' JOHNNY TURK '


Johnny is a slang form of the common male names John or Jonathan. The term "Johnny Turk" was used during the First World War to refer to Turkish people.

The Ottoman Turkish Empire was one of the leading protagonists of World War I, and the stolid courage of the individual Ottoman soldier -
'Johnny Turk' as his enemies knew him - was recognised by all.

Enlarge
related TheAge Newspaper artical .. Anzac Day - Latest Comments/Your Say: http://blogs.theage.com.au/yoursay/archives/
2006/04/anzac_day.html
| April 12, 2006 09:26 AM
*
http://blogs.theage.com.au/yoursay/archives/2006/04/anzac_day.html
(For your interest, you may find the Gul Arslan's two comments at the above address )

Descendants of World War I Turkish soldiers can march on Anzac Day, the Victorian RSL has decided, because they were a very honorable The endorsement does not extend to families of German, Japanese, Italian or North Vietnamese. What do you think of this decision?

What's Told?
Positive Views |
Natural Views | What Turks said?

'Johnny Turk', who many Australian soldiers later came to respect regardless of the horrific fighting that they had suffered.

[When the Turks taken an official acceptance from the Victoria RSL, some comments made by the Australian people ] See the feedbacks regarding 'Johnny Turk - Honorably Enemy' 'Theage' newspaper ...

Johnny Turk

By Lesleyanne Hawthorne, ATFS publications, Melbourne 1986, P.O.Box 144, Mulgrave Nth, Victoria 3170, Australia. Lesleyanne Hawthorne was born in Melbourne and educated at Monash University. She traveled widely in the United States, Europe and South East Asia. As a freelance writer, she has contributed to papers such as the Age and the National Times on a variety of topics. She is the author of 'Refugee: The Vietnamese Experience', Oxford University Press, 1982.

Introduction
I would like to begin by quoting from a letter that was left in the winter of 1915, in the abandoned Gallipoli headquarters of the Australian Third Lighthorse Brigade. It was addressed to the Turkish force commander, who would find it and read it soon after the evacuation.


"The Brigadier presents his compliments to our worthy TURKISH opponents and offers those who first honour his quarters with their presence such poor hospitality as is in his power to give, regretting that he is unable personally to welcome them.

After a sojourn of 7 months in Gallipoli we propose to take some little relaxation...and in bidding 'Au revoir' to our honorable foes we Australians desire to express appreciation of the fine soldierly qualities of our Turkish opponents and of the sportsmanlike manner in which they have participated in a very interesting contest, honourable, we trust , to both sides.


For a little while we have been with you, yet a little while and you shall see us not. For us it is a matter of deep regret that the ancient friendship so long existing between the British and Turkish Empires should have been thus disturbed by the insidious machinations of the Arch-enemy of humanity.

We have left this area and trenches in which we have taken considerable trouble and pride, clean and in good order, and would be grateful if they may be so maintained until our return, particular care being asked in regard to matters of sanitation, so vital to the well being of an army.

We hope that you will find the wine, coffee, tobacco, cigarettes and food to your taste, and a supply of fuel has been left in the cupboard to ameliorate in some measure the discomfort during the cold watches of the winter

Our only request is that no member of the nation who was guilty of the inhuman murder of that noble woman Miss Edith Clavell to whose photo this message is attached, will be permitted to pollute with his presence the quarters of soldiers who have never descended to such barbarous and ruthless methods.

'Editor: Germans executed the British nurse Edith Clavell in 1915' "I do not pretend to be an historian, and I do not know a great deal about Gallipoli. But I grew up surrounded by the artifacts of war because the men in my family had a facility for dying in them. In the Second World War my mother's three brothers went off to fight Japan. Two of them died. There was a strong hatred of the Japanese in my family (which has passed now) and that detestation extended to the Germans.

A generation earlier I had close family members who fought in the First World War; however I was aware from early childhood that clear distinctions were made between enemies, which not even the passage of time could account for.

My grandparents' brothers fought the Turks. My grandmother's brother was killed at Gallipoli, while my grandfather's brother survived it, going on later to fight through the whole Middle-Eastern campaign.

One of the favorite toys of my childhood was a three-metre intricately beaded snake, made by a Turkish prisoner-of-war for that soldier. The craftsman wove into it 'TURKISH PRISONER 67L', and then the name of my great uncle. Originally, before it got broken, there was a little lizard trapped in the mouth of the snake.

Perhaps for the Turk it was a wry joke on his captivity. There were also other momentoes - faded sepia postcards, and letters which I remember reading before they were finally lost.

I grew up because of these things with a strong awareness of the Turks, but with no hatred whatsoever.

Since childhood I have had an intense interest in that First World War, and in consequence have done much casual reading on it.

Conclusion

It is a long time since Gallipoli, and over the past few decades we have seen in Australia an increasing nostalgia for it as a period of national challenge and proving. Yet in spite of this there has been a chance since my childhood two decades ago. Once, we unquestioningly glorified our soldiers' feats. As children we were told Gallipoli meant Anzac gallantry in a just war. Now there is some belated reappraisal - a recognition of the validity of the Turks' position, even though that doesn't negate a proud sense of the Anzacs' achievements.

