For over a decade, history education in Australia has been a site of struggle over collective memory of the colonial past. Since the injection of Indigenous perspectives into History and Society and Environment curricula, conservative historians, politicians, and media commentators have been fighting to see an end to ‘black armband’ history – or what they see as an excessively mournful view of our collective history – and its replacement with what they argue is a more ‘balanced’ celebratory vision of the national past. The new national history curriculum, which has sought to get beyond so-called ‘black armband’ and ‘white blindfold’ histories, has recently come under fire for its perceived lack of attention to one of the nation’s founding mythologies, the battle of Gallipoli. To engage with this debate, we will draw on a framework first presented by Friedrich Nietzsche for thinking about the uses and abuses of historical discourse, particular his concern with nationalistic histories. Nietzsche has not been an uncontroversial figure in studies of nationalist history, having had selective aspects of his work posthumously co-opted by the National Socialist movement in Germany during WWII, via the mediation of his sister and editor, Elisabeth Förster-Nietzsche. However, as his disappointment with his one time friend, the nationalistic composer (and favourite of the Führer) Richard Wagner shows, Nietzsche demonstrated caution and concern with history as national mythology. Nietzsche's argument, written around the time of his breach with Wagner, was that there were three types of history: (1) the monumental (in which past events and deeds were valorized and venerated); (2) the antiquarian (in which attempts were made to preserve the past as cultural heritage and source of identity); and (3) the critical (in which aspects of the past were challenged from the standpoint of present “truths”). According to Nietzsche’s scheme, each of these uses of history was subject to abuse (by being used exclusively, or to excess), in which case historical discourse would lead to human subjugation rather than freedom. His answer was to pit the various forms of history against each other in a complex balancing act. Coupled with a brief exploration of the way ‘Gallipoli’ gets represented in current Australian history textbooks, Nietzsche’s framework will be used to consider what we should do with Gallipoli in the national curriculum.

1. NIETZSCHEAN
PERSPECTIVES ON A
NATIONAL HISTORY
CURRICULUM:
WHAT SHOULD WE DO
WITH GALLIPOLI?
Robert Parkes
Heather Sharp
University of
Newcastle

2. ABBOTT & GALLIPOLI: OR MORE PAYNE
FOR HISTORY CURRICULUM?

3. SHOULD WE LET THE RIGHT
HAVE THEIR WAR?

4. THE CRITIQUE OF GALLIPOLI
 Over-emphasis on war / military history; pro - ANZAC
interpretation (Lake & Reynolds, 2010).
 Australian military history bigger than just Gallipoli (Reed,
2004).

5. TEXTBOOKS AND/AS CURRICULUM
 Use of textbooks a signature pedagogy in history education?
 Implicated in the construction of national attitude and
identity (Crawford, 2007, 2009).
 Dif ficult to get beyond nationalistic perspectives ( Elmersjö,
2013).
 Shifting focus to how textbooks are actually used in the
classroom alongside content analysis ( Repoussi & TutiauxGuillon, 2010).

6. RETROACTIVE
Textbook Content Analysis
Non-WWI
Other WWI
Gallipoli
ANZAC
Other
 Military planning/political
reasons.
 Turkish perspective
(but, actually it is not a
Turkish perspective at
all, it‟s about what
Australian soldiers
[presumably] thought about
the Turks).
 Soldiers‟ experiences.
 Battles of Suvla Bay, Lone
Pine and The
Nek, Evacuation.

7. NELSON
Textbook Content Analysis
Non-WWI
Other WWI
Gallipoli
ANZAC
Other
Military
planning/political
reasons.
Australian soldier
experiences.
Failure of campaign

8. MACMILLIAN
Textbook Content Analysis
 Military
planning/political
reasons that led to the
Gallipoli landing.
Non-WWI
Other WWI
Gallipoli
ANZAC
Other
 Contesting the Gallipoli
„facts‟ about military
action.
 Soldiers‟ experiences.
 Focus on the battles at
Lone Pine and the Nek.

9. CAMBRIDGE
Textbook Content Analysis
Non-WWI
Other WWI
Gallipoli
ANZAC
Other
Australia‟s
involvement and the
failure and
withdrawal at
Gallipoli.

10. OXFORD
Textbook Content Analysis
 Context of Gallipoli
campaign before
moving into a focus on
Australia‟s involvement.
Non-WWI
WWI Other
Gallipoli
ANZAC
Other
 Conditions and soldiers‟
experiences.
 A comparison is done
between John Simpson
Kirkpatrick and Major
General Sir William
Throsby Bridges.

11. NIETZSCHE AS CONTROVERSIAL FIGURE
IN THE HISTORY OF NATIONALISM
 Selective aspects of his work
posthumously co-opted by the
National Socialist movement
in Germany during WWII, via
the mediation of his sister and
editor, Elisabeth För sterNietzsche.
 His disappointment with his
one time friend, the
nationalistic composer (and
favourite of the Führer)
Richard Wagner
shows, Nietzsche
demonstrated caution and
concern with histor y as
national mythology.

12. NIETZSCHE‟S THREE FORMS OF HISTORY
 Monumental - in which past events and deeds were valorized
and venerated.
 Antiquarian - in which attempts were made to preserve the
past as cultural heritage and source of identity.
 Critical - in which aspects of the past were challenged from
the standpoint of present “truths ”.

