I can't really say more than what has already been said. The book is just a wonderful text to read through. It's easy to read, and the author is great with giving details and weaving them into the story without losing the reader attention. Very much recommended.

Rorke's Drift was a heroically fought but pointless battle in a savagely waged but peripheral war, the ill-conceived invasion in 1879 of Zululand by a small British Army under Lord Chelmsford, known to history as the Anglo-Zulu War. Snook, a serving officer in the modern regiment descended from the 1st / 24th regiment that defended Rorke's Drift, provides an exhaustive and detailed monograph on the battle.

Though as a general reader I would not know if Snook made factual or interpretive errors, his study seems impressively and meticulously researched and he writes well, sometimes stirringly. Indeed, the middle third of the book, which tells the almost incredible story of how a group of 139+ British soldiers, a quarter of them sick, successfully fought off repeated attacks by approximately 3,000 - 4,500 Zulus, makes for compelling and absorbing reading. Although writing exclusively from the British viewpoint (there are no Zulu written sources, after all), he tells a little about the Zulu command structure and commanders and shows admiration for the fighting qualities of Zulu warriors. I also liked that he decries war rather than glorifies it: ultimately, this tribute to the bravery of the heroes of Rorke's Drift concludes by making the timely point that their story 'epitomise[s] the folly of waging war except as a genuine measure of last resort.' I agree.

The book has lovely color plates, and good maps of the Rorke's Drift mission itself. One other great feature of the book is its extensive appendices, which include rosters of the soldiers who fought at Rorke's Drift and some firsthand accounts, as well as Chard's report to Queen Victoria, and an analysis of the battlefield. Good stuff for the research historian.

The main reason I even knew anything, prior to reading this book, about Rorke's Drift was Stanley Baker's great 1964 movie about it, which of course contains numerous instances of artistic license (e.g., sadly there was no inspiring rendition of 'Men of Harlech,' no 'saluting of fellow braves,' etc.); indeed I was surprised to learn that the movie gets a few things quite wrong (Harry Hook was not a dissolute malingerer, but a clean-living teetotaler, for instance). In contrast to the film which depicts mass charges of Zulu impis wielding assegais and cowhide shields, Snook shows that many of the Zulus had muskets, though they didn't know how to sight them well, and jumped from cover to cover. In addition, the movie shows the British soldiers often using mass volleys of rifle fire, which Snook argues was ahistorical.

Why not 5 stars? I found it a little irritating that, despite the subtitle, much of the book focuses on the Battle of Isandlwana, the disaster that took place earlier on Jan.22 of which Rorke's Drift was the aftermath. Snook even devotes much of his post-mortem discussion to allocating blame for the Isandlwana debacle.

I also found the discussion of blame somewhat beside the point: Chelmsford was not even at Isandlwana, and the subsequent imperial government inquiry that fixed blame on him obviously needed a scapegoat for the disaster. Ultimately, Chelmsford's error was to have a mindset -- underestimating the Zulus' fighting abilities -- that was probably shared by much of the British leadership. Moreover, Chelmsford was the victor at the battle (Ulundi) that ended the war, and neither his peers nor Snook give him much credit for this achievement. Steeped as he is in the ethos of the British military establishment, Snook agrees with the verdict of the government inquiry. I think there is some room at least for disagreement.

I made the mistake of tackling this book without reading Snook's earlier volume on Isandlwana, How Can Men Die Better, and consequently found the substantial portion of this book that treats Isandlwana and its aftermath difficult to follow. I believe I would have enjoyed and understood more if I had read that volume first, so I would recommend doing that before reading this book if you are not already knowledgeable about the Battle of Isandlwana.

Overall, though, there is no denying that Snook has written an essential book for anyone who wants to understand this sanguinary episode in the history of British arms. Snook's study is probably destined to be a definitive treatment of Rorke's Drift.

Rorke's Drift was a heroically fought but pointless battle in a savagely waged but peripheral war, the ill-conceived invasion in 1879 of Zululand by a small British Army under Lord Chelmsford, known to history as the Anglo-Zulu War. Snook, a serving officer in the modern regiment descended from the 1st / 24th regiment that defended Rorke's Drift, provides an exhaustive and detailed monograph on the battle.

