Trekking through Bechuanaland

E. Spiers
{"title":"Trekking through Bechuanaland","authors":"E. Spiers","doi":"10.7765/9781526137913.00015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Several African campaigns did not involve skirmishes, sieges, battles or engagements of any significance. Whereas the British Army had to mount offensives and seek rapid, decisive military outcomes to disperse and demoralise its enemies (while minimising its own logistic burdens and likely losses from sickness and disease), African adversaries responded to these offensives in different ways. If facing overwhelming odds, they sometimes avoided engagement and opted for manoeuvre (or even complete dispersal), luring the British and their auxiliaries across an inhospitable landscape and leaving them tired, thirsty and despondent. Inevitably these expeditions attracted less attention at home, especially if they coincided with major campaigns elsewhere – as happened to the Bechuanaland expedition (1884–85) and the two Asante expeditions of 1896 and 1900 – and so few letters from them survive. Nevertheless, the Bechuanaland campaign at least demonstrated the degree of British adaptation since the Anglo-Boer War of 1881. The expedition was occasioned by Boer freebooters exploiting the rivalry among Bantu clans along the border from Vryburg to Mafeking and proclaiming the two semi-independent republics of Goshen and Stellaland in Bantu territory. The Gladstone Government regarded these incursions as breaches of the London Convention (1884), and resolved to protect the Bantu chiefs and retain control of the trade route from Cape Colony to Central Africa. It despatched Major-General Sir Charles Warren (RE), as a special commissioner with some 4,000 men, including 1/Royal Scots, the 6th Inniskilling Dragoons, three batteries of field artillery, a battery of Gardner machine-guns, three regiments of mounted rifles (recruited partly in Britain and partly in the Cape), balloon and field telegraph sections, a pioneer corps, and a corps of Bantu guides. Warren was required to evict the Goshenites from Bechuanaland (the Stellalanders had accepted British rule) and re-establish order. C H A P T E R S E V E N","PeriodicalId":125869,"journal":{"name":"The Victorian soldier in Africa","volume":"48 12","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Victorian soldier in Africa","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7765/9781526137913.00015","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Several African campaigns did not involve skirmishes, sieges, battles or engagements of any significance. Whereas the British Army had to mount offensives and seek rapid, decisive military outcomes to disperse and demoralise its enemies (while minimising its own logistic burdens and likely losses from sickness and disease), African adversaries responded to these offensives in different ways. If facing overwhelming odds, they sometimes avoided engagement and opted for manoeuvre (or even complete dispersal), luring the British and their auxiliaries across an inhospitable landscape and leaving them tired, thirsty and despondent. Inevitably these expeditions attracted less attention at home, especially if they coincided with major campaigns elsewhere – as happened to the Bechuanaland expedition (1884–85) and the two Asante expeditions of 1896 and 1900 – and so few letters from them survive. Nevertheless, the Bechuanaland campaign at least demonstrated the degree of British adaptation since the Anglo-Boer War of 1881. The expedition was occasioned by Boer freebooters exploiting the rivalry among Bantu clans along the border from Vryburg to Mafeking and proclaiming the two semi-independent republics of Goshen and Stellaland in Bantu territory. The Gladstone Government regarded these incursions as breaches of the London Convention (1884), and resolved to protect the Bantu chiefs and retain control of the trade route from Cape Colony to Central Africa. It despatched Major-General Sir Charles Warren (RE), as a special commissioner with some 4,000 men, including 1/Royal Scots, the 6th Inniskilling Dragoons, three batteries of field artillery, a battery of Gardner machine-guns, three regiments of mounted rifles (recruited partly in Britain and partly in the Cape), balloon and field telegraph sections, a pioneer corps, and a corps of Bantu guides. Warren was required to evict the Goshenites from Bechuanaland (the Stellalanders had accepted British rule) and re-establish order. C H A P T E R S E V E N
徒步穿越贝川纳
几次非洲战役没有涉及任何重大的小规模冲突、围攻、战斗或交战。英国军队必须发动进攻,寻求迅速、果断的军事结果,以驱散敌人并使其士气低落(同时尽量减少自己的后勤负担和疾病可能造成的损失),而非洲对手则以不同的方式应对这些进攻。如果面临压倒性的优势,他们有时会避免交战,选择机动(甚至完全分散),引诱英国人和他们的辅助人员穿越荒凉的风景,让他们疲惫,口渴和沮丧。不可避免的是,这些远征在国内引起的关注较少,尤其是当它们与其他地方的重大战役同时发生时——比如贝古纳兰远征(1884-85)和1896年和1900年的两次阿珊特远征——因此,他们留下的信件很少。尽管如此,贝干纳兰战役至少显示了英国自1881年英布战争以来的适应程度。这次远征是由布尔海盗发起的,他们利用班图部落之间从维里堡到马富金边境的竞争,宣布在班图领土上建立两个半独立的共和国戈申和斯特拉兰。格莱斯顿政府认为这些入侵违反了《伦敦公约》(1884年),决心保护班图酋长,并保持对从开普殖民地到中非的贸易路线的控制。它派出了查尔斯·沃伦爵士(RE)少将作为特别专员,带着大约4000人,包括1/ 1皇家苏格兰人、第6因尼斯基尔龙骑兵团、3个野战炮兵连、1个加德纳机枪连、3个骑步枪团(部分在英国招募,部分在开普省招募)、气球和野战电报组、一个先锋军团和一个班图向导军团。沃伦被要求将戈申人驱逐出bechuanand(斯特拉兰德人已经接受了英国的统治)并重建秩序。这是我的第一次尝试
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信