They may not be ‘true blue' but these Anzac biscuits are truly delicious
135g (1½ cups) desiccated coconut
200g (2 cups) rolled oats
80g (½ cup) sesame seeds
2 tsp ground ginger
95g (½ cup) soft brown sugar
95g (½ cup) dark muscovado sugar
250g salted butter, chopped
2 tbsp date syrup
½ tsp bicarbonate of soda (baking soda)
80ml (⅓ cup) boiling water
METHOD
Preheat the oven to 150C fan-forced (170C conventional). Line a baking tray with baking paper.
Put the flour, coconut, oats, sesame seeds, ginger and both sugars in a large bowl and mix with your hands to combine.
Heat the butter and date syrup in a small saucepan over a low heat until melted and stir to combine. Put the bicarbonate of soda in a small bowl, add the boiling water and mix well. Add this to the melted butter mixture in the pan, it will fizz up a little, then pour it over the dry ingredients and stir to combine well.
Roll the mixture into balls about the size of an egg, then place them on the prepared baking tray. Use the palm of your hand to gently press down on the biscuits to flatten them.
Bake the biscuits for 15-20 minutes, or until golden. Allow them to cool on the tray for about 5 minutes before transferring to a wire rack to cool completely. I like a crisp Anzac, but if you prefer a chewy Anzac do not flatten them as much and cook for 12-15 minutes.
Makes 20
This is an edited extract from Pranzo by Guy Mirabella (Hardie Grant Books), RRP $60. Available in stores nationally. Photography by Guy Mirabella.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Advertiser
01-07-2025
- The Advertiser
It's not how much you spend on defence but how well you spend it
This is a sample of The Echidna newsletter sent out each weekday morning. To sign up for FREE, go to It was another ignominious end. Dismantled, cannibalised for spare parts, their bodies were buried in an undisclosed location. They were never very good and were destined to be replaced, but a fatal crash in 2023 saw their demise brought forward. But Defence's jettisoning of the MRH90 Taipan helicopter wasn't the first time it had spent billions on a dud. In October 2008, their rotor blades removed, another terrible decision was shrink-wrapped, loaded onto semi trailers and trucked out of the HMAS Albatross naval air station near Nowra. If the MRH90 decision was a blunder, the decision in 1997 to buy 11 Super Seasprites for our fleet of ANZAC class frigates, was a catastrophe. At least the MRH90 flew. Not a single Super Seasprite became operational. You might as well have piled up in small denominations the $1 billion they cost and set fire to it. Of course, it's not just kit that's meant to fly which has the sour taste of expensive lemon about it. We've had the Collins class subs. Noisy, unreliable and, as discovered last year, corroding in the salt water meant to be their natural habitat. Having already cost about $20 billion, billions more is being spent to keep them going until the AUKUS subs arrive - if they do. The largest ships our navy operates - the two Landing Helicopter Decks, HMAS Canberra and HMAS Adelaide - arrived in the middle of the 2010s riddled with defects. HMAS Canberra chalked up 6000 of them. And the cost to keep them is nudging $200 million a year. I could go on. And on. And on some more. When it comes to spending money on defence, our track record on spending it wisely is far from flash. We have a history of spending a lot of buck for little bang. That's why alarm bells ring when there's a clamour for increased defence spending without any detail about how and where that money should be spent. Much of it is political noise, generated by NATO snapping to attention with a sharp "Sir, yessir!" - or a simpering "Yes, Daddy" if you were nauseated by its sycophancy when Trump visited - when it agreed to a US demand to lift its defence spending to 5 per cent of GDP. The Albanese government has batted away the calls from the usual suspects - Pete Hegseth, Karoline Leavitt and their two local parrots, Angus Taylor and Bridget McKenzie, neither of whom have spelled out of what spending they'd cut or taxes they'd raise to meet the extra spending. The government says Australia will decide on the capabilities it needs and spend accordingly. It's read the room and knows we don't like being told what to do - especially by the Trump administration. And we won't take well to extortion via tariffs either. It also knows Australia doesn't need to strike the same war footing as Europe. We don't have a war on our doorstep. There's no Russia imperilling our borders. That's not to say we shouldn't be clear-eyed about the challenges we face. China's military build-up cannot be ignored but also should not be overstated. It's unlikely to be coveting our distant shores because it's far cheaper to buy the resources we have than attempt to seize them. But can we ever know for certain? Probably not. Defence spending is important. But it's less a question how much we spend than how well. HAVE YOUR SAY: Should Australia follow NATO's lead and increase defence spending? Would you be happy to pay more tax to pay for more military hardware? Is China a bigger threat than the US to Australia? Email us: echidna@ SHARE THE LOVE: If you enjoy The Echidna, forward it to a friend so they can sign up, too. IN CASE YOU MISSED IT: - NSW Premier Chris Minns has refused to condemn the "brutal" actions of police who broke up a pro-Palestine protest that left a one-time federal Greens candidate with a serious eye injury. - A senior public servant who gave a relative's career a leg up while hiding their connection has been found to be corrupt by the National Anti-Corruption Commission. - One of Australia's biggest health insurers admits it incorrectly dealt with loads of claims and left customers thousands of dollars out of pocket. Bupa says it is "deeply sorry" for the conduct Australia's consumer watchdog found to be misleading and deceptive across more than five years. THEY SAID IT: "A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defence than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual doom." - Martin Luther King jnr. YOU SAID IT: Truth might be the first casualty in war, but language falls soon after in a cacophony of buzzwords and euphemisms. "There also seems to be a great shortage of 'guardrails' in Australia in recent times," writes Ian. "No doubt, we could use some on our off-ramps. The expressions 'ethnic cleansing' and 'collateral damage' may be euphemistic, but they drip with irony and let the imagination run amok. So, they are all the more powerful expressions for it." David writes: "A concomitant aspect of the ongoing Coca-Cola-nisation of Australia is the gradual change of pronunciation of certain syllables/words/emphases adopted by news presenters/commentators: 'progress', where 'prog' rhymes with 'dog', and 'process' where 'proc' rhymes with 'boss'. The 'cig' in cigarette is emphasised instead of the 'ette'. Is it an inferiority problem, insecurity, ignorance? Whatever, it is painful." "The 'buzz phrase' that annoys me most? 'Reaching out' when all I did was make a phone call," writes Judith. "Nothing dramatic. I wasn't in dire straights. I didn't need rescuing. It was just an ordinary, garden variety phone call, probably to make an ordinary, garden variety enquiry about hours of trading. Or something equally mundane." Maggie writes: "Ethnic cleansing' revolts me. There's nothing clean about it; it's genocide. 'Decimate' - not nearly as bad as some people seem to think. 'That's incredible' - I hear, 'I don't believe you'. A diplomatic off-ramp? There's danger of simplistic thinking that might cloud a complex reality." This is a sample of The Echidna newsletter sent out each weekday morning. To sign up for FREE, go to It was another ignominious end. Dismantled, cannibalised for spare parts, their bodies were buried in an undisclosed location. They were never very good and were destined to be replaced, but a fatal crash in 2023 saw their demise brought forward. But Defence's jettisoning of the MRH90 Taipan helicopter wasn't the first time it had spent billions on a dud. In October 2008, their rotor blades removed, another terrible decision was shrink-wrapped, loaded onto semi trailers and trucked out of the HMAS Albatross naval air station near Nowra. If the MRH90 decision was a blunder, the decision in 1997 to buy 11 Super Seasprites for our fleet of ANZAC class frigates, was a catastrophe. At least the MRH90 flew. Not a single Super Seasprite became operational. You might as well have piled up in small denominations the $1 billion they cost and set fire to it. Of course, it's not just kit that's meant to fly which has the sour taste of expensive lemon about it. We've had the Collins class subs. Noisy, unreliable and, as discovered last year, corroding in the salt water meant to be their natural habitat. Having already cost about $20 billion, billions more is being spent to keep them going until the AUKUS subs arrive - if they do. The largest ships our navy operates - the two Landing Helicopter Decks, HMAS Canberra and HMAS Adelaide - arrived in the middle of the 2010s riddled with defects. HMAS Canberra chalked up 6000 of them. And the cost to keep them is nudging $200 million a year. I could go on. And on. And on some more. When it comes to spending money on defence, our track record on spending it wisely is far from flash. We have a history of spending a lot of buck for little bang. That's why alarm bells ring when there's a clamour for increased defence spending without any detail about how and where that money should be spent. Much of it is political noise, generated by NATO snapping to attention with a sharp "Sir, yessir!" - or a simpering "Yes, Daddy" if you were nauseated by its sycophancy when Trump visited - when it agreed to a US demand to lift its defence spending to 5 per cent of GDP. The Albanese government has batted away the calls from the usual suspects - Pete Hegseth, Karoline Leavitt and their two local parrots, Angus Taylor and Bridget McKenzie, neither of whom have spelled out of what spending they'd cut or taxes they'd raise to meet the extra spending. The government says Australia will decide on the capabilities it needs and spend accordingly. It's read the room and knows we