Though as a general reader I would not know if Snook made factual or interpretive errors, his study seems impressively and meticulously researched and he writes well, sometimes stirringly. Indeed, the middle third of the book, which tells the almost incredible story of how a group of 139+ British soldiers, a quarter of them sick, successfully fought off repeated attacks by approximately 3,000 - 4,500 Zulus, makes for compelling and absorbing reading. Although writing exclusively from the British viewpoint (there are no Zulu written sources, after all), he tells a little about the Zulu command structure and commanders and shows admiration for the fighting qualities of Zulu warriors. I also liked that he decries war rather than glorifies it: ultimately, this tribute to the bravery of the heroes of Rorke's Drift concludes by making the timely point that their story 'epitomise[s] the folly of waging war except as a genuine measure of last resort.' I agree.

The book has lovely color plates, and good maps of the Rorke's Drift mission itself. One other great feature of the book is its extensive appendices, which include rosters of the soldiers who fought at Rorke's Drift and some firsthand accounts, as well as Chard's report to Queen Victoria, and an analysis of the battlefield. Good stuff for the research historian.

The main reason I even knew anything, prior to reading this book, about Rorke's Drift was Stanley Baker's great 1964 movie about it, which of course contains numerous instances of artistic license (e.g., sadly there was no inspiring rendition of 'Men of Harlech,' no 'saluting of fellow braves,' etc.); indeed I was surprised to learn that the movie gets a few things quite wrong (Harry Hook was not a dissolute malingerer, but a clean-living teetotaler, for instance). In contrast to the film which depicts mass charges of Zulu impis wielding assegais and cowhide shields, Snook shows that many of the Zulus had muskets, though they didn't know how to sight them well, and jumped from cover to cover. In addition, the movie shows the British soldiers often using mass volleys of rifle fire, which Snook argues was ahistorical.

Why not 5 stars? I found it a little irritating that, despite the subtitle, much of the book focuses on the Battle of Isandlwana, the disaster that took place earlier on Jan.22 of which Rorke's Drift was the aftermath. Snook even devotes much of his post-mortem discussion to allocating blame for the Isandlwana debacle.

I also found the discussion of blame somewhat beside the point: Chelmsford was not even at Isandlwana, and the subsequent imperial government inquiry that fixed blame on him obviously needed a scapegoat for the disaster. Ultimately, Chelmsford's error was to have a mindset -- underestimating the Zulus' fighting abilities -- that was probably shared by much of the British leadership. Moreover, Chelmsford was the victor at the battle (Ulundi) that ended the war, and neither his peers nor Snook give him much credit for this achievement. Steeped as he is in the ethos of the British military establishment, Snook agrees with the verdict of the government inquiry. I think there is some room at least for disagreement.

I made the mistake of tackling this book without reading Snook's earlier volume on Isandlwana, How Can Men Die Better, and consequently found the substantial portion of this book that treats Isandlwana and its aftermath difficult to follow. I believe I would have enjoyed and understood more if I had read that volume first, so I would recommend doing that before reading this book if you are not already knowledgeable about the Battle of Isandlwana.

Overall, though, there is no denying that Snook has written an essential book for anyone who wants to understand this sanguinary episode in the history of British arms. Snook's study is probably destined to be a definitive treatment of Rorke's Drift.

Rorke's Drift was a heroically fought but pointless battle in a savagely waged but peripheral war, the ill-conceived invasion in 1879 of Zululand by a small British Army under Lord Chelmsford, known to history as the Anglo-Zulu War. Snook, a serving officer in the modern regiment descended from the 1st / 24th regiment that defended Rorke's Drift, provides an exhaustive and detailed monograph on the battle.

Though as a general reader I would not know if Snook made factual or interpretive errors, his study seems impressively and meticulously researched and he writes well, sometimes stirringly. Indeed, the middle third of the book, which tells the almost incredible story of how a group of 139+ British soldiers, a quarter of them sick, successfully fought off repeated attacks by approximately 3,000 - 4,500 Zulus, makes for compelling and absorbing reading. Although writing exclusively from the British viewpoint (there are no Zulu written sources, after all), he tells a little about the Zulu command structure and commanders and shows admiration for the fighting qualities of Zulu warriors. I also liked that he decries war rather than glorifies it: ultimately, this tribute to the bravery of the heroes of Rorke's Drift concludes by making the timely point that their story 'epitomise[s] the folly of waging war except as a genuine measure of last resort.' I agree.

The book has lovely color plates, and good maps of the Rorke's Drift mission itself. One other great feature of the book is its extensive appendices, which include rosters of the soldiers who fought at Rorke's Drift and some firsthand accounts, as well as Chard's report to Queen Victoria, and an analysis of the battlefield. Good stuff for the research historian.

