Grasping Gallipoli

by Peter Chasseaud

  Terrain classification

  Given the factors discussed above, it is possible to divide the terrain of the Gallipoli Peninsula into a series of sectors, land systems, which have in common aspects of landscape, geology, available water and vegetation characteristics, and that may be distinguished from each other. In turn, these ‘land systems’ should enable us, 100 years on, to make some judgements about the key issues that would have had a material effect on the campaign, as it unfolded.

  Taking all the available evidence, six types of landscape, six land systems, may be recognised, all of them dependent largely on the underlying geology – the ‘structural grain’ – of the Gallipoli Peninsula.23 These land systems are described below.

  Plateaux. North-east–south-west trending, flat-topped escarpments and plateaux which are dissected by deeply incised valleys are a major component of the landscape. These landforms have been created on a bedrock of soft layers of clays and sandstones, which overlie harder limestones beneath (see below). These plateaux form the dominant topographical features of the Peninsula, but are usually set back from the coast, with coastal cliffs formed by harder limestone rocks found beneath the softer materials, with the notable exception of the Anzac sector. The surfaces of this land system are relatively firm and dry ‘going’ surface, although disturbed, finer-grained sediments are prone to wind transport during the summer months. The softer rocks can be dug easily – particularly important to both defender and attacker.

  In most cases, the plateaux are vegetated by relatively dense, low growing garrigue shrubs typical of the Mediterranean coastal areas – this is a disadvantage to the attacker, as the shrubs, with their spikes and barbs, are hostile and dense enough to shelter snipers. Water availability in this landscape is locally variable, and is dependent on the disposition of locally porous and impervious strata, and ground water is found only at great depth, usually within the underlying limestone aquifers. Surface ground water is scarce, although it may occur here and there where water has perched on thin clay strata that have impeded the downwards movement of water from periodic rainfall.

  At Anzac, this land system is heavily dissected, with dense, closely spaced and dry valleys separated by a complex network of sharp-crested ridges. Vegetation is typically dense consisting of low ground cover shrubs, but this falls away to bare surfaces where the slopes are steep and unstable. Trees are sparse and widely spaced. A steep, north-west-facing scarp which trends south-west–north-east defines the northern boundary of the Sari Bair Plateau, and this is no doubt the action of a geological fault. The lower slopes of this scarp are heavily gullied, and typical slope angles range from 20 to 40° on the valley sides. The plateau top is dissected by north-east–south-west trending valleys – gullies like Shrapnel Gully, which were to become an important lifeline during the campaign. High points tend to form along ridges, typified by the peaks of Chunuk Bair and Koja Chemen Tepe, with elevations of 261 and 308 metres respectively. To the south-west of the plateau area there is an undulating dip slope (5–10°), deeply incised by a network of dry stream beds, the valley sides of which are covered in dense scrub.

  The Kilid Bahr and Achi Baba plateaux, with a mean elevation of 150 metres, have much broader plateau surfaces dissected by deep, steep sided river valleys. These valleys exploit the underlying structural grain of the Peninsula, and between them are broad, flat-topped elongate spurs oriented north-east–south-west. Farther east, towards the Gulf of Saros, the same dissected plateaux can be observed forming the spine of the Peninsula. Heavily dissected steep slopes are typical of the Chinar Dagh and Karaman Dagh between Suvla Bay and the Gallipoli Straits, the opening to the Sea of Marmara. Most celebrated are the low plateaux west of Bulair, at the neck of the Peninsula, heavily fortified since the Crimea, defending the remainder of the Peninsula, dominating the Narrows, from attack.

  Limestone cliffs. This landscape is formed by the layering of harder limestone layers over softer rocks, and it typifies the cliffs that are seen all around the coast of the southern part of the Peninsula, from Kum Tepe to Maidos (Eceabat). In fact, these rocks form the basement for the hills and mountains of the plateaux, and some of the gentler, cultivated slopes from Cape Helles to Krithia (Alcitepe) are formed by the same combination of limestones. These slopes have relatively gentle slope angles and are usually dissected to a varying degree by a number of prominent dry valleys, with broad undulations between. These slopes provide satisfactory ‘going’ surfaces which are mostly dry and firm, especially were there is insubstantial soil development, and particularly in the coastal areas. Most slopes are cultivated, and have been for centuries, but where slopes are too steep for cultivation, they are covered with the same dense, low garrigue scrub that is characteristic of the more upland sectors of the battlefields. Water is present as ground waters in the limestones, and spring lines, found at the junction of the permeable limestone with impermeable clays, are seen around the coast.

  River beds. Low lying, flat or gently undulating valley floors filled with alluvium are an important component of the landscape; few if any have flowing rivers or streams. The majority of these valleys are cultivated and have been cleared of dense vegetation. The valley floors provide variable ‘going’ surfaces; although in dry valleys the surface may be relatively firm, it may be prone to lifting by wind where exposed. As such, the valleys have been important communication ways, in the southern Peninsula between Gaba Tepe and Maidos (Eceabat); from Ejelmer Bay east of Suvla on the Gulf of Saros to the villages east of the Anafarta mountains; the stream beds down to the Dardanelles at Karakova; and, most notably, at the town of Gallipoli (Gelibolu) itself, also on this coast.

  In all the river beds, the possible presence of potable ground waters is tempting to the military mind; but it is dependent on the underlying geology and the thickness of the alluvium. The river alluvium itself – sands and gravels – may also be a useful aquifer, although close to coastal areas, groundwater is seasonally contaminated by sea water.24

  Coastal plain. This system consists of a low lying coastal plain, typified by the Suvla (Anafarta) Plain, with gentle slopes and areas of inland drainage. In the Suvla Plain, water flow is highly seasonal and is impounded by a system of coastal sand dunes, and an area of elevated terrain at Lala Baba, to form a salt lake. Low lying areas close to the lake may retain water and are usually marshy. The alluvial plain associated with the lake is mostly cultivated, with few trees, although uncultivated areas may be covered by dense garrigue scrub. Where this coastal plain is traversed by perennially flowing rivers, the river corridor/valley is densely vegetated. The Salt Lake is known to dry out completely during high summer (August), but is today kept wet through a permanent connection to the sea. The coastal plain ‘going’ surfaces are variable, as they are usually soft and water saturated close to the lake, although in 1915 seasonal desiccation produced a surface traversable by foot in August. In the inland areas, the ‘going’ surfaces are passable in most cases. The Salt Lake is too saline to provide potable water, due primarily to seasonal evaporation, and is used in the production of salt. Ground water is present in the alluvium, although close to the sea it may be contaminated by salt.

  The most celebrated area of coastal plain is that close to the small settlement of Bulair. The low, cultivated, and heavily fortified hills west of Bulair give way to an area of coastal plain adjacent to potential landing beaches at Bakla Liman.25 Marshy in places, defended by sand spits and dunes, this area of coastal plain played on the mind of both attacker and defender alike.

  Linear ridges. Linear ridges trending approximately east–west and north-east–south-west define the northern margin of the Peninsula almost to its neck at Bulair, with elevations typically up to 200 metres. There are two principal linear hills within this system: the Anafarta Ridge to the south-east; and the Karakol Ridge to the north-west, running parallel to the north-east coast, between Suvla Point and Ejelmer Bay. Both ridges are associated with the North Anatolian Fault system, as is t
he coast of the Gulf of Saros in the north. The ridges are made of hard rocks, a factor not lost on the soldiers of the day.26 Typically, the sharp, thinly bedded and steeply tilted coarse sandstones break into slabs, and this helps create a coastline at the northern part of Suvla Bay that is highly indented, providing ample opportunity for the creation of small, natural harbours, harbours which are still used today for small-scale fishing operations.

