Gallipoli- The Landing at ANZAC Cove: A Research Based Inquiry







Dix blames the southern tow for starting to veer northerly. He headed for the shore as fast as possible to lower the margin of error


Dix states that personnel other than himself have to blame for the error


No documents contain any evidence of last minute changes


No British documents mention a marker buoy. This disproves Point A





Turkish soldiers moved the marker buoy


The Battleships may be out of position to begin with


Thursby made last minute changes that only the Southern Tow knew about.


The Battleships were northwest of the intended position


Thursby had made a previous change to plan, prior to the time in question


Thursby claims that the tows landed extremely close to the intended landing spot.


The northerly current only affected the southernmost tow.


Waterlow and Dix had previously made a detailed recon of the area.


The Triumph\'s marking position was extremely detailed, thus the margin of error would have been minute


The positions of the battleships were off position

b. I disagree with the official statement, bearing in mind as there are far more plausible causes raised, and there is also stronger evidence to support them. Considering as it would be almost certain that the tows were ordered to row perfect east, and which to the best of their ability, they did; it would seem exceedingly impossible that the northerly current only affected the southernmost tow, and none of the others. And should this northerly current have existed, the commanders would have taken note of it on their reconnaissance, and should they have missed it, then the Triumph, told specifically to take note of such findings, would have communicated it to those whose influence may have changed the course of the landing. Also, seeing as Commanders Dix and Waterlow made an exceedingly detailed reconnaissance of the area the preceding night, which would make Lt. C. Waterlow’s gaffe of thinking Ari Burnu as Gaba Tepe a farfetched claim.


a. That the fated Anzac Landing on 25th April was the result of navigational error of the three battleships, London, Queen, and Prince of Wales.

b. The fated Anzac Landing on 25th April was the result of navigational error of the three battleships, London, Queen, and Prince of Wales. Much evidence has come to light, that the mysterious northerly current could not have been the cause of this incident, seeing as if it was, then the other tows would also be moved pushed north, not just Waterlow’s. The Triumph, the battleship sent first to mark the position of the launching point had been given extremely detailed instructions, one of which was to take note of any irregular currents; the professional sailors aboard had not taken such note, as the current could not have existed. The second part of the official account can be quashed as both commanders have made meticulous reconnaissances of the area close prior to the ill-fated landing. Both of the aforementioned reasons can be annulled as both commanders knew of the area, and at the hour of the landing, it would have been near light, and thus they would realise if they were veering off course, and correct themselves, and they would also see landmarks of both Ari Burnu and Gaba Tepe. It was the fault of the three battleships, London, Queen and Prince of Wales (hitherto known as “the battleships”), as respected historian Robert Rhodes James (hitherto known as RRJ) correctly suggested, as they, themselves were out of position before the tows had even left them, due to erroneous navigation or another reason. Bearing in mind that the tows were ordered to steer directly east, had the battleships been in the correct coordinates, the tows would have arrived at the correct landing point. However, they didn’t. Thus, with the other slightly plausible explanations dismissed, we can conclude that the fault is of the three battleships.