The main reason I even knew anything about this battle was Stanley Baker's great 1964 movie about it, which of course contains numerous instances of artistic license (e.g., sadly there was no inspiring rendition of 'Men of Harlech,' no 'saluting of fellow braves,' etc.); indeed I was surprised to learn that the movie gets a few things quite wrong (Harry Hook was not a dissolute malingerer, but a clean-living teetotaler, for instance). In contrast to the film which depicts mass charges of Zulu impis wielding assegais and cowhide shields, Snook shows that many of the Zulus had muskets, though they didn't know how to sight them well, and jumped from cover to cover. In addition, the movie shows the British soldiers often using mass volleys of rifle fire, which Snook argues was ahistorical.

Why not 5 stars? I found it a little irritating that, despite the subtitle, much of the book focuses on the Battle of Isandlwana, the disaster that took place earlier on Jan.22 of which Rorke's Drift was the aftermath. Snook even devotes much of his post-mortem discussion to allocating blame for the Isandlwana debacle.

I also found the discussion of blame somewhat beside the point: Chelmsford was not even at Isandlwana, and the subsequent imperial government inquiry that fixed blame on him obviously needed a scapegoat for the disaster. Ultimately, Chelmsford's error was to have a mindset -- underestimating the Zulus' fighting abilities -- that was probably shared by much of the British leadership. Moreover, Chelmsford was the victor at the battle (Ulundi) that ended the war, and neither his peers nor Snook give him much credit for this achievement. Steeped as he is in the ethos of the British military establishment, Snook agrees with the verdict of the government inquiry. I think there is some room at least for disagreement.

I made the mistake of tackling this book without reading Snook's earlier volume on Isandlwana, How Can Men Die Better, and consequently found the substantial portion of this book that treats Isandlwana and its aftermath difficult to follow. I believe I would have enjoyed and understood more if I had read that volume first, so I would recommend doing that before reading this book if you are not already knowledgeable about the Battle of Isandlwana.

Overall, though, there is no denying that Snook has written an essential book for anyone who wants to understand this sanguinary episode in the history of British arms. Snook's study is probably destined to be a definitive treatment of Rorke's Drift.

Snook, a serving officer in the modern regiment descended from the 1st / 24th regiment that defended Rorke's Drift, provides an exhaustive and detailed monograph on the well-known January 22-23, 1879 battle from the Anglo-Zulu War (AZW).

Though as a general reader I would not know if Snook made factual or interpretive errors, his study seems impressively and meticulously researched and he writes well, sometimes stirringly. Indeed, the middle third of the book, which tells the almost incredible story of how a group of 150+ British soldiers, a quarter of them sick, successfully fought off repeated attacks by approximately 4,500 Zulus, is difficult to put down. Although writing from the British viewpoint (there are no Zulu written sources, after all), he tells a little about the Zulu command structure and commanders and shows admiration for the fighting qualities of Zulu warriors. I also liked the fact that he decries war: ultimately, this tribute to the bravery of the heroes of Rorke's Drift concludes that their story 'epitomise[s] the folly of waging war except as a genuine measure of last resort.' I agree.

The book has lovely color plates, and good maps of the Rorke's Drift mission itself. One other great feature of the book is its extensive appendices, which include rosters of the soldiers who fought at Rorke's Drift and some firsthand accounts, as well as Chard's report to Queen Victoria, and an analysis of the battlefield. Fascinating stuff for the research historian.

Of course, we have no reason to think that the more memorable lines and episodes from Stanley Baker's great 1964 movie about the battle ever happened (e.g., no inspiring rendition of 'Men of Harlech,' no 'saluting of fellow braves,' etc.), and indeed the movie gets a few things quite wrong (Harry Hook was not a dissolute malingerer, but a clean-living teetotaler, for instance). In contrast to the film which depicts the Zulu impis as relying mostly on mass charges of warriors wielding assegais and cowhide shields, Snook shows that many of the Zulus had firearms, though they didn't know how to sight them well, and jumped from cover to cover. In addition, the movie shows the British soldiers often using mass volleys of rifle fire with their Martini-Henrys, which Snook argues was ahistorical.

Why not 5 stars? I found it a little irritating that, despite the subtitle, much of the book focuses more on the aftermath of the Battle of Isandlwana, the disaster that took place earlier on Jan.22, than on Rorke's Drift, and even devotes much of its post-mortem discussion to allocating blame for the Isandlwana debacle.

