Whilst compiling a nominal roll I found an interesting item page 11 of 29 from the service records of 4130 Sapper Alexander McDonald of the Australian 4th Field Co Engineers (ex 600, 19th Battalion) showing on his B103 that shows him being admitted to hospital on 29/10/15 suffering from gas poisoning. Is it possible that it was used or is it more likely it was fumes from shellfire that caused it? Can anyone shed any light on this please?
http://naa12.naa.gov.au/scripts/Imagine.asp
Rod
Full Version: Was Gas used at Gallipoli?
Rod;
This has been discussed in several threads, and a search should find those discussions.
Briefly, the Brits sent out gas cylinders and Special Brigade men. but they never got further than Alexandria. Why they bothered to go that far is surprising, as almost everywhere the Allies were facing the Turks uphill, and released gas would probably rolled back into the trenches, but hardly would progress uphill. (Foulkes, the British head of gas warfare, was an energetic officer, but had no special training, and often made amazingly dumb technical decisions.) Despite some rumors, the Turks/Germans never tried gas; Turkish industry could barely make ammunition, and the Germans could get almost nothing past the Romanians and Serbs.
The explosions of heavy shells and also mining warfare sometimes produced fatal levels of gas.
Bob Lembke
This has been discussed in several threads, and a search should find those discussions.
Briefly, the Brits sent out gas cylinders and Special Brigade men. but they never got further than Alexandria. Why they bothered to go that far is surprising, as almost everywhere the Allies were facing the Turks uphill, and released gas would probably rolled back into the trenches, but hardly would progress uphill. (Foulkes, the British head of gas warfare, was an energetic officer, but had no special training, and often made amazingly dumb technical decisions.) Despite some rumors, the Turks/Germans never tried gas; Turkish industry could barely make ammunition, and the Germans could get almost nothing past the Romanians and Serbs.
The explosions of heavy shells and also mining warfare sometimes produced fatal levels of gas.
Bob Lembke
Rod
As Bob has said this has cropped up before and you will get some info on the topic of gas from this thread http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/i...4960&hl=gas
regards
Michael
As Bob has said this has cropped up before and you will get some info on the topic of gas from this thread http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/i...4960&hl=gas
regards
Michael
As has ben said this subject (including the man with gas poisoning has been flogged around a number of threads. So just a few points to ponder.
-I've seen gas used as short for gas gangrene - very nasty but nothing to do with poison gas.
-I've also seen references to men suffering from carbon monoxide poisoning from badly ventilated stoves/cookers in dugouts.
-Both sides learnt very quickly that releasing gas from cylinders was a mugs game with high risk to one's own side from wind change or shell damage to the cylinders so after some bad experiences gas was usually delivered by shell or later mortar round (Livens ,Toffee Apple and 4 inch Stokes on the Allied side). In this case one would have expected gas shells to be fired to the rear of the Turkish positions from where it would roll down into their trenches - but
- The closeness of the lines in Galipoli would have made it difficult to use gas without endangering one's own troops
-The Turks could have produced some types of poison gas - indeed with the chlorine based gases they had better access to the raw materials needed than did the Germans
- One would not expect the Germans to try and ship large quantities of gas to Turkey far more sensible to ship gas making plant via Bulgaria and the Black Sea (although British and Russian forces did intradict the routes stuff did get through)
-The British expected the Turks to use gas in Mesopotamia as gas masks and other gas precautions were issued. In fact none was used
- According to a posting in one of the other threads the Germans sent Gas experts to Mespot but they were never used.
To sum up the Turks could have used gas but all the available evidence is that neither they or the British did not
-I've seen gas used as short for gas gangrene - very nasty but nothing to do with poison gas.
-I've also seen references to men suffering from carbon monoxide poisoning from badly ventilated stoves/cookers in dugouts.
