PDA

View Full Version : The Battle of Maiwand: Another Isandlwana, Another Land


jainso31
12-12-2010, 14:08
The Battle Of Maiwand (West of Kandahar) on 27th July 1880 was one of the largest battles of the 2nd Anglo-Afghan War of 1878-1881.
Following victories at Ali Masjid,Peiwar Kotal,Kabul and Ahmed Khel; British
forces controlled much of Eastern Afghanistan.Despite these triumphs,the
western province of Herat,ruled by the recently deceased emir's son,Ayub
Khan;remained unconquered.Seeking to drive the British from Kandahar,
Ayub Khan assembled a mixed force of 8500 regular and irregular troops and began marching east.
To deal with this threat ,the British commander,Lt.Gen.Primrose.dispatched a Brigade of British and Indian troops west-3000 combat troops incl. the 66th Foot and 3000 support personnel.Marching to the HELMAND RIVER,the brigade,commanded by Brig. G.Burrows, an inexperienced field commader, moved into a position to support an army sent by,Sher Ali Khan, the Govenor of Kandahar.
Combined, their forces equalled those of Ayub Khan approximately.Problems began shortly after Burrow'sarrival,when much of the Kandahar army mutinied and deserted. Left to face Ayub Khan alone,Burrows began withdrawing,while seeking an opportunity to attack before the enemy reached Kandahar. After receiving reports that Ayub khan was moving towards MAIWAND,Burrows marched to intercept.
Moving quickly,most of the British troops were unable to eat or fill their canteens on the morning of the battle.After spotting Ayub Khan's columns
near Maiwand, Burrows moved out into a plain; and formed battle lines,hoping to catch the Afghans on the march. As Ayub Khan's artillery opened fire,Burrows then decided against attacking and assumed a "defensive posture".Seeing that both of Burrows' flanks were now open to attack;Ayub Khan deliberately arrayed his forces so as to envelop the British line.As his troops marched into position,he brought his superior artillery to bear,hammering the British lines.The British fought bravely back bringing
their Martini-Henry rifles to bear, to decimate the advancing Afghans.
Around mid-day,the Afghans began a series of assaults on the British lines.
The British on their part were fighting desperately,but could not kill fast enough,but kill they did, to the best of their limited capability-they were ,after all in a trap, of their commander's making.After a pause in the fighting, AyubKhan attacked again around 2.30pm.Charging forward,they were able to force Jacob's Rifles, an Indian regiment,ultimately causing the entire British line to collapse.With the situation now completely out of hand,Burrows now ordered a retreat south towards the village of Khik.There,about 100 men of the 66th Foot made a desperate last stand and died to a man.
Following the defeat,Burrows and the survivors fled towards Kandahar,
arriving the next morning.
During this battle the british suffered 1757 dead,and 175 wounded,all of whom,most likely dispatched by the victorious Afghans. This represented
75% of the the combat force-the 66th Foot being all but wiped out.
Ayub Khan's army lost approx.2000 killed and 1500 wounded.an approximation.
The battle Of Maiwand was one of the few occasions in the 19th Century, when an Asian army defeated a Western power.Nemesis overtook Ayub Khan
at the battle of Kandahar on 1st Sept.1880; where he escaped with his life his life but his army was routed.This engagement effectively ended this war.
This conflict itself; resulted in litle change in the geo-political situation in central Asia, and worked to further Afghan mistrust of foreigners!

ANOTHER DONKEY AND LIONS STORY
PS Discuss Please
jainso31

jainso31
29-01-2011, 14:25
Things have not got any better in the last 130 years -they have got much worse,so much so;that I very much doubt just what the H--- we think we are doing there currently-winning hearts and minds-I don't think so!! When
we do leave again for the umpteenth time -we'll be told by ignorant politicos
that we done good..!


jainso31

Brett Hendey
31-01-2011, 04:45
A few years ago, a retired British army officer published an article about Afghanistan in a Durban newspaper. He concluded that the present action in Afghanistan is futile - "those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it".

Of course, it is the politicians who don't learn and their soldiers who pay with their blood.

