The British were more merciful to the defeated Zulus than the Zulus themselves had been earlier in the 19th century. Neighbouring tribes had simply been exterminated or forced to migrate northwards.
I suspect much of the violence in the coastal regions is down to ‘Men’ desiring to move up a notch to a warrior and lacking warfare to prove themselves resort to making a battle amongst their own personal enemies .
Why do countries invade other countries, then claim being a victim when their asses are kicked by the defending army, Russia and Ukraine are an example.
Its caused by the fact the creator only views his finished video through his editing software and nott through the internet network like his intended audence views the video. @Radrook353
This is stupid and wrong. "The British Empire" did not go to war with the Zulu's (who, incidentally, were a ferocious empire building nation who killed and enslaved their neighbours). Local British Officials disobeyed orders and launched a war against the Zulu's. The British government specifically told the High Commissioner for South Africa, Sir Henry Bartle Frere that he should, under no circumstances, attack Zululand yet he went ahead and did so. After the disastrous campaign and defeat, he and Chelmsford hurriedly launched a second invasion to try to restore their reputations at home before they could be reprimanded (remember, it took months to travel there from London and communications were also much slower). However, I've said too much. This is obviously yet another race baiting piece of drivel which is ignorant of the historical facts that it pretends to portray.
The stupidity of your comment. Do you know how many people died because of their brutal empire? How many countries had their borders redrawn anlanguage annihilated? The very country you live in was stolen from the natives and their populations murdered in mass. Shane on you for such an insensitive racist comment!
Actually, if you are a student of history, you learn unexpected things. The Zulu were invaded. They defended against a Brit aggressor. Brits suffered horribly the first few weeks before importing a large modern armed professional army. Zulus were far more honorable within their culture than Brits were within European morals. Zulus were a minor tribe with minor lands until Shaka asserted his birth right as son of dead king. Shaka was a trained and hardened foot soldier riding high in an adjacent Paramount. He killed his rivals beginning lengthy brutal revenge for the wrongs done to him, mother and grandmother. He established his unique training, arms and way of fighting. He was killed by half family later in life. Subsequent Zulu leadership was far less brutal and more peaceful. Expansion occurred under Shaka not following kings.
The British had their hands in everyone's business if there were resources to extort. They wiped out tens of thousands of American Indians , just like they did to India, and the African Zulu's after being humiliated in the 1st war they lost in 1879 against them.
The Zulus were willing to live alongside the British, but the British forced the issue and wanted Cetshwayo to abdicate and submit which he would not do...
I am by no means an expert in the Zulu wars but the bits l have gleaned has left me with the impression that Chelmsford was a egotistical war criminal and that for whatever faults he had Cetshwayo did the best he could under impossible circumstances and l feel shame on what we British did in Zululand.
you CANNOT keep trying to judge previous century's politicians, generals and troops by today's modern (quite often silly) standards. or you end up with abraham lincoln (as guilty as putin), wt sherman, and us grant on trial for war crimes in the civil war. let alone cromwell in ireland, and GOD only knows who else would have to have statues pulled down, we could award ns germany victory in ww2 if we remove arthur harris from history, But that leave us with the SS on the uk streets.
@@tesmith47 you do know the Zulu came from central western Africa and were latter invading south Africa than were the Dutch boars and I'd say a close tie between the British and the Zulu in reaching south Africa. When the Dutch settle the cape it was occupied by the San and the Xhosa and !Kung . Then the British took the cape and pushed the boars eastward.
If you respect the Zulus please do not photoshop a a fake teaser photo for UA-cam. It is ridiculous and has nothing to do with Zulu culture or tradition. The content of the video is acceptable and realistic
Why the hell couldn't those two very different cultures lean to live together in peace. Instead of one of them the British going and destroy a whole nation well established in their own land with their own system of government. Living happily and healthy under the leadership of the King. Could they not have found a way for both cultures to live side by side? But no it was all about power and control. Just like it is today.
Now the Zulus re using the Bull’s Horns tactic to loot Department Stores
Well you obviously admire zulus to have watched this
Great presentation as for me it has filled in what was the final outcome of the Zulu wars- thanks!
The British were more merciful to the defeated Zulus than the Zulus themselves had been earlier in the 19th century. Neighbouring tribes had simply been exterminated or forced to migrate northwards.
Put on your boots. that deep Bullshit. It was a land grab .
LOL!!
BS
@@nothingnothing5183 May I suggest that you Google the Bantu word 'mfecane'.
A Little Lime Juice..... 5.27 to prevent SCURVY.
...
I suspect much of the violence in the coastal regions is down to ‘Men’ desiring to move up a notch to a warrior and lacking warfare to prove themselves resort to making a battle amongst their own personal enemies .
The British like Rome bloodied themselves in that conquest and made the Zulus first and the Boers later regret resisting them.
Excellent piece of sad history. Saddest though for the dreadfully illiterate captions displayed. Oh dear.
shut them off
Why do countries invade other countries, then claim being a victim when their asses are kicked by the defending army, Russia and Ukraine are an example.
Because the past shows that victors or conquerors invent and write their version of history. Kind regards Tim
Finding it difficult to hear the naration.
I thought it was caused by a flaw in my computer.
Its caused by the fact the creator only views his finished video through his editing software and nott through the internet network like his intended audence views the video. @Radrook353
noteworthy documentary...congrats
Just 8000 Zulus were slaughtered? The UISA slaughtered 200,000 Philippines who fought to have USA troops leave their land.
