Customer Reviews

Gallipoli: 1915 (Osprey Trade Editions)

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

One of the best things that Haythornthwaite's book has going for it is the concise, easy-to-understand manner in which it was written, which is especially helpful in descriptions of the military manoevers that were conducted throughout the Gallipoli campaign. Historians already familiar with the basics of the campaign and looking for more in-depth discussion would likely be better served by Laffin's Damn the Dardanelles or the Gallipoli volumes of C.E.W. Bean's vast, official history, The Story of ANZAC.

That said, Haythornthwaite provides an excellent, well-written overview of the Gallipoli campaign, discussing both what happened and why things went so wrong. The color plates are particularly helpful in discerning the strategy behind various troop movements, and the book's bibliography would likely prove very useful for those inclined to use this work as a starting point for further research. Overall, a valuable resource for anyone interested in investigating the fight for Gallipoli.

this book provides an insightful look into both the factual and the causal history of the galipoli campaign. Whether you are curious about the campaign from seeing the movie or are just curious about one of the most hopelessly galant and dramatic fights ofthe first world war, you are sure to love it. This book is also a valuable aide in understanding Australia's miliary foreign policy as it's reprucussions are felt, in spirit more than in a genuine resentment of Great Britain, still today

"Gallipoli 1915" by Philip Haythornthwaite is an informative entry point into the disastrous Allied assault on the Turkish peninsula. This book is definitely not suited for serious scholars of the First World War; surely the author was writing for a youthful audience or one that was wholly unfamiliar with the Dardanelles campaign. That said, the writing is not without merit; for the reader wanting a quick and easy to read summary the text is ideal, though Haythornthwaite's prose often lacks embellishment or thoughtful insight into the specifics of the epic battle.

Perhaps the defining feature of this book is its colorful layout. The text is effectively spread throughout the pages, supported by an excellent collection of maps and photographs which make up for the dryness of the prose. These visual aids made the book quite enjoyable and provided a holistic approach to retelling the main components that defined the battle of Gallipoli.

The book begins with a basic rundown of the major personalities that defined the decision making process during the campaign. Dull and predictable characters such as British General Ian Hamilton are contrasted with the dashing and bold leadership of Turkey's Mustafa Kemal. The basic breakdown of Allied generalship and the Turkish ability to rise to occasion is established in the first few pages as the reader learns of the disparity between opponents and how key figures stepped forward in crucial moments. Despite the summarized nature of the text, the author is able to reiterate this point as it appears time and again and is the commonly held notion of why Gallipoli was so disastrous for the British and their allies. Haythornthwaite conveys the frustration and indecisiveness that doomed such sturdy and fearless troops to slaughter. The reader learns that Gallipoli epitomized the World War 1 phrase describing the relationship between Generals and enlisted men as "donkeys leading lions."

After the profile of the campaign's leaders, the next chapter gives a typically brief description of the armies they commanded. There is quite a focus on the technical nature of each army as statistics concerning the composition of field units and their equipment is given. I found these to be slightly interesting, but again the writing lacks embellishment, bordering on blandness. But the author does convey the superiority of the Allies on paper, which would play into their belief that Turkey would be a pushover. This underestimation of the fighting capabilities of the Ottoman Empire was a crucial mistake, one of the many that doomed the campaign to failure.

The campaign itself began with a typically ill-fated naval engagement, as the Royal navy attempted to force its way through the Dardanelles, incurring heavy losses due to shore batteries and mines. It is only after this attempt was halted that ground troops were committed in the first D Day of modern warfare. The primitive amphibious strategy is one of the most interesting aspects of the battle, as lessons learned here would be invaluable in years to come, particularly in the Second World War. The fatal mistake was the lack of communication and disconnect with the command structure which halted the beach heads at Anzac Cove and Cape Helles before they could capture the high ground and link up, allowing the Turks a chance to organize. Hamilton's decision to negate the element of surprise, only pressing on when the troops were all massed following entrenchment was to be a death knell for the operation. It was repeated again at Suvla Bay in August as an amphibious landing could have turned the Turkish flank but defensive entrenchment was favored over lighter and faster assaults. The result was nearly a year of alternating human wave attacks, causing 250,000 casualties on each side before Allied withdrawal.

Those who have read Alan Mooreheads brilliant book on the battle of Gallipoli will find little extra in Haythornthwaite's book.A few coloured plates is not enough to buy this book.

Almost everything mentioned within this book have been noted somewhere else. Haythornthwaite did a good job of putting it altogether and made our life easier to read it in one piece.

Above else it shows that Mustafa Kemal, loved by some and hated by others, actually gain the most out of this disasterous ANZAC's campaign. He ascended to power only to liquidize the 'last'/'only' Khilafah that the Muslim had by 1924. You'll be amazed and wondered whether the whole thing was a 'setup' to break the Ottoman Devlet from the inside.

In the end the Ottoman lost the whole war by alligning to the wrong side (Central Powers) in that pitiful World War I.

This book is hard to read and way too factual - always talking about this regiment and this battalion moving this many yards and then joining with that other regiment, etc. It is very hard to get a feeling of the battles that took place and the immensity of the human suffering this campaign caused. It is utterly missing drama and emotion.

In addition, despite all that verbal detail, the maps are not detailed enough - making them hard to follow against the written details.

In short, this book is not easy to read and - Alan Moorehead's book makes a better job doing that.