-Both sides learnt very quickly that releasing gas from cylinders was a mugs game with high risk to one's own side from wind change or shell damage to the cylinders so after some bad experiences gas was usually delivered by shell or later mortar round (Livens ,Toffee Apple and 4 inch Stokes on the Allied side). In this case one would have expected gas shells to be fired to the rear of the Turkish positions from where it would roll down into their trenches - but
- The closeness of the lines in Galipoli would have made it difficult to use gas without endangering one's own troops
-The Turks could have produced some types of poison gas - indeed with the chlorine based gases they had better access to the raw materials needed than did the Germans
- One would not expect the Germans to try and ship large quantities of gas to Turkey far more sensible to ship gas making plant via Bulgaria and the Black Sea (although British and Russian forces did intradict the routes stuff did get through)
-The British expected the Turks to use gas in Mesopotamia as gas masks and other gas precautions were issued. In fact none was used
- According to a posting in one of the other threads the Germans sent Gas experts to Mespot but they were never used.
To sum up the Turks could have used gas but all the available evidence is that neither they or the British did not
Thank you for replies it looks like it's come from another source as per Bryn's posting Oct 11 2005 so think we can put this to bed and let it rest peacefully.
Rod
Rod
Before you all disappear, was gas used in Egypt?
Given that the Turks didn't get further than the Canal (apart from a few sorties near Suez) and the only other fighting was against the Senussi over in the Western desert (and pretty well documented) there appears to have been no use of gas or occassion for it. I have seen allegations that the Italians used some against the Senussi in Libya but no evidence.
QUOTE (centurion @ Jun 1 2008, 01:04 PM) 
Given that the ...
Thanks.
geoff
Asquith specifically forbade the use of gas in Gallipoli, because they had not used it against our troops - this is quite clear in a letter held at the National Archive. Gas was authorised in the middle east later in the war once it had been revealed how our prisoners of war had been treated. This, as it happened, was restricted to tear gas.
TR
TR
Geoff,
In Allenby's letter to Robertson of 8th August 1917
his item 3 reads "I am applying now for gas equipment and personnel. We have no gas here: and it ought to be of great uses opposite Gaza, and possibly elsewhere"
This may be a ref to Allenby's telegram of 10th August 1917 requesting up to 2000 cylinders of 'White Star' and one company of RE to operate the gas cylinders
[from Wikipedia; Although phosgene was sometimes used on its own, it was more often used mixed with an equal volume of chlorine, the chlorine helping to spread the denser phosgene. The Allies called this combination White Star after the marking painted on shells containing the mixture.]
Robertson replied on 15th August 1917 explaining the shortages of materials and difficulties of supply
"No S.K. chemical shell available, but if acceptable could send P.S. * 10,000 smoke shells per month could be sent, 5,000 already sailed. No prospect of being able to supply P. grenades or Livens drum and projector. Several gas companies could probably be sent to you at the end of October if you will inform me whether you still require them early in that month. Before then none available."
[SK = tear gas, PS = Chloropicirin (lethal) {* it is thought that the full point after the S denotes the end of this sentence}, P grenades = Phosphorous grenades]
Above info from 'Allenby in Palestine - the middle east correspondence of Field Marshal Viscount Allenby' selected & edited by Matthew Hughes, Army Records Society/Sutton Publishing Ltd 2004
In his notes Hughes also provides the following
"The official histories of the Palestine campaign make no mention of the use of gas at the third battle of Gaza, but there is evidence in the Australian archive to suggest that it was successfully used at that battle: 'Allenby's First Offensive', Gullett papers, AWM 40/58. The use of gas is also noted in Erickson's 'Ordered to Die', p.163."
For the latest research, Hughes then goes on to recommend the works on this subject (published in Hebrew) by Tel Aviv University's Dr. Yigal Sheffy
regards
Michael
In Allenby's letter to Robertson of 8th August 1917
his item 3 reads "I am applying now for gas equipment and personnel. We have no gas here: and it ought to be of great uses opposite Gaza, and possibly elsewhere"
This may be a ref to Allenby's telegram of 10th August 1917 requesting up to 2000 cylinders of 'White Star' and one company of RE to operate the gas cylinders
[from Wikipedia; Although phosgene was sometimes used on its own, it was more often used mixed with an equal volume of chlorine, the chlorine helping to spread the denser phosgene. The Allies called this combination White Star after the marking painted on shells containing the mixture.]
Robertson replied on 15th August 1917 explaining the shortages of materials and difficulties of supply
"No S.K. chemical shell available, but if acceptable could send P.S. * 10,000 smoke shells per month could be sent, 5,000 already sailed. No prospect of being able to supply P. grenades or Livens drum and projector. Several gas companies could probably be sent to you at the end of October if you will inform me whether you still require them early in that month. Before then none available."
