Gas at Gallipoli

[CROONAERT]

By the way, if anyone should have a picture of a Turk with gas protection... I am VERY interested to see it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Kristof.

It'll take some finding, but I've seen a photo of a Turk wearing a German Gummimaske. The photo could have originated from the 1920's, but I'm pretty certain that it's circa.1918.

I'll see if i can find it.

dave.

[bob lembke]

Bill;

Thanks for the report on the winds. I didn't know any specifics, but an exposed penninsula like that has to be very windy. It clearly would be an absurd place to attempt a cylinder attack.

I don't know what role Foulkes had in the decision to send cylinders, but he was always trying to set up cylinder attacks, even late in the war when all allies and enemies had given up on them. In my mind he was extremely energetic, but sometimes made really bad technical decisions and hung onto them and pursued the tactical things that flowed from these decisions like a junkyard dog with a bloody bone. A very dangerous kind of guy, and not always to the enemy.

Dave;

Remember that the Turks had at least one army corps on each of the southern Russian front (Galicia) and in the Macedonia area. The former, at least, were extensively equipped and trained by the Germans. I have seen a rare photo of a Turkish flame thrower team training on an exercise field in Galicia. I believe the gas sent to Alexandria ended up on Salonika. And I think the Russians used gas a bit. So that is where it could be expected that Turks would receive German gas masks.

Bob Lembke

[rob carman]

Somebody wrtote: I believe that Dr Sheffy is preparing articles for publication.

This is probably the article that was referred to:

Sheffy, Y, 2005. The Chemical Dimension of the Gallipoli Campaign: Introducing Chemical Warfare to the Middle East. War in History, 12 (3): 278-317.

Abstract: Studies of the history of chemical warfare ignore the chemical dimension of the campaigns in the Middle East during the First World War. They miss the fact that the British first considered using gas in the region during the Gallipoli campaign in 1915. At that time, the political and military leadership in London, as well as senior commanders of the Mediterranean Expeditionary Force (MEF), were alarmed by the possibility of Turkish chemical attacks and repeatedly debated whether they should pre-empt this move by initiating the use of gas. This raised ethical, moral and prestige considerations, related to the British reputation in the Middle East. Eventually, gas cylinders were shipped to the MEF but never used. The British waited another year and a half before attacking the Turks with chemical munitions in Palestine.

Regards,

Rob Carman

[TwoBob]

Australian 3LH with gasmasks.

[Kurt1959]

I don't know if ever gas was used during the Gallipoli campaign - however...

In the records about Capt Pieper, who was the commander of the Turkish Waffenamt, which means the whole ammunition and weapons production from spring 1915, the following is stated:

"With the start of the trench warfare on Gallipoli the production of weapons fpr close battle started. From the front lines they ordered bombs and rockets to Ausräuchern fumigate? the enemy trenches and the warheads should be filled with materials which produce poisonous gas. Those rockets were produced very quickly."

At least the thoughts to use gas were made as well as the means were produced under the auspice of the German officers and craft masters in the factories in and around Istanbul. Fortunately never used!

[Edward J.]

People tend to argue over what are atrocities and which side is more prone to committing them. Emotions can run high.

Here's a simple way to address the issue: Whom would you rather face in combat, a Brit or a Turk?

To whom would you rather surrender, a Brit or a Turk?

[mcderms]

It depends if you're a Brit surrendering to a Turk or a Turk surrendering to a Brit and if it's circa 1915 and just east of Istanbul... If you throw and Aussie into the mix then it really is a non-starter!

In short, if its close combat and you try and put your hands up, you're basically (edited - bad language is not appreciated) Especially if you are anywhere near a machine gun, flame thrower, gas canister or in possession of a saw backed bayonet.

If I have to choose, I'll be a Brit surrendering to the Hun when Operation Micheal has over run my post or a Hun surrendering to a Brit when Haigs counyer attacks kicked in. If I'm a Hun and I see an ANZAC badge advancing on me, I reserve the right to scarper as fast as my little Germanic legs can carry me...

