The first casualty of war

Abstract

The publication of 'Return to Gallipoli' has 'opened up a new front in the historiography of the Anzac myth '. But unlike the simple oppositional paradigms of the History Wars, the sides in this particular dispute are fluid and problematic. This reply to McKenna's and Ward's critique offers new insights into the relationship between feeling, memory and historical understanding as it explores the creative archaeology of 'Return to Gallipoli'. It challenges McKenna's and Ward's singular interpretation of the Anzac experience, identifies flawed and highly selective textual analysis and demonstrates the contested nature of commemoration through the testimony of Anzac travellers themselves. Show more