don't like being told what to do - especially by the Trump administration. And we won't take well to extortion via tariffs either. It also knows Australia doesn't need to strike the same war footing as Europe. We don't have a war on our doorstep. There's no Russia imperilling our borders. That's not to say we shouldn't be clear-eyed about the challenges we face. China's military build-up cannot be ignored but also should not be overstated. It's unlikely to be coveting our distant shores because it's far cheaper to buy the resources we have than attempt to seize them. But can we ever know for certain? Probably not. Defence spending is important. But it's less a question how much we spend than how well. HAVE YOUR SAY: Should Australia follow NATO's lead and increase defence spending? Would you be happy to pay more tax to pay for more military hardware? Is China a bigger threat than the US to Australia? Email us: echidna@ SHARE THE LOVE: If you enjoy The Echidna, forward it to a friend so they can sign up, too. IN CASE YOU MISSED IT: - NSW Premier Chris Minns has refused to condemn the "brutal" actions of police who broke up a pro-Palestine protest that left a one-time federal Greens candidate with a serious eye injury. - A senior public servant who gave a relative's career a leg up while hiding their connection has been found to be corrupt by the National Anti-Corruption Commission. - One of Australia's biggest health insurers admits it incorrectly dealt with loads of claims and left customers thousands of dollars out of pocket. Bupa says it is "deeply sorry" for the conduct Australia's consumer watchdog found to be misleading and deceptive across more than five years. THEY SAID IT: "A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defence than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual doom." - Martin Luther King jnr. YOU SAID IT: Truth might be the first casualty in war, but language falls soon after in a cacophony of buzzwords and euphemisms. "There also seems to be a great shortage of 'guardrails' in Australia in recent times," writes Ian. "No doubt, we could use some on our off-ramps. The expressions 'ethnic cleansing' and 'collateral damage' may be euphemistic, but they drip with irony and let the imagination run amok. So, they are all the more powerful expressions for it." David writes: "A concomitant aspect of the ongoing Coca-Cola-nisation of Australia is the gradual change of pronunciation of certain syllables/words/emphases adopted by news presenters/commentators: 'progress', where 'prog' rhymes with 'dog', and 'process' where 'proc' rhymes with 'boss'. The 'cig' in cigarette is emphasised instead of the 'ette'. Is it an inferiority problem, insecurity, ignorance? Whatever, it is painful." "The 'buzz phrase' that annoys me most? 'Reaching out' when all I did was make a phone call," writes Judith. "Nothing dramatic. I wasn't in dire straights. I didn't need rescuing. It was just an ordinary, garden variety phone call, probably to make an ordinary, garden variety enquiry about hours of trading. Or something equally mundane." Maggie writes: "Ethnic cleansing' revolts me. There's nothing clean about it; it's genocide. 'Decimate' - not nearly as bad as some people seem to think. 'That's incredible' - I hear, 'I don't believe you'. A diplomatic off-ramp? There's danger of simplistic thinking that might cloud a complex reality." This is a sample of The Echidna newsletter sent out each weekday morning. To sign up for FREE, go to It was another ignominious end. Dismantled, cannibalised for spare parts, their bodies were buried in an undisclosed location. They were never very good and were destined to be replaced, but a fatal crash in 2023 saw their demise brought forward. But Defence's jettisoning of the MRH90 Taipan helicopter wasn't the first time it had spent billions on a dud. In October 2008, their rotor blades removed, another terrible decision was shrink-wrapped, loaded onto semi trailers and trucked out of the HMAS Albatross naval air station near Nowra. If the MRH90 decision was a blunder, the decision in 1997 to buy 11 Super Seasprites for our fleet of ANZAC class frigates, was a catastrophe. At least the MRH90 flew. Not a single Super Seasprite became operational. You might as well have piled up in small denominations the $1 billion they cost and set fire to it. Of course, it's not just kit that's meant to fly which has the sour taste of expensive lemon about it. We've had the Collins class subs. Noisy, unreliable and, as discovered last year, corroding in the salt water meant to be their natural habitat. Having already cost about $20 billion, billions more is being spent to keep them going until the AUKUS subs arrive - if they do. The largest ships our navy operates - the two Landing Helicopter Decks, HMAS Canberra and HMAS Adelaide - arrived in the middle of the 2010s riddled with defects. HMAS Canberra chalked up 6000 of them. And the cost to keep them is nudging $200 million a year. I could go on. And on. And on some more. When it comes to spending money on defence, our track record on spending it wisely is far from flash. We have a