The Anzac Spirit - Literature review Example

Anzac Introduction For quite sometime prior to Australia’s federation, and for at least fourteen years subsequent, the multitude of white Australians felt they were in a state of flux; they felt that their young nation did not have a history, they had no identity and therefore no nation status. With the advent of World War I Australians saw the opportunity to forge the national identity which they had for decades sought to achieve. Albeit Australians were longer citizens of the British empire, they still felt a sense of patriotism for their former country. The sentiment of the Australian people was amplified by two prominent members of the Australian parliament as Joseph Cook, who was the Liberal Party Prime Minister stated, if the old country is at war, so are we, our duty is quite clear, to grind up our lions and remember we are Britons. The proposition and the subsequent action of the Austrtalians was the beginning of the establishment of a national identity.(ABC News,2008). Andrew Fisher, the then Labour Party Leader of the Opposition, was in complete sync as he stated, that Australia was willing to commit every Australian male and deplete its coiffers in their support of the war effort.This paper will deal with the contributions which two of the so-called white dominion countries, Australia and New Zealand made to the effort in the Western Front. Australia in 1914 had a male adult population of 330,000 men, 14% of them volunteered for service. It should be noted that the entire force of Australians were volunteers, whilst among the New Zealanders the male population was more than 100,000, 20% became solders, and of this total, 74% were volunteers. Men from New Zealand and Australia were caught up in the crucible of war and fought on the side of Great Britain and all of its allies.Actually, as early as November 1914 plans were in the pipeline to form the corps. When the troops set sail, they thought their destination was Europe, however, due to the unfortunate experiences of the Canadian forces who were at the time deployed on Salisbury Plain, it was decided not to subject the newly recruited forces to the inclement weather being experienced in Ebgland. They were instead diverted to Egypt, to receive additional training, prior to being deployed to the Western Front.The Australian Imperial Force and the New Zealand Expeditionary Force, was initially planned to be designated as the Australsian Army Corps. It was the consensus reference which the troops unofficially used to refer to themselves whenever they participated in joint sporting events during their training in Egypt.In the minds eye of the New Zealanders the phrase bore to heavy a reference to the Australian contigent. Consequently in an environment of fairness and non-partiality, while stationed in Egypt under the command of British General William Birdwood and in December 1914, they were merged into the Australian and New Zealand Army Corps. It has been put forth, that the acronym (ANZAC) was actually created by administrative clerks who found the entire phrase too cumbersome. The phrase was not officially adopted by the troops until after they landed at Gallipoli. According to Dr Frank Bongiorno, when Australia went to war in 1914, this was the beginning of actual Australian nationhood.(Bongiorno) The Legacy The stated mission of the ANZAC soldiers was to be a contigent in an allied expedition to capture the Gallipoli peninsula which would free up the passage way to the Black Sea and allow the allied navies unfettered access.The plan called for the forces to overrun and capture Constantinople, which was a German ally.There were 20,000 soldiers in the British forces, including the Anzacs and other allies who landed in an area which is known as the Anzac cove.This landing has been documented as the birth of two nations. (Manne,2007). When they landed on April 25, they were forcefully repelled by the Turkish Army. The plan was to converge upon the Turks with all of the force they could muster. The first reports which were received on the status of the invasion and the morale of the troops was, the soldiers did not wait for the boats or the orders of their superiors to command them to converge upon the beach. They were heroic souls, bent on making a difference, and were not deterred by the incoming fire from the weapons of their enemies. They formed a line and commenced to converge in linear movement toward their objective.(Ashmead-Bartlett 1915).The messages which were being transmitted to the Australians back home were espousing of virtues which all could take pride in recounting.General Birdwood lamented that words themselves were not adequate in describing the courage, endurance and the soldierly qualities of the Australians, and with this, all Australians were proud, because this was their first test on an international stage and the Anzacs had done well.(Ashmead-Bartlett 1915). Charles Bean was considered by many to be the official war historian, and it was he who pioneered the Anzac spirit. This is the phenomenon which puts forth the premise that there are shared characteristics which exist between New Zealand and Australian soldiers.(NYT 1916). The qualities are centered around a number of ideas, including courage, ingenuity, mateship and endurance.