13. HOW IS GALLIPOLI REPRESENTED?
THE MONUMENTAL
 “ T h e A u s t r a l i a n s d e p a r t e d … c o m f o r t e d to h av e s t u c k i t o u t s o r e s o l u t e l y a n d to h av e
g a m e l y p l aye d t h e i r p a r t i n s u c h a h o p e l e s s c a u s e ” ( p . 2 57 ) . S o , d e s p i te t h e G a l l i p o l i
c a m p a i g n b e i n g c o m p l e t e l y fl awe d , t h e s o l d i e r s a r e v a l o r i z e d fo r h av i n g d o n e a n
e x c e l l e n t j o b a n d a t t h e s a m e t i m e v e n e r a t e d b e c a u s e t h e c a m p a i g n , a s a w h o l e wa s a
“ h o p e l e s s c a u s e ” ( p . 2 57 ) , i m p l y i n g t h a t n o m a t te r w h a t t h e Au s t r a l i a n s o l d i e r s d i d , t h ey
wo u l d n e v e r h av e b e e n a b l e to a c h i e v e s u c c e s s , d e s p i t e b e i n g ( a s i n d i c a t e d i n e a r l i e r
p a r t o f t h e n a r r a t i v e ) “ … w i d e l y p r a i s e d fo r t h e i r s k i l l a n d te n a c i t y a s a s s a u l t t r o o p s ” ( p .
2 57 ) .
 O n 7 D e c e m b e r 1 91 5 , t h e B r i t i s h C a b i n e t o r d e r e d a r e t r e a t o f a l l A l l i e d t r o o p s f r o m
G a l l i p o l i . A B r i t i s h wa r c o r r e s p o n d e n t , E l l i s A s h m e a d - B a r t l e t t , a n d a yo u n g A u s t r a l i a n
j o u r n a l i s t , Ke i t h M u r d o c h , h a d a t l a s t e x p o s e d t h e te r r i b l e c o n d i t i o n s a n d fl aw e d m i l i t a r y
c a m p a i g n i n g to t h e B r i t i s h l e a d e r s . ( p . 2 57 )
 T h e A N Z AC s we r e p a r t o f a f a r l a r g e r A l l i e d fo r c e o f B r i t i s h a n d Fr e n c h , i n w h a t h a s b e e n
d e s c r i b e d a s o n e o f t h e m i s m a n a g e d m i l i t a r y c a m p a i g n s i n h i s to r y. ( p . 2 5 5 ) .
 T h e B r i t i s h , u n d e r e s t i m a t i n g t h e Tu r k s ‟ c a p a c i t y to d e fe n d t h e i r c o u n t r y, e x p e c t e d to
s u c c e e d by a n av a l b o m b a r d m e n t t h a t b e g a n i n Fe b r u a r y. B y m i d M a r c h i t h a d f a i l e d
dismally… (p. 256).
 O n e o f t h e g r e a te s t d i s a s t e r s i n B r i t i s h m i l i t a r y h i s to r y e n d e d fo r t h e A N Z AC s o n 1 9
D e c e m b e r 1 91 5 . T h e Au s t r a l i a n s d e p a r t e d , s h a t te r e d to l e av e m o r e t h a n 8 0 0 0 o f t h e i r
d e a d b e h i n d , b u t c o m fo r t e d to h av e s t u c k i t o u t s o r e s o l u te l y a n d to h av e g a m e l y p l aye d
t h e i r p a r t i n s u c h a h o p e l e s s c a u s e . ( p . 2 57 )

14. HOW IS GALLIPOLI REPRESENTED?
THE ANTIQUARIAN
 …the ANZACs were widely praised for their skill and tenacity
as assault troops. It was not expected that „mere colonials‟
would perform so courageously under concentrated fire. (p.
257)

15. HOW IS GALLIPOLI REPRESENTED?
THE CRITICAL
 The Gallipoli campaign was also not the fir st large militar y encounter
in which Australian troops had fought…It was said in 1900 that: „from
the landing of Australian troops on African soil will date the true bir th
of Australian nationhood‟. (p. 255 )… but it returns to the monumental:
It was to be the Dardanelles campaign (Februar y 1915 to Januar y
1916) and the Gallipoli landings of April 1915 that would eventually be
viewed in this light.” (p. 255) .
 …on one narrow strip of ground called The Nek , which was not much
larger than a tennis cour t, hundreds of member s of the 8 th and 10 th
Australian Light Hor se regiments were needlessly scarified. This battle
forms the central episode of Peter Weir‟s 1981 film, Gallipoli, but the
main of ficer responsible was actually Australian, not British. (p. 257)
 Most militar y historians conclude that Gallipoli was „a sideshow‟ to the
main events of the Western Front. They also see it as a tragic waster of
human life that was poorly conceived by Lord Kitchener, the British War
Secretar y and Winston Churchill, Fir st Lord of the Admiralty. By the
time if concluded, for no territorial gain whatsoever, there had been
more than 392000 casualties. (p. 256)

16. HISTORY FOR LIFE:
GETTING BEYOND THE HISTORY WARS
 According to Nietzsche‟s scheme, each of these uses of
history was subject to abuse (by being used exclusively, or to
excess), in which case historical discourse would lead to
human subjugation rather than freedom .
 His answer was to pit the various forms of history against
each other in a complex balancing act.
 Multiple narratives and multiple forms of history must be the
pre-requisite condition for a history curriculum aimed at
equipping people for “life”.