Best book on Gallipoli- opinions sought please

[Philip Wilson]

The Military Papers of Lt-General Frederick Stanley MAUDE 1914-17, edited by Andrew Syk for the Army Records Society, published in 2012 includes a useful Chapter on Gallipoli - when MAUDE was GOC 13th (Western) Division, covering the period June 1915 to January 1916. Well worth reading.

[Jeff Pickerd]

Back at post number 7 PMHart, as one of his book recommendations suggested, " For fun, I really like David Cameron (not the Tory swine) whose books have been eye-opening and an excellent read." From this I would take it that he is referring to Dr David W. Cameron, given that Pter Hart has his recommendation for the book, Sorry, Lads, But The Order Is To Go, printed on its back cover. I found this book to be an excellent outline of the Gallipoli August campaign, although obviously heavily influenced by the writting of C. E. W. Bean, (that could be said of all Australian authors), but I struggle to find where 'For fun' comes into it.

At post number 10 Peter Hart stated: "People do prefer it if you just peddle the myths and legends..." From the Light Horse forum the following would indicate that not all people subscribe to that sentiment:

"The ‘Stand down’ Myth from the charge at the Nek

(Quote)

Jack would recall how they waited for the call. There was no talking – most were lost in their own thoughts. He was thinking of his wife, with whom he had never known the joys of married life, and through his Boer War experiences and to the dreadful voyage on that fishing boat. He shuddered as the phone rang. The senior officer answered. The men steeled themselves, waiting for the whistle blast and almost certain death. The officer seemed to be doing a lot of talking. He replaced the receiver looked down the line and breaking into a smile shouted those words of remission, “Stand Down!” [Excerpt from the book - ‘The Miraculous “Life” of a Man Called Jack’]

***********

It came as a disappointment to find the perpetuation of the ‘stand down’ myth again published in, “GREAT BATTLES IN AUSTRALIAN HISTORY”, by Jonathan King, Allen & Unwind, NSW 2011, where at page 87, paragraph three, from the chapter – “THE NEK, GALLIPOLI, 7 AUGUST 1915: SLAUGHTER ON THE TENNIS COURT OF DEATH”, the following extract is recorded: -

“Fortunately, others were spared. Thinking he was going die, Trooper Jack Cox said he had been ‘lost in my thoughts, thinking about my wife with whom I had never really known the joys of married life and my time in similar battles in the Boer War’. Then Cox had seen an officer doing a lot of talking on a field phone before he replaced the receiver, look down the line and broke into a smile, shouting: ‘Stand down, men’!”

There is no accreditation or reference to the source of this quote from the Acknowledgements or Selected Bibliography of this book, and ironically, from the referenced books listed, “Gallipoli Diaries, The Anzacs’ Own Story Day by Day”, also by Jonathan King, is not mentioned, and that omission will become apparent. There is also no index, no end notes, or chapter reference notes produced in this publication.

From what can be made out, no-one to date has picked up upon, nor challenged the factual error recorded in this publication concerning the Trooper Jack Cox ‘Stand down’ telephone incident, accredited to the fourth line of the 10th Light Horse Regiment at the charge at the Nek, 7th August 1915. No other recognised publications dealing with the charge at The Nek, starting with such as the official history by Dr. C. E. W. Bean, and the later works: “The Nek” by Peter Burness, Ian Gill in “Gallipoli to Tripoli”, and John Hamilton, “Goodbye Cobber, God Bless You”, mention this incident of having taken place on Russell’s Top, 7th August 1915.

There is a very simple explanation as to why this incident is a myth; Trooper Jack Cox was not there!

The quoted Trooper Jack Cox was not ever a member of the 10th Light Horse Regiment, or any other unit of the 3rd Light Horse Brigade; he was in fact Pte Arthur John Cox No.85, “A” Sqdn, 4th Light Horse Regiment. He was neither in the fourth line of the charge at the Nek nor present in the trenches on Russell’s Top, 7th August; nor likely to have ever set foot upon that particular sector of Anzac prior to that date. In fact at that time he was a member of the 4th LH Regt reinforcement to the 11th Infantry Battalion at Ryrie’s Post, and from his service record it shows that he was wounded in the right shoulder by shrapnel on the 6th August during the Turkish attack on Leane’s trench, and evacuated from Anzac Cove onboard the Hospital Ship “Ascania”, 7th August, the morning of the said incident taking place. On another note, there were no phones in the firing line trenches on Russell’s Top, 7th August; the closest phone to the front line was the ‘AW’ phone at the 3rd Light Horse Brigade’s forward headquarters in the ‘White Street’ trench, about fifty meters behind the firing line, the same command dugout that housed the Brigade Major, Lt Col Jack Antill.