history of spending a lot of buck for little bang. That's why alarm bells ring when there's a clamour for increased defence spending without any detail about how and where that money should be spent. Much of it is political noise, generated by NATO snapping to attention with a sharp "Sir, yessir!" - or a simpering "Yes, Daddy" if you were nauseated by its sycophancy when Trump visited - when it agreed to a US demand to lift its defence spending to 5 per cent of GDP. The Albanese government has batted away the calls from the usual suspects - Pete Hegseth, Karoline Leavitt and their two local parrots, Angus Taylor and Bridget McKenzie, neither of whom have spelled out of what spending they'd cut or taxes they'd raise to meet the extra spending. The government says Australia will decide on the capabilities it needs and spend accordingly. It's read the room and knows we don't like being told what to do - especially by the Trump administration. And we won't take well to extortion via tariffs either. It also knows Australia doesn't need to strike the same war footing as Europe. We don't have a war on our doorstep. There's no Russia imperilling our borders. That's not to say we shouldn't be clear-eyed about the challenges we face. China's military build-up cannot be ignored but also should not be overstated. It's unlikely to be coveting our distant shores because it's far cheaper to buy the resources we have than attempt to seize them. But can we ever know for certain? Probably not. Defence spending is important. But it's less a question how much we spend than how well. HAVE YOUR SAY: Should Australia follow NATO's lead and increase defence spending? Would you be happy to pay more tax to pay for more military hardware? Is China a bigger threat than the US to Australia? Email us: echidna@ SHARE THE LOVE: If you enjoy The Echidna, forward it to a friend so they can sign up, too. IN CASE YOU MISSED IT: - NSW Premier Chris Minns has refused to condemn the "brutal" actions of police who broke up a pro-Palestine protest that left a one-time federal Greens candidate with a serious eye injury. - A senior public servant who gave a relative's career a leg up while hiding their connection has been found to be corrupt by the National Anti-Corruption Commission. - One of Australia's biggest health insurers admits it incorrectly dealt with loads of claims and left customers thousands of dollars out of pocket. Bupa says it is "deeply sorry" for the conduct Australia's consumer watchdog found to be misleading and deceptive across more than five years. THEY SAID IT: "A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defence than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual doom." - Martin Luther King jnr. YOU SAID IT: Truth might be the first casualty in war, but language falls soon after in a cacophony of buzzwords and euphemisms. "There also seems to be a great shortage of 'guardrails' in Australia in recent times," writes Ian. "No doubt, we could use some on our off-ramps. The expressions 'ethnic cleansing' and 'collateral damage' may be euphemistic, but they drip with irony and let the imagination run amok. So, they are all the more powerful expressions for it." David writes: "A concomitant aspect of the ongoing Coca-Cola-nisation of Australia is the gradual change of pronunciation of certain syllables/words/emphases adopted by news presenters/commentators: 'progress', where 'prog' rhymes with 'dog', and 'process' where 'proc' rhymes with 'boss'. The 'cig' in cigarette is emphasised instead of the 'ette'. Is it an inferiority problem, insecurity, ignorance? Whatever, it is painful." "The 'buzz phrase' that annoys me most? 'Reaching out' when all I did was make a phone call," writes Judith. "Nothing dramatic. I wasn't in dire straights. I didn't need rescuing. It was just an ordinary, garden variety phone call, probably to make an ordinary, garden variety enquiry about hours of trading. Or something equally mundane." Maggie writes: "Ethnic cleansing' revolts me. There's nothing clean about it; it's genocide. 'Decimate' - not nearly as bad as some people seem to think. 'That's incredible' - I hear, 'I don't believe you'. A diplomatic off-ramp? There's danger of simplistic thinking that might cloud a complex reality." This is a sample of The Echidna newsletter sent out each weekday morning. To sign up for FREE, go to It was another ignominious end. Dismantled, cannibalised for spare parts, their bodies were buried in an undisclosed location. They were never very good and were destined to be replaced, but a fatal crash in 2023 saw their demise brought forward. But Defence's jettisoning of the MRH90 Taipan helicopter wasn't the first time it had spent billions on a dud. In October 2008, their rotor blades removed, another terrible decision was shrink-wrapped, loaded onto semi trailers and trucked out of the HMAS Albatross naval air station near Nowra. If the MRH90 decision was a blunder, the decision in 1997 to buy 11 Super Seasprites for our fleet of ANZAC class frigates, was a catastrophe. At least the MRH90 flew. Not a single Super Seasprite became operational. You might as well