The idea has been increasingly expressed that Gallipoli represents more than war. There are those who suggest that it marks a special friendship sealed in the young blood of two very different countries.

This sentiment is somewhat unique - especially once you realize that many of the moves towards redefinition of the relationship have come from the old diggers, "Editor: Digger is the colloquial name for Australian soldier" who on their own initiative and through all the barriers started corresponding with Turks. A number of them have journeyed back. Those who have done so have found Anzac graves well cared for in Turkey for decades - a situation said to be almost without precedent between the opposing forces of two sides once locked in bitter conflict. How many nations have tended their invaders' graves?

1985 marks a special time - the seventieth anniversary of the Gallipoli/Canakkale campaign. What is even more remarkable is that the Turkish Foreign Minister has just opened a memorial to Attack in the War Memorial at Canberra. The place of the original landing in Turkey has been re-named Anzac Cove, in a ceremony attended by all foreign ambassadors. In Albany, Western Australia - a state that gave many of its fine young men to the campaign, and where my own family came from - the Turkish Consul General has named a promontory for Ataturk.

I would like to conclude with a statement which appears on many of these war memorials, and one which I believe is very beautiful. It is a message sent by Ataturk in 1934 to be passed on to those people whose sons had fallen in Gallipoli two decades before. He said:

"Those heroes that shed their blood and lost their lives, you are now in the soil of a friendly country. Therefore rest in peace. There is no difference between the Johnnies and the Mehmets to us where they lie side by side in this country of ours. You, the mothers, who sent their sons from far away countries, wipe away your tears; your sons are now lying in our bosom and are at peace. After having lost their lives on this land they have become our sons as well."

After some conflicts, hatred stays with the nations for generations. But it was not so with Gallipoli. It has never been so for the Turkish and Australian peoples.

"Editor: Between April 25 and December 20, 1915, in an area of 20 kilometres by 8, the following numbers of troops were killed: 86,000 Turkish 8,700 Australian 2,700 New Zealanders 27,000 British and Indian"

"Editor: While Turkish armies were fighting with British, Anzacs and the French at Gallipoli, they were also fighting the Russians in the Eastern front and British-Arab alliance in the south. At a time when there were no young men left in Anatolian villages, Armenian subjects of the Ottoman Empire collaborated with the Russian invaders.. pillaging and murdering women and children in villages which were left defenseless after all men were conscripted to fight the enemies who were in a feeding frenzy - trying to devour what was left of the collapsing Ottoman Empire. Armenians in border regions were thus deported to southern provinces and many perished during the arduous exodus. Generations of Armenian militants later resorted to vicious terror tactics murdering numerous Turkish diplomats as revenge killings for an alleged genocide during the war years" www.tallarmeniantale.com | Find out the Truth!

 

Selected Articals:

Lloyd Robson wrote:

These men reflected the egalitarian colonial origins of Australia and were direct and straightforward in their dealings with each other, and contemptuous of lesser breeds; they could and did fight like threshing machines when they had to . . . They showed up all other soldiers and especially the British to be lacking in initiative and go; they revealed that they were rather undisciplined when that discipline was merely a formality, but really needed no controlling when it came to the deadly business of battle - then they became highly effective, skilful and feared killers, they were a classless army; they stuck to their mates through thick and thin; their burden as soldiers was lightened by a sardonic sense of humour . . . And in their ranks abounded many wags and tough nuts who made it a rule always to outwit the authorities; they did not give a damn for anyone on earth, in heaven or in hell.

Their highly distinctive tunics and hats were perhaps never cleaned and brushed as they might have been . . . they had a penchant for removing objects of value left in their way and were expert con men; their contempt for "Gyppos" was notorious; though they at first hated the Turks . . . very soon they developed a respect for Johnny Turk;
their attitude to the German soldier was not one of hate but respect . . .


The stereotypic Australian soldier was very tall and sinewy and hatchet-faced. He had a great respect for the institutions of the "old country" and what he perceived as its quaintness, but little time for pommy officers and men as a rule, or until they proved themselves manly. He got on well with the Scots. The stereotype was not formally religious but had a lot of time for the Salvation Army and some of the "fighting" padres."
The Hon. C. J. S. LYNN

 

Shortlisted for Children's Book Council of Australia Eve Pownall Award 2004.
OZ " Carlyon, Patrick 2004, The Gallipoli story, Penguin, Camberwell, Vic.


"This is a riveting and unbiased account that explodes myths and reveals the human faces behind the tragic Gallipoli campaign. It tells of the misery, courage, humour and mateship that flourished in the Australian and New Zealand trenches and also extols the bravery of 'Johnny Turk'.


This is a 'must-have' for studies of Senior Modern History Bridging and comparative studies, 'World War I and nationalism after World War I' and for Studies of Society and Environment strand, 'Time, Continuity and Change' for an examination of situations in Australia before and after a change in Australian or global settings. "