[SK = tear gas, PS = Chloropicirin (lethal) {* it is thought that the full point after the S denotes the end of this sentence}, P grenades = Phosphorous grenades]
Above info from 'Allenby in Palestine - the middle east correspondence of Field Marshal Viscount Allenby' selected & edited by Matthew Hughes, Army Records Society/Sutton Publishing Ltd 2004
In his notes Hughes also provides the following
"The official histories of the Palestine campaign make no mention of the use of gas at the third battle of Gaza, but there is evidence in the Australian archive to suggest that it was successfully used at that battle: 'Allenby's First Offensive', Gullett papers, AWM 40/58. The use of gas is also noted in Erickson's 'Ordered to Die', p.163."
For the latest research, Hughes then goes on to recommend the works on this subject (published in Hebrew) by Tel Aviv University's Dr. Yigal Sheffy
regards
Michael
re Sheffy's work; If you wish to take this further then you may want to see this
http://wih.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/12/3/278
Sorry I don't have a subscription to either SAGE or Athens
regards
Michael
http://wih.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/12/3/278
Sorry I don't have a subscription to either SAGE or Athens
regards
Michael
QUOTE (michaeldr @ Jun 2 2008, 10:24 AM)
re Sheffy's work; If you wish to take this further then you may want to see this
Geoff,
Send a PM with an email address and I will forward you the article (40 pages).
Stuart
quote: re Sheffy's work; If you wish to take this further then you may want to see this
http://wih.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/12/3/278
Sorry I don't have a subscription to either SAGE or Athens
Stuart,
no sooner had I finished reading your last post to Geoff,
when your pdf file turned up in my e-mail
Very many thanks for your prompt kindness here
with best regards
Michael
http://wih.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/12/3/278
Sorry I don't have a subscription to either SAGE or Athens
Stuart,
no sooner had I finished reading your last post to Geoff,
when your pdf file turned up in my e-mail
Very many thanks for your prompt kindness here
with best regards
Michael
Rod,
In reply to your opening question
Dr. Sheffy's article has the following;
"False alarms were raised several times in October and November. Early in October, the Royal Munster Fusiliers (who had respirators available for only half their soldiers) reported from the Helles sector that tear gas was used against them and had affected some of the men. More erroneous reports followed, originating in gas created by the detonation of British ammonal explosives during tunnelling operations by Royal Engineers personnel. The digging of tunnels from British and Australian forward lines towards Ottoman trenches in order to explode mines under enemy positions just before MEF attacks had been proceeding since May, and was reciprocated by the Turks. But now the growing sensitivity to the chemical threat, as well as expected Ottoman retaliation after a successful mining operation in the same sector several days earlier, caused the troops to ‘feel and smell’ gas that the enemy had ostensibly discharged inside the tunnels. Having received the first report on 25 November, Le Sueur and Colson rushed to Fusilier Bluff, on the north-western tip of the Helles front line, and after personally visiting the tunnel, smelling the marked fruity odour and collecting testimonies, identified the substance to be an ester, an organic compound formed by the reaction between acid and alcohol, which was not usually employed for military purposes. However, two days later, a similar incident occurred in another tunnel. This time the tunnellers swore they had heard pumping going on in the Turkish mine and smelt sweet colourless gas, leading Le Sueur to conclude that the Ottomans had indeed discharged chemicals based on chloropicrin, which causes tears and vomiting. Hewitt was also under the impression that tear gas was used, after hearing about the incidents from an experienced mining engineer, who had been present and claimed he himself had suffered from the pear-like fumes. An additional report on poisonous gas released by the enemy towards Australian tunnellers in the Anzac sector served to magnify the erroneous assessment. Later, the Australians even reported they had been subjected to tear gas shelling, and the remains of such a bomb were sent to Mudros for analysis. After examination, Willcox and Hewitt found that it contained paraffin wax ‘which produced weeping’, judging it to consist of poisonous or irritating halogens (xylyl bromide or benzyl bromide was mentioned). But the laboratory was too primitive for a definite analysis, and Hewitt could conclude only that ‘lachrymating materials appear to have been used [on the Gallipoli peninsula]’."