have piled up in small denominations the $1 billion they cost and set fire to it. Of course, it's not just kit that's meant to fly which has the sour taste of expensive lemon about it. We've had the Collins class subs. Noisy, unreliable and, as discovered last year, corroding in the salt water meant to be their natural habitat. Having already cost about $20 billion, billions more is being spent to keep them going until the AUKUS subs arrive - if they do. The largest ships our navy operates - the two Landing Helicopter Decks, HMAS Canberra and HMAS Adelaide - arrived in the middle of the 2010s riddled with defects. HMAS Canberra chalked up 6000 of them. And the cost to keep them is nudging $200 million a year. I could go on. And on. And on some more. When it comes to spending money on defence, our track record on spending it wisely is far from flash. We have a history of spending a lot of buck for little bang. That's why alarm bells ring when there's a clamour for increased defence spending without any detail about how and where that money should be spent. Much of it is political noise, generated by NATO snapping to attention with a sharp "Sir, yessir!" - or a simpering "Yes, Daddy" if you were nauseated by its sycophancy when Trump visited - when it agreed to a US demand to lift its defence spending to 5 per cent of GDP. The Albanese government has batted away the calls from the usual suspects - Pete Hegseth, Karoline Leavitt and their two local parrots, Angus Taylor and Bridget McKenzie, neither of whom have spelled out of what spending they'd cut or taxes they'd raise to meet the extra spending. The government says Australia will decide on the capabilities it needs and spend accordingly. It's read the room and knows we don't like being told what to do - especially by the Trump administration. And we won't take well to extortion via tariffs either. It also knows Australia doesn't need to strike the same war footing as Europe. We don't have a war on our doorstep. There's no Russia imperilling our borders. That's not to say we shouldn't be clear-eyed about the challenges we face. China's military build-up cannot be ignored but also should not be overstated. It's unlikely to be coveting our distant shores because it's far cheaper to buy the resources we have than attempt to seize them. But can we ever know for certain? Probably not. Defence spending is important. But it's less a question how much we spend than how well. HAVE YOUR SAY: Should Australia follow NATO's lead and increase defence spending? Would you be happy to pay more tax to pay for more military hardware? Is China a bigger threat than the US to Australia? Email us: echidna@ SHARE THE LOVE: If you enjoy The Echidna, forward it to a friend so they can sign up, too. IN CASE YOU MISSED IT: - NSW Premier Chris Minns has refused to condemn the "brutal" actions of police who broke up a pro-Palestine protest that left a one-time federal Greens candidate with a serious eye injury. - A senior public servant who gave a relative's career a leg up while hiding their connection has been found to be corrupt by the National Anti-Corruption Commission. - One of Australia's biggest health insurers admits it incorrectly dealt with loads of claims and left customers thousands of dollars out of pocket. Bupa says it is "deeply sorry" for the conduct Australia's consumer watchdog found to be misleading and deceptive across more than five years. THEY SAID IT: "A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defence than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual doom." - Martin Luther King jnr. YOU SAID IT: Truth might be the first casualty in war, but language falls soon after in a cacophony of buzzwords and euphemisms. "There also seems to be a great shortage of 'guardrails' in Australia in recent times," writes Ian. "No doubt, we could use some on our off-ramps. The expressions 'ethnic cleansing' and 'collateral damage' may be euphemistic, but they drip with irony and let the imagination run amok. So, they are all the more powerful expressions for it." David writes: "A concomitant aspect of the ongoing Coca-Cola-nisation of Australia is the gradual change of pronunciation of certain syllables/words/emphases adopted by news presenters/commentators: 'progress', where 'prog' rhymes with 'dog', and 'process' where 'proc' rhymes with 'boss'. The 'cig' in cigarette is emphasised instead of the 'ette'. Is it an inferiority problem, insecurity, ignorance? Whatever, it is painful." "The 'buzz phrase' that annoys me most? 'Reaching out' when all I did was make a phone call," writes Judith. "Nothing dramatic. I wasn't in dire straights. I didn't need rescuing. It was just an ordinary, garden variety phone call, probably to make an ordinary, garden variety enquiry about hours of trading. Or something equally mundane." Maggie writes: "Ethnic cleansing' revolts me. There's nothing clean about it; it's genocide. 'Decimate' - not nearly as bad as some people seem to think. 'That's incredible' - I hear, 'I don't believe you'. A diplomatic off-ramp? There's danger of simplistic thinking that might cloud a complex reality."
