The Landing at Anzac, 1915: Chris Roberts (Crunchy)

[green_acorn]

Having obtained a copy last Friday, I am just in the process of lightly reading the book whilst otherwise occupied with my studies and will read it properly over the Easter break. Nevertheless, I would highly recommend The Landing at Anzac, 1915 to all, whether the intended audience; today's and our future officers and soldiers; or the general public who want a sound military understanding of the operation and events. In particular an outstanding book for academia, lecturers, school teachers and tertiary students of the campaign, Chris Roberts book will stand the test of time and should substantially rebalance the understanding of the landing. Indeed it has been written and presented in a way that it could be the best single source book for those, like the media, needing to quickly get a better understanding of the day’s events for speeches or commentary pieces in Australia and New Zealand near Anzac Day.

From my first impressions I only have a few very minor technical quibbles, not with Crunchy's content, but with the supporting graphics, that is things like the use of the 1950's NATO standard military symbology which can have quite different meaning to those who understand them, in comparison to the WW1 units represented. For example: A WW1 Artillery Brigade is a later Brigade equivalent(X)? A US/foreign regiment equivalent (III)? Or is it a battalion equivalent (II)? Stop doing my head in! When we are talking about a WW1 British Empire Field Artillery Brigade, which had the equivalent number of guns to a 50's-90's Commonwealth field artillery regiment (18), using the 50's symbols the FAB should be represented by a battalion symbol II, not an X (I'm a pedant on that sort of stuff after having used and taught symbology and military graphics for far too many years). Ditto for the HMG symbol on the Vickers and Maxim's, surely not the equivalent of a .50 cal M2 Browning or a 12.7mm DShK! Though I do like the use of colour terrain images with overlay movement graphics, they probably appeared great on the compilers computer screen, the image is somewhat darker on paper.

All in all, a very good book worthy of its intended audience and one which will have much broader interest and impact outside of the Australian Army - well done Crunchy.

Cheers,

Hendo

PS: I was surprised that someone "higher" than the Australian Army's Historian, Roger Lee, didn't do the introduction. It used to be quite common for CGS's/CA's to give such books gravitas by putting their imprimatur on such things.

Edited to fix some spelling mistakes and to clean up my explanation on the symbols

[Crunchy]

Several people have contacted me asking about the ebook on Amazon, and the fact it is not available there. I have contacted the publisher who has replied:

" It can take up to 6 weeks for Amazon to put titles up on all Amazon countries around the world (such as amzon.co.uk) unfortunately we cannot control this nor are we advised when they are up. However purchases can still be made around the world using the two links on our website for Amazon or Apple.

http://www.bigskypublishing.com.au/Books/Campaign-Series/The-Landing-at-Anzac/1006/productview.aspx (CLICK ON THE AMZOAN LINK)

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00BXKNCLA/ref=as_li_qf_sp_asin_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=211189&creative=373489&creativeASIN=B00BXKNCLA&link_code=as3&tag=bigskypublish-20 "

The Amazon link shows it is not yet available but the Apple link has the ebook.

Not sure when Amazon will have it, but I hope this clarifies the situation.

Best wishes

Chris

[moggs]

Having just finished reading I have to say what an impressive piece of work. Congratulations Chris. It was very interesting to work through your analyses of those first days. Thank you

Jonathan

[Chris_Baker]

This is my review for LLT:

The landing at Anzac 1915

Australian Army Campaign Series, volume 12

by Chris Roberts

published by Big Sky Publishing, Sydney, 2013

ISBN 978 1 922132 20 8

cover price not stated

paperback, 176pp plus appendices, order of battle and index. Illustrated.

reviewed by Chris Baker

I have not found this to easy to buy online, but it should be available from the Australian War Memorial: link to the book

I read many books on the battles and armies of WW1. For objectivity, presentation, clarity and lasting value as a work of reference, I cannot praise The landing at Anzac highly enough. It is a stunning piece of work and a book that deserves to be read by anyone interested in the Gallipoli campaign or in the history of the Australian, New Zealand and Turkish forces of the First World War.