There has been a sequence of published works that have incorporated the ‘stand down’ myth prior to the publication of “GREAT BATTLES IN AUSTRALIAN HISTORY”, but the irony is, Dr. Jonathan King as the original instigator of this myth, now nine years later, has republished the fallacious story as an unaccredited, unreferenced, nor evidenced, supposed factual account. The evidence to establish this accusation follows by setting out the chain of publications that record, and in most cases, elaborates upon, the ‘stand down phone incident at the charge at the Nek.

“THE AUGUST OFFENSIVE, AT ANZAC, 1915” by David W. Cameron, Australian Army Campaigns Series – 10, Army History Unit, Canberra, 2011, is the next publication in line to use a form of the quote, and this found at the second paragraph, page 69.

“At this point the telephone rang at the front line and all watched as an officer conducted a heated conversation before putting down the receiver. The officer looked down the line at his men and, breaking into a smile, shouted, ‘Stand down, men!”

Although in the above publication the incident is not attributed to Trooper Jack Cox by David Cameron, it clearly has its derivation from his 2009 book “Sorry, Lads, But The Order Is To Go”, UNSW Press, as noted in the reference section titled “Further Reading “, where at the section, 7th August, PART 3: chapter 13 – ‘Goodbye, I don’t think I’ll be coming back from this one’ (The charge at The Nek), page 195.

“Trooper Jack Cox was waiting in the fourth line convinced he was about to die. He recalled: ‘(I was) lost in my own thoughts, thinking about my wife with whom I had never really known the joys of married life...’ (Chapter 13 reference number 44). At this point the telephone rang and he watched as an officer had an intense conversation before putting down the receiver. The officer looked down the line at his men and breaking into a smile shouted: ‘Stand down, men!’ (Chapter 13 reference number 45).”

Here he has used the quote of this incident from Jonathan King, published in the 2006 book “Gallipoli Diaries, The Anzacs’ Own Story Day by Day”, Kangaroo Press, at pages 142/143. (Cameron’s chapter 13 reference numbers 44 & 45). “Thinking he was going to die, Trooper Jack Cox of the fourth wave said he had been ‘lost in my own thoughts, thinking about my wife with whom I had never really known the joys of married life and my time in similar battles in the Boer War. But Cox had seen the phone ring and saw the officer doing a lot of talking. He saw the officer replace the receiver, look down the line and break into a smile shouting ‘Stand down, men!” (Quote - J. King)

Reading up until the 7th August, PART 3: chapter 13 – ‘Goodbye, I don’t think I’ll be coming back from this one’ (The charge at The Nek), I did not question the integrity of quoted extracts, nor to the authenticity of names and detail. What disheartened me and forged a feeling of distrust to the possible accuracy of detail from the preceding chapters, occurred at page 189, the quote from Major Dale. Although referenced to AWM4 10/3/7 there was no Major Dale in the 8th Light Horse Regiment, and in fact the referenced AWM quote belonged to Major Arthur Vivian Deeble, commanding officer of the second line of the charge, and the quoted section was a part of his report forwarded to the 3rd LH Brigade headquarters in August 1915 as the then acting C.O. 8th Light Horse Regiment. Although possibly an editing/proof reading error that slipped under the radar, this mistake set in train an investigation to the stand down incident.

Up until Cameron’s publication in 2009 Dr. Jonathan King had been the only author to record this event as to have taken place at the charge at the Nek in his 2003 book “GALLIPOLI DIARIES, The Anzacs’ Own Story Day by Day”, Kangaroo Press, and again in the paperback 2006 edition at pages 142/143. “Thinking he was going to die, Trooper Jack Cox of the fourth wave said he had been ‘lost in my own thoughts, thinking about my wife with whom I had never really known the joys of married life and my time in similar battles in the Boer War,. But Cox had seen the phone ring and saw the officer doing a lot of talking. He saw the officer replace the receiver, look down the line and break into a smile shouting ‘Stand down, men’!”