Regards
Brett

jainso31
31-01-2011, 07:17
This is a message that I have been trying to get across for years.Very few Mps are sufficiently educated in history and if they are, they just don't give a D---!Just how many successfil regime changes have been brought about by force of arms.?

jainso31

jainso31
05-02-2011, 15:14
Considering the past two centuries worth of warring with Afghanistan by us (and once by the Russians) which has achieved absolutely nothing-it was called "The Great Game" in Victorian times. Is this US driven Great Game scoring any goals whatever-I thought that Vietnam would have "cooled" them off some but no. What IS behind this 21st century posturing.???

jainso31

CE REYC
05-02-2011, 16:41
re: post 5: MONEY!

jainso31
05-02-2011, 16:51
Money! -would you care to explain exactly, what you mean by that cryptic expression;and I have to say I wouldn't ask the question if I knew the answer.

jainso31

CE REYC
05-02-2011, 17:30
I do tend to be a bit cynical but try this. US electioneering costs millions the parties getting their sponsorship in great measure from industrialists. Of course they cannot be accused of wanting a payback through the budget for arms etc. Afghanistan has deposits of silver, copper, coal; iron, lead, rubies, gold, chrome, barite, uranium, talc, lapis lazuli and salt. Any bets on who has mining rights. Cotton is one of the crops and up in that top right hand corner opium poppies. It was the attraction of the latter that made the old East India Company foray into the country. PS I did try to reply to your PM but it appears you do not take them.

jainso31
05-02-2011, 17:44
Sir -I bow to your obvious superior knowledge put so succinctly.I really did not think sufficiently deeply ie politicos get MONEY from arms dealers-which I did know, but missed.The mineral reserves took my breath away.
Poppies mean drugs -the dirty sobs.mind you I wouldn't like to carry that burden for long, but tell me -what does the UK get out of this particular midden??NOT THE SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP??
PS just click on my name and choose "send message"
jainso31

Harley
07-02-2011, 20:37
Reading through contemporary accounts of the action at Maiwand, one can't help but get the impression that Brigadier-General Burrows, whatever his experience, was put in a very poor position by his superior officer and the desertion of the native troops. One may imply that Burrows was a "donkey" - I for one am not convinced. The image of Burrows trudging away from the battlefield leading an animal with one dead man and one wounded man on it was reported by an eyewitness who refused to question his personal bravery. It is remarkable how completely he seems to have disappeared from history afterwards.

Simon

patroclus
07-02-2011, 21:22
Reading through contemporary accounts of the action at Maiwand, one can't help but get the impression that Brigadier-General Burrows, whatever his experience, was put in a very poor position by his superior officer and the desertion of the native troops. One may imply that Burrows was a "donkey" - I for one am not convinced. The image of Burrows trudging away from the battlefield leading an animal with one dead man and one wounded man on it was reported by an eyewitness who refused to question his personal bravery. It is remarkable how completely he seems to have disappeared from history afterwards.

Simon

I would agree with this. Burrowes' force fought well against many times their number. The circumstances were quite different to Isandlwana - for one thing, the Afghan artillery was much superior to that of the British and very well served.

jainso31
08-02-2011, 07:32
The fatal errror that Burrows made was to form attacking lines with "open"
flanks, instead of forming "square" in a defensive mode;against superior numbers.This is not MY opinion, but the Victorian Army textbook, as to setting out your troops against a larger force.I never ever said the British troops did not fight well nor evenimplied that. Maiwand was a tactical mistake, made by an inexperienced field officer.
Isandlwana was lines=a rout,Ulundi was a square=victory.
Gen.Primrose sent out Burrows, because he was his Brigade commander,and I'm sure he would not have asked for him specifically-he had NO battle experience. What then, do nothing;absolute heresy and another Byng type fiasco.The British government were not in the mood for another Isandlwana.


jainso31

patroclus
10-02-2011, 10:29
The fatal errror that Burrows made was to form attacking lines with "open"
flanks, instead of forming "square" in a defensive mode;against superior numbers..
jainso31

Yes. However Burrowes WAS attacking. The first rule of the British and Indian armies when up against an Asian army (whether superior in numbers or not) was to attack at once. It usually worked. The Afghan artillery was superior and artillery is a good counter to squares, even if the circumstances had allowed Burrowes to form them. I am not saying that Burrowes was a brilliant commander!

jainso31
10-02-2011, 13:18
BUT as I said patroclus,by attacking, Burrows opened his flanks, to a superior number of enemy forces; and this led to Ayub's grievous assault on a lesser number of his enemy-it did not matter to him how many of his men were lost-so long as he prevailed-which he did.QED
PS The square saved the day at Abu Klea
jainso31

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infantry_square