judy7007 Posted 27 October , 2009 Share Posted 27 October , 2009 I have just seen a photograph on a State Library website in Australia with a photograph entitled "Australians Landing at Suvla Bay, 25 April 1915". (Yes, I did have to fill in their "contact us" form). "And the Band played Waltzing Matilda" twice mentions Australians being slaughtered at Suvla Bay. Slim Dusty (and others) also sang about an Australian soldier lying on Suvla Bay. I wonder where this idea came from? Judy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armidale Posted 27 October , 2009 Share Posted 27 October , 2009 Mainly because Anzac Cove had not been named at the time of the landings. Maps of the area then available to the press and particularly in Atlases were very sketchy showing mainly the Dardanelles, Suvla Bay and Gelibu. It was known that the ANZACS had landed between the mouth of the Dardanelles and Suvla Bay. The whole coastline there is only a few miles. They had travelled a few thousand miles to get to the penninsular, so pin pointing the actual landing within about 1 mile, on a featureless map was reasonably accurate. For about three months nothing else of importance happened at Suvla Bay, and by that time the die had been cast. Gallipoli as we know it was Gelibu anglicasied ?. The best version of Suvla Bay was by Ray Kernaghan, father of Lee and Tania. Slim was OK, though. Eric Bogle admitted that he was influenced by the "Old Australian Homestead" 'folksong" when he dashed off "And The Band Played Waltzing Matilda". He was absolutely amazed by his [delayed] success, and states that he would have been more accurate with such things as "1915" and "Tin Hat", and may have dispelled any doubt that his country saying "Son..." meant he was conscripted. Had he done so the song may not have struck the chord that it decidely has with audiences around the world. IMHO the caption of the picture should not be altered. Historically it was correct at the time of creation. There were many songs about people sailing to Botany Bay. THat is more romantic than Port Jackson and easier to rhyme with than "Siddeney", their true destination. The geographical error is about the same distance as on Gallipoli. And talking about bays, it would surprise many part and full time residents of Canberra that Jervis Bay is also in the A.C.T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmaasz Posted 27 October , 2009 Share Posted 27 October , 2009 Judy: I'd like to understand more about the myth you have referred to. In a book I have about the Dardanelles, written by a naval officer who was there and published in 1916 and which includes a map, the Anzacs landed at points between 2 and 4 miles from Suvla. This is not such a great distance that it could not be loosely described as Suvla, and there is no other named place nearby. Is this a touchy subject for Australian historians? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muerrisch Posted 27 October , 2009 Share Posted 27 October , 2009 a rose by any other name ........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluedog Posted 27 October , 2009 Share Posted 27 October , 2009 Regardless of the lyrics of songwriters and balladeers , the only Australians at Suvla Bay were 300 Officers and men of theRoyal Australian Naval Bridging team who were landed on August 8th. and were employed in the building of wharves , bridges , unloading stores and repairing and maintaining equipment in open air workshops. During the 5 months at Suvla they suffered casualties of 2 dead , 60 wounded and 2 died of disease. The bulk of the team were evacuated on the night of 16/17 December but 50 remained behind at Lala Baba beach and were not taken off until 0430 on Dec. 20th. Thus being the last Australians to leave the Peninsula as the evacuation at Anzac Cove was completed by 0410 on Dec. 20th. During the Suvla campaign they were based at "D" beach on the north side of Suvla Bay. "D" Beach is now on the maps and known to the Locals as Kangaroo Beach. Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tim_oz Posted 28 October , 2009 Share Posted 28 October , 2009 Judy Its something Ive come across now and again and always thought it was people who did not know better taking the Eric Bogle song as fact, but as you say it certainly predates that. The episode on the Dardanelles in the otherwise excellent 1964 TV documentary The Great War, attributes a quote from Monash as describing the Australians leaving Sulva Bay when in fact he was clearly describing Anzac Cove. Given the historical weight behind that series if they could not get it right what hope for the rest of us. Tim B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiegeGunner Posted 28 October , 2009 Share Posted 28 October , 2009 I suspect no-one would think twice about the slight geographical 'drift' if it were not for the name Suvla having other connotations associated with