Gallipoli - how many in each team?

[peggie]

Triv

Thank you for the picture.

Are the gents in Bowler Hats at the front the Officers, and those marching behind the placard, the OR's?

If so that seems a high % of the survivors ended up in Sydney.

Bob & Tim

Could you estimate the numbers you saw marching in your city's Anzac Days

Marg

[PhilB]

Nice assessment,Bill & Bob. One further refinement - you could hardly desert from the Peninsula (the deserters would have been long gone, though I know some British were executed for it) so that slur couldn`t be applied to the Anzacs? It is perhaps similar to the sanctifying of the Contemptibles who fought before the horror battles of popular memory? Phil B

[Bob Doneley]

Triv

Bob & Tim

Could you estimate the numbers you saw marching in your city's Anzac Days

Marg

Marg,

Brisbane, 1978 - 1982, probably about 5-10 men? Declined very rapidly after that. At that time it was possible to see 'Original Anzacs' - men who had landed on the 25th, wandering around under their own steam. Men who had been in France were relatively common - probably about 30 - 50. Even a Light Horseman in full uniform, less horse. I even met a man who had known Simpson, of Donkey fame.

Opportunities lost....

Bob

[peggie]

Bob

missed opportunities... "If only I'd listened to Grandpa"..... Sounds vaguely familiar.

Thank you. I was wondering if the old memory was playing tricks. A neighbour had copies of the Anzac Day Parades etc from your ABC. We had been impressed by the banners and the representatives of the Old Contemptibles and commented that the reception given them by the locals was quite at odds with the supposed anti-British sentiment that we constantly hear attributed to you folk down under. From memory most of the marches were from the mid to late 1950ies thro 1960ies, and the Great War was well represented.

The suggestion that ANZACs considered themselves the last of the Knight Errant out for a little dash and derring do simply amazes me. Where could they dash, where could they even get a dash, on Gallipoli.

That neighbour had a movie "In the sands we have written our names". It starts with a light horse soldier's soliloqy "Of all the ******** of places, this would have to take the cake." The Myths of the OC's and the ANZACs have some similarity but surely none of them believed or help spread such improbable assessments.

Mentioning desertion rates in a discussion such as this hardly seems appropriate. To escape Gallipoli in 1915 must have taken a great deal of expertise, and if anyone achieved it , good luck to him.

Nor can I agree with the asssessment of the Australian RSL. Our neighbour even mentioned that the Ron Barrassie we saw walking on water at the opening of the Commonwealth Games had lost his father at Tobruk and was greatly assisted by the RSL. Apparently they have always been up front in looking after those who were badly treated by fate.

Marg

[PhilB]

Mentioning desertion rates in a discussion such as this hardly seems appropriate. To escape Gallipoli in 1915 must have taken a great deal of expertise, and if anyone achieved it , good luck to him.

Marg

It`s appropriate because it was so difficult and because potential deserters had probably already gone. A man didn`t have to leave the peninsula to desert, so it was quite feasible and did happen. Phil B

[Bob Doneley]

As far as desertions are concerned, I think Bill was referring to men who enlisted and then deserted before sailing from Australia. I don't know of many/any, especially in that First Contingent, who deserted in either Egypt or Gallipoli.

Marg, the Australian image of Gallipoli was largely shaped by the media, not the men themselves (although I'm sure very few did anything to dispel the myths once they got home). Charles Bean, in later life the Australian Official Historian but at the time a war correspondent, did much to initiate and shape the Anzac legend. Not out of any small-minded or profit-driven motives, but out of sheer admiration for the men whose lives he shared. But it was his flowery writing style that embellished Anzac and enshrined it in memory.

Ron Barassi was cared for by Legacy, not the RSL as such. Legacy is a uniquely Australian organisation, established in 1923 by returned servicemen (independently of the RSL) to care for the widows and children of their mates. It still exists today. Only ex-servicemen can join Legacy, although others can be associate members (Friends of Legacy). They offer all sorts of assistance, from school scholarships to mowing the lawn & cutting firewood for elderly widows. Opinions on the RSL vary widely, as it is often seen as a political organisation, promoting the interests of ex-servicemen. But Legacy is highly regarded by everyone, regardless of political persuasion. Probably only the Salvation Army is more highly regarded.

Bob

[Guest Bill Woerlee]

Bob

G'day mate

Excellent summary. My comments about deserters was more at embarkation in the first instance and France in the second. Regarding the 1914/5 Star, it was embarkation but in 1916 onwards it was from France.

As to Legacy, I can only concur with your comments. Legacy is respected throughout the community and there is no doubt about it that there is an air of good will associated with the name.

Cheers

Bill

[Bryn]

Graeme wrote:

"I have also been told, that the award of a Gallipoli medal was canned because Australia didnt want any other nation to get the award ( how true this actually is is another matter )."

Not true at all in fact. Following is some information regarding the 'Gallipoli Star':

"This Medal, designed by Warrant Officer R.K. Peacock, of Melbourne, was approved by H.M. The King for award to the Aussie and Enzed Troops who served in the Gallipoli Campaign. Serious difficulties arose after the announcement of the award had been made, owing to strong objections being taken by some Members of Parliament and the Press in England, because it could not be conferred on British troops who fought at Gallipoli. The 1914-15 Star was then authorised for all troops that had served in the Field anywhere prior to December 31, 1915. The Gallipoli Star was abandoned."

It was the British Parliament that would not authorise it for British soldiers; consequently it was dropped.

Regarding the lack of 1914 Stars to Aust and NZ units. There were certainly Australians and New Zealanders who qualified, under all the rules, to receive these, but who did not. The units were the Australian Naval and Military Expeditionary Force (AN&MEF) and the New Zealand Samoa Advance Force. Both were in action in a war zone in 1914. Neither received the 1914 Star. Neither did the crew of HMAS Sydney, though they engaged and defeated the German cruiser 'Emden' in 1914.

[alliekiwi]

Regarding the 'A' for Anzac on Australian uniforms... out of interest, did the New Zealanders have anything like that for their ex-Gallipoli soliders?

*kicks toe in the ground* I always thought the 'A' stood for 'Australia' or 'Artilliary' (unit) or... something.

Oops.

Very little is made of Armistice Day, November 11th, in New Zealand. Our war remembrance day is April 25th, Anzac Day. And that's when we have our poppies, too. It's because of a historical quirk of fate - the boat from France that held the poppies for November 11th 1921 was late, so they decided to keep the poppies for Anzac Day the following year. And we've done it on that day ever since.

That's not to say New Zealand is only glorifying Gallipoli and ignoring the Western Front and all that. It's just that we picked our war remembrance day, and it happens to be different from other people.

After all, the UK has November 11th, and commemorate war dead from all the wars, not just WW1... it could just as easily have been changed to coincide with the anniversary of VE Day, or VJ Day for WW2 - or the end of the Crimean War, whatever date that ended on. Not to mention the US has their Remembrance Day on some other date, which has signficance to them of which I'm not aware.

Allie

[duckman]

One factor that has been touched on, but not really explored is the nature of the conditions. Those who served at ANZAC were living in the same couple of sq miles for 7 or 8 months, sharing awful conditions - officers and men alike. The intimacy and "democracy" of that environment, coupled with the extended nature of the engagement built an association with the place and the time that could not be matched by a brief engagement in France, however bloody. Transferring up and down the line, serving in different actions, a more "structured" environment - experience in France varied from man to man, while in Gallipoli there was a core that EVERY man who served there could share in.

Gallipoli memories (in my experience) centred around the tension, the dirt and the flies - hard conditions, but ones that are easily gilded in the memory. Memories of the Western front were more likely than Gallipoli to be suppressed for the sheer horror. One may look back on waving a plague of flies off a jam tin or getting (unsuccessfully) sniped at with a certain rueful smile. Cringing, terrified, digging into the earth barehanded to escape shelling a la Pozieres is not something anyone could look back on with anything but horror.

I'm not for a moment suggesting that Gallipoli was in any way more pleasant to experience. Only that is was more amenable to a slight fondness in recollection.

The men in France could look back on Gallipoli as another place and time, even while they were in the process of making history on the Western Front. How many newbies seeing combat for the first time would have been told "Oh yes, but it was much worse at Lone Pine..."

The legend built during the war, and nothing done in France could compare, at least in the thoughts of the men who had been there.

Duckman

PS: My great uncle wore an 'A' - but if I remember rightly, he talked more about its negative effects. The persistent assumption with the ANZAC / Australian Corps that anyone who had been to Gallipoli was somehow better than anyone who had missed out was used to the advantage of old sweats and to the detriment of the reinforcements.

PPS: I'm honestly shocked that any of my compatriots who have enough knowledge/interest in this to voice their opinion (yes, I realise we ARE talking about Australians) are ignorant of other countries participation. I guess the old saying is true - "Nobody ever lost money by underestimating the public's intelligence."

[frev]

Hi Duckman

Just noticed your signature. What a small world - I've just been reading the very interesting story of Martin O'Donoghue 'Kamarooka to Gallipoli' - (I wonder if you're in the photo taken at the Shrine last year?)

