An Unfortunate Accident of Geography: Badlands and the ANZAC Sector, Gallipoli, April–December 1915

  • Peter DoyleEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Military Geosciences book series (AMG)


Gallipoli continues to be a cause célèbre for those seeking to assign blame for this ill-fated military campaign fought against the Ottoman Empire from April to December 1915. Variously blamed are weak generals, poor planning and preparation—and even inadequate topographical mapping. Intended to assist the Allied naval fleet in breaking through the Dardanelles Straits, thereby threatening the Ottoman Capital of Constantinople (and, it was hoped, forcing the Ottomans out of the war), the military campaign was certainly hastily conceived and under-resourced. Commencing on 25 April 1915 as an amphibious landing, the campaign soon degenerated into a desperate struggle, as the Allies attempted in vain to break out of tightly constrained beachheads. This study investigates the role of terrain in the warfare of the ANZAC (Australian and New Zealand Army Corps) Sector, from initial landings in April, to attempted breakout in August. At ANZAC, an ‘unfortunate accident of geography’ brought, dry, mostly fine-grained Pliocene sediments to the coast. An upland area created by the North Anatolian Fault System, the fine sediments were (and are) quickly weathered and eroded to form topographically complex gullied surfaces. This would be the almost hopeless battleground of the Australians and New Zealanders in April–December 1915. With the Ottomans holding a firm grip on the ridge top, the ANZAC troops were constrained to a small, deeply dissected and mostly waterless sector of the scarp slope of the Sari Bair Plateau and ridge system. The war here would be hard fought and bloody, with geology having a major impact on its outcome; the withdrawal of ANZAC troops in December 1915.


Dardanelles Gallipoli Amphibious landings Badland topography Ottomans ANZAC Water supply Trenches Tunneling 


  1. Anon (2012) Military water supply, think defence: 4 March 2012 19.01.13. Accessed March 2012
  2. Aspinall-Oglander CF (1929) History of the great war: military operations Gallipoli, volume 1. Inception of the campaign to May 1915. Heinemann Ltd, LondonGoogle Scholar
  3. Aspinall-Oglander CF (1932) History of the great war: military operations Gallipoli, volume 2. May 1915 to the evacuation. Heinemann Ltd, LondonGoogle Scholar
  4. Beeby-Thomson A (1924) Emergency water supplies for military, agricultural and colonial purposes. Crosby Lockwood and Son, LondonGoogle Scholar
  5. Branagan D (1987) The Australian mining corps in World War I. Bull Proc Aust Inst Min Metall 292:40–44Google Scholar
  6. Callwell CE (1924) The Dardanelles. Constable and Company Ltd, LondonGoogle Scholar
  7. Carlyon L (2003) Gallipoli. Bantam, LondonGoogle Scholar
  8. Chasseaud P, Doyle P (2004) Grasping Gallipoli: terrain, maps and failure in the Dardanelles. Spellmount Ltd, StaplehurstGoogle Scholar
  9. Crawley R (2014) Climax at Gallipoli. University of Oklahoma Press, NormanGoogle Scholar
  10. Doyle P (2008) Six VCs before breakfast, terrain and the Gallipoli Landings 1915. In: Nathanail CP, Abrahart RJ, Bradshaw RP (eds) Military geography and geology: history and technology. Land Quality Press, NottinghamGoogle Scholar
  11. Doyle P (2011) Battle story: Gallipoli, 1915. The History Press, StroudGoogle Scholar
  12. Doyle P, Bennett MR (1999) Military geography: the influence of terrain on the outcome of the Gallipoli Campaign, 1915. Geogr J 165:12–36Google Scholar
  13. Doyle P, Bennett MR (2002) Terrain and the Gallipoli Campaign, 1915. In: Doyle P, Bennett MR (eds) Fields of battle, terrain in military history. Kluwer Academic Publishers, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  14. Hamilton I (1920) Gallipoli diary. Arnold, LondonGoogle Scholar
  15. Nevinson HW (1920) The Dardanelles Campaign. Nisbet & Co Ltd, LondonGoogle Scholar
  16. Palka EJ, Galgano FA (2005) Military Geography from Peace to War. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  17. Prior R (2009) Gallipoli, the end of the myth. Yale University Press, New HavenGoogle Scholar
  18. Rhodes James R (1965) Gallipoli. Batsford, LondonGoogle Scholar
  19. Stanley P (2005) Quinn’s Post: Anzac, Gallipoli. Allen & Unwin, MelbourneGoogle Scholar
  20. Ternek Z, Erentöz C, Pamir HN, Akyürek B (1987) 1:500,000 Ölçekli Türkiye Jeoloji Haritasi (Explanatory Text of the Geological Map of Turkey). Maden Tetkik ve Arama Genel Müdürlügü Vayinlarindan, IstanbulGoogle Scholar
  21. Travers T (2001) Gallipoli 1915. Tempus, StroudGoogle Scholar
  22. Waite F (1921) The New Zealanders at Gallipoli. Whitcombe & Tombs, AucklandGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Earth SciencesUniversity College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations