normal DU PLESSIS, C.J.H. COMDT

  • Elmarie
  • Elmarie's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Senior Member
More
6 months 4 days ago #49170 by Elmarie
Elmarie created the topic: DU PLESSIS, C.J.H. COMDT
POW NUMBER: 8403
SURNAME: DU PLESSIS
FORENAME: CASPER JAN HENDRIK
AGE: 55 YEARS
ADDRESS: MODDERFONTEIN, RUSTENBURG
RANK: COMMANDANT
CAPTURED: 1900/07/30, RUSTENBURG
POW CAMP: DIYATALAWA, CEYLON



Elmarie Malherbe
Attachments:

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
6 months 3 days ago #49188 by Brett Hendey
Brett Hendey replied the topic: DU PLESSIS, C.J.H. COMDT
In my recently-acquired book on the Rustenberg Commando, Comdt Caspar du Plessis is one of only a few members who receives favourable mentions in the early stages of the war. Through mass defections, the 2000-strong Rustenberg Commando had virtually disappeared by mid 1900, except for Comdt du Plessis and 130 Burghers, who were at its core when it was re-formed in June 1900. Unfortunately according to General Smuts,, "the Rustenbergers did not distinguish themselves" in their first fight and Comdt du Plessis "was badly wounded ... and his untried men retired leaving their Commandant to the mercy of the enemy." Later the "British found Commandant Casper du Plessis badly wounded ... and had him taken to the British military hospital where he together with other casualties were nursed back to health ...".

Brett
The following user(s) said Thank You: Elmarie

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Elmarie
  • Elmarie's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Senior Member
More
6 months 3 days ago #49190 by Elmarie
Elmarie replied the topic: DU PLESSIS, C.J.H. COMDT
Hi Brett

Yes after his recovery they send him to Ceylon.





Elmarie Malherbe
Attachments:

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
6 months 3 days ago #49197 by Brett Hendey
Brett Hendey replied the topic: DU PLESSIS, C.J.H. COMDT
Thank you again, Elmarie. The Derdepoort murders took place in November 1899, so the 1901 date given is incorrect, or have I misunderstood something?
Regards
Brett

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Moderators: djb
Powered by Kunena Forum