King gives neither a reference to the origin of Trooper Cox’s statements, nor any acknowledgement to the published work from which those statements are drawn. The only clue to the origin of the story is found in the left margin of page 142, the paperback 2006 edition; the photograph of RSM Arthur John Cox DCM, No. 85.

The only book that could be the source for King’s quoted statements of Trooper Cox, and to the photograph is, ‘The Miraculous “Life” of a Man Called Jack’, Lime Leaf Publications, by John Cox, first published January 2002 (son of RSM Arthur John Cox DCM), and that information quoted found at the chapter titled ‘Raw Courage’, pages 74 & 75, (the opening quotation of this narrative). What John Cox relates in this chapter pertains to that which was remembered by him and the family of what Jack Cox had told of his Gallipoli experiences over the years before his death in 1959. Apart from the reference to it being “August and a heavy, bitter battle was being waged”, there is nothing written to indicate just where on Gallipoli Trooper Cox is referring to, no officers or men are named, no regiments or brigades mentioned, no definite date is given. All of the story is rather vague and could be relating to the advance anywhere on Gallipoli, it could be referring to an action from Ryrie’s Post on the 6th August, or what seems most likely, a compilation of a number of the actions of the August offensive.

What led Jonathan King to attribute this story to being a description of the fourth line of the 10th Light Horse Regiment at the charge at the Nek? The possible answer could be that it just seemed to fit the desired circumstances for the attempt to halt the fourth line of the 10th LH Regt. To get an indication as to apparently why King jumped to the conclusion that the story recorded in this chapter by John Cox was describing the charge at Nek can only be illustrated by the full transcript of that story describing the charge being reproduced as follows:-

“On command, the men of the first line moved into position. On the whistle blast they sprung up the ladders, leaping out of the trenches, shouting at the Turks, who immediately brought horrendous firepower to bear on the attacking troops. It was wholesale ‘slaughter’. Hardly a man made it out of the trenches and most fell back, either dead or wounded. The command was given, the men of the second line took up their position. Grim, quiet, they awaited the blast of the whistle. Their officers gazed at them, as quiet as the men. The senior officer waited for the phone confirmation. When it came he nodded to his men, drew his revolver, then putting his whistle to his lips, blew it, and with his men went up the ladders. Some of this line made it over the top and started racing towards the Turkish trenches. But the withering fire cut them down and within minutes not a man was left standing. Many had fallen back into the trenches, some spreadeagled across the sandbags, some now lying in no man’s land. The stretcher-bearers and medicos tried desperately to succour the wounded and the dying.

The command was given for the third line to move into position and as one the line responded. There wasn’t a man in that line who did not realize his chances of survival were almost nil, but this knowledge did not stop them from obeying their orders nor from doing what they considered was their duty. Every one of them was a volunteer soldier and if this was what he had volunteered for, so be it. The deadly, almost hopeless position they were now in, the ghastly conditions under which they had been living was something no mind could ever have dreamed up when they had volunteered for active service to help save the Empire from the aggressive Hun.

Jack would recall how they waited for the call. There was no talking – most were lost in their own thoughts. He was thinking of his wife, with whom he had never known the joys of married life, and through his Boer War experiences and to the dreadful voyage on that fishing boat. He shuddered as the phone rang. The senior officer answered. The men steeled themselves, waiting for the whistle blast and almost certain death. The officer seemed to be doing a lot of talking. He replaced the receiver looked down the line and breaking into a smile shouted those words of remission, “Stand Down!”

What does strike one from the script, there is no mention of a fourth line of the charge; Odd!

John Cox himself in the ‘Introduction’ to his book, page v, gives the following disclaimer as to the accuracy and correctness to much of the books content:- “This story is based on snippets of his life he would ’let fall’ and which the writer has tried to recall and place in the correct sequence of happenings. In most cases it has been impossible to verify the facts and in this regard little has been done except that the original documents, reproduced in this book, are held by the writer and verify much of the story.” For this incident; No they Don’t!