and Dr. Sheffy's final conclusion re Gallipoli
"...chemical weapons were never used in the Gallipoli campaign."
regards
Michael
In reply to your opening question
Dr. Sheffy's article has the following;
"False alarms were raised several times in October and November. Early in October, the Royal Munster Fusiliers (who had respirators available for only half their soldiers) reported from the Helles sector that tear gas was used against them and had affected some of the men. More erroneous reports followed, originating in gas created by the detonation of British ammonal explosives during tunnelling operations by Royal Engineers personnel. The digging of tunnels from British and Australian forward lines towards Ottoman trenches in order to explode mines under enemy positions just before MEF attacks had been proceeding since May, and was reciprocated by the Turks. But now the growing sensitivity to the chemical threat, as well as expected Ottoman retaliation after a successful mining operation in the same sector several days earlier, caused the troops to ‘feel and smell’ gas that the enemy had ostensibly discharged inside the tunnels. Having received the first report on 25 November, Le Sueur and Colson rushed to Fusilier Bluff, on the north-western tip of the Helles front line, and after personally visiting the tunnel, smelling the marked fruity odour and collecting testimonies, identified the substance to be an ester, an organic compound formed by the reaction between acid and alcohol, which was not usually employed for military purposes. However, two days later, a similar incident occurred in another tunnel. This time the tunnellers swore they had heard pumping going on in the Turkish mine and smelt sweet colourless gas, leading Le Sueur to conclude that the Ottomans had indeed discharged chemicals based on chloropicrin, which causes tears and vomiting. Hewitt was also under the impression that tear gas was used, after hearing about the incidents from an experienced mining engineer, who had been present and claimed he himself had suffered from the pear-like fumes. An additional report on poisonous gas released by the enemy towards Australian tunnellers in the Anzac sector served to magnify the erroneous assessment. Later, the Australians even reported they had been subjected to tear gas shelling, and the remains of such a bomb were sent to Mudros for analysis. After examination, Willcox and Hewitt found that it contained paraffin wax ‘which produced weeping’, judging it to consist of poisonous or irritating halogens (xylyl bromide or benzyl bromide was mentioned). But the laboratory was too primitive for a definite analysis, and Hewitt could conclude only that ‘lachrymating materials appear to have been used [on the Gallipoli peninsula]’."
and Dr. Sheffy's final conclusion re Gallipoli
"...chemical weapons were never used in the Gallipoli campaign."
regards
Michael
Rod, probably gas from the firing of the mine in the following account (same day your man was 'gassed').
Lieutenants Bowra and Thom, Australian Engineers, were killed by gas fumes while checking a tunnel after the firing of an Australian mine:
'If a mine, when fired, did not break through satisfactorily to the open air or to the enemy's workings, the poisonous gases left by the explosion remained in the tunnel, endangering the life of anyone who entered it. For example, on Oct. 29, in order to make sure that a working party might safely enter Tunnel C2, in which a mine had just been fired, Lieut. F.D.A. Bowra... went down the rope ladder in the shaft leading to it. He had warned Lieut. E.T. Bazeley (of Nagambie, Vic.) of the 22nd Bn. that there might be danger from poisonous gases, and as he did not return Bazeley and a man named Currington (of Annandale, NSW) went down with a rope. They found Bowra collapsed, but before they could rescue him both were overcome. Bazeley had barely strength to climb the ladder; Currington began to climb and fell back. Major Newcombe and Lieut. Thom were summoned from the 4th Coy.'s H.Q., and Thom, refusing to be tied to the rope, went down, but collapsed before he could save Bowra. ...Thom, Bowra, Currington, and two other men of the 22nd, Pte W.B.S. Good (of Wonthaggi, Vic.) and Pte. G. Stelling (of Essendon, Vic.) died...' (Bean Vol. 2 p823n).
Bean mentions that 12 others were 'seriously 'gassed' ' in this incident.