the later landings there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaeldr Posted 28 October , 2009 Share Posted 28 October , 2009 Whether or not it has contributed to this confusion in any form, I cannot say, however there were raids on Suvla at the time of the first landings The British OH (see pages 312> in Vol.I) mentions Naval & NZ (but not Australian) landing parties going after Turkish artillery observers at Nimbrunesi Point from the evening of 30th April 1915. Quote: "Doubling to the top of Lala Baba, these (Navy) men found and destroyed a telephone wire in a small trench on its summit, but the Turkish piquet escaped. Two days later this raid was repeated on a somewhat larger scale, and at daybreak on the 2nd May 50 men of the Canterbury Battalion, under Capt. C. Cribb, left for Suvla in the destroyer Cone (Commander C. Seymour). This attack met with more success. A landing was effected inside the bay, at the foot of Lala Baba, and the raiders, advancing in three parties, found the trench at the top of the hill occupied by seventeen sleeping Turks. On the alarm being given the Turks fired a few shots, but it was too late to put up an organized resistance and after two of them had been killed and two had bolted, the remainder of the party, consisting of an officer and twelve men, surrendered. The New Zealanders searched the neighbourhood, discovering two other small trenches overlooking Nimbrunesi Point. But the telephone wire destroyed by the sailors had not been repaired, and no instruments were found. About noon the whole party re-embarked without interference from the enemy." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truthergw Posted 28 October , 2009 Share Posted 28 October , 2009 I can vouch for the fact that the song quoted earlier about an Australian homestead was very popular. I happen to know a couple of verses and the tune from my parents who had learned it as a ' pop ' song in their youth. i.e. at the time of the Great war or just after. They knew it as Suvla Bay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
judy7007 Posted 28 October , 2009 Author Share Posted 28 October , 2009 Maps of the area then available to the press and particularly in Atlases were very sketchy showing mainly the Dardanelles, Suvla Bay and Gelibu. It was known that the ANZACS had landed between the mouth of the Dardanelles and Suvla Bay. The whole coastline there is only a few miles. They had travelled a few thousand miles to get to the penninsular, so pin pointing the actual landing within about 1 mile, on a featureless map was reasonably accurate. For about three months nothing else of importance happened at Suvla Bay, and by that time the die had been cast. ......... And talking about bays, it would surprise many part and full time residents of Canberra that Jervis Bay is also in the A.C.T. I think the sketchy maps and the short distances make a great deal of sense, and as you rightly say, a pretty accurate pin point at that time. As for Jervis Bay, I do know it is in the ACT as I lived in Canberra for over 40 years and we used to go down there in buses to dances at the Naval College! Great days!. However in those days we pronounced it JARvis Bay. Only in much more recent times was it discovered that the man they named it after actually pronounced his namer JERvis. For a while people tried calling it JERvis Bay but it was hard to change. I'm not sure what the latest is on that one! Many thanks for your reply. I think the Ray Kernaghan version is the best too but I couldn't spell it! Judy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
judy7007 Posted 28 October , 2009 Author Share Posted 28 October , 2009 I suspect no-one would think twice about the slight geographical 'drift' if it were not for the name Suvla having other connotations associated with the later landings there. I think this is extremely well put and, in fact is the crux of the whole matter as to why some Australians are indeed "touchy" about it. Many thanks Judy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
judy7007 Posted 28 October , 2009 Author Share Posted 28 October , 2009 Regardless of the lyrics of songwriters and balladeers , the only Australians at Suvla Bay were 300 Officers and men of theRoyal Australian Naval Bridging team who were landed on August 8th. and were employed in the building of wharves , bridges , unloading stores and repairing and maintaining equipment in open air workshops. During the 5 months at Suvla they suffered casualties of 2 dead , 60 wounded and 2 died of disease. The bulk of the team were evacuated on the night of 16/17 December but 50 remained behind at Lala Baba beach and were not taken off until 0430 on Dec. 20th. Thus being the last Australians to leave the Peninsula as the evacuation at Anzac Cove was completed by 0410 on Dec. 20th. During the Suvla campaign they were based at "D" beach on the north side of Suvla Bay. "D" Beach is now on the maps and known to the Locals as Kangaroo Beach. Peter Peter, So far I haven't found this information so am very pleased to have it. Many thanks for your input. I know from other posts that you spend lots and lots of time on the Peninsula. I have only just begun but will keep going back when I can Judy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