Not a particularly sound endorsement to the authenticity of the books content for the purposes of a reliable source of reference!

All of this demonstrates how an unattributed assumption by one author, to a vague and undocumented story published by another author, can come to represent a significant incident of the 3rd Light Horse Brigade’s charge at the Nek that never actually occurred. This in turn being further published and elaborated upon by another author as an accepted and recognized historical fact.

The Series Introduction of “THE AUGUST OFFENSIVE, AT ANZAC, 1915” by David W. Cameron, Australian Army Campaigns Series – 10, states that it ‘complements the Army’s other history publications, which produce academically rigorous and referenced analytical works.’ And further elaborates: “The Campaign Series focuses on leadership, command, strategy, tactics, lessons and personal experiences of war... The Campaign Series covers both the well known campaigns and battles and those that are not so well known. The Australian Army History Unit sees this series growing into a significant contribution to the history of the Australian Army, one that will provide an excellent introduction to the campaigns and battles the Army has fought.”

These are fine and admirable objectives, but it is indeed a great shame that that high standard of recording the remarkable history of the Australian Army has been denigrated, and a very real pity that a myth has been allowed to become entrenched within that history.

There is probably little that can be done to redress the inclusion of this erroneous story after the length of time since the publication of the various books mentioned, other than correction being made to any possible re-prints of one or more of these publications. As this myth seems to have now become firmly entrenched within the history of the charge at The Nek as a fact, as recorded as such by varying degrees within the above publications, it is now time well overdue for it to be exposed as such, and the historical record put right once and for all.

All publishers of the mentioned books have been advised of the erroneous inclusion of this incident within their respective publications by letter in the second week of August this year, to-date, the Australian Army History Unit has been the only publisher to acknowledge receipt of the letter, and to advise that an investigation into my claims will be undertaken.

This myth cannot be allowed to remain unchallenged before it does take hold as a supposed historical fact in further publications!

Jeff Pickerd"

I now have to accept that not all published works can be taken at face value, in all cases further reading, and checking, is necessary, as the above clearly demonstrates.

HM

[James A Pratt III]

Other books of intrest on Gallipoli:

After the battle Gallipoli Then and Now

Dardenalles dilema E keble Chatterton

Life of a Irish Soldier Alexander Godley His memoirs he commanded one of the ANZAC divisions there. Not the greatest book he was sort of a "Colonel blimp" type bet it does have a little on the campaign

[Philip Wilson]

History of the Great War - based on Official Documents by Direction of the Historical Section of the Committee of Imperial Defence :

Military Operations - Gallipoli - Volume 1 Maps and Appendices published in 1929.

29 useful appendices - commencing with Lord K's 12 instructions to Sir Ian Hamilton dated 13 March 1915, The Order of Battle M.E.F., actual Orders and Instructions for the Landings April 1915 with 4 supporting maps and diagram of the Helles Landing issued with operational orders for the landing - very useful indeed to have a long side you when reading the various accounts in published works since.

[MichaelBully]

I have only just started reading up on Gallipoli very recently. I got a great deal from reading Peter Hart's 'Gallipoli'. My main Gallipoli related interests are to do with the 6th-10th August 1915 campaign and also Sir Ian Hamilton's contact with Lord Kitchener. Thank you Philip, will have to look at this volume. But was wondering, have Sir Ian Hamilton's telegrams to Lord Kitchener ever been published ? I have tried to locate them at the National Archives.

Regards

History of the Great War - based on Official Documents by Direction of the Historical Section of the Committee of Imperial Defence :

Military Operations - Gallipoli - Volume 1 Maps and Appendices published in 1929.

29 useful appendices - commencing with Lord K's 12 instructions to Sir Ian Hamilton dated 13 March 1915, The Order of Battle M.E.F., actual Orders and Instructions for the Landings April 1915 with 4 supporting maps and diagram of the Helles Landing issued with operational orders for the landing - very useful indeed to have a long side you when reading the various accounts in published works since.