Los zulues debieron 😊agarrar sus cañones tras su victoria y fusiles y municiones en general ese fue su gran error
How would the title king of Zulus compare with kings of European nations?
About the same as smaller kingdoms in Central Europe the germmanys king of Poland or sweeden or king of Naples
stone castle/mud hut
Respect is always given to someone who fights back! And just a note not all europeans are the same ethnicity!
You do know that they didn’t dress like that don’t you?
Took one look at the totally fake Zulu uniforms and decided i was no longer interested 😢
This is stupid and wrong. "The British Empire" did not go to war with the Zulu's (who, incidentally, were a ferocious empire building nation who killed and enslaved their neighbours). Local British Officials disobeyed orders and launched a war against the Zulu's. The British government specifically told the High Commissioner for South Africa, Sir Henry Bartle Frere that he should, under no circumstances, attack Zululand yet he went ahead and did so. After the disastrous campaign and defeat, he and Chelmsford hurriedly launched a second invasion to try to restore their reputations at home before they could be reprimanded (remember, it took months to travel there from London and communications were also much slower). However, I've said too much. This is obviously yet another race baiting piece of drivel which is ignorant of the historical facts that it pretends to portray.
dZI EKI TEJ WOJNIE TO JEDYNE PLEMIE KTÓRE STAŁO SIE NARODEM, I KTÓRE DZISIAJ JEST DUMNE ZE SWOICH DOKONAŃ PRZEWODZĄC INNYM CZARNYM.
ack dokie woklsb gmdoessn lkdsnnci myhsdva kkl..
If it wasn't for England alot of countries would not exist. I'm american and give thanks for England..
The stupidity of your comment. Do you know how many people died because of their brutal empire? How many countries had their borders redrawn anlanguage annihilated? The very country you live in was stolen from the natives and their populations murdered in mass.
Shane on you for such an insensitive racist comment!
canadian......
That's the stupidest thing I've heard this week. They were nations before the British arrived to conquer
You're a damn fool.
Britain stole all the colonies
The British in history, and I am British, certainly messed up most of the world for temporary riches.
Bollocks.
Actually, if you are a student of history, you learn unexpected things. The Zulu were invaded. They defended against a Brit aggressor. Brits suffered horribly the first few weeks before importing a large modern armed professional army. Zulus were far more honorable within their culture than Brits were within European morals. Zulus were a minor tribe with minor lands until Shaka asserted his birth right as son of dead king.
Shaka was a trained and hardened foot soldier riding high in an adjacent Paramount. He killed his rivals beginning lengthy brutal revenge for the wrongs done to him, mother and grandmother. He established his unique training, arms and way of fighting. He was killed by half family later in life. Subsequent Zulu leadership was far less brutal and more peaceful. Expansion occurred under Shaka not following kings.
Cetshwayo was Shaka's son
The British had their hands in everyone's business if there were resources to extort. They wiped out tens of thousands of American Indians , just like they did to India, and the African Zulu's after being humiliated in the 1st war they lost in 1879 against them.
When did the British 'wipe out tens of thousands of Native Americans'? Your source?
1st battle, NOT WAR, a war is a series of battles.
Made a change from American Indians killing each other eh?
The Zulus were willing to live alongside the British, but the British forced the issue and wanted Cetshwayo to abdicate and submit which he would not do...
so they forced it.
Abdicate no fact is British were perfectly happy to gave him as a client ruler. They did require disbanding of the Zulu army
@@jeffbybee5207 WTF?
so cetshwayo fought and lost, NEXT!
I am by no means an expert in the Zulu wars but the bits l have gleaned has left me with the impression that Chelmsford was a egotistical war criminal and that for whatever faults he had Cetshwayo did the best he could under impossible circumstances and l feel shame on what we British did in Zululand.
They didn’t do any worse than any other warring tribe
It was a land grab
@@davemartino5997 you do know the zulu did not invade and attack the british??
you CANNOT keep trying to judge previous century's politicians, generals and troops by today's modern (quite often silly) standards.
or you end up with abraham lincoln (as guilty as putin), wt sherman, and us grant on trial for war crimes in the civil war.
let alone cromwell in ireland, and GOD only knows who else would have to have statues pulled down, we could award ns germany victory in ww2 if we remove arthur harris from history, But that leave us with the SS on the uk streets.
@@tesmith47 you do know the Zulu came from central western Africa and were latter invading south Africa than were the Dutch boars and I'd say a close tie between the British and the Zulu in reaching south Africa. When the Dutch settle the cape it was occupied by the San and the Xhosa and !Kung . Then the British took the cape and pushed the boars eastward.
If you respect the Zulus please do not photoshop a a fake teaser photo for UA-cam. It is ridiculous and has nothing to do with Zulu culture or tradition. The content of the video is acceptable and realistic
Why the hell couldn't those two very different cultures lean to live together in peace. Instead of one of them the British going and destroy a whole nation well established in their own land with their own system of government. Living happily and healthy under the leadership of the King. Could they not have found a way for both cultures to live side by side? But no it was all about power and control. Just like it is today.
Living happily 😂
It was a land grab.
live together in Africa??!!?? how about the fckn europeans stay the hell in europe and live peacefully??????
The zulu's didn't live peacefully with their african neighbors either....
another idiot wanting everyone to play happily together, go talk to putin, hamas and iran.