I've just read Carlyons latest opus hence the fear/respect!

[Terry_Reeves]

Hold on a moment please, this thread is about whether gas was used in Gallipoli - nothing else. Let's not spoil it for the original poster.

TR

[michaeldr]

quote from El Shahin: In the records about Capt Pieper, who was the commander of the Turkish Waffenamt, which means the whole ammunition and weapons production from spring 1915, the following is stated:

"With the start of the trench warfare on Gallipoli the production of weapons fpr close battle started. From the front lines they ordered bombs and rockets to Ausräuchern fumigate? the enemy trenches and the warheads should be filled with materials which produce poisonous gas. Those rockets were produced very quickly."

The following may be of interest

"On the 16th (July 1915) we took over from the Manchester a small stretch of trenches on our left, and "C" Company salved fifteen asphyxiating bombs from a pent-house in one of the nullah trenches. A captured Turkish officer, evidently disapproving of these innovations by his German masters, had given information as to where they would be found. Packed in two cases marked RAKATEN, they were long, slender, uncanny-looking projectiles evidently intended for discharge from a trench-mortar."

This is from 'The Fifth Battalion Highland Light Infantry in the War 1914-1918' author: F.L. Morrison

which can be seen here http://www.gutenberg.org/files/20250/20250-h/20250-h.htm

The quotation is from Chapter III

PS: There is also a good Bird's Eye View map of Helles at the end of the book

regards

Michael

[McNamara]

i doubt that the terrain would lend itself to the effective use of gas for reason of both the topography and climate

regards

[rodonisle]

I have documents from the AWM showing my grandfather was evaced from ANZAC Cove in October. His injuries are listed as: "concussion and gas effects" and "concussion and gas poisoning" as well as "neurasthenia".

So, your information and discussion related to the subject of this thread is most interesting and valued.

Thanks

- Rod

[infantry]

Dr. Yigal Sheffy's brilliant article is answering all the questions that were raised in this threat. His another article is dealing with the British introduction of chemical warfare into Middle East.

Regards

[bob lembke]

I have documents from the AWM showing my grandfather was evaced from ANZAC Cove in October. His injuries are listed as: "concussion and gas effects" and "concussion and gas poisoning" as well as "neurasthenia".

So, your information and discussion related to the subject of this thread is most interesting and valued.

Thanks

- Rod

Under some conditions men could be poisoned, even fatally, by fumes from detonated explosives in both artillery attacks and in mine warfare. The concussion diagnosis supports that kind of exposure to gas. It would be interesting to see the Dr. Sheffy article; but to me the idea of a Turkish (or German) gas attack at Gallipoli is almost impossible for about a dozen reasons.

Bob Lembke

[Paul Hederer]

Dr. Yigal Sheffy's brilliant article is answering all the questions that were raised in this threat. His another article is dealing with the British introduction of chemical warfare into Middle East.

Regards

I second that. For anyone interested in the topic it is addressed directly in "War in History," 2005; 12; starting at page 278 "The Chemical Dimension of the Gallipoli Campaign: Introducing Chemical Warfare to the Middle East," by Yigal Sheffy.

Paul

[Dogan Sahin]

Hi

I havent come accross any information as to gas being used by the Turks; on the contrary I have read that usage of gas was considered "unchivalrious" by Ottomans. However, I have recently downloaded first part of a book documenting the canakale wars (printed by state archives online-currently only relating to 1915 and is in Latin Ottoman, which I can read even if it is time consuming) that the English used shells which diffused "green colored smoke"..there are also İD cards for a couple of foreign journalists, reports on soldiers dying of dum dum bullets and pictures of the bullets. Lots of info for those who are seeking info from Turkish side(the submarines, german machine gunners etc).