[Philip Wilson]

I have only just started reading up on Gallipoli very recently. I got a great deal from reading Peter Hart's 'Gallipoli'. My main Gallipoli related interests are to do with the 6th-10th August 1915 campaign and also Sir Ian Hamilton's contact with Lord Kitchener. Thank you Philip, will have to look at this volume. But was wondering, have Sir Ian Hamilton's telegrams to Lord Kitchener ever been published ? I have tried to locate them at the National Archives.

Regards

Michael

The Ian Hamilton Papers are at the Liddell Hart Centre for Military Archives, King's College, London. Some of Ian Hamilton's correspondence whilst at Gallipoli features in John Lee's book A Soldier's Life - General Sir Ian Hamilton published in 2000. Chapters 9, 10 & 11 cover Gallipoli. Chapter 12 covers the Dardenelles Commission. Well worth reading - extensive bibliography, good notes section with sources quoted, good maps with supporting illustrations. Very readable indeed - sensible size print being used to good advantage - easy to read on a long train journey.

Philip

[MichaelBully]

Thanks Philip, have already bought Soldier's Life - General Sir Ian Hamilton and have now looked at the chapters you mention.

Particularly intrigued by the account of Ian Hamilton having dinner with Churchill on 6th June 1916, maintaining that Lord Kitchener had not been disclosing contents of telegrams Hamilton had sent from Gallipoli, when the news of Lord Kitchener's death reached them.

Would be interested in seeing the contents of the telegrams and also the Dardanelles Commission final report.

I understand that there is a new biography being published about Sir Ian Hamilton extremely soon so will be interesting to see what the latest view is of the telegrams that Sir Ian Hamilton sent to Lord Kitchener.

Regards,

Michael Bully

Michael

The Ian Hamilton Papers are at the Liddell Hart Centre for Military Archives, King's College, London. Some of Ian Hamilton's correspondence whilst at Gallipoli features in John Lee's book A Soldier's Life - General Sir Ian Hamilton published in 2000. Chapters 9, 10 & 11 cover Gallipoli. Chapter 12 covers the Dardenelles Commission. Well worth reading - extensive bibliography, good notes section with sources quoted, good maps with supporting illustrations. Very readable indeed - sensible size print being used to good advantage - easy to read on a long train journey.

Philip

[James A Pratt III]

archives.org has both volumes of Galipoli Diary by ian hamilton

[MichaelBully]

Thanks James, have been directed towards this via the Gallipoli Association Forum. Regards.

archives.org has both volumes of Galipoli Diary by ian hamilton

[woronora]

Hamilton's latest biography is "Johnny: The Legend and Tragedy of General Sir Ian Hamilton" by John Philip Jones, which was published on 15./11/12. I bought my copy from the Book depository, however I am yet to receive it.

Cheers

John

[MichaelBully]

Thanks for the reminder about this biography -knew that it was due out. I will be treating myself to a copy soon. very keen to see if the writer presents any more information concerning the contact between Ian Hamilton and Lord Kitchener in 1915, also in Ian Hamilton is life following Gallipoli. Regards

Hamilton's latest biography is "Johnny: The Legend and Tragedy of General Sir Ian Hamilton" by John Philip Jones, which was published on 15./11/12. I bought my copy from the Book depository, however I am yet to receive it.

Cheers

John

[Guest]

If you are really interested in the 6th-10th August I would recommend the War Diaries as they were mostly written at the time or within days of the actions when memories were fresh. Some include personal accounts and narratives written by senior survivors of important actions and a lot of correspondence with the author of the OH Aspinall Oglander trying to thrash out the truth on contentious issues. In my opinion many of the unit histories slightly distorted events ...reading the diaries in parallel with the published unit histories is revealing process.

By definition a broad history has to leave much of the interesting detail out, and despite the great efforts of Aspinall-Oglander and all who followed him, there is more history excluded than included in many of the histories. This is not a criticism, merely a recognition that publishers will limit the size of a book. I think P Hart has mentioned a few times that Gallipoli has enough broad histories and now needs more detailed studies on specific parts of the campaign.

For me the period 6th-21st August is the most interesting, especially at Suvla as it included the first use of Kitchener's Army in assault en masse and the largest set battle of the campaign. The 'idealistic' social conditioning of Edwardian gentlemen subalterns of Kitchener's Army, their subsequently reckless bravery and ultimately pyrrhic style of leadership would provide enough material for a book in its own right. It would also have served to demonstrate quite early on the potentially devastating consequences that community based recruiting had on those very towns and villages - both the New Army and the TF Divisions. Suvla has often been given less space in the histories for reasons I don't really understand and until fairly recently was rather neglected as an area of specific study. The intensity of the actions in these two weeks was arguably as devastating as anything in the war if casualties as a per cent of those deployed are anything to go by. Of course this is only one brutal measure and some would argue one measure which cannot transcend campaigns. The unique nature of the extreme terrain that provided almost no shelter from enemy eyes, the wide variation in climate and conditions from mediterranean high summer to blizzards within four months, again magnified by the unique terrain of the Kiretch Tepe ridge and the basin of the Suvla Plain, the problems caused by the long logistic chain and reinforcement rates being outstripped by battle casualty rates and then the devastating effect of non-battle casualties, the complexities created by poor command and control and weak General leadership, poor coordination between the Army and the RN, inadequate artillery etc all make it a fascinating case study....and all this in the shadow of the debate of whether it was lost in Whitehall before anyone set foot on Gallipoli or was it lost at Suvla. Endless material.

The War Diaries of the 2nd Mtd Div, 10th Irish Div, 11th Northern Div, 13th Div (2 Bdes only), 29th Div, 54th Div are all available online for a few pounds and as far as value for money goes, will be difficult to beat. It is also worth noting the the only detailed analysis of Aspinall Oglander's OH so far by Andrew Green concluded (to his surprise) that rather than whitewash the campaign, Aspinall-Oglander was pretty objective and did a superb job by the standards of the day. The lengthy correspondence with hundreds of survivors (included in the diaries and in CAB 45 files at TNA) and their general approval of his account also stands as testimony to Aspinall Oglander's objectivity and provide contemporary evidence to support Green's view. The enormous scope (2 Vols) and detail of the OH make it hard to beat, and of course Aspinall Oglander had a grandstand view. If later authors have seen further it is because they 'stood on the shoulders' of this giant publication.

MG

[MichaelBully]

That's great Martin-will go through the sources that you suggest. Thank you for your help . My interest in the August Days of Gallipoli was stimulated by researching Gallipoli casualty Leonard George Cheesman. With best wishes, Michael Bully

 

 

[Tom Wales]

Having read several books with the title 'Gallipoli' plus others and with Tim Travers on the shelf awaiting attention, my own favourite books are :

'The Man with the Donkey by Sir Irving Benson' - not everybody's favourite but it got me interested in Gallipoli

'Gallipoli' by John Masefield - I have a 1917 edition. It was apparently written specifically for propaganda purposes but nevertheless is contemporary with some wonderfully descriptive passages as well as the obvious romanticism. Well illustrated too. I see it is still available in paperback.

[Lone Pine2]

I love Peter Hart's book (and have a signed copy) but for a starter, which I found and which was not too technial was Gallipoli By Alan Moorhead, gave an easy to follow background to Gallipoli and the Campagnie.

[Kurt1959]

I also recommend Haluk Orals book - particular with good short stories, testimonies and very good pictures. Haluk is also very much engaged in the research of the Turkish campaign and beside he is initially a mathematic and physics professor very well in historical research.

[gilly100]

For me on overall campaign I would say the best two are Peter Hart and Tim Travers. Excellent writing styles, researched and told with authority. No myth peddling and hard hitting narrative. All combatants covered. Read both these for modern day works. Martins' comments on war diaries pertinent also.

Ian Gill

[Maricourt]

I'm not sure if I have missed it being mentioned above, but for a contemporary account, I found "Make Me A Soldier - A Platoon Commander in Gallipoli" by Arthur Behrend one of the best war memoirs I have come across. After Gallipoli he went on to the Western Front and wrote about his experiences in "As From Kemmel Hill - An Adjutant in France & Flanders 1917-1918". Both extremely good reads.