The scope of the book is relatively narrow in that it focuses entirely on the landings made on the western coast of the Gallipoli peninsula on 25 April 1915 and on the advance inland to the tangled, inhospitable ridges that dominate the beaches. But my goodness in what depth! Chris Roberts has drawn upon original official and personal records of both sides, and from them drawn as clear and detailed account of what actually took place as is possible. Frankly unless some other major treasure trove of evidence turns up I doubt that his analysis will be bettered. Noting but not relying on Charles Bean's official history and other post-battle interpretations, the author manages to explain the strategic plans and imperatives of both sides; the operational decisions that were or were not taken; the deployment of the troops; and gets right down to small-scale platoon-level accounts of the fighting.

Wonderfully illustrated with maps (I do not believe I have ever seen better), contemporary photographs from Australian and Turkish sources and views of the battlefield today, the book also includes clear comparative descriptions of the composition of formations and units, as well as mini-biographies of key commanders. In a work of 184 pages in total, this is a considerable achievement.

It goes without saying that Anzac day and Anzac beach are of especial importance to the two sides and are vital symbols in the making of Australia as a nation. I can think of no finer tribute to the men who fought and no greater acknowledgement of that national importance than to tell the story as well as this.

Through reading and seeing Gallipoli for myself, I have come to the opinion that it was indeed a visionary but fatally flawed campaign. It was never going to succeed, never. One winces at some aspects of the way the campaign unfolded, and standing on those ridges surely no one can be anything but in awe of the fact that men could fight here at all. The heroic endeavours of men of both sides on those high cliffs and ridges are self-evident, and &The landing at Anzac brings clarity and reality to those efforts.

Fantastic.

And to round it all off, the book is beautifully produced on glossy paper and in colour!

[Crunchy]

Hendo and Jonathan,

Thank you for your kind words. Glad you enjoyed it.

Cheers

Chris

[Crunchy]

Chris,

Thank you for your very generous review. I very much appreciate it.

Cheers

Chris

[WhiteStarLine]

I read many books on the battles and armies of WW1. For objectivity, presentation, clarity and lasting value as a work of reference, I cannot praise The landing at Anzac highly enough. It is a stunning piece of work and a book that deserves to be read by anyone interested in the Gallipoli campaign or in the history of the Australian, New Zealand and Turkish forces of the First World War.

What a nice choice of words Chris B. I was lucky enough to be in the audience at the book's launch last Thursday. The majority of Canberra-based military historians were present and there wasn't a lot of room for more people. A local radio personality launched it and she had obviously read the book and understood its impact. She related the typical anecdote all Australians know, of men at the landing stepping over bodies struck down by Turkish machine guns. Then she quote Chris R's systematic research of what Turkish forces were actually present in those early hours, where they were placed, what they could see and what they could bring in the way of effective fire. I've just finished reading it and I will be posting my own review in a day or two. In this post I simply wanted to say how good it was to see the local level of interest in this book.

[WhiteStarLine]

I recently attended the launch of the book 'The Landing at Anzac, 1915' by Chris Roberts and I finished reading it a few days later. It is a very well-written account that adds a great deal to our body of knowledge of this campaign, which has spawned so many myths that persist until this day. Chris is one of the growing body of ex-serving military officers who have capped off active service with later qualifications including the award of an Honours Degree in history.

There can't be many books these days where a reviewer doesn't get to pen the phrase 'looks at the campaign from both sides'. However, in recent years, a growing body of Turkish professional historians have been translating and interpreting their own source documents. Their conclusion is that the Ottoman Army was not a rag-tag bunch held together by the German military mission but had heeded the defeats of the recent Balkan Wars and modernised. Chris has taken steps to tap into this rich and revealing resource and agrees with their conclusion, pointing out that 75% of the defending regiment were married men with families, literally defending their own homes from our invasion. Yet before the landing an Australian staff officer wrote of "an enemy who has never shown himself as good a fighter as the white man".

The political and military background to the campaign is covered in the opening chapters and I found the sidebars with biographies, army comparisons, major weapons of each side and maps to be very helpful. It is not until page 77 that the first Turkish rifle shot rings out, so there is plenty of space given to the skilful deployment of the defending troops by experienced Turkish commanders and the ceaseless exercises carried out by day and night practising repelling a beach landing. The maps of the ground showing Australian and Turkish dispositions are very clear, consistent and large enough to trace each unit and the same graphics are updated almost hourly on day one - I found that as I continued with the narrative I relied on them to maintain some kind of geographical awareness.

