Frinfo - Gallipoli - Six VCs Before Breakfast to be displayed together

Mr_Fingerz

LE
Book Reviewer
An interesting article considering that popular belief would have it that only ANZAC forces fought there.
 
And those ANZACs were all Australian ...

And quite a few were still British subjects in the Australian Army.

N.b. Not down playing the Australians it's just Mr Bravehearts story gets told as gospel.
 
And quite a few were still British subjects in the Australian Army.

N.b. Not down playing the Australians it's just Mr Bravehearts story gets told as gospel.
Which grips my shit too.

What also grips my shit is Aussies ignoring what the 'NZ' stands for in 'ANZAC'.
 

rampant

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
And quite a few were still British subjects in the Australian Army.

N.b. Not down playing the Australians it's just Mr Bravehearts story gets told as gospel.

Technically they were all British subjects.
 

oldbaldy

LE
Moderator
An interesting article considering that popular belief would have it that only ANZAC forces fought there.
Casualty rates were:
  • Australia: 18.500 wounded and missing - 7,594 killed.
  • New Zealand : 5,150 wounded and missing - 2,431 killed.
  • British Empire (excl. Anzac) : 198,000 wounded and missing - 22,000 killed.
  • France : 23,000 wounded and missing - 27,000 killed.
  • Ottoman Empire (Turkey) : 109,042 wounded and missing - 57,084 killed.
 
Casualty rates were:
  • Australia: 18.500 wounded and missing - 7,594 killed.
  • New Zealand : 5,150 wounded and missing - 2,431 killed.
  • British Empire (excl. Anzac) : 198,000 wounded and missing - 22,000 killed.
  • France : 23,000 wounded and missing - 27,000 killed.
  • Ottoman Empire (Turkey) : 109,042 wounded and missing - 57,084 killed.

Not meaning to take anything away from the Gallantry of the 1st Battalion, the Lancashire Fusiliers, which is the point of this thread, I would still like to clear up a few misconceptions.

The first is that there is not a single Australian historian who does not acknowledge that of the roughly half million British Empire troops who served at Gallipoli only 50,000 of them were ANZAC’s.

About 10%.

The ignorance of this fact (and the Gallipoli campaign generally) seems to be purely a UK phenomenon.

In this context casualties are a poor metric of comparison. A better metric to use to explain the emphasis that Australian’s in particular place on that campaign is to examine the Victoria Crosses awarded for it.

47 Victoria Crosses were awarded for service at Gallipoli. (My rough numbers)

42% went to the Royal Navy

36% went to the British Army

17% went to the First Australian Imperial Force.

All of the ANZAC VC recipients were born in Australia or New Zealand with the single exception of Leonard Keysor who was born in London

The percentage rises to 20% if the award to George Moor of the Hampshire Regiment is considered. Moor was born in St Kilda Melbourne.

The 3rd Battle for Krithia took place on 4 June and although the 42nd East Lancashire Division came close to taking the village, the bloody repulse of the Royal Naval Division on their right laid bare their flank. The Hampshire's, to the left of the 42nd Division's line of attack, initially advanced successfully but at dawn on the 6th a sudden panic appeared to seize the units in the front trenches, who began to stream to the rear. By this time, Moor, who was only 18 years old, was in virtual command of what remained of his battalion. He took charge of the situation, shot several men who were running off in terror, and led several charges to stabilise the line. His recommendation came from officers of a neighbouring battalion who had witnessed his extraordinary conduct. Having gained the MC and bar later in France, Moor died of influenza in November 1918, aged 21.

This over representation in terms of gallantry awards, possibly partially explains the Australian interest in the campaign.

An examination of the circumstances of some of the Victoria Cross awards for Gallipoli also potentially explains the lack of enthusiasm in the UK for proper study of the campaign.

