The Battle For Gallipoli In World War I

Published Date: 02 Nov 2017

On the 1st of January 1901, the British Parliament passed legislation allowing Australia�s six colonies to govern as part of the Commonwealth of Australia. As a fairly new independent nation, Australia welcomed the conflict of the Great War as a test of the nation�s unity. Whilst the landing was a military disaster, failing to meet its objectives, by hanging on in the face of Turkish attacks, it was deemed as a triumph. Australian official correspondent, Charles Bean declared that, �with the landing on Gallipoli a sense of Australian nationhood was born.� Australian troops performed heroically and overcome the odds, showing that Australia could stand proud beside the motherland and thus, holding her head high as an equal. An Australian poem enticed by the Gallipoli landing by poet Joan Torrance exhibits the intense pride governed by the increasing Nationalism, �Australia! Our dear Homeland- All Nations hail thee now; Thy fearless sons have glory set upon thy royal brow.� Rather than referring to Britain as the �Homeland�, the poem illustrates that other nations now recognised Australia as an independent and fruitful nation.

The central idea of �Australian Manhood� was first presented through the Gallipoli campaign. It was seen in the eager attitude of thousands of men enrolling in the battle, the overall conduction throughout the massacre and the humble approach to mateship with citizens across the globe. The diggers symbolised the attributes that have become known as the Anzac spirit, developing a sense of national character through the traits of: endurance, courage, ingenuity, good humour and mateship. Perhaps Private Simpson is the most recognizable leader to express these attributes. Day and night, Simpson carried leg wounded casualties upon his donkey, Duffy from the head of Monash valley down Shrapnel gully to the beach all the while embodying a cheerful attitude, amidst the shrapnel and rifle-fire. For the first time, the world saw clearly the qualities that characterized Australians and personified Australian manhood. That, even now in the twenty-first century can be seen through the harmony obtained in ANZAC ceremonies and the benevolence personified in citizens.

The myth of the ANZAC digger identifies with Australians as an �imagined community�, tracing a lineage that connects the Anzac and digger-nationalism with the collective shared social stance on male bonds of homosocial mateship. These sacred memories and legends act as major contributors to a shared sense of history, binding Australians together through the common identification of the collective memory of such events through the stories told about the landings and the national characteristics shadowed through soldiers, whether real or imagined. The legend having a �nation-building� and �nation-sustaining� effect as Ann Curthoys states, �In the story of Anzac lies the emotional locus of Australian narratives of nation.� Objectively, Anzac may not have given birth to the country but by the soldiers setting an example for citizens the nation is able to solidify ties of friendship, loyalty and comrade between not only other citizens but also other nations.

Conversely, the Anzac tradition was almost entirely built upon the imagery of masculinity. The troops endured the �baptism of fire� and were almost gratified as a �race of athletes� by the English press. As a result, Australian nationhood was articulated in masculine experience driven in a language that was derived from an arrangement of historical forces. The vocalisation of such masculinity redefined Australian citizenship by the sense that soldiers were honoured above all else including females. In 1987 Jill Roe argued that Australian soldiers forged the positions of women just as those women were achieving full citizenship in Australia and hence in a way were viewed as not just mere citizens but as the creators of the nation. Furthermore, women might have given birth to the soldiers of the country but those soldiers gave birth to the nation itself through the battle of Gallipoli. Returned men claimed under associations such as RSSILA, that they had shown such devotion to the nation that in return they should be given the privilege in how the nation was run through pensions, soldier settlement schemes, war service homes, preference in government employment and ritual recognition on Anzac Day. For that reason, feminists emphasised the depreciation of women rights and consequently, Adrian Howe writes, �those women who served in subsequent wards and commemorated Anzac Day, could never be seen as anymore than intruders... or irrelevant if they marched.� To a certain extent, the battle of Gallipoli served to elevate the rights of men over women.

By the means of masculinity and militarism being elevated, the promotion of a day of military commemoration as one of Australia�s most important national days of birth of not only the nation�s values but also identity allows the battle of Gallipoli to become exclusive and only adapt to a secular group of society whom were present in the war. Attempts to include diverse groups and minorities are diminished through the Anzac-centric focus perhaps driven from Australia not having an independence day. As Australia Day is often recognised as the �day of British invasion�, by default the nation is enthralled by Anzac Day. Accordingly, the constant reminiscence of the legend means those who meet the characteristics devised from the origins are perceived as being more Australian compared to others, particularly those born overseas. Tim Soutphommasane, a first-generation Australian who was born overseas bearing a Chinese and Lao heritage states that he, �once struggled to see how Anzac Day could have meaning for me.� Conceivably, by not having a grandfather or great-grandfather who served in the battle of Gallipoli solidified his teenage years through finding a loss when others spoke about the great sacrifice. A noticeable exclusion under the White Australia policy can be stemmed by the war and as a consequence marginalises the multiculturalism Australia is driven on.

Not only is Australia professed as a multiculturalism society but, the average family was better nourished, housed and educated in comparison to any other society. The developing of self-governing colonies and their economies and institutions had introduced progressive reforms and had as a result, placed Australia at the front position of the democratic advance. The years founding the new Commonwealth introduced women�s rights, a living wage, old age pensions and measures which established the welfare state. Therefore, by stating that the battle of Gallipoli flourished the nation is to diminish farming or legislating, labouring, teaching and nurturing children. Before Australian soldiers invaded Turkey in 1915, Australia was seen as an extraordinarily successful nation and possibly, �the envy of many countries in the contemporary world� . In fact, if the myth of the legend was indeed accurate and the battle of Gallipoli did govern and define Australia the decades between the wars had very little to show for it, in particular the country�s self-confidence. Perhaps, war did not bring the nation together but somewhat divided the society. Australia reluctantly followed Canada, South Africa and Ireland in the domination to achieve independence and in correspondence, Australia was not an independent nation either before or after the war. In effect, the nation had no control in regards to its foreign policy, diplomatic service and even in its choice of enemies. Subsequently, while speakers may express the role of the war in regards to the creation of the nation during Anzac Day celebrations, if the war did make the nation more confident it was only for a very small extent of time.

The legend of Anzac is reminiscence of an almost biblical creation story for Australia. As old diggers pass away, their children wear their grandfathers� or great grandfathers� medals with absolute poise and take their place of absence in the Anzac Day Service. With a steady increase of numbers in visitors to the Australian War Memorial, that fateful day at Gallipoli is still in the hearts and souls of many young Australians. While the country is no longer an extension of Britain and had in fact won itself the right to be acknowledged as an independent nation the only significant and substantial extent of the war is apparent through the Anzac spirit showcased throughout our national identity. The Anzac experience may be part of what and who we are as Australians but, the act of national creation was governed as a nation by not only the Commonwealth but also through the unity of creating a budding civilization in the years after the war.