3 Review(s)

This new book traces the disparities in the memory of Gallipoli that are evident in the countries that participated in the campaign. It explores the way in which history is written at the personal, local, professional, and national levels. This study tackles key questions about just how the history of any given event comes to be written in a certain way and how very different versions of an event can compete for attention. Often one particular version holds the field drowning out its rivals. The Gallipoli campaign of 1915 serves as an excellent case study through which the process of 'making history' can be observed. Among the case studies are Martin Gilbert on Churchill, Keith Jeffery on Gallipoli and Ireland, and David Dutton on the French view of a campaign in which they were more heavily involved than the Australians. Christopher Pugsley uncovers the reality behind the myths of Anzac, and Keith Grieves writes on the local commemoration of the campaign in Sussex. Other chapters consider the writing of unit histories, the professional study of the campaign in the development of amphibious warfare, the romance of the British cultural history of Gallipoli, and the shifts that are evident in the portrayal of Anzacs in Australian cinema.