  The orientation of the ridges points to the strong east–west oriented structural control of the region. Both major ridges have an asymmetrical cross section, with gentler slopes to the south-east, and steeper slopes to the north-west. North-west slopes are dissected by shallow, parallel-aligned valleys, most marked in the main Karakol Ridge. The gentler dip slopes are only dissected to a minor degree by stream networks that feed low-lying areas. The two ridges are linked by a series of flat topped hills, with elevations of up to 250 metres, which trend north-west–south-east, and also show some limited dissection. In general, the slopes are broad and open, although usually covered by dense garrigue scrub vegetation. ‘Going’ surfaces are mostly firm and dry.

  Military implications of the land system analysis

  The subdivision of the beautiful landscape of the Gallipoli Peninsula into workmanlike packages – the land systems – serves to indicate what might have been known to the military observer standing on the deck of one of His Majesty’s vessels off the shores of Gallipoli in 1915. Certainly, although pigeonholing of landscape in this way is a late 20th century phenomenon, all of its components would have been well known in 1915 and are picked out on the maps used in the planning stages, and in the contemporary reconnaissance panoramic sketches.27 The hills, valleys and slopes, at the very least, would have been visible from the sea. What our retrospective analysis achieves is the highlighting of a number of terrain aspects that were to assume great importance in the Gallipoli Campaign of 1915: vantage points; ground conditions for trenches and fortifications; the traversability by men and animals of the ground surface, beach width and water supply. All of these factors, intimately associated with the terrain, were to grow in importance as the campaign unfolded, and are of importance in the prosecution of military campaigns throughout history. They were, surely, on the minds of Hamilton and his Staff in 1915.

  Vantage/refuge points. The highest areas with the best vantage points are provided by the plateaux and ridges. Particularly important is the scarp line of the Sari Bair Range which provides a direct line of sight from the subsidiary peaks of Koja Chemen Tepe and Chunuk Bair to the Suvla Plain below. Little refuge is available for troops at the base of this slope, especially in the numerous deeply incised valleys and broad surfaces below. The south-east facing plateaux slopes have a gentler gradient and vantage is gained from the flat peaks such as Achi Baba with a good field of observation, although this has been challenged.28 However, where deeply incised, the parallel valley systems provide good opportunity for refuge. The Karakol and Anafarta ridges also provide significant vantage potential, particularly with respect to observation of the Suvla Plain and valley bottoms, although the east–west orientation of the ridges is a complication that would require careful positioning for defensive positions. The Bulair Lines, heavily defended, provide vantage for defenders against seaborne invasion, the attackers rising up from open beaches.

  Ground conditions for defensive works. Ground conditions for defensive works and ‘going’ surfaces for the movement of men and animals are variable. The softer sedimentary rocks of the plateau tops provide suitable ground conditions for trench, dugout and tunnel construction, especially where, as at Sari Bair, there are hard bands that could be, and were, used to give support to the roofs of offensive tunnels later in the campaign. Problems arise for trench construction through the density of vegetation cover and consequent root system penetration. The coastal cliff regions and harder ridges are composed of harder rocks which require heavier tools and more intensive excavation works, and this would be especially true of the long standing defensive works in the geologically older and harder rocks of the Bulair lines. On the southern part of the Peninsula, in some cases, the slabby and blocky nature of the rocks provides the possibility of the construction of breastworks and outposts out of stone blocks, as occurred at Y Ravine on Gully Spur in Helles, and at Jephson’s Post on the Karakol Ridge. Entrenchment of low-lying areas in valleys and plains would be possible, due to the ease of working – but floods, which were to occur in the later part of 1915, would cause a problem.

