Recently read an Australian book about Gallipoli. Apologies for not remembering it's name, if it's important to any one I can find out.
The book not only did not seemed concerned apportioning "blame" for 3BRIG's failure to advance to the Third Ridge, its description of the 25th. of April seemed to mainly focus on the break down of command and control.
As a Canberran, I quite liked the older narrative which blamed the Queenslanders and described my boys (+ some Vics) up on, and over, Baby 700.
Is this indicative of modern research on ANZAC cove? Some kind of "New History" focussing on the marmalade, biscuits and flies and not making judgemental, or sweeping, statements?
Third Ridge, ANZAC, 25th April
Re: Third Ridge, ANZAC, 25th April
I think that is indicative of good modern history - but to sell lots of books it helps to have at least one judgmental sweeping statement, preferably blaming a known historical figure. Its the best way to get onto the mediaantwony wrote:Recently read an Australian book about Gallipoli. Apologies for not remembering it's name, if it's important to any one I can find out.
The book not only did not seemed concerned apportioning "blame" for 3BRIG's failure to advance to the Third Ridge, its description of the 25th. of April seemed to mainly focus on the break down of command and control.
As a Canberran, I quite liked the older narrative which blamed the Queenslanders and described my boys (+ some Vics) up on, and over, Baby 700.
Is this indicative of modern research on ANZAC cove? Some kind of "New History" focussing on the marmalade, biscuits and flies and not making judgemental, or sweeping, statements?
