38 replies to this topic

[cdr]

Nice article in the BBC History magazine on this topic

[Jim_Grundy]

I've just finished Peter Hart's 'Gallipoli'. Loved it.

My review:

The Gallipoli campaign cannot be said to have been poorly served by historians. Indeed, this is the author's second work on the subject, the first, “Defeat at Gallipoli”, was co-authored with Nigel Steel. However, this book makes a strong claim to adding much that is new to our understanding of what it meant to be a participant in the ill-fated Dardanelles adventure. And one that I would unhesitatingly recommend to anyone interested the subject.

The telling of history, particularly that concerning the Great War, has developed significantly in the past thirty years or so. The actions of great men and plans of campaign illustrated by broad arrows on a map have been largely overtaken by anecdotal accounts of the actual participants. Both approaches have their merits but weaknesses too. Detached accounts telling how this or that division or brigade moved an inch across a map pay little heed to the price paid by the men on the ground. Whilst the stories of the men themselves without the historical infrastructure on which to link the reality of war to how and why they came to be there in the first place leave the reader little the wiser. And Peter Hart again proves himself to be a master at combining the two traditions, complemented with his own informed and expertly articulated interpretation of events.

'Gallipoli' is written in the author’s by now trademark style. The motivations and actions of those at the very top of the chain of command are outlined clearly and concisely, setting in context the experiences of those given the job of putting the lofty aims of the likes of Churchill into practice. But, and this was for me the stand out feature of this work, the author reminds us that the allied forces were not simply battling military incompetence, difficult terrain, a harsh climate and flies but well-led and very brave, professional Turkish soldiers. In addition, we are reminded of the French contribution to the campaign, one that has received little attention from English-speaking authors (and I suspect amongst French ones too). Indeed, Peter Hart goes so far as to argue that the French were the most effective military force on the allied side and given the hardest task, exposed as they were to fire from the Asiatic shore whilst tackling some of the toughest conditions found anywhere on the Peninsular.

The role of the French contingent might surprise many readers, as will, perhaps, the author’s firm assertion at the very beginning of the book that the campaign was a forlorn hope from the start. Hart’s contention is that politicians looking for a cheap alternative to taking on Germany on the Western Front did more than delude themselves, they wasted thousands of lives in the process. And the grand scheme to send aid to Russia via the Dardanelles is exposed as a complete fantasy. The irony that the British in 1915 lacked the very shells and artillery required to break the deadlock of trench warfare, either in France or Gallipoli, meaning there were none to spare for the Russians in the first place, is not lost.

Although this is the author’s second visit to Gallipoli, the quotations from those involved are all new; their power will make an impact on the most avid reader of military history. As such, ‘Gallipoli’ is another magnificent tribute by Peter Hart to the generation that fought the Great War. I am, as anyone might guess, an admirer of the author’s work. But what is clear here and in his other works is that Peter Hart directs our admiration to those whose story he has so beautifully told. Highly recommended.

[Steven Broomfield]

Mrs B and I have just popped into Winchester, for lunch and to do a bit of shopping (tea, shoe polish and a toy for the dogs - ecelctic, huh?), and went into Waterstone's in the Brook Centre. I was amazed to stumble on a pile of unsigned copies of this tome (well, two copies, to be honest). Using my Waterstone's loyalty card points, I saved about the same as I would have done buying it from Amazon (sorry, Forum funds), so am now the proud owner of an unsigned copy.

If the author would like to leave a signed adhesive label in a brown envelope in the second cubicle in the Gent's at Waterloo East Railway Station, I shall attach it. Alternatively, I am open to offers while the book is still pristine

I must also say, inter alia, that it look well up to the author's usual standard.

(That is a compliment, by the way).

[Jim_Grundy]

Interesting review of 'Gallipoli' in the Financial Times: http://www.ft.com/cm...l#axzz1DHO8IYXH

[Steven Broomfield]

On a serious note, having swept all other non-commuting reading to one side, I am now about a third of the way through this excellent book. Well up to the author's usual standard - a combination of wit and insight, based on a level of study and knowledge of some depth - I can really say it's well worth the money.

I do, however, have a minor niggle, aimed, I suspect, at the publisher rather than the author. The book has some very good sketches and maps, and some very good photos (some I've not seen before). However, the publisher sees no need for an index of these. It is quite difficult, when looking for a map (not fold-out, of course - that really is old-fashioned   ) to have to thumb back to the place you think it was. OK, you can use a book mark or a piece of paper, but really an index would be quite simple and surely not too expensive?

However, that is a minor niggle, and doesn't detract from the quality of the volume as a whole.

[steve wargraves]

Here's my three penny worth on Gallipoli by Peter Hart,. Is there any one left in the country who doesn't share an odd pint (some say very odd) pint with this loveable character?