judy7007 Posted 28 October , 2009 Author Share Posted 28 October , 2009 Judy Its something Ive come across now and again and always thought it was people who did not know better taking the Eric Bogle song as fact, but as you say it certainly predates that. The episode on the Dardanelles in the otherwise excellent 1964 TV documentary The Great War, attributes a quote from Monash as describing the Australians leaving Sulva Bay when in fact he was clearly describing Anzac Cove. Given the historical weight behind that series if they could not get it right what hope for the rest of us. Tim B Tim So true! I think however that there has been so much more interest in Gallipoli in recent years (by that I mean about the last 15 years) that these questions are now bound to arise. As so many people are now going to the services held on the Peninsula each Anzac Day (and I think there are about 4 on the day including a Turkish service), they are learning more and more from the history guides and therefore asking more and more questions. Someone has just sent me the Andrew Denton DVD Gallipoli : Brothers in Arms showing some interviews with some participants and with the historian on the AWM tour in 2006. As an aside, the historian strongly refutes the "myth" that the 25 April landing was on the "wrong" beach - but that is another topic which I don't want to get into now! Judy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluedog Posted 29 October , 2009 Share Posted 29 October , 2009 Judy When you wish to have the quote of Gen. Hamilton and Commander Dix regarding landing on the wrong beach at Anzac , please let me know as I have the quotes and page number from the London Gazette regarding these. Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
judy7007 Posted 29 October , 2009 Author Share Posted 29 October , 2009 Judy When you wish to have the quote of Gen. Hamilton and Commander Dix regarding landing on the wrong beach at Anzac , please let me know as I have the quotes and page number from the London Gazette regarding these. Peter Many thanks, Peter, I'd really like to have these details. I am actually very interested in the opinions (or evidence?) that it may not have been the wrong beach (and have done a little investigation). I had a long? discussion with my husband (ex RAN) this morning - he apparently read about the Royal Australian Naval involvement the other day on the RAN website - but we hadn't yet caught up on that one. I'll read more. Judy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluedog Posted 29 October , 2009 Share Posted 29 October , 2009 Judy Am away at the moment but will be back home about Nov.16th. Will post what I have. Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
judy7007 Posted 29 October , 2009 Author Share Posted 29 October , 2009 Judy Am away at the moment but will be back home about Nov.16th. Will post what I have. Peter Many thanks Peter. Whenever you can will be fine. Judy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
centurion Posted 29 October , 2009 Share Posted 29 October , 2009 I suspect no-one would think twice about the slight geographical 'drift' if it were not for the name Suvla having other connotations associated with the later landings there. Funny though in Britain there is some angst over getting the site of a major battle field (Bosworth) 'off' by about two miles. Geographical drift does matter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmaasz Posted 29 October , 2009 Share Posted 29 October , 2009 I hope you all don't mind my intruding on this Australian history. I've found it interesting. About landing on the wrong beach: The Australian official History says that happened and there is a sketch map showing the intended and actual landing places. See page 255 at: http://www.awm.gov.au/cms_images/histories/2/chapters/12.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