I also found the discussion of blame somewhat pointless: Chelmsford was not even at Isandlwana, and the subsequent imperial government inquiry that fixed blame on him obviously needed a scapegoat for the Isandlwana disaster. Ultimately, Chelmsford's error was to have a mindset -- underestimating the Zulus' fighting abilities -- that was probably shared by much of the British leadership. Moreover, Chelmsford was the victor at the battle (Ulundi) that ended the war, and neither his peers nor Snook give him much credit for this achievement. Steeped as he is in the ethos of the British military establishment, Snook agrees with the verdict of the government inquiry. I think there is some room at least for disagreement.

I made the mistake of tackling this book without reading Snook's earlier volume, How Can Men Die Better, and consequently found the substantial portion of this book that treats Isandlwana and its aftermath difficult to follow. I believe I would have enjoyed and understood more if I had read that volume first, so I would recommend doing that before reading this book if you are not already knowledgeable about Isandlwana.

Overall, though, there is no denying that Snook has written an essential book for anyone who wants to understand this stirring though sanguinary episode in the history of British arms. Snook's study is probably destined to be the definitive treatment of Rorke's Drift.

Snook, a serving officer in the modern regiment descended from the 1st / 24th regiment that defended Rorke's Drift, provides an exhaustive,detailed, apparently meticulously researched monograph on the well-known January 22-23, 1879 battle from the Anglo-Zulu War (AZW).

Though as a general reader I would not know if Snook made factual or interpretive errors, his study seems impressively and solidly researched and he writes well, sometimes stirringly. Indeed, the middle third of the book, which tells the almost incredible story of how a group of 150+ British soldiers, a quarter of them sick, successfully fought off repeated attacks by approximately 4,500 Zulus, is difficult to put down. Although writing from the British viewpoint (there are no Zulu written sources, after all), he tells a little about the Zulu command structure and commanders and shows admiration for the fighting qualities of Zulu warriors. I also liked the fact that he decries war: ultimately, this tribute to the bravery of the heroes of Rorke's Drift concludes that their story 'epitomise[s] the folly of waging war except as a genuine measure of last resort.' I agree.

The book has lovely color plates, and good maps of the Rorke's Drift mission itself. One other great feature of the book is its extensive appendices, which include rosters of the soldiers who fought at Rorke's Drift and some firsthand accounts, as well as Chard's report to Queen Victoria, and an analysis of the battlefield. Fascinating stuff for the research historian.

Of course, we have no reason to think that the more memorable lines and episodes from Stanley Baker's great 1964 movie about the battle ever happened (e.g., no inspiring rendition of 'Men of Harlech,' no 'saluting of fellow braves,' etc.), and indeed the movie gets a few things quite wrong (Harry Hook was not a dissolute malingerer, but a clean-living teetotaler, for instance). In contrast to the film which depicts the Zulu impis as relying mostly on mass charges of warriors wielding assegais and cowhide shields, Snook shows that many of the Zulus had firearms, though they didn't know how to sight them well, and jumped from cover to cover. In addition, the movie shows the British soldiers often using mass volleys of rifle fire with their Martini-Henrys, which Snook argues was ahistorical.

Why not 5 stars? I found it a little irritating that, despite the subtitle, much of the book focuses more on the aftermath of the Battle of Isandlwana, the disaster that took place earlier on Jan.22, than on Rorke's Drift, and even devotes much of its post-mortem discussion to allocating blame for the Isandlwana debacle. (Snook concludes that while several field commanders at Isandlwana were incompetent, the bulk of blame should go to Lord Chelmsford, the overall British commander during the AZW).

I also found the discussion of blame somewhat pointless: Chelmsford was not even at Isandlwana, and the subsequent imperial government inquiry that fixed blame on him obviously needed a scapegoat for the Isandlwana disaster. Ultimately, Chelmsford's error was to have a mindset -- underestimating the Zulus' fighting abilities -- that was probably shared by much of the British leadership, so it seems, at least to this civilian, perhaps a bit unfair to saddle him with the blame for Islandlwana. Moreover, Chelmsford was the victor at the battle (Ulundi) that ended the war, and neither his peers nor Snook give him much credit for this achievement. Steeped as he is in the ethos of the British military establishment, Snook agrees with the verdict of the government inquiry. I think there is some room at least for disagreement.