I am not sure who the intended audience is. While terms with a strict definition within the military such as 'interdict', the 'ground of tactical importance' and the capture by the Turks of the 'vital ground' might be self-explanatory to a lay audience, the symbols showing the various units in an infantry division are more specialist and perhaps could have warranted an separate explanation of symbols at the end of the book, perhaps after the appendices, timeline and order of battle?

Of the landing itself, Chris professionally demolishes the myths that persist today, some of which he shows originated from eyewitnesses who in reality were never there. The use of a side bar at intervals within the book shows the key weapons, how they were crewed and where they were located and as an example, the devastating power of a platoon of well-trained riflemen is used to highlight not only the destructive effect, but how survivors might later come to believe they had been under machine gun fire. Military histories can become a jumble of brigade, battalion, company and platoon units where you try to recall a few pages later who the author is currently talking about. Chris consistently puts Turkish units in italics and coupled with the maps on every few pages, helps decipher when the (Turkish) 10th company is firing on (Australia's) D company.

We are brought up in Australia to believe that our soldiers fought ferociously and tenaciously, as did the Turks and tribute is rightly paid to soldiers of both sides. Chris talks about brave Turkish counter-attacks against a line of companies that could now deliver a peak rate of fire of 1,200 rounds a minute and the inevitable toll of repeated counter-attacks on them. However, there is no doubt that the Australian commanders at battalion level and above showed their inexperience and at the brigade level there were too many delays and calls for urgent reinforcements where in fact the defenders were outnumbered.

This was not the battle-hardened AIF of 1918 where an experienced Corps Commander could give orders for a Divisional attack, predict the successful outcome and be just 3 minutes out. Interviews with survivors like Noel Loutit, who penetrated further inland than almost any other Australian to glimpse the Dardanelles, are used to highlight the disconnect between platoons and companies that achieved their objective, sometimes quickly, with the command paralysis at the higher level calling for more and more reinforcements. Yet, Chris does not stereotype the men and their commanders as "lions led by donkeys". Some later played a vital role in Australia's contribution to WW1, while others went on to become competent brigade or divisional commanders. A small percentage did not leave the safety of the beach, or took reckless risks with fatal consequences.

The vexed question of the consequences of landing on the wrong beach are dealt with in the very thorough Conclusion chapter and it is cited as "not a major cause of the Anzac failure". Loutit always believed it was a blessing and once told me: "Thank heavens we did! When we saw the beach we were meant to land on we would all have been killed!” The appendix analysing whether the Turks might have had machine guns firing on the landing parties is very interesting and compelling and few could disagree with Chris's conclusion that machine guns were an artillery asset held way behind the front line platoons.

Did I have any quibbles? I thought the approach by Bean reflected less of a rush to publish than Chris implies. As an example Bean followed Loutit's party inland in 1919, navigating using piles of spent cartridge cases and accepting that in some positions captured Australian weapons could possibly have been fired by Turks. When he reached the highest point described by Loutit, his notebook records that he could not spot the Dardanelles. He records that he wrote to Loutit in Adelaide, who replied how he left his men on the summit and walked to a spot that he could see. This I thought was an excellent example of checking and re-checking primary sources. I believe the book reflects the highest production quality and the charts are clear and helpful. However, the photographs seem to be scanned 1970's slides digitised, with colours a little washed out and less than optimal contrast. Given that some images are credited to John Lafferty, this might be the case.

All in all, this is a stunning account that combines modern scholarship with myth demolition. Chris has accurately been described as a post-revisionist historian, which is usually used to describe someone who does not set out to describe heroic and noble soldiers led by incompetent and uncaring generals. It is a wonderful book that should be read by anyone with a serious interest in Gallipoli.

[keithmroberts]

It is really frustrating that the book is not being released here in the UK. I suppose the market is limited, but that does not reduce the frustration.