Lieutenants Bowra and Thom, Australian Engineers, were killed by gas fumes while checking a tunnel after the firing of an Australian mine:
'If a mine, when fired, did not break through satisfactorily to the open air or to the enemy's workings, the poisonous gases left by the explosion remained in the tunnel, endangering the life of anyone who entered it. For example, on Oct. 29, in order to make sure that a working party might safely enter Tunnel C2, in which a mine had just been fired, Lieut. F.D.A. Bowra... went down the rope ladder in the shaft leading to it. He had warned Lieut. E.T. Bazeley (of Nagambie, Vic.) of the 22nd Bn. that there might be danger from poisonous gases, and as he did not return Bazeley and a man named Currington (of Annandale, NSW) went down with a rope. They found Bowra collapsed, but before they could rescue him both were overcome. Bazeley had barely strength to climb the ladder; Currington began to climb and fell back. Major Newcombe and Lieut. Thom were summoned from the 4th Coy.'s H.Q., and Thom, refusing to be tied to the rope, went down, but collapsed before he could save Bowra. ...Thom, Bowra, Currington, and two other men of the 22nd, Pte W.B.S. Good (of Wonthaggi, Vic.) and Pte. G. Stelling (of Essendon, Vic.) died...' (Bean Vol. 2 p823n).
Bean mentions that 12 others were 'seriously 'gassed' ' in this incident.
QUOTE (Bryn @ Jun 4 2008, 02:09 PM)
Rod, probably gas from the firing of the mine in the following account (same day your man was 'gassed').
Lieutenants Bowra and Thom, Australian Engineers, were killed by gas fumes while checking a tunnel after the firing of an Australian mine:
'If a mine, when fired, did not break through satisfactorily to the open air or to the enemy's workings, the poisonous gases left by the explosion remained in the tunnel, endangering the life of anyone who entered it. For example, on Oct. 29, in order to make sure that a working party might safely enter Tunnel C2, in which a mine had just been fired, Lieut. F.D.A. Bowra... went down the rope ladder in the shaft leading to it. He had warned Lieut. E.T. Bazeley (of Nagambie, Vic.) of the 22nd Bn. that there might be danger from poisonous gases, and as he did not return Bazeley and a man named Currington (of Annandale, NSW) went down with a rope. They found Bowra collapsed, but before they could rescue him both were overcome. Bazeley had barely strength to climb the ladder; Currington began to climb and fell back. Major Newcombe and Lieut. Thom were summoned from the 4th Coy.'s H.Q., and Thom, refusing to be tied to the rope, went down, but collapsed before he could save Bowra. ...Thom, Bowra, Currington, and two other men of the 22nd, Pte W.B.S. Good (of Wonthaggi, Vic.) and Pte. G. Stelling (of Essendon, Vic.) died...' (Bean Vol. 2 p823n).
Bean mentions that 12 others were 'seriously 'gassed' ' in this incident.
Lieutenants Bowra and Thom, Australian Engineers, were killed by gas fumes while checking a tunnel after the firing of an Australian mine:
'If a mine, when fired, did not break through satisfactorily to the open air or to the enemy's workings, the poisonous gases left by the explosion remained in the tunnel, endangering the life of anyone who entered it. For example, on Oct. 29, in order to make sure that a working party might safely enter Tunnel C2, in which a mine had just been fired, Lieut. F.D.A. Bowra... went down the rope ladder in the shaft leading to it. He had warned Lieut. E.T. Bazeley (of Nagambie, Vic.) of the 22nd Bn. that there might be danger from poisonous gases, and as he did not return Bazeley and a man named Currington (of Annandale, NSW) went down with a rope. They found Bowra collapsed, but before they could rescue him both were overcome. Bazeley had barely strength to climb the ladder; Currington began to climb and fell back. Major Newcombe and Lieut. Thom were summoned from the 4th Coy.'s H.Q., and Thom, refusing to be tied to the rope, went down, but collapsed before he could save Bowra. ...Thom, Bowra, Currington, and two other men of the 22nd, Pte W.B.S. Good (of Wonthaggi, Vic.) and Pte. G. Stelling (of Essendon, Vic.) died...' (Bean Vol. 2 p823n).
Bean mentions that 12 others were 'seriously 'gassed' ' in this incident.
I was reading the 22nd Bn AIF's History by Captain Gorman which also mentions this event. However three weeks before this mine explosion a suspected gas bomb landed inside the 22nd's area and was investigated extensively which while not providing direct evidence of Turkish use of chemical warfare certainly highlighted the allied concern with such issues.
CT
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.