I made the mistake of tackling this book without reading Snook's earlier volume, How Can Men Die Better, and consequently found the substantial portion of this book that treats Isandlwana and its aftermath difficult to follow. I believe I would have enjoyed and understood more if I had read that volume first, so I would recommend doing that before reading this book if you are not already knowledgeable about Isandlwana.

Overall, though, there is no denying that Snook has written an essential book for anyone who wants to understand this stirring though sanguinary episode in the history of British arms. Snook's study is probably destined to be the definitive treatment of Rorke's Drift.

This book proves to be a nice follow-up to Snook's previous effort, How Can Man Die Better which covers the Battle of Isandlwana. This book covers the Defense of Rorke's Defense where a single company of the 24th Regiment held off the Zulu forces many times their strength.

Rorke's Drift is one of these battles of which many books have already been written about and this one proves to be quite readable, very well researched and in a typical style of the author, you feel at times that you are in there with the troops. It doesn't say anything truly new here but it does add fresh perception to the battle and the author enjoyed on few occasions to compared the real account with the film account, Zulu, starring Stanley Baker and Michael Caine. The book also gives a great insight into the soldiers who fought with such desperation. The narrative was often "hero oriented" in telling. Zulu side was also present but limited in form. The heart and soul of this book lies in the retelling of the Rorke's Drift from the Anglo-centric point of view. Although the account of the battle proves to be bit on the short side, it was clearly written and easy to follow. Unlike one of the previous reviewers, I thought the author's prose was quite good and passage flows very nicely.

The book come well illustrated with diagrams of Rorke's Drift that reflects very nicely on the battle. There are quite a few photographs and color paintings that also proves to be quite good.

But in all honesty, if I had to choose one book on Rorke's Drift, it probably won't be this one. I would choose Adrian Greaves' Rorke's Drift book which is far more detailed, superior in-depth book on the subject. Snook's book is good and worthy of the four stars but it been done before. I think one of the main weaknesses of the book lies with the fact that Snook didn't spend that much on battle itself. There are considerable amount of material in the book that dealt with Isandlwana, rest of the Zulu Wars and so forth. Personally, I would prefer a book about Rorke's Drift to be about Rorke's Drift.

In conclusion, I would recommended this book to any reader interested in the early stages of the Zulu War even if it may not be the best book on the subject.

This book should be required reading for anyone interested in the Anglo-Zulu War. Not only does Lt. Col. Snook explain in great detail the events of the defense of Rorke's Drift in great detail but he also brings to life the men who were involved in this climactic battle. This is a ground breaking book which sheds light on a little known yet amazing occurence in military history. Unlike the other historians who have written on this battle Lt. Col. Snook has researched The Battle of Rorke's Drift in depth and his work over the years shows itself on every page. 'Like Wolves on the Fold' builds upon Snook's other book 'How Can Man Die Better' and both when read one after the other form an excellent and essential history on the AZW. As a military historian I highly recommend them both.

LWotF is an almost minute-by-minute account of the battle of Rorke's Drift. While militarily insignificant, the story of this small battle was much popularized by the 1964 movie "Zulu" (which is still pretty good, even in light of the special effects of today's big-battle productions).

The extent of the research is impressive but the book is a dry read. I suppose one can only do so much with so narrow a topic. I believe the author is the official historian of the particular British regiment involved, so he has a pretty targeted audience. Personally, I would have prefered a more complete discussion, placing the battle in its wider historical context.

If you're looking to understand the Zulu Wars or British colonial history in Africa, look elsewhere. If, for some reason, you have a particularized interest in this specific historical footnote of an event (or if you're interested in knowing how accurate the movie was), then this is the book for you.

LWotF is an almost minute-by-minute account of the battle of Rorke's Drift. While militarily insignificant, the story of this small battle was much popularized by the 1964 movie "Zulu" (which is still pretty good, even in light of the special effects of today's big-battle productions).

The extent of the research is impressive but the book is a dry read. I suppose one can only do so much with so narrow a topic. I believe the author is the official historian on the particular British regiment involved, so he has a pretty targeted audience. Personally, I would have prefered a more complete discussion, placing the battle in its wider historical context.

If you're looking to understand the Zulu Wars or British colonial history in Africa, look elsewhere. If, for some reason, you have a particularized interest in this specific historical footnote of an event (or if you're interested in knowing how accurate the movie was), then this is the book for you.