Cheers

Mick
 

Petardier

War Hero
One could also note that the award of a VC depends on the writing of the citation. An interesting statistic would be the number of citations written by units and the number that were successful. It's also worth noting that if you have high casualties then citations may not get written either because there were not surviving witnesses or that the extraordinary had become normal.
 
I don't Completely agree with you Petardier.

I agree particularly with you that 'the extraordinary had become normal'.

I agree with you generally that gallantry awards are an imperfect measure to judge such things by. As are casualty rates.

I would make the case though, that the ANZAC's were behind the eight ball in 1915 in terms of lobbying power in your terms of citations written and particularly the number that were successful. I think the statistics are relevant because of this factor.

(I've some consistency in taking this position because I have previously argued here that the UK contingent in Vietnam were also over represented in gallantry awards. As you know)

I think it does say something. I think my metric in this case is especially valid.

I'm only contributing here because I do want to crush the meme's that have arisen so far on this thread that Australians:

A) Are only informed by Peter Weir's 1981 film 'Gallipoli"

B) Have no appreciation of the magnitude of sacrifice in that campaign of the British Army and Navy. .......Or the French.

C) That we ignore the contribution of the Kiwi in ANZAC. That in particular is a particularly vicious slur.

That said; I do want to know more about the individuals who 'won six before breakfast' . Can someone point me to an online bio of any of them? Where and how they were bought up? The lives they lived before the war? I'd like a hint of their motivation. Where can it be found?

Cheers

Mick
 
I don't Completely agree with you Petardier.

I agree particularly with you that 'the extraordinary had become normal'.

I agree with you generally that gallantry awards are an imperfect measure to judge such things by. As are casualty rates.

I would make the case though, that the ANZAC's were behind the eight ball in 1915 in terms of lobbying power in your terms of citations written and particularly the number that were successful. I think the statistics are relevant because of this factor.

(I've some consistency in taking this position because I have previously argued here that the UK contingent in Vietnam were also over represented in gallantry awards. As you know)

I think it does say something. I think my metric in this case is especially valid.

I'm only contributing here because I do want to crush the meme's that have arisen so far on this thread that Australians:

A) Are only informed by Peter Weir's 1981 film 'Gallipoli"

B) Have no appreciation of the magnitude of sacrifice in that campaign of the British Army and Navy. .......Or the French.

C) That we ignore the contribution of the Kiwi in ANZAC. That in particular is a particularly vicious slur.

That said; I do want to know more about the individuals who 'won six before breakfast' . Can someone point me to an online bio of any of them? Where and how they were bought up? The lives they lived before the war? I'd like a hint of their motivation. Where can it be found?

Cheers

Mick
I don't know about online, but the book 'Hell's Foundations' by Geoffrey Moorhouse tells the story of the Lancashire Fusiliers from Bury and the effect the casualties had on the town post-WW1.
ISBN 0-340-43044-3
 

Petardier

War Hero
Not sure about lobbying. I've never been up to speed on the workings of the honours & awards process but I've also never heard any suggestion of lobbying. What I have noticed is that there are differences between units in their 'enthusiasm' for writing citations, and I've heard anecdotally that the quality of citation writing is very mixed.

An interesting example is the difference between the 2 & 10 GR and 6 & 7 GR in Borneo, bearing in mind that all had two battalions and all did multiple tours.
 
I don't Completely agree with you Petardier.

I agree particularly with you that 'the extraordinary had become normal'.

I agree with you generally that gallantry awards are an imperfect measure to judge such things by. As are casualty rates.

I would make the case though, that the ANZAC's were behind the eight ball in 1915 in terms of lobbying power in your terms of citations written and particularly the number that were successful. I think the statistics are relevant because of this factor.

(I've some consistency in taking this position because I have previously argued here that the UK contingent in Vietnam were also over represented in gallantry awards. As you know)

I think it does say something. I think my metric in this case is especially valid.

