@gelibolu2015 seeing as you asked me, & for the benefit of @TGTandV here's my review on this new book by Neil Storey, published by @penswordbooks which I hope you'll all read to the end... 
...This book offers nothing new by way of new evidence towards the fate of the 5th Norfolks at Kuchuk Anafarta Ova on 12 Aug 15 . Neil Storey is good at writing stories. His books are always well written and full of nostalgia when it comes to Norfolk...
...The first three chapters of his book follow that route when he looks at aspects of Norfolk prior to WW1, how the Territorial Force was formed and then looks at the Sandringham Company prior to the declaration of war...
...The initial story of the 5th Norfolk Regiment mobilisation is told fairly well but there is a point in the book, namely Page 64, where he could have tackled a myth properly and certainly, as a historian, he should have evidenced something fully, which he does not...
...This page looks at the demise of the Sandringham Company when it amalgamated with another in February 1915. Instead of telling the proper story he decides to justify the use of the words Sandringham Company because after this there was some sort of tradition kept...
…where the original members of the Sandringham Company were still paraded separately. He fails to mention that the Royal connection was still kept because the new amalgamated one was called the ‘King’s Company’...
...This is a terrible omission in a book that should not detract from what actually happened after the 5th Norfolks reformed in February 1915. The words Sandringham Comapany should have ceased to exist after page 64...
...So sadly Mr Storey just keeps the word Sandringham Company in his writing after this. This does not help to quell a myth that others still follow when the entire regiment was assumed to be the Sandringhams, the Sandringham Regiment, etc, etc, etc...
...There are then a series of subjects which he either glosses over, does not challenge, or completely misses out. These are the following…
…He does not look at the action on the 12th August 1915 from the Turkish perspective. Had he researched this properly he would have been able to do this by using, at the very least, the war diaries for the Turkish 1/36th, 3/35th & 3/36th Regts who faced the 153rd Bde…
...He makes no mention of Major Munib of the 36th Regt who also wrote about the Turkish defence and counter attacks...
...A really important factor within all of this, certainly when you try to debunk the myths surrounding the 5th Norfolks fate are Prisoners of War (POW), or the idea that the Turks killed the survivors in cold blood taking no POWs...
...POWs are an afterthought in his book and he does not use any of the accounts that were recorded by the Turks from 5th Norfolk men who were captured, two examples being the interviews with Lt Fawkes & Sgt Allen...
...these would have added to the book, helping to debunk the 'shot in cold blood' myth. This is frustrating and extremely disappointing...
...another myth he writes about is the 'female sniper' stories that came out of the campaign. This story has been debunked by experts & has always been denied by the Turks. He uses an account where this is mentioned but does nothing to refute it...
...this is extremely disappointing, especially when people like Tolga Ornek have done so much work around this myth to show it was a myth...
...in relation to the casualty count for the action on 12th August 1916, Neil Storey does nothing to actually show you the reality of the actual loss of men from the Sandringham Estate. Instead he looks at the loss & disappearance from the Sandringham Company myth...
...the reality of that was that the Sandringham Estate lost 1 officer & 16 men. This is hidden in a full casualty list at the end, but not centred on. This is a terrible omission as well...
...although he uses accounts to tell his story, he does not use the accounts that came out from the men who survived the action who were interviewed at the end of 1915 and the beginning of 1916. These are readily available if you know where to look...
...he just relies on one account for this when this terrible myth could have been laid to bed once and for all had he allowed the men who came back to tell their story...
...all of whom refuted the disappearance story when they were interviewed...
...sadly this led me to put the book down having read chapters 6 and 10. This is sad because he also writes about the 4th & 5th Norfolks at Gaza...
...but, in my opinion, this book is ruined by the way Mr Storey has gone down the old, 'predictable' routes that others have taken when writing about this subject...
...this is also not the first time Neil Storey has written about this subject, He had a book published in 2009 which also looked at the Norfolk TF in WW1 & WW2. The same subject was looked at then, it was written about in the same way & many of the same images that appear...
...in that book are present in this book. On the subject of imagery, he does not use any maps to describe the advance on 12th August, he just relies on 2 maps of Gallipoli as a whole...
…This would have helped to tell the story for people who need that sort of resource to help them understand the story as a whole. So, @gelibolu2015 I would ask you to share this with your Turkish friend & anyone else you feel this will interest…
... @penswordbooks I apologise for this poor review of a book you have published. But I cannot sit by and see this happen when I know there is so much more that could have been covered by someone who calls himself a ‘Historian’…
Errata here, 163rd Bde