On Wednesday morning, January 22, 1879, the 1st Battalion and most of the 2nd of the British 24th Regiment of Foot was wiped about by a Zulu army at Isandlwana in South Africa. (This battle is covered in Lieutenant Colonel Mike Snook's book, HOW CAN MAN DIE BETTER.)

After Isandlwana, the victorious tribesmen swarmed on several miles to the missionary compound, comprising a residence/hospital and storehouse, at Rorke's Drift. Here, for five hours in the late afternoon and evening of January 22nd, 154 remnant troops of the 2nd/24th successfully held off a siege by some 4,500 assailants. This stalwart defense, the crowning glory in the history of the 24th (now the Royal Regiment of Wales), is the subject of LIKE WOLVES ON THE FOLD, also by Snook.

I'm no expert on such narratives, but this book seems to me to be as exemplary an account of a small unit defensive action as one can find anywhere. Based on after-action reports and participants' memoirs, it's of the sort I would have expected from Custer and his 7th Cavalry troopers, or the Alamo defenders, or the 300 Spartans of Thermopylae, had any of these heroic bands had the good fortune to survive. But at Rorke's Drift, luck had little to do with it - just gritty determination, an adequate supply of ammo, inspired leadership from Lieutenants John Chard and Gonville Bromhead, and not just a little desperation; they were surrounded.

The volume includes a commendable 33-page section of photographs and painting reproductions. There are also several excellent drawings of the Rorke's Drift compound at various stages of the battle, each showing the direction of the Zulu attacks against a defense wall hastily constructed of 200-lb mealie-bags and 100-lb cases of hardtack and tinned bully beef - a perimeter that contracted and changed shape several times during the course of the siege as Chard and Bromhead found it necessary to withdraw and regroup their men in the face of ferocious assaults. Indeed, about halfway through the ordeal, the hospital was set aflame and had to be evacuated under fire.

The narrative of the 24th's gallant stand comprises the first half the book and is the most riveting part. The remaining, more staid chapters concern themselves with the outcome of the Anglo-Zulu War, the assignment of responsibility for the Isandlwana debacle, and the post-war careers of the principle British and Zulu combatants, particularly the eleven British defenders of Rorke's Drift who were honored with the Empire's highest award for valor, the Victoria Cross - the most ever awarded in British military history for a single action.

The story told by LIKE WOLVES ON THE FOLD illustrates the British "stiff upper lip" at its stiffest. The Empire and the Queen Empress were privileged to have such men in their service.

I've read a dozen plus books on the Zulu War and have seen the movies a number of times.
This book is the absolute best of all!

Zulu, with Michael Caine. Well, Hook was not a malingerer and the swiss guy was only 25 years old. The guys who brought the word of the Zulu's coming to the drift probably deserted their comrades. And Bromhead really was the bravest officer. Great book. Dispels the movie misconceptions, among which the battle basically ended during the night with no stand against the redoubt in daylight. Good history, but a bit chronolically broken. In the end really it's the Indians with bows and arrows and the cavalry with rifled weapons. Not so much a fantastic effort by a company of the 24th Regiment of Foot, but what should be expected, notwithstanding the rather inaccurate rifle fire of Zulus with Martini-Henris at the drift. The author makes it plain that any competent British officer could hold off the Zulus with proper orders and clear chain of command. For the romance of war take the movie, for colonial romance take the book.

Lieutenant Colonel Mike Snook has written what appears to be the definitive book on the defense of Rorke's Drift. He corrects errors made by previous writers and provides as clear a picture of the battle as is possible more than a century after the fact. There is a wealth of information, but his prose never gets bogged down. In fact, the book reads as easily as a novel. The book includes some very useful maps that complement the text and give the reader a good sense of the progression of the battle. I highly recommend Snook's book to anyone interested in the incredible skill and courage of the defenders of Rorke's Drift.

Lieutenant Colonel Mike Snook has written what appears to be the definitive book on the defense of Rorke's Drift. He corrects errors made by previous writers and provides as clear a picture of the battle as is possible more than a century after the fact. There is a wealth of information, but his prose never gets bogged down. In fact, the book reads as easily as a novel. The book includes some very useful maps that complement the text and give the reader a good sense of the progression of the battle. I highly recommend Snook's book to anyone interested in the incredible skill and courage of the defenders of Rorke's Drift.

