and I might be wrong) but none of the barricades were more than twice the height of a man and most of them were significantly lower than that. The Zulus could have easily made crude platforms or ladders. At the very least they could have boosted each other over the walls. The Zulus were very fit and strong so I'd say it wouldn't be too hard a task for them.



Sheer numbers alone, combined with a night attack should have resulted in a certain victory.

[24thRegiment]

Ahh but pulling each other over the wall takes time and they would be defenceless at the time making them vulnerable.

[IrishBlood]

Yes, BUT there are 4,000+ of them and as Dark Horse pointed out above, the rifles the British used were capable of passing through 2-3 Zulus with one shot. They were defenseless as soon as they came into rifle range! Their only hope would have been an overwhelming attack from all directions, preferably at night.