judy7007 Posted 29 October , 2009 Author Share Posted 29 October , 2009 I hope you all don't mind my intruding on this Australian history. I've found it interesting. About landing on the wrong beach: The Australian official History says that happened and there is a sketch map showing the intended and actual landing places. See page 255 at: http://www.awm.gov.au/cms_images/histories/2/chapters/12.pdf Hi, I think the information on the link below is quite interesting - there was a thread on the "wrong beach" on GWF a while back but, although I am very interested, it hasn't been highest on my list of Gallipoli research, only because I have so much else I am researching about the Campaign. http://www.abc.net.au/innovation/gallipoli...al_analysis.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armidale Posted 29 October , 2009 Share Posted 29 October , 2009 Funny though in Britain there is some angst over getting the site of a major battle field (Bosworth) 'off' by about two miles. Geographical drift does matter It might matter around Bosworth where millions of people have lived or travelled through in the period since the battle. The drift would be of no concern to the inhabitants of that section of the Turkish coastline, or to the majority of Australians. In many cases their next door neighbours lived further away than the 'drift' but their home address was the same. It was of great concern to those in many "Old Australian Homesteads" that their menfolk would not be returning from what was, at the time, the scene of the greatest single loss of Australian lives ANYWHERE. Suvla Bay could be found on any school atlas. It may have a 'nice' ring to it, but is certainly more practicable than a map reference in latitude & longitude. THat reference would probably not be much different to that of Suvla Bay, anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armidale Posted 29 October , 2009 Share Posted 29 October , 2009 Why all the fuss about where the ANZACs fought anyway? The French, British, and Newfoundlanders all refer to Gallipoli, which geographically was the english translation of the Turkish town of Gelibu. To be 'acceptable' the reference should be "gallipoli peninsula", but even that description was probably coined as a result of the invasion. In some cases 'we' do not even have the continent right, as much fighting took place in Asia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armidale Posted 29 October , 2009 Share Posted 29 October , 2009 Number: G00579 Maker: Brooks, Ernest Place made: Ottoman Empire: Turkey, Chanak, Gallipoli Peninsula Date made: September-December 1915 Physical description: Black & white Summary: A despatch rider galloping from Suvla Bay to Anzac Cove to avoid being sniped at. Great risk was run by these men in carrying out their very important duties. I hope this is not considered to be a red herring. Notice that the location 'given' this pic by the British Official Photographer is "Chanak". There have been inferences that Australians were not at Suvla Bay, [with certain exceptions]. Another exception is the squad of snipers, actually counter snipers, raised mainly from Australian Light Horse units who were sent there in August. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northern Soul Posted 29 October , 2009 Share Posted 29 October , 2009 That's a rather puzzling caption; I suspect a bit of journalistic licence. What about the photographer? Was he invisible to snipers? Those graves can't have been prepared too quickly either. Maybe this was the sort of caption that was used to fire up the imagination of the public at the time? Despatch riders galloped because the message sender wanted the intended recipient to get the message as soon as possible. Andy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armidale Posted 30 October , 2009 Share Posted 30 October , 2009 Spoilsport! But now that you ask... A despatch rider galloping from Suvla Bay to Anzac Cove to avoid being sniped at. Great risk was run by these men in carrying out their very important duties. The rider is possibly 852 Private (Pte) Stirling Fritz Blacket, who enlisted in the 2nd LIght Horse on 19 December 1914. After being wounded at Gallipoli in August 1915, Pte Blacket returned as a despatch rider to Suvla Bay in September. In an interview with his grandson in later life, he described the taking of a photograph of either himself or his fellow despatch rider on the Gallipoli Peninsula. 'I distinctly remember the time the photographer got permission to take the photo. He had a valuable camera and valued himself. It was hard to take photos in a safe place to avoid you or the photographer getting shot up. The place I suggested was a quiet little beach on Anzac Cove, with just a couple of graves there. I told this photographer that one of us would ride around there so he could take photos. That goes down well with the public when they see someone galloping around. So we did a canter around for him while we were sitting upright on the horse and he took these photos. We couldn't ride fast as there was a lot of traffic. When despatch riding we would crouch over the neck of the horse to avoid getting shot.' Pte Blacket continued to serve in the Light Horse, and was awarded a Military Medal, for his part in the capture of seven Turks near Khor El Ajham on 21 July 1917. He was also commended for his work as a despatch rider at Gallipoli and in the Middle East. Credit line: Admiralty Official Photograph Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now