(The ANZAC Spirit 2003).According to Bean, Anzac stood, and still stands, for reckless valor in a good cause, for enterprise, resourcefulness, fidelity, comradeship, and endurance that will never own defeat. (Bean) The strategy for the battle at Gallipoli was conceived as one which would be fought and won in the immediate, to take Turkey out of the war. Due to the fact that the Anzac soldiers had developed the stereotype of having rejected unnecessary restrictions, possessed a sardonic sense of humor, was contemptuous to danger, and had proved themselves equal to anyone in the theatre of battle, this was perceived as doable.(Anzac Spirit 2002). In spite of the defeat which the soldiers suffered at Gallipoli, the soldiers were perceived individually and collectively as being courageous, possessing endurance, embodying initiative and stern discipline.Even though the soldiers endured substantial casualities and saw the lost of over 8,000 Australian lives, the news of the mere landing of the Anzac represented a profound moral boost for Australians, and it catapulted the date of April 25, as a very special time, one which denoted the ultimate sacrifice which had been made by their fellow countrymen. Even though they lost the battle, they had won the victory of paving the way for a positive and proud national identity. It has been said that anything thing which is great, can and must withstand the test of time. Not only has the Anzac legacy been tested by time, it has also been scrutinized by its detractors. Clark (1995) recounted a totally negative image which contrasted with the honorable and innocent persona which endeared the soldiers to their counrymen. He made mention of the zealous recruits participating in sexual orgies with young girls, and of the confrontations some of the recruits had with police while engaging in street brawls. He also made allegations of xenophobic behaviour while in Egypt. That they also over indulged in alcohol, rioted, and spent a considerable amount of time in brothels, which placed their health at risk.(Clark, 1995). Scholars such as Mann (2007), made major queries into the veracity of the Anzac legend, as he argued that, it would probably have been more accurate to describe the entire concept as mythological.(Mann, 2007). Also, Blair (2001), states in an interview with the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, that the positive image which has been etched into the memories of the Australian public were erroneously inaccurate and should not be continually put forth to depict the experiences of the 1st Batallion at Gallipoli.(Blair 2007). In the opinion of Blair (2007), the noted Australian historian, Bean, presented a story book assessment of what actually transpored, and he presented that Bean felt justified in presenting this view, because the Australian people deeply grieved the loss of the large ultimate sacrifice and they needed to be uplifted.(Blair, 2007). Additionally, Edgar (2008), reports that professor Verity Bergman argues that the accounts of the Anzac soldiers on the western front as being a representation of unity and mutual sacrifice, is in fact a misrepresentation. His premise is that there were two conscription referenda which were defeated.(Cahill,2008). Professor Bergman alleges that all Australians were not in favor of participation, in spite of the fact that all of the Australian members of the Anzac were volunteers. In a 2008 editorial the Sydney Morning Herald posed the question, why after 90 years are Australians still clinging to a questionable past to define who they are? Why is the Australian still doubting themselves? The editorial goes on to question the validity of a people being able to define who they are by the mere celebration of an event which is shrouded in contradictions and controversay.(SMH,2008). McKenna (2007) puts forth the argument that the traits which the Anzac soldiers possessed are not unique traits, as they can be found in multiple countries around the Middle East and Africa as well.(McKenna,2007). The contemporary tide begins to shift, as Alan Young brings forth another dynamic view in his film, he makes the point that, if Gallipoli is the birthplace of the Anzac acronym, then the Western Front is where the Anzac legend grew up, stood tall and cemented their place in international history; and in our hearts".(Young) He forges forward to solidify the perception and devotion which the Australian has for those who fought and died, by pointing out that the actual number deserving the last full measure of devotion was at least five times as many Australians who died in the front line war, than at Gallipoli.However, this is a fact which receives little mention and is unknown to many Australians. As a consequence, Australians have much more of an identity and a national heritage, than the masses are aware of.(Young). The entire concept of Anzac and the gender exclusion which it represents, does not fit well in the minds eye of the feminists, who allege that the promotion of mateship, projects the implication that the only true Australian is of male gender.This has prompted allegations of exclusivity and discrimination from Australian feminists.Consequently they contend that this is not a true measure of the Australian identity.( Australian Studies Center).Also there is the argument that the concept of Anzac promotes militarism and heroism, which can ultimately preclude the promotion of diversity, and will ultimately obscure the true meaning of a national identity.