Regards

[Guest]

hi dogan

what is mentioned in the book you have downloaded is what usually happens after the artilery stop firing,

here is a pharagraph from the book of defeat at gallipoli,

"THE ACRID SMELL OF SMOKE BECAME ALMOST UNBEARABLE"

another paragraph

"the sun,high in the heavens by 9am,but after 30 mins later bombardment its golden disc was veiled by thick clouds o smoke and dust that floated skywards,while the acrid smell of powder hung heavly in the air."

william

[Dogan Sahin]

hi dogan

what is mentioned in the book you have downloaded is what usually happens after the artilery stop firing,

Thanks fred,

yes , I did continue reading the site and learned that especially Howitzer shells had such effect. I believe neither side used gas in Gallipoli..

regards

[truthergw]

I am no expert in gas warfare but the books I have read suggest that at the time of the fighting in Gallipoli, gas would have been delivered by the British through nozzles from cylinders. First use of gas was 25th September in this way at Loos and I have seen no suggestion that shells were available between then and December, when Gallipoli was abandoned. Reading of the work involved in installing the cylinders and their associated pipework and the necessity for men of the RE Special Companies to release it, makes me doubtful that gas was used by the British side.

[bob lembke]

I am no expert in gas warfare but the books I have read suggest that at the time of the fighting in Gallipoli, gas would have been delivered by the British through nozzles from cylinders. First use of gas was 25th September in this way at Loos and I have seen no suggestion that shells were available between then and December, when Gallipoli was abandoned. Reading of the work involved in installing the cylinders and their associated pipework and the necessity for men of the RE Special Companies to release it, makes me doubtful that gas was used by the British side.

And of course, at most points the Allies at Gallipoli faced Turkish forces entrenched higher up a slope. There were a lot of dumb things done during WW I (a fair number by the Special Brigade), but it is hard to see someone attempting to conduct a cylinder gas release uphill. Perhaps that is why some British gas equipment and men were sent from the Western Front to Alexandria, but never then sent on to the actual battlefield.

Bob Lembke

[Colin W Taylor]

I'm no expert on gas warfare, nor on Gallipoli but whilst reading a book on my relative's battalion in Gallipoli I came across the following:

'On 7th October he {the Turk} caused great excitement by using what was believed to be a gas bomb. For some time thereafter officers wearing red tabs haunted the bomb's resting place and as much care was taken in the excavation of it's remnants as though they were relics from a buried city. The effective small box respirator was not then on issue and the anti-gas equipment consisted of a piece of black gauze and a pad of saturated wadding...' (With the 22nd - A history of the 22nd Bn AIF by Capt E Gorman MC)

It would suggest that whether gas was being used or not by the Turks and whether or not the Turks (as clean fighters) would or wouldn't use gas on the peninsular the threat of such an eventuality was taken seriously and warranted thorough investigation.

I came across another account of gas on the peninsular and thought I should read more of what has been written

The warnings produced by the above incident or another filtered around - an officer of the 2/1st Londons mentions in his diary on the 9th Oct 15:

'The discomforts were added to by the fact that the Turks took advantage of the change in the weather and wind to send along some asphyxiating bombs, so that we had to be ready with our respirators. However none came near us...' (Strong for Service - Lord Nathan of Churt by H Montgomery Hyde)

By this stage respirators had been issued and this example may have been an intelligence warning of the use of 'gas bombs' or the spread of gossip or rumour between units.

I'm sure this muddies the water!

CWT

[/font]

[bob lembke]

Colin;

I know a fair amount about the Turkish/German side at Gallipoli, and have read all of the primary sources I have been able to find, such as Germans, an Austrian, and a German Swiss in the French Foreign Legion at Gallipoli, all writing in German, and I have never seen anything remotely suggesting the Turkish use of gas at Gallipoli. I also know quite a bit about the Turkish arms industry at that point in time, the German efforts to improve it, and the state of the then Turkish economy/industry. With great effort, they were able to manufacture plentiful SMA for the 16 types of rifles the Turkish Army used. They were able to produce artillery ammunition for the smaller calibers; the shells fired, but due to poor fuses the odds of the HE shell actually exploding at the other end were not good. Also, they had to cast shell bodies in iron, rather than form them out of steel, so that when they exploded they threw about sand-like iron particles, rather than sharp shards of steel splinters. So the improvised Turkish arms industry was working frantically to provide the most basic munitions, and in my judgement would have little or no capacity to experiment with exotic munitions. At this time there was almost no land or sea connectivity between the Central Powers and Turkey until very late in 1915. Also, this was very early for gas, even on the Western Front, with the munitions and techniques only being developed at this time.