Peter Hart is the Oral Historian at the Imperial War Museum and the author of several acclaimed books on the Great War including his Nigel Steel collaboration Defeat at Gallipoli. As an acknowledged expert on Great War matters with a primary interest in the sideshow at Gallipoli it was inevitable he would release another publication on the subject. His latest offering, the appropriately named Gallipoli will inevitably be well received by any Great War aficionado familiar with the no holds barred style of this competent author. This is not a rehash of the earlier publication, but one containing in the main unpublished combatants statements all skilfully merged into this definitive account. Admittedly there are no shortages of books on the Dardanelles campaign so why should we make room on our bookshelves for one more?

                Hart is a writer at the pinnacle of his career with an encyclopaedic knowledge of the Gallipoli campaign gained in part through interviewing veterans, unlimited access to archives and guiding British staff officers around the peaks and beaches of a coastline that still begs the question ‘What if?’ Competently writing about one of the classical naval and infantry failures in military history, especially one as diverse as the Dardanelles venture is quite a challenge, and here we have an account second to none. The book is in the authors familiar style of a meticulously researched well written account liberally interspersed with statements from both sides. I must admit in some books I find the use of statements a stumbling block to the flow of the account; however such irksome distractions can never be applied to the work of Peter Hart, an adroit master of the succinct telling quote.

            In 1915 the British were the junior partner in the Franco-British alliance, and in most British accounts the presence of the French army receives scant recognition, for they are usually over shadowed by the coverage of the exploits of our colonial and empire troops. From the outset Hart declares his aim is to tell the tale of the multinational task force, therefore whether your interest concerns British, French, Australian, New Zealand or Indian combatants on land or sea this book is for you.

Hart also acknowledges ‘the victors in 1915’ and it’s a refreshing change to read the Turkish witness accounts, for they give an insight into the psyche of a much under-rated well trained, disciplined and  competently led adversary, erroneously dismissed as amateurs by the British.  

On the other hand, General Sir Ian Hamilton the commander of the Mediterranean Expeditionary Force was far from an amateur, he was a professional soldier but his grandiose planning relied on the success of each individual facet of military operations. Hart rightly asserts his over elaborate plans combined with the lackadaisical leadership of Hamilton and most of his staff almost guaranteed failure. He further asserts the reason for failure was not due to ill fortune but muddled thinking, a fault neither Mustafa Kamel and General Otto Liman von Sanders possessed, their clarity of thought would prove the winning factor at every turn. But this is not a book about bashing generals, indeed there is some sympathy towards the predicament certain officers found themselves in, for in some respects it drew comparison to their peers on the Western Front.

            Nonetheless each and every book on this subject exasperates the reader, for the troops whether at Anzac, Helles or Suvla were in a hopeless situation. Almost a century later historians with all the benefit of hindsight continue to disagree on the decision to open up an eastern front. Never the one to sit on the fence, Peter Hart describes the decision as an act of lunacy that could never have succeeded and convincingly supports his view throughout the work. In coming to his ‘lunacy’ conclusion, Hart has in my opinion ably countered the ‘worthy gamble’ assertions of his peers and provided adequate evidence to convince others to grasp the enormity of the failure at Gallipoli.

            Nicely rounding off the book is a concise three day tour guide useful for visitors to the beaches and hills at Helles, Anzac Cove and Suvla Bay.  

            Peter Hart’s extensive research in British, French and Turkish archives has produced arguably the most readable and thought provoking account of a military fiasco fought by men of incredible heroic resilience. This 530 page doorstep of a book, is worthy of space on the bookshelves of any serious student of military history.

[PMHart]

I've never been called loveable before!

Lovable Pete

[truthergw]

Yes you have. They always call you that in Dundee and North Fife. Mind, they spell it different.

[Steven Broomfield]

steve wargraves, on 12 February 2011 - 02:14 PM, said:

                Hart is a writer at the pinnacle of his career

All downhill now ...

[Kate Wills]

PMHart, on 13 February 2011 - 11:08 AM, said:

I've never been called loveable before!

Lovable Pete

Perhaps you should listen to your wife more..?

[Rockdoc]

Kate Wills, on 13 February 2011 - 02:03 PM, said:

Perhaps you should listen to your wife more..?

Why change the habits of a lifetime?

Keith

[Siege Gunner]

steve wargraves, on 12 February 2011 - 02:14 PM, said:

Hart is a writer at the pinnacle of his career

'Pinnacle'  —  a kind of barnacle that grows on pinnaces ...  

[Bryn_Hammond]

George Armstrong Custer, on 27 January 2011 - 01:10 PM, said:

Ah, but isn't it the unsigned copies of Hart books which are rare and valuable, Brian? I've certainly never managed to get my hands on one of these elusive creatures - they're as rare as unsigned copies of Bryn Hammond's 'Cambrai'!

George

Just get your own work published, George!

[MartinBennitt]

Here is what Gary Sheffield thought of it (and another book)

cheers Martin B