(Gallipoli, 2008). In spite of the many criticisms and in light of the strong beliefs, the idea that the Anzacs represent an example for future generations of Australians has been reinforced over and over again. One such incident was the recent articulation of the Australian Defence Minister acknowledging that the Anzacs put forth and amplified some of the inherent values of Australians, and reinforced the creed on which the lives of Australians are based upon. (SMH, 2007) A lack of observance during the 1960’s and 70’s resulted in a dwindling of the Anzac spirit. This was particularly prevalent among the baby boomers who were stark opponents of Australia’s participation in the Vietnam War. In this conflict, many of the soldiers were forced to serve and this was completely contrary to the volunteerism of the Anzac spirit.(The Australian 2006). The nostalgia of celebration was rekindled with the production of the film entitled Gallipoli, which engendered the heightened level of political discourse.The resurgence has in essence been a rebirth, with the contemporary celebrations being supported by the Australian youth of both New Zealand and Australia.(Hall & Hede 2006) The soldiers and the battle Mustafa Kaemal Ataturk, was the leader who was in command of the fighting Turks at Gallipoli.He went on to become the founder of the Turkish Republic in 1932, as he later went on to pay tribute to the Anzac’s who invaded the cove. There were no signs of the existence of good or evil as the two armies faced each other during the eight month struggle. The attitudes of the two armies to some, seem to be ironic, that they both share a deep seated commitment to celebrate Gallipoli, and in a peculiar kind of way especially when one considers the battlefield outcome, there is little mystery why Turkey embraces this period. However, one must go inward to find reason why Australians find solace in the period.To a large degree Gallipoli seems to have different meanings, depending on the person. As we know this situation, it consists of a set of facts and these facts are in and of themselves, enough for the average Australian to feel a deep sense of pride concerning the happenings at Gallipoli. The unfortunate circumstance is that these facts are at times convoluted and sprinkled with legends as well as myths, and it stands that in many instances, the latter set of circumstances will represent the larger part of the story. Gallipoli represents a magnificent episode in military history, albeit as it was fought in the shadows of the great War, it could not in any way be considered to be big. While in the minds eye of the Australian, Gallipoli is a place in the heart, and the ingredients which produce warm inner glows, it is also a state of mind When one speaks of Gallipoli in Australia, one can readily detect a semblance reverence.One can say, without much of a stretch that Gallipoli has in its own way become a church, and be that as it seems to be, even secular churches need myths.To the average Australian, Gallipoli has become a faith, and as is they way of faiths, they are hostile to analysis.Moreover, Gallipoli has become bigger than the facts. The people needed to be informed about what was happening to and with their loved ones and countrymen. The English journalist Ashmead-Bartlett took on the role of war correspondent. He was so credible until the clergy quoted his reports in the Sunday sermons. Australians believd his reports to be honest and accurate. On the basis of his information feeds the enlistments topped the charts in July and August of 1915.(Carlyon 2004). The circumstance was that there was an Anzac reality and there was the story which Ashmead-Bartlett had fictionalized. During this period of limited media penetration, a considerable amount of information was systematically withheld from the journalists and of course the general public.Nonetheless, Asmead-Bartlett was not lacking in creativity.He proceeded to captivate his Australian readers with manipulations of the truth.(Carlyon, 2007). He adopted a style which would have made even Kipling envious. His romantic accounts of Gallipoli were tettered by his desire to remain popular among Australians. Actually the landing of the Anzac at Gallipoli, was more of a military catastrophe than a success. Not only did he glorify the landing, he fudged the causality report.He was offering a report which stated that there were merely 300. However, by the time the newspaper hit the stands, the causalities had reached more than 8,000, with more than 2,000 dead. According to Carlyon (2007),There were some large heroes on Gallipoli, dozens and dozens of them.Men like Harry Murray, who became the most decorated Australian of the war; his mate Percy Black, who died at Bullecourt; Alfred Shout, who won the VC at Lone Pine and talked cheerfully as they carted him off to die; Walter Cass, who the following year became one of the heroes of the battle of Fromelles in French Flanders; Fred Tubb, who won the VC at Lone Pine and died two years later trying to win another one during the battle of Menin Road; the irrepressible Pompey Elliott; Bert Jacka, who won the VC on Gallipoli and should have received another at Pozieres; and William Malone, the New Zealander who should have won the VC on Chunuk Bair. Gallipoli was also a fine training ground for future Australian generals. Monash, Glasgow, Gellibrand, Rosenthal, Hobbs, Holmes, Blamey and Morshead .