  Gallipoli ‘landsystems’

  Traversability and ‘going’ surfaces. In all cases, with the possible exception of the low lying areas of valley and plain, slopes are difficult to traverse. In particular, the dissected slopes of the plateaux of Sari Bair, Kilid Bahr and Achi Baba are especially problematical. The steep, gullied, arid ‘badland’ topography of the north-western slopes of the Sari Bair Range is particularly so, as the depth of valley incision creates a broken terrain in which it is easy for attacking troops to lose contact and for communications to break down. Continuity of terrain features, difficult to assess remotely, is also a problem, and was especially to be so when the attacking Anzac troops found that there was no easy route from Plugge’s Plateau up to the heights of Sari Bair – the Razor’s Edge having been formed from the erosion of harder rocks capping what was thought in all pre-campaign intelligence to be a continuous ridge.

  Finally, the steeply-incised, narrow and flat-bottomed valleys and steep coastal cliffs of Cape Helles are a significant barrier to mass troop movements and landings, something that would have been self evident in the reconnaissance, and which was indicated in the maps issued prior to the landing.29 Given the overall aridity of the landscape, suitably firm ‘going’ surfaces are provided with the exception of seasonally wet land areas of valleys, coastal plains and the Salt Lake, with the most suitable for heavy traffic being the limestone cliffs and slopes of the southern Peninsula. In all cases, roads were poor, requiring the attention of engineers from their arrival in 1915.30

  Beach width. The most suitable landing beaches, in the sense of width and the possibility of accommodating large numbers of men, are those associated with river valleys as they reach the coast, and the broad expanse of the coastal plain. These provide wide stretches of beach with a relatively gentle gradient which are not directly associated with coastal cliffs and other height and slope disadvantages. Suvla Bay is typical of this, but other, less expansive examples are seen either side of the Gaba Tepe promontory, and in Morto Bay. Bakla Liman, behind the Bulair Lines, was another possibility, with a broad, sheltered beach, albeit overlooked by the prominent central ridge of Kuru Tepe to the east. Beach development at the foot of the plateaux and limestone cliffs is mostly unsatisfactory, forming either narrow beaches with steep sea cliffs, or, in the case of the steep limestone cliffs, narrow beaches associated with steep, incised and easily enfiladed valleys, typical of the beaches at Cape Helles.

  Water supply. The Gallipoli Peninsula is a mostly green and pleasant land in which cultivation, particularly of the low slopes of the southern part of the Peninsula, is entirely possible. This would have been observable from the sea and the air, as would the arid, badland topography of the Anzac area. Seasonal rivers flow when rainfall is heaviest in the winter months, and ground waters are recharged, particularly in the limestone strata of the coastal areas and the sands and gravels of the river valleys. Beach sediments also hold some water supply potential, although contamination from salt water is a problem.31 The poorest opportunities for ground waters are in the higher plateaux, as surface ground-waters are present only locally, the rest being at depths beyond the capability of Royal Engineer drilling.

  Summary. The land system analysis highlights two major points which would have needed to be considered in planning an invasion, but which were not necessarily to hand in the planning of the 1915 campaign. Firstly, there are few satisfactory landing beaches associated with the steep coastal limestone cliffs of the southern
part of the Peninsula; yet those associated with broader coastal settings, such as that of Suvla and at Bulair, are wider and more suitable to mass deployment of troops – although, as in the case of Suvla Bay, overlooked by a range of hills, that required capture at the earliest opportunity.32 Secondly, with the exception of the high ground surrounding the Suvla Plain (Karakol and Anafarta ridges), the remainder formed a distinct land system which, although suitable for the construction of defensive positions, has limited ground-water for the supply of troops. Clearly then capture of the high ground was of the greatest importance, and in normal circumstances, was to be executed rapidly to prevent stagnation into static warfare.

  In a paper read to the Royal Geographical Society on 26 April 1915, the noted archaeologist and expert on the Near East, D G Hogarth, outlined the geography of the war with Turkey. This paper, read a day after the landing had been made and undoubtedly in ignorance of the land-based assault, made the following conclusion: