rvsakhadeo Posted 25 April , 2007 Share Posted 25 April , 2007 Why the Gallipoli troops consisted only of Australians and New Zealanders (plus may be a few from Britain) ? Why no Indian troops were considered as a part of the Expeditionary Force? Was it by chance or design ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
horatio2 Posted 25 April , 2007 Share Posted 25 April , 2007 Both of your questions are based on a totally incorrect understanding of the composition of the MEF. I do not wish to appear curt but may I suggest you read a little about the campaign to see the fallacy of your remarks because to post the full details here would be a rather long task. The short answers are 1. They did not 2. They were and did. 3. Not applicable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Borderman Posted 25 April , 2007 Share Posted 25 April , 2007 To be fair, if you listen to some of our friends from the other side of the globe you might get that impression Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rvsakhadeo Posted 25 April , 2007 Author Share Posted 25 April , 2007 Both of your questions are based on a totally incorrect understanding of the composition of the MEF. I do not wish to appear curt but may I suggest you read a little about the campaign to see the fallacy of your remarks because to post the full details here would be a rather long task. The short answers are 1. They did not 2. They were and did. 3. Not applicable. Thanks for setting my understanding right and for not sounding curt! Since none of what I read contained any information about Indian troops,I had raised this point.Can you recommend book/s which contain the info? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevem49 Posted 25 April , 2007 Share Posted 25 April , 2007 Gallipoli 1915 by Tim Travers is useful. Google Gallipoli and you will find lots online. The ANZACs were outnumbered by British and French troops. Indian and Gurka troops were there as well. Indian units were part of the British Army and so part of the MEF, BEF etc. My own British battalion had 29% of its total war casualties on Gallipoli in a two day period. stevem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ejcmartin Posted 25 April , 2007 Share Posted 25 April , 2007 Don't forget the late addition of the Newfoundlanders in the fall of 1915! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alliekiwi Posted 25 April , 2007 Share Posted 25 April , 2007 As far as I know, more Indians died at Gallipoli than Australians or New Zealanders. But by far the British and French had more deaths than the Anzacs. Mythology is a powerful thing. Edit I was incorrect about the Indian figures - I looked it up and one chart has: How many soldiers died at Gallipoli? The latest figures from our colleague Patrick Gariepy, who has been working on the British Commonwealth casualties for more than ten years and who, I believe, has a more accurate count than anybody, are as follows: British (including Irish) 29, 134 Australian 8, 520 New Zealand 2, 806 Indian 1, 891 Newfoundland 45 Ceylon 4 Others* 29 * Others comprise 14 men of the Zion Mule Corps, 11 of the Greek Labour Corps, 3 Guides & Interpreters and 1 man of the Maltese Labour Corps. These figures include deaths at Gallipoli, or those who died of disease / wounds at sea, or on the Greek island of Lemnos, in Egypt, Malta, Gibraltar or Britain (including Ireland). Please note that the French casualty figure is not included in the above table, but is generally agreed to be approximately 10, 000. This is from Bryn Dolan's webpage about Anzac Officers who died at Gallipoli (he posts on this forum). Allie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rvsakhadeo Posted 25 April , 2007 Author Share Posted 25 April , 2007 Gallipoli 1915 by Tim Travers is useful. Google Gallipoli and you will find lots online. The ANZACs were outnumbered by British and French troops. Indian and Gurka troops were there as well. Indian units were part of the British Army and so part of the MEF, BEF etc. My own British battalion had 29% of its total war casualties on Gallipoli in a two day period. stevem I confess having read only Alan Moorehead's"Gallipoli",that too very long ago. Thanks for the suggestion! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gyrene Posted 2 October , 2007 Share Posted 2 October , 2007 Which unit were the Newfoundlanders attached to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoplophile Posted 3 October , 2007 Share Posted 3 October , 2007 A battalion of the Royal Newfoundland Regiment served with the 29th Division. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Martin Posted 3 October , 2007 Share Posted 3 October , 2007 The 1st Newfoundland Regiment as has been stated, served in the 29th division as part of the 88th Brigade, during their time in Gallipoli. The 2nd Newfoundland Regiment in existance at that time was located at Ayr, Scotland acting as a reserve battalion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bantamforgot Posted 3 October , 2007 Share Posted 3 October , 2007 As stated myths are the legend of war, how many people know that French troops took part in the the war in Arabia re. T,E. Lawrence . Colin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punjab612 Posted 3 October , 2007 Share Posted 3 October , 2007 And don't forget the French with about 47,000 casualties of whom approximately 5,000 died. Peter 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