Lieut - Col W G Malone N.Z.E.F

[(nzef)]

Hi All,

This is a question that has been bugging me for a while now. I've read his diary transcript "No Better Death" and have done a quick search of this site, but still the answer eludes me.

Why was Malone's body not recovered and given a burial that befitted someone of his rank?

I can understand the chaos of war, but surely there would have been someone who would have done this?

Malone was killed on the 8th and the British troops were not pushed off the hill until the 10th. Was it just not possible to reach the summit in any way?

I believe the naval "friendly fire" incident has been reasonably disproved (Although, I believe it did happen to a party of Gurkha's??)

I mention this, as I thought that perhaps his body was not able to be recovered.

Can someone answer this question for me?

Cheers

[Verrico2009]

You've probably seen this (http://www.nzetc.org/tm/scholarly/tei-WH1-Cant-t1-body-d4-d2.html#name-208648-mention). Reading it and the subsequent page makes me think the opportunity simply didn't arise (men thinking they'd been relieved rather than reinforced and units not arriving all makes it sound very chaotic) - or that there wasn't an identifiable body to retrieve (the fighting continues to be heavy, with sustained enemy attacks).

[(nzef)]

Hi,

Yes, I had read through that but I don't think it really answered my question. Thanks for replying though.

I feel there is something more to be uncovered.

Cheers

[gem22]

nzef

Have you read Carlyon's book 'Gallipoli'? If you haven't I recommend you do. I'm nearing the end of it at the moment and I'm finding it a very good read. He covers the death of Malone, albeit briefly, in context with what was happening around Chunuk Bair at that time.

Without quoting large bits of the book, which you may have read already, I'll give a very brief summary. Effectively Malone's body was not recovered because their was nobody available to recover dead bodies. The medical services, including stretcher bearers, were grossly undermanned and the terrain was extremely difficult to cross. Carlyon makes the point that even wounded men were taking as much as 3 days to get down to the beach and at times as many as 6 stretcher bearers were needed to get 1 stretcher across the more difficult parts. All this was happening whilst they were under fire from the Turks on Hill Q and Battleship Hill; if I've read it correctly. So life was dangerous in the extreme and no matter how high a rank a body had it was still a dead body and the living, wounded, were more important and rightly took priority.

You mention in your post that the Friendly Fire incident had been disproved but Carlyon is firmly of the opinion that the shell that killed Malone came from either a ship or from ANZAC. I'ld be interested to know what evidence you have to the contrary; just to give me a more balanced view of the event.

Garth

[(nzef)]

Hi Garth,

Thanks for the reply. Yes, I have read that book, but a while ago now.

In regards to the friendly fire incident. I can not recall the publication(s) but I was certain that I had read that, although there were indeed instances (The Gurkha party comes to mind) of friendly naval fire, it was not this which killed Lt-Col Malone. I'm almost certain his diary transcript has a passage which mentions he was killed instantly by a shrapnel bullet from an air burst and collapsed into a colleagues arms. I'll check that again tonight.

Cheers