Regards ... Maricourt

[Philip Wilson]

I am currently re-reading Gallipoli by Alan Moorehead (first) published in 1997 by Wordsworth Military Library- see posts 45 and 46

Those of you who are familiar with this book will be aware of the following which can be found on the back cover of the paperback version:

'In 1915 the Gallipoli Campaign was designed to break the deadlock in the muddy trenches of the Western Front by forcing the Dardanelles, capturing Constantinople, knocking Turkey out of the war and bringing supplies and arms to the Russians for their immense German Front. It was a costly failure. Using private papers as well as official records, Alan Moorehead re-creates with extraordinary vividness the drama of Gallipoli with its tragic hesitations and missed opportunities. He describes the heroism of British and Anzac troops who were hemmed within a few terrible acres of beach and hillside and permanently under shell fire. His sympathetic account provided the basis for the film Gallipoli, and won the First Duff Cooper Prize for Literature.'

Sixteen years have elapsed since this book was written and each of us will have our own views about Gallipoli based on what we have read. As a book its worthy of reading alongside other newer publications to arrive at your own conclusions.

By way of contrast then the book To What End Did They Die - Officers died at Gallipoli by R.W.Walker published in 1985 provides biographical details of over 2,000 British and Empire Officers (Australian, New Zealanders, Indians etc) - Army, Royal Navy, Royal Marines, Royal Naval Divison, killed or died of wounds as a consequence of the conflict. It includes a good selection of maps, details of allied shipping engaged, Orbat, Units present, together with a useful short history of the campaign (diary of events), including details of specific actions and a selection of supporting photos. Includes location of war graves cemeteries and has a useful one page bibliography.

Philip

[lostinspace]

Philip,

Hate to be a "nit-picker" but Alan Moorehead died in 1983 and "Gallipoli" was first published in 1956, I have a paperback copy from around 1970 or so ( I think Gallipoli was filmed around 1980?), totally agree with the rest of your post though.

Regards,

Dave

[Philip Wilson]

Philip,

Hate to be a "nit-picker" but Alan Moorehead died in 1983 and "Gallipoli" was first published in 1956, I have a paperback copy from around 1970 or so ( I think Gallipoli was filmed around 1980?), totally agree with the rest of your post though.

Regards,

Dave

Dave - Yes I agree with you he died in 1983 and he won the prize in 1956 - I was of course quoting from the paper back edition published in 1997 (Wordsworth Military Library) and it just shows how people viewed his book then - effectively in retrospect.

The book was first published in 1956 and it received great aclaim although it was later criticized by the British Gallipoli historian Robert Rhodes James as "deeply flawed and grievously over-praised."

Philip

[keithmroberts]

With criticism like that from RRJ it must be a good book!

Keith

[Maricourt]

Some time ago I purchased a DVD of Peter Weir's excellent film "Gallipoli". As well as the usual trailers etc., there is an interview with Peter Weir and he quotes from C E W Bean's "Official History of Australia in the Great War". The whole book [2 volumes], with the relevant chapters concerning the Gallipoli campaign, can be downloaded in PDF form from the Australian War Memorial site.

Regards ... Maricourt

[Guest]

Some time ago I purchased a DVD of Peter Weir's excellent film "Gallipoli". As well as the usual trailers etc., there is an interview with Peter Weir and he quotes from C E W Bean's "Official History of Australia in the Great War". The whole book [2 volumes], with the relevant chapters concerning the Gallipoli campaign, can be downloaded in PDF form from the Australian War Memorial site.

Regards ... Maricourt

There will be a lot of Brits turning in their graves. Weir's film is arguably one of the prime movers behind some of the more controversial views of Gallipoli. I understand he was very selective with the portrayal of some of the key events.

[gilly100]

I agree with Martin on Weir's movie. A good movie, and still is today from an evocative viewpoint, but one came out feeling the Brits were to blame for the continuation of the successive lines to charge to their doom. Of course, that was not the case as most people on this forum know. We managed that little affair all on our own. And of course, the bloodbath at Suvla was generally ignored, with only focus on lack of more forward movement and success. Still enjoy watching from time to time, but glad I know more of the facts, with a mind open to the sacrifice going on all around at the time. Now, a new movie on Chunuk Bair, with all participants would be a ripper, if correctly portrayed.

Ian