Author:
Edward J Erickson
ISBN:
978-1-78346-166-0
Publisher:
Pen and Sword Books
Softcover
Pages:
271
Photos/maps:
17/24
Much
of history is based upon perception and not necessarily upon reality; such is
the case with the military forces of the Ottoman Empire. Viewed through the
lens of “the sick man of Europe”, the march of Allenby into Jerusalem and the
drama and romance of Lawrence of Arabia, it is easy to overlook or forget that
the Army of the Ottoman’s was actually quite successful against the combined
military’s of France and Great Britain. The successes of the Ottoman’s in the
First Battle of the Dardanelle Strait (1915), Gallipoli (1915), Kut (1916) and
the First and Second Battles of Giza (1916) are just as often credited to their
German advisors as opposed to any integral capability. Erickson’s book, an
operational review of the Gallipoli Campaign from the exclusive perspective of
the Ottoman’s, does much to address this.
The
author begins his narrative with a detailed analysis of the years leading up to
the 1915 campaign; the experience of some of the key commanders (both in terms
of training and combat), the lessons resulting from the First Balkan War
(1912-1913), the upgrades to the fortifications of the Dardanelle Straits, the
doctrinal adjustments made to the Ottoman Regimental system and the training
regime of the Ottoman’s for their army. The last two are of particular note as
the Ottomans changed their regimental system from a square (four battalion) to
a triangle (three battalion) system. This was found to be a much more
manageable and responsive construct (and one in fact that the allies ultimately
adopted in 1918). Additionally, the author discusses the fact that the
Ottoman’s mobilized their forces in July, 1914 (a full three months before
commencing hostilities) and this, given that they were not actively engaged in
a land campaign until Gallipoli, provided them almost an entire year of work-up
training for their forces.
Erickson’s
analysis of the Battle itself is insightful and detailed. Drawing upon primary
source material from the Turkish archives, he is able to trace the actions and
decision making of the Turkish commanders and the actual role that the German
advisors (such as von Sanders) played. It is interesting to note that over the
course of the campaign, there were series of individuals relieved of command by
the Turkish General Staff including German officers. The reader comes away from
this analysis with an appreciation of the complexity of the operational and
tactical actions of the Ottoman forces. Advances to contact, transfers of
authority, reliefs in place both night and day, combined support operations,
multiple operational reorganizations of forces, a detailed reporting system, proactive
command and decision making and dynamic leadership by the officer corps all
speak to a modern and competent military structure and hierarchy.
The
author does not spare the rod in his analysis either and he is quick to point
out the flaws and weaknesses of the Ottoman forces with equal clarity. This
provides both balance and perspective in the overall analysis. He also provides
discussion (although not to the detail or depth of the campaign itself) of the
service support elements of the Ottoman forces operating on the Gallipoli
Peninsula including medical, veterinary, supply and transport services.
Finally, he also looks to the strategic level and the impact that operating
within the most technologically advanced and infrastructure wise, the most
developed part of the Ottoman Empire had upon the capability of the Ottoman
forces within the region.
Erickson
provides numerous maps that are of benefit to the reader in following the
actions of the Turkish forces as the Campaign unfolded; unfortunately, they are
original maps from the Turkish archives and, as such, are very difficult to
read and follow. Additionally, I would have enjoyed seeing more photographs of
some of the key players in the Ottoman hierarchy such as Brig Esat Pasha and
Enver Pasha. The bibliography is very extensive citing a series of memoires,
primary (mainly from the Turkish military) and secondary sources that
collectively provide the reader a plethora of options for further reading. The
same may be said for the appendices citing command billets, ammo usage and
orders of battle.
No comments:
Post a Comment