TOPIC:

The men in the photos of the 4.7's are so relaxed that I wonder if some were taken in the days after the battle of Colenso, during the attempt of the 4.7's to destroy the road bridge at Colenso.
Burne writes in With the Naval Brigade in Natal (1899-1900) / Journal of Active Service:
“Sunday, 17th December.—Commenced shelling Colenso Bridge at noon with a view to destroy it; but after a few rounds the order was cancelled and we again returned to camp.
Monday, 18th December.—Stood to arms at 4 a.m., then went to general quarters for action, when the 4.7 guns opened fire at daylight on Colenso Bridge for about two hours with lyddite, at a range of 7,300 yards. Lieutenant Hunt, on the left, struck one of the piers with a shell and took the roof off a small house close by; otherwise not much harm was done. It was a frightfully hot and depressing day with a wind like air from a furnace; and, bad luck to it, directly the sun was down at 5 p.m. a heavy dust storm came on which covered everything in a moment with black filthy dust, followed by vivid lightning and drenching rain which was quite a treat to us dried-up beings. I myself succeeded in catching a tubful of water which ensured me a good wash and a refreshing sleep for the night.
Tuesday, 19th December.—A cool nice morning and all the men in good spirits. At 8 a.m “the 4.7 guns opened fire again on Colenso Bridge. Lieutenant England's gun—the right 4.7 gun—knocked the bridge away; a very lucky and good shot, at which, needless to say, Sir F. Clery was very pleased.”
Here again is the photo of Gen Clery on R marked x watching Lt England firing his 4.7 (courtesy Arnold van Dyk).

Rob,

It is certainly possible that some of the photographs were taken on the 17th, 18th or 19th. Looking at the the landscape in the selection I have posted, it seems to me that the images were captured at at least three different locations. However, it is difficult to know which shots were taken when.

Reading Dickson's account of this period, it appears he did not film the guns on the post-Colenso dates. The 17th was so unbearably hot that his team hardly left their tents, and the 18th was spent in Durban, ensuring that the footage already captured was safely loaded onto a Castle Line steamer bound for England. He briefly mentions the destruction of the wagon bridge on the 19th, but does not describe any filming. I therefore suspect the photographs that include the Biograph camera were taken on the 13th or 14th, and most probably the 14th, as correspondents (apart from Dickson) were barred from attending the bombardment until after firing had pretty much ceased at noon that day. This would explain why the Naval Brigade are stood down in these shots: "After the shooting was all over and things comparatively safe, a stream of war correspondents could be seen making their way towards us from Frere Camp".

The photograph you posted was taken from the exact same spot as the first image in this thread, which includes Dickson's camera. Burleigh's presence in the latter shot again suggests that it was taken during the afternoon of the 14th, once the press corps had at last been released from the bounds of the camp perimeter, and after the shooting had all but ceased. The grey overcast weather also fits with Burleigh's observation that, unusually, "Thursday broke raw and cold".

The ground upon which the guns were placed for the actual battle is described as a slight rise, which indicates that those images showing the 4.7s on the tops of hills were not taken on the 15th. Indeed, I suspect none of the photographs show the guns in action during the main engagement.

This is what watching the actual battle looked like (Pakenham, p. 119).








Here is a photograph showing the result of Lieutenant England's "fluke" shot. It is noteworthy that Burleigh, unlike those writers with allegiance to the Naval Brigade, states: "Excellent as the weapons of the bluejackets are, their shooting is not always what it ought to be".




..

This list of accredited war correspondents seems to explain why Dickson was able to be present at actions from which the remainder of the press were excluded. The only cinematographers that were officially recognised were Joe Rosenthal and Edgar Hyman, of the Warwick Trading Company. Accredited journalists were at a disadvantage, in that they had to abide by regulations laid down by Generals in the field. Thus, while the likes of Bennett Burleigh were incarcerated at Frere Camp, forbidden from venturing beyond the outposts, Dickson, as a civilian, was, with the help of his bluejacket friends, able to get close to the action.

This state of affairs did not go down well with the accredited press corps, to the point where a formal complaint was sent to General Clery.


Burleigh, The Natal Campaign, pp. 175 – 176

Most of the correspondents felt so sore over yesterday's embargo, although on neither that nor the prior occasion did the enemy fire a shot, that they decided on meeting to raise a formal protest.

Here is the colour and form their action took: --

To LIEUT.-GENERAL Sir C. F. CLERY, etc.
Military Camp, Frere, Natal,
Tuesday, December 12, 1899.

Sir, – The licensed correspondents with this force respectfully desire to draw your attention to what they consider to be a great hardship to them, and to the interests they serve.
On two occasions – one recently, and the other today – we have been debarred from accompanying the troops, although in both instances there was a great likelihood that an action would ensue. The hardship is the greater in that while we were stopped at the picquet, civilian visitors in camp, correspondents' cyclist servants, and others, have been permitted to accompany the troops afield.
We ask that, as licensed correspondents, who are subject to an active censorship, and as gentlemen honestly seeking to do our duty, we be permitted to discharge those functions for which we have been commissioned.

Very respectfully,
Your obedient servants.
(Signed by nearly all of the correspondents).

We were given to understand that today [13 December] that restriction would be withdrawn. It was pointed out by myself and another – an American journalist – deputed to lay the matter before General Clery, that the invidious distinction made was as if we were suspected of being likely to play the part of spies upon the army. Our contention was that we should be trusted at least as much as outsiders, or sent away from camp journals were wont to give in print matters of as much interest, or more, to the enemy than to friends at home.

[according to Dickson's account, restrictions were eventually lifted on the 14th, with correspondents arriving at the front from Frere at around midday].






..