I feel that my eyes need a rest from this aerial shot, which I have turned every-which-way and still cannot match with a map I have. The map is based on a photographic survey made on 5th September 1915 (the map is dated 7th Sept)
One thing that does strike me however, is that the map shows almost continuous scrub land between Chocolate Hill and Green Hill, with at best, only a couple of patches which might be cultivated fields. And at the moment I cannot reconcile that with what I see on the above aerial shot.
Come on chaps - let's hear some other views on this, please
Ditto. The aer photo is a very big challenge. I have spent hours trying to match the field boundaries with the Sep, Oct and Nov editions of the 1:10,000 Bristh maps to no avail. Ditto with the modern Google earth. There is no doubt the Aer photo is of Gallipoli and in particular the flat terrain in the Suvla plain (the granularity and orientation 'bias' of the field pattern is very similar to the maps and modern satmaps) but I can not for the life of me get any fit. I have also tried with the areas NW towards Dublin Castle and also tried further SW... the only problem is that one very quickly gets into large features such as hills (with no field patterns) or the Salt Lake. The image is almost all fields and that means it can only lie within a relatively small part of Suvla. As a long shot I tried to match Helles too but the field patterns are distinctly different.
John I know is the expert in Aer photos. I sense that it is taken at an oblique angle but that should not make it too difficult. I can't see any trench pattern that matches either the British or Turkish trench maps. I am not 100% convinced tthe orientation is correct (NS and EW). I would have thought it very unlikely that the photographer got an exact NS and EW alignment. Also looking at the shadows, especially those of the tall poplar trees that line the ditches (and still do today), the shadows should reveal some clue as to the orientation. - like a gnomon on a sundial. If you look at Google Earth (see below) the sat images were taken in late October (2006), so roughly the same time of year and the shadows are distictly pointing N. Clearly if the photo was taken early in the morning or late in the afternoon the shadows would be pointing nearly WNW or ENE (respectively) but I would imagine Aer photos would have been taken near midday to optimise the light (John will doubtless be able to advise). Either way, I think the shadows would have some northerly orientation and the shadows will allow us to limit the possibilities within about a 170 degree arc centred around North .......I think it needs to turn about 90 degrees anticlockwise.
The photo has stumped me for sure. .......My only very wild guess is that the image is a negative (mirror image). This however is extremely unlikely. I don't have the technology to flip the image.
PS On the separate issue of the building, I noticed in the Historical Records of the South Nottinghamshire Hussars Yeomanry 1794-1924 there is a photo of Cator's House (between pages 224 and 225) showing it as a stone building with a pitched tiled roof, and a high sandbag wall immediately adjacent - very similar to the photo that John posted. I am about to unpack my boxes that include the Regimental histories of the Sharpshooters, Roughriders, Westminster Dragoons, Lovat Scouts and Herts Yeo. Hopefully some might have photos that add to the discussion - they all at some time operated in the area.
PPS Dates. Reading the Warwick Yeo in the Great War, it says as late as Oct 11th "The ground in front [of the trenches just South of Choc Hill] was strewn with dead bodies of those who had fallen in the fighting in August and the men had to be employed in burying parties..." which suggest the original Dead Man's Gully photo could have been taken as late as this date.