Cheers, Frev

[duckman]

Hi Duckman

Just noticed your signature. What a small world - I've just been reading the very interesting story of Martin O'Donoghue 'Kamarooka to Gallipoli' - (I wonder if you're in the photo taken at the Shrine last year?)

Cheers, Frev

Small world indeed, frev!

The book was written by my aunt (her mother (my Nana) adored Martin as a child), and I had some small contribution to it - mostly in Sherlocking a group of photos. The book was sparked by the unexpected appearence of his original letters, and gave us a chance to review what we "knew" about him, and as is common in this sort of thing, it turned out quite a bit of what we "knew" was wrong - including the fact that the date of wounding cited in my signature block is wrong. Turns out he was wounded shortly after the Nek when a mine was detonated prematurely - I'll get around to changing it some time. (sorry if thats a spoiler!)

I wasn't in the Shrine photo - I live interstate, and my interest was not a known factor until the book was on the presses ( ) - unfortunate as Brenda is a skilled genealogical researcher, but WWI in not her area of expertise. I think the book would have benefitted from some tighter editing and some links to other events, but I can't fault Brenda's dedication to the cause. It also inspired some mini research projects that I have in the pipeline.

I didn't realise the book was in public circulation - how'd you score a copy?

[frev]

I didn't realise the book was in public circulation - how'd you score a copy?

Well - you know how one thing leads to another! Martin just happens to be one of the soldiers I'm researching (in company with over 700 others) - including some of his mates also mentioned in the book. Anyway, included him in my list of those in the 8th LH that I sent to another researcher & he in turn put me on to Brenda.

Perhaps you may be able to wangle a little input into a 'revised reprint' in the future - it could be in the wind.

Cheers, Frev

PS - sorry guys for hijacking the thread.

[peggie]

Marg, the Australian image of Gallipoli was largely shaped by the media, not the men themselves (although I'm sure very few did anything to dispel the myths once they got home). Charles Bean, in later life the Australian Official Historian but at the time a war correspondent, did much to initiate and shape the Anzac legend. Not out of any small-minded or profit-driven motives, but out of sheer admiration for the men whose lives he shared. But it was his flowery writing style that embellished Anzac and enshrined it in memory.

Ron Barassi was cared for by Legacy, not the RSL as such. Legacy is a uniquely Australian organisation, established in 1923 by returned servicemen (independently of the RSL) to care for the widows and children of their mates. It still exists today. Only ex-servicemen can join Legacy, although others can be associate members (Friends of Legacy). They offer all sorts of assistance, from school scholarships to mowing the lawn & cutting firewood for elderly widows. Opinions on the RSL vary widely, as it is often seen as a political organisation, promoting the interests of ex-servicemen. But Legacy is highly regarded by everyone, regardless of political persuasion. Probably only the Salvation Army is more highly regarded.

Bob

A belated thankyou for the courtesy Bob.

Maybe the explanation originally given me about Legacy was not fully understood, but regardless of the niceties, this does exemplify the impression that the Australian Veterans considered themselves a class apart and would not trust anyone other than their own with the welfare of the widows orphans and invalids.

This same attitude may be evident in the perceived rationalisation of the Anzac spirit. The veterans may not have felt the need to explain their conceptions to the outside world. They may have felt that membership of their exclusive fraternity would equip each member with an adequate understanding of what it meant. The outsiders who assumed the role of propagating the story may not have been equiped for the role.

As to the difference between incentives and attitudes between the Western Front and Gallipoli, the number of dashing and incredible actions recorded in the bravery award citations do not sit with the concept of them merely hiding in a foxhole or bunker until things blew over.

Marg

[campaign]

Interesting thread - such knowledge. Did anyone else see the clip on TV recently, from a movie I think, stating that the Brits were drinking tea at the time ?! Also that clip of former Premier Keating last night, (Oz and Them) or was it us and oz, whatever, I was shocked to hear his comments to their House about Malta etc., and though not that well read myself, thought it misguided waffle and contributes much to the attitudes of others - a poor show.............

[duckman]

Interesting thread - such knowledge. Did anyone else see the clip on TV recently, from a movie I think, stating that the Brits were drinking tea at the time ?! Also that clip of former Premier Keating last night, (Oz and Them) or was it us and oz, whatever, I was shocked to hear his comments to their House about Malta etc., and though not that well read myself, thought it misguided waffle and contributes much to the attitudes of others - a poor show.............

I didn't, for some reason I can't get BBC4

I'd just like to point out that Paul Keating, Germaine Greer and Shane Warne are not necessarily typical of all Australians - in good ways and bad. But I'm sure they brought much grist to somebody's mill...