(Carlyon 2007). The standing tradition is of course to view Gallipoli as a symbol of British military incompetence and to pass Australians off as victims. There is little dispute, given the historical accounts, that there were some less than competent English generals; the one which come to mind in the immediate are the likes of Godley, who has been characterized a robotic, Hunter-Weston, and Stopford at Silva. On a different note, there was also Birdwood. Albeit he was not a tactician, he was blessed with the ability to lead men and win their loyalities. Also there was general Harold Walker,who took over the 1st Division, and in so doing, Australians will always be in his debt. Time and circumstance has for some reason, forgotten the contributions of Hooky Walker.Whenever a battle takes on the life such as that at the cove, there is always plenty of blame to be shared. Truth be told, quite a number of Australian senior officers were credited with less than favourable performances as it related to the landing and in the August offensive.(Carlyon 2007). The conditions for the soldiers at Gallipoli were terrible; getting ashore was not their most difficult endeavour, they were compelled to fight from a position on a ridge for eight months. The were cast into indefensible positions, such as the one found on Pope’s Hill, which featured a cliff behind them. It has been said that Gallipoli was all about mateship. They were a group of brave and enduring men who were caught up on a hellish position, but they maintained their hold on humor. Their entire encampment for the entire eight months was the front line, there was no back area to relieve ones self of stress or tensions.The food was a disgusting assortment of things thrown together, which usually rendered it inedible. The area was infested with flies, due to the sickness human necessities and death. One must bear in mind that the total land area which the ANZACS occupied for more than eight months was no more than 400 feet and shaped like a triangle.It was estimated that at one point, that more than 70% of the soldiers was affected with dysentery. Synopsis Deep in the annals of old sayings, there is the lament of, victory has a thousand fathers, but defeat is an orphan. Never has an orphan been so warmly embraced as Gallipoli.It has been embraced because it is deserving of a special tribute to all of the brave and courageous men who placed themselves in harms way, to enable an ideal to flourish. Moreover, for the men of ANZAC, this was a very special time in the development of their countries, where they felt the need to exhibit to the rest of the world, their right to exist and the internal need to establish for themselves and their counrymen, a history and an identity. A history and an identity which would make it clear to everyone that they wanted to be a member of the free world, and if their sovereignty was at stake, let it be known, that it would be defended with the same fervor, as they exhibited at Gallipoli. The orphan now has a home, because Australians have achieved victory, and they embody a cherished past which is imbued with bravery and commitment. In the minds and hearts of all of those. who were not present to participate in the times or the battle, it is fitting and proper that they acknowledge the endurance of their forefathers and never forget what they did, and there is no longer a need to question why. They have left something greater than most will ever be able to contribute, and they did it unselfishly. Continue to remember the day, and the men who made it possible for freedom to be something you think of as a constant state of your being. Bibliography Anzac Day remembering Australians who served, ABC News online 2008-04-24 Bongiorno, F,.ANZAC DAY, Senior Lecturer in History, University of Nerw England,Australian Government Culture and Recreation Portal, Manne,R.(2007), The war myth that made us, The Age April 25, 2007 Ashmead-Bartlett,E.(19150 The Dawn of the legend:Australian War Memorial,May 18, 1915 ANZAC Day in London; King, Queen, and General Birdwood at Services in Abbey"New York Times. April 26, 1916. The ANZAC Spirit. Retruned and Services League of Australia, Western Australian Branch. 2003.Retrieved on line on May 18,2009, from http://www.rslwahq.org.au/anzacspirit.html Clark, M.(1995), A History of Australia, Pimlico, New Edition, January 1995 Blair D. (2001), The Making of the Anzac myth, (interview), Austyralian Broadcasting Corporation, Lateline TV transcript, Retrieved on line on May 18, 2009, from www.abc.net.au/lateline/s281903.htm, 23/4/2001 Cahill, S. (2008), Don’t mention the anti-war feeling, The University of Melbourne Voice Vol 3, No 1, 14 April-May 2008) Sydney Morning Herald (2008), Anzac; a day to quell the ardor for desperate glory, April 4, 2008, Retrieved on line on May 19, 2009, from http://www.smh.com.au/news/editorial/anzac-a-day-to-quell-the-ardour-for-desperate-glory/2008/04/24/1208743142809.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1 McKenna,M. (2007) Patriot Act, The Australian, 06 June. Young, A. Forging the Anzac Tradition, The Untold Story National Identity, Australian Studies Centre, Petra Christian University Sydney Morning Herald ,Thousands mark Anzac Day at Gallipoli, , , April 25, 2007 The Australian, (2006) The Anzac Spirit, 4-25-06 Hede, AM, and Hall, J.(2006)"Anzac Day and Australian nationalism: assessing the marketing lifecycle of this cultural phenomenon", Deakin University:Retrieved on line on May 20, 2009, from www.deakin.edu.au/research/stories/hede/anzac-vietnam.doc Carlyon L. (2004), Gallipoli in a Nation’s Remembrance, Talks at the Memorial, Australian War Memorial Anniversary 11 November Read More