I'm only contributing here because I do want to crush the meme's that have arisen so far on this thread that Australians:

A) Are only informed by Peter Weir's 1981 film 'Gallipoli"

B) Have no appreciation of the magnitude of sacrifice in that campaign of the British Army and Navy. .......Or the French.

C) That we ignore the contribution of the Kiwi in ANZAC. That in particular is a particularly vicious slur.

That said; I do want to know more about the individuals who 'won six before breakfast' . Can someone point me to an online bio of any of them? Where and how they were bought up? The lives they lived before the war? I'd like a hint of their motivation. Where can it be found?

Cheers

Mick

As Retread2 says Hells foundations covers the topic very well. I particularly like the story about the VC recipient that found himself up in front of his ex commanding officer at the local magistrates court for giving his wife the "short answer". His mitigating circumstances were that she gave him a dose when he returned home from war.
If you can't get hold of a copy I would be happy to get you one.
Regarding the issues you brought up my experience has been that every Aussie and Kiwi except one kiwi has believed that Gallipoli was them alone. The Kiwi's would have been especially galling if it wasn't for my own Antipodean relatives two of which gave me a history lesson on Gallipoli without knowing they were the direct descendants of a Lancashire Fusilier and one of the Munsters plus a couple of other relatives in the LF's who were there.
I'm not being sneery or didactic I just wish our common history could be seen as such
By the way Bury is fiercely proud of the LF's and more know the story of Gallipoli than most would think.
 

udipur

LE
Book Reviewer
I'm only contributing here because I do want to crush the meme's that have arisen so far on this thread that Australians:

A) Are only informed by Peter Weir's 1981 film 'Gallipoli"

B) Have no appreciation of the magnitude of sacrifice in that campaign of the British Army and Navy. .......Or the French.

C) That we ignore the contribution of the Kiwi in ANZAC. That in particular is a particularly vicious slur

It's difficult not to generalise here but whilst I accept that the average Aussie does acknowledge other nations' contributions when pressed, Gallipoli has achieved an almost mythical state of interpretation.

Brown's book explains it excellently.
Amazon product
Keating talks of recognising Kokoda as the birth of the nation militarily - after all, it was a campaign where they emerged the victor.

Statistically, the Aussies do emphasise the disproportionate contribution their fledgling country made to this campaign but since their population was approx 5 million and 50,000 went, that's 1%.

The UKs population was approx 40 million and contributed 500k - 1.25%.

We suffered ten times the wounded which fits into the proportions but the Aussies did lose more compared to the UK.

Agree that medals might skew things but this thread started with one battalion winning six VCs - incredible in anyone's eyes.
 
Thread bump, in case anybody's in Manchester at moment.

Would love to go, as Keneally family were close neighbours of my father's family.


Posted from the ARRSE Mobile app (iOS or Android)
 
The 50th anniversary dinner.

Brave men.
Lancashire%20Landing%20SurvivorsSmall.jpg
 
Dear Wang,

I sent you a line yesterday via a wounded officer who was going to post it at the base, but as this boat is the out of mail headquarters I drop a line again as I can censor it myself.

I got through the landing without a scratch thanks to my natural instinct to seek cover on a flat beach, but sprained my ankle badly the second night falling in a trench in the dark.

By Jove it was pretty hot that first Sunday morning. I can hardly write about it yet.

Poor old Porter was killed by a hand grenade I think climbing up the cliff on my right. I am awfully sick he got knocked over.

Tom Maunsell and Tommy were shot getting out of the boat.

Clark was shot through the head sitting in the boat. I tell you I looked pretty slippy about getting ashore. I jumped overboard in 5 feet of water.

I don’t think the men realised how hot the fire was they were laughing and joking to the last.

I only got about five men ashore alive in my boat and not one of them could use their rifles owning to sand jamming the bolt.


http://www.lancs-fusiliers.co.uk/gallerynew/WW1/Gallopoli ww1/gallipoli.htm
 
That Major Cuthbert Bromley looked a right hard bastard in the photo.
 

Latest Threads

Top