Home > Online Exhibitions

Australian perceptions of others at Gallipoli

An important part of Australia defining itself as a nation was the recognition at Gallipoli that Australians had developed distinct characteristics. Observers, and the troops themselves, noticed differences in particular between the colonial soldiers and officers, and those of the British Army. They were not shy about pointing out such differences. The Melbourne Age correspondent gets straight to the point in his opening lines to an article entitled 'Types in the Fighting Line' in August 1915: 'Were I asked briefly to sum up the outstanding features of the Australian soldier, it could be done in two words'physique and fearlessness'.

The correspondent, probably Phillip Schuler, comments that, when the men meet at the beach at Anzac Cove, the Australian and the New Zealand soldier comes down 'stripped to the waist, his skin as dark as that of the Indian, who stands near him in patient attitude', while the British may be 'just as hot as the colonials . . .but they are fully dressed, their tunics cover a very white skin' and their faces are 'so thin'. Their fearlessness, he says of the Australians, 'amounts at times to recklessness'.

REFERENCE
Article, 'Types in the Fighting Line', probably by Phillip Schuler, about how the Australian soldiers had been educating the English troops on how to cope in the harsh conditions.)
The Age, 5 October, p. 7, NLA newspaper call no. NX 233
Click to view transcriptClick to view manuscript

A further characteristic destined to become legendary was initiative, which Australians seemed to have in greater abundance than their British counterparts. The correspondent attributes such initiative to 'the instinctive bushman' noting however that most of the Australian troops were not of the bush''It would be absurd to conclude that every Australian that has enlisted is a born bushman ... but ... they have an instinct for adapting to conditions'. The Australian troops were never short of survival skills, honed on country rambles followed by 'the bivouac under summer skies'. Of such skills the British were 'fearfully handicapped', so 'the Tommy learnt from the Australian how to brew his tea and mix his stew'.

When it came to culinary imagination however, the Indians had everyone's measure and could 'disguise as no other cook can the bully beef ration'.

Most comparisons are made with 'the Tommy', who is not derided, just noted to be different, and not always. Some basic traits are still shared, 'I will say this, that never a thing either a Tommy or an Australasian possessed but that he would not hand it to a comrade in need'.

Australian attitudes to the British are mixed, depending on circumstance. Charles Bean noted in a diary entry that 'you can't trust a Tommy' but his praise for the British landing at Sedd-el-Bahr is unrestrained. 'I do not suppose the history of warfare can tell a more glorious story' he writes in his official report. He also writes that the best of the British can hold a line as well as the Australians.

A changing Australian attitude to the mother country emerged from the Gallipoli experience. The Australians learned the British were fallible. They learned also how different the relations between officers and men were in both armies and appreciated the level of equality in the Australian and New Zealand forces. Allegiance to empire remained strong but Australians now felt they had held their own within it.

IMAGE
Anzac soldiers, camped near the trenches, unpack boxes of supplies, June? 1915
ENLARGE IMAGE
J.P. Campbell
Anzac soldiers, camped near the trenches, unpack boxes of supplies, June? 1915
Pictures Collection
IMAGE
Q.M. Maloney shaving, [as another soldier holds up a mirror for him] June 1915
ENLARGE IMAGE
J.P. Campbell
Q.M. Maloney shaving, [as another soldier holds up a mirror for him] June 1915
Pictures Collection