Keith

[Crunchy]

Hi Bill,

Thank you for your very kind review,

just a point of clarification. I heartily agree with you that Bean made every effort to corroborate the evidence he collected, and I have read the correspondence between Loutit, Loutit's father and Bean in 1920. My point was that the book was published within two years of Bean returning to Australia (about May 1919) and the 1st Edition was published in 1921, which is a very short period for a tome over 600 pages written entirely from primary sources. Outstanding effort - it took me longer to research and write The Landing at Anzac, 1915.

Have a good Anzac Day, I'm off to Victoria tomorrow.

Best wishes

Chris

[Fedelmar]

Congratulations Chris

Sandra

[Chris_Baker]

Pals may be interested in this TV interview with Chris Roberts: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-04-19/anzac-anomalies/4640610

[Steven Broomfield]

It is really frustrating that the book is not being released here in the UK. I suppose the market is limited, but that does not reduce the frustration.

Keith

Hear, hear.

[Wendy Macpherson]

Congratulations Chris the book sure looks wonderful and the ABC interview was great, reading this thread has certainly wet my appetite to buy a copy.

Wendy

[Jim_Grundy]

At the risk of incurring the wrath of the moderators, I got hold of a copy in less than a week courtesy of Hyland's Bookshop, Melbourne (can't be doing with e-books).

Just started reading the book and mightily impressive it is too.

[Jeff Pickerd]

Chris,

I have now finished reading your wonderful book. May I also add my congratulations for your masterful appraisal of the events of the 25th April, and following two days, a magnificent example of thorough and intelligent research. I was particularly impressed with your analysis of the various actions of the senior players, both ANZAC and Turkish, most enlightening.

There is little I can add to the justified high praise already put forward here by others, apart from wholeheartedly agreeing with those opinions expressed.

Well done!

Jeff

[tumbi1]

Hello all,

My name is Mark and I am new to this forum - this is my first post. I found out about this forum through the acknowledgements at the start of Chris’s book!

I have the Australian official histories at home and have always been a bit confused about the landing as it isn’t clearly explained in them. Chris’s book certainly cleared it up for me! I agree whole heartedly with the reviews expressed so far, and can only say this is a brilliant book. Part of its brilliance is its simplicity, which gives you such a clear view of what happened. The accompanying maps and photos also add a lot to the clarity.

Being able to see what was happening on “the other side of the hill” is invaluable to an understanding of a battle, and this is the first book I have read that gives you the Turkish perspective. I also like the fact that Chris gives the Turks a human face with the mini officer biographies and a good overview of the make up of the units the Allies faced.

Thanks to this book my imagination can now turn to the many what-ifs, with a much better understanding of what was possible.

Many thanks for your effort Chris!

Mark.

[Crunchy]

Welcome to the forum Mark. You will find it a amazing wealth of information. Thank you for your kind comments.

Cheers

Chris

[Guest]

Not available on Amazon yet, but as soon as it is.....

Mike

[paulgranger]

I've been checking Amazon regularly, but didn't think to check Amazon.com - I've only been checking the UK site - I'll definitely be downloading it when it is released..

[AlanCurragh]

It is available as an e-book from the UK iBooks store - £4.99

[gilly100]

I can't help it. I just don't like the whole e book thing even though I understand the advantages and so on.Much prefer to flick (properly flick) through the pages and get a proper look. No different here with Crunchy's book. To me, e-book just seems to devalue the whole concept of 'a' book.

Ian

[paulgranger]

There's no reason why you can't have both, I've got quite a few books in both digital and real form, but unless Chris's book finds its way into a bookshop in the UK, or on to Amazon as an actual papery thing, then the e-book is the current option. It's better than not having the book at all.

[gilly100]

No argument there Paul. Enjoy the read. It's good. Couldn't bare the thought anything I wrote going e-book after years of hard graft putting it together. Besides, if its a dud, it will make a good doorstop or intruder repellant! Can't do that with an e book.

Ian

[Robert Dunlop]

Chris, absolutely superb book. One of the best I have read on WW1, particularly on the lower level tactics as well as your incisive analysis of the decision-making processes. Many congratulations.

The table of timings will work very well when I reproduce the battle in miniature. I am planning to redo all of the landings for 25 April.

I cannot recomment this book too highly.

Robert