Additionally, I have read say 10-15 memoires of Allied officers and soldiers, and some official histories, and I have to say that the memoires are repleat with errors and gross exagerations about the weapons that the Turks were throwing at the Allies, regularily describing, for example, incoming shells in calibers that the Turks did not have. Also, a lot of other odd stuff, like female Turkish soldiers (let's not start that old wives' tale again here) and sea monsters eating bathing Allied soldiers.

Be assured that the Turks (nor the Allies) did not use gas at Gallipoli.

Bob Lembke

[rodonisle]

After further study, I have discovered that my Grandfather's "gas" was, in fact, from mining operations under the Turkish lines where the explosion did not reach the surface. The mine shaft became full of the resulting gases. He was overcome and saved by a volunteer who went into the shaft and pulled him out. So, no puzzle or doubt on this reference to gas at Gallipoli.

If I knew how to post a PDF, I would share the documents.

[stevenbecker]

Mate,

Just to name one of the aussies I have gassed?

HULL Stewart Allan 245 Spr 1 FCE (744) WIA 6-8-15 gas reported wounded with L/Cpl Guest from explosion while att 2 FCE digging suport tunnels/trenches to Lone Pine (G) RTA MU enteric relist 16R/2 FCE (R245) Tos 1 FCE 8-16 to 2 FCE 12-16 to 16 FCE in UK 4-17 to 1st Army Troops Co AE (ATC) 10-17 WIA 10-4-18 neck shrapnel reported 1 kiled and 9 wounded when shelled with 134 FC RE placed under command 25 Div around Ploegsteert to 2/Cpl 8-18 F&B shown as 1 LH FSE N/R

I have others but as stated by Bryn they were woking under ground when gassed.

Cheers

S.B

[Waddell]

After further study, I have discovered that my Grandfather's "gas" was, in fact, from mining operations under the Turkish lines where the explosion did not reach the surface. The mine shaft became full of the resulting gases. He was overcome and saved by a volunteer who went into the shaft and pulled him out. So, no puzzle or doubt on this reference to gas at Gallipoli.

If I knew how to post a PDF, I would share the documents.

Rod,

Was your grandfather in the Field Company Engineers?

Scott

[Bryn]

'If a mine, when fired, did not break through satisfactorily to the open air or to the enemy's workings, the poisonous gases left by the explosion remained in the tunnel, endangering the life of anyone who entered it. For example, on Oct. 29, in order to make sure that a working party might safely enter Tunnel C2, in which a mine had just been fired, Lieut. F.D.A. Bowra... went down the rope ladder in the shaft leading to it. He had warned Lieut. E.T. Bazeley (of Nagambie, Vic.) of the 22nd Bn. that there might be danger from poisonous gases, and as he did not return Bazeley and a man named Currington (of Annandale, NSW) went down with a rope. They found Bowra collapsed, but before they could rescue him both were overcome. Bazeley had barely strength to climb the ladder; Currington began to climb and fell back. Major Newcombe and Lieut. Thom were summoned from the 4th Coy.'s H.Q., and Thom, refusing to be tied to the rope, went down, but collapsed before he could save Bowra. ...Thom, Bowra, Currington, and two other men of the 22nd, Pte W.B.S. Good (of Wonthaggi, Vic.) and Pte. G. Stelling (of Essendon, Vic.) died...' (Bean, Story of Anzac, Vol. 2 p823n).

I've been reading diaries and newspaper reports by participants in the Gallipoli campaign for well over twenty years and have to say I've never come across even a mention that gas was used by either side. I've certainly never read anything from the allies accusing the Turkish forces of using gas.