As with his companion volume on Isandlwana, this book is chock full of interesting information I couldn't find elsewhere. It also dispells a few myths on the battle. I enjoyed the background on the soldiers and civilians involved, as well as the Zulus. It is basically only 2/3 about the battle at Rorke's drift. The other part of the book goes into more detail on Isandlwana and the battles that followed Rorke's drift, along with details on the warriors after the battle. I thought the bios on the participants were a little sparse, considering this was a book on the battle of their lifetimes. I have found much more detail on some of them in websites online. The book is not very long, it could have been included. I also found the author's same habit of referring to arcane S. African geography and people's names in later chapters that he had only briefly (or not at all) described earlier. So the reader has to flip back to figure out what a "koppie" is, or who a named person was. Or where a particular geographic feature lies in relation to the camp.

This book gave me, for the first time, a good hour by hour idea of the fighting, and the type of fighting it really was. Even though other books had better maps, they just didn't impart the same sense of what really happened. It was not like the movie Zulu, with massed rushes, for the most part. Rapid fire would force Zulus to go to ground. It also, unlike his Isandlwana book, came with adequate maps indicating actions on the field.

Unfortunately, once again, the author's pride for and bias towards his own regiment, the 24th, could not be surpressed. He again could not resist laying into poor Lt. Col Durnford, assigning him blame and personality flaws which are not substantiated by the record. ( the opinions of rivals who hated him or wanted a scapegoat should not be considered) The fault at Isandlwana was Pulleines, plain and simple. The author's own photos of the topography show that only a fool would have deployed troops in anything but a tight square when faced with massed Zulus. Especially w/o a large reserve to counter the well-known Zulu encircling tactics. The wagons and tents could be moved to accomodate that! In fact, they could have been formed into a laager and saved the day. Arrogance from 24th officers was the cause of the disaster, not Durnford's foray with 250 native troopers and a gaggle of unmounted men who would have hardly helpd the defense. Durnford was not the camp commander, and certainly would not have been welcomed had he tried to assume command, Pulleine's adherence to strict military protocols to the contrary. He commaned the #2 column, period. His orders did not say "take command of the 24th" from what I can recall.

I think the author's pride in his regiment also caused him to overlook some of the flaws in the Rorke's drift defense. Examples include setting up a perimeter that was too large to be defended w/o the native levies and troopers who fled before battle. Relying on shaky or battle-shattered troops to man a line was unsound. They should have been considered a reserve at best. Building it that large was correct. But not immediately withdrawing the patients from the vulnerable hospital to the more defensible storage building was not. The lack of connections between hospital rooms to aid the defense was another error, as was not mealie-bagging any doorways to prevent them being used by Zulus for entry. All are engineering failures. A high proportion of the British deaths were patients and lone able-bodied soliders left to fend for themselves in the hospital w/o adequate support, or more importantly, leadership. No sergants, just privates who did an amazing job anyway. It seems Chard and Bromhead were willing to sacrifice them if need be. Or, an understandable oversight. But an oversight nontheless. They also neglected to build a high redoubt initially and only thought of it later. This redoubt firing from a higher level, allowed them to double firepower in any one direction as needed to counter thrusts. An engineer should have known better.

These were touched upon, but these actual errors were quickly forgiven and passed off by the author, while he savaged Durnford for simply having an aggressive nature and holding off several thousand Zulus for a long while in a well-ordered retreat with 250 effectives, while Pulliene ignored the threat to his flank. Obviously, anything done by a 24th officer is ok, yet an outsider is held to a much higher standard. That kind of bias makes one question if the rest of the information is true or not, which is a shame. The book is otherwise very illuminating. It just is in need of a new edition removing the biased parts. I read to get facts, the armchair analysis should be clearly labeled as such.

This is a well-written and quite extensively detailed account of the defense at Rorke's Drift by a habdful of British soldiers against thousands on Zulu warriors fresh from their victory at Isandlwana. It recounts the actions taken by the leading officers, and the defenses that were quickly erected (and just in time) before the attacks began. This action was covered in the movie "Zulu", and the author does point out where book and cinema differ. He is obviously proud of the stout defense put on by the "redcoats", but he also praises the Zulus for their courage and persistence in the face of mass rifle fire. Both sides covered themselves with glory, but the British Empire eventually won the "war" that began with their devastating defeat earlier in the same day at the attacks at the Drift.

After reading, and thoroughly enjoying, "How Can Man Die Better", I was prepared to rip through this book with great gusto. No disappointment. It's a fantastic read. I came to the subject with a cursory knowledge (I'd read the Osprey campaign book) and some Hollywood images. I came away with as complete & thorough an understanding as I'm likely to get. While some may disagree with the point of that Lt. Col. Snook's obvious love & respect for his regiment engenders, they couldn't disagree with his clear rendition of the facts, busting of myths, and thorough exploration of the subject from a military point of view. Lt. Col. Snook includes as much of the point of view of the Zulu as he can as well. I wish more military history was written like this. It's just a great and informative read. I hope we can look forward to more books from this author.

Written by a serving officer of the Royal Regiment of Wales, formerly the 24th, Like Wolves On The Fold: The Defence Of Rorke's Drift is the fascinating true story of one of the most improbable victories in military history. In January of 1879, a Zulu host attacked a single company of the 24th Regiment of the British Army and a handful of recuperating hospital patients. Retreat was not an option, and the enemy outnumbered the defenders nearly thirty to one. Like Wolves On The Fold shows how sheer bloody-mindedness, as much as any other quality, turned the tables on the Zulus. Like Wolves On The Fold also surveys the remainder of the war, and examines the tragic end of the war's participants. A collection of inset photographs and artwork, most in black and white but a few in color, round out this rousing military history, which pays full respect to both sides in a bloody conflict.

I was'nt much surprised with this book. It was exactly as I expected (after all I enjoyed the first volume HOW CAN MAN DIE BETTER a lot... even if a bit biased in favor of the 24th foot... really easy to understand why of course!... after all the author IS an old 24th serving officer!...).

Probably in the beginning it was set off by such ridicule books of the "COVER OF" type... I hate revisionists as much as him really.

The amount of information and detail is mind-blowing and a lot of things and arguments get a proper SHAKE...

The fight at Rorke's Drift is very well done and clearly exposed with neat diagrams (always a plus), but I expected THAT... I even enjoyed more the clear analysis of the blame (if someone had to be blamed) for the Isandlwana battle-disaster.

The Appendices alone are a must have for your collection motive enough.

And even better, he carefully mentions Ian Knight as the provider of some tips (a fair play writer our SNOOK... to say the least) and includes all his relevant works on the bibliography! (how many times an author who wants to sell books about a subject "edits" his sources to do not give publicity to the competition!... this is not the case here!... in a way I think he just wrote the books to gave the PROPER VIEW from HIS regiment...).

Of course I have nearly all of Ian Knight production, and HE is one of the leading experts in this particular "SMALL WAR" (not that you will have considered a charging zulu "SMALL" at all...).

A page turner for military enthusiasts and specially for lovers of the late XIXth century.

ADB

PS: If you have'nt read the first volume get it... is even more "new" in approach than the present one, and probably the BETTER of the pair... but that is only because THERE EXISTED A LOT of precedent studies of Rorke's Drift which gave due praise to the stamina of the 24th soldiers and fellow "other units" comrades!...

I have read a considerable amount about the 1879 fight at Rorke's Drift where a small British force successfully resisted the furious attack of an enormous Zulu army, and I would unhesitatingly put Mike Snook's "Like Wolves On the Fold: The Defence of Rorke's Drift" at the top of the list of books about the battle.

Snook, a longtime officer in the Royal Regiment of Wales (the successor unit to the 24th Infantry which fought at both Isandlwana and Rorke's Drift) quite obviously identifies with the British soldiers who fought there, but he also shows a great liking and respect for their Zulu foes. The result is a book that celebrates courage and honors sacrifice, no matter the color of the skin of the fighting man.

"Like Wolves On the Fold" is a companion volume to Snook's earlier "How Can Man Die Better: The Secrets of Isandlwana Revealed" about the famous Battle of Isandlwana, fought the same day only several miles away, a battle in which the Zulu army crushed a large British field force. Although it is not absolutely necessary to read "How Can Man Die Better" first, it is nonetheless a good idea, as the author returns to the subject of Isandlwana in the last third of "Like Wolves On the Fold" to render judgement on who was to blame (and who gets credit) for what happened there.

With "Wolves On the Fold", due to the small number of British troops invoved and thanks to the availability of numerous primary sources, Snook was able to construct a fast-paced, entralling narrative that often focuses upon individual soldiers during the fight. And in doing so, he corrects many erroneous myths promulgated by earlier books (and by the 1964 film "Zulu" which was exciting cinema, but not really history). His intimate familiarity with the terrain and professional military background allow Snook to speak with rare authority.