SBS Australia
25-06-2025
- SBS Australia
Veterans mark 75th anniversary of the 'forgotten' Korean War
Veterans mark 75th anniversary of the 'forgotten' Korean War Published 25 June 2025, 8:59 am It is 75 years since the start of the Korean War. The three-year conflict, which began on the 25th of June 1950, is estimated to have killed more than 3 million people. 18,000 Australians served as part of the UN forces, more than 350 losing their lives. A handful of surviving veterans bore witness at a special memorial in Canberra, to what is often viewed as "the forgotten war".
ABC News
24-05-2025
- ABC News
Amid 'terrible' POW conditions in Italy, these WWII Anzacs made a daring alpine escape
When Simon Tancred left Australia to guide hikers through Italy's medieval mountain trails, he never expected it would lead him to a little-known chapter of Australian military history. But when the family of World War II gunner Carl Carrigan approached Simon to retrace the 100-kilometre Italian escape route used by Anzac prisoners of war (POWs), he became fascinated by a story of survival and endurance. After enlisting in 1940, brothers Carl and Paul Carrigan and their two mates, Ron Fitzgerald and Lloyd Leadingham — all from Moree, in country New South Wales — were deployed to Libya in northern Africa. After four days in the trenches, the men were taken prisoner near Tobruk and shipped to Italy as POWs. As winter closed in, the men were held in harsh conditions in Campo 57 in northern Italy among 5,000 other Anzac POWs. "They nailed together these pretty, shabby temporary accommodations … and the winds from Eastern Europe would sweep through," Simon told Richard Fidler on ABC Conversations. Under the sadistic fascist leadership of Colonel Vittorio Calcaterra, food was scarce in the camp and summary executions were the norm. "Just out with a gun and [the guard would] shoot someone there and then," Simon said. After two and a half years, the situation for the Moree men improved when they were relocated to Vercelli to work in the rice fields where they were treated sympathetically. "Conditions were a lot better because in that part of Italy, they weren't fascist sympathisers. In fact, there was a lot of anti-fascism," Simon said. A few months later, when the Italian leadership signed a treaty with the Allies, the POWs were freed, but danger still loomed as Germany seized control of Italy's north. The boys from Moree joined a group of 100 POWs and were led into the mountains by Italian partisans — members of the resistance. The group scattered when a patrol of German soldiers arrived, and the boys hid in a barn near Vermogno, where they were helped by a young woman, who spoke no English, to board a blacked-out tram through Nazi-occupied Biella. Still in their prison uniforms, and feeling they "stuck out like sore thumbs", the men nervously followed the woman's instructions. "[The tram] went through Biella, which by then had been locked down by the Nazis," Simon said. "Carl actually mentions in his memoir that he peeped out the window, and the place was full of Germans, which must have been absolutely terrifying." The woman then smuggled the men into her apartment. "[Her] mother freaked out, of course, but they fed them," Simon said. "They had the best feed they'd had in three years. "They had wine and they slept the night on the floor." The next day, with no maps or guides, the men set off on an eight-day hike to reach the safety of Switzerland. Simon, using Carl's memoirs and old military maps, retraced their journey. "I was experiencing the same big climbs, the same rocky scrambles. It's very exhilarating," he said. Fearing capture by the Germans, the men kept to the overgrown but safer mountain trails. The terrain was unforgiving — granite peaks, glaciers, and plunging valleys — and the men, weakened by years of imprisonment, had no food and inadequate gear. When they arrived in Riva Valdobbia in the upper valleys of the Alps, after days of brutal climbing at high altitude, the men were "absolutely shattered", Simon said. "They hadn't eaten for three days. They'd slept outdoors," he said. "They were debilitated anyway — they had two and a half years in prison camps." However, the valleys were anti-fascist so considered "friendly country" and the men were warmly welcomed. "School kids came out and cheered them," Simon said. "They set up tables in the square, and they gave them … lots of delicious macaroni and wine." They were given a lift by road workers to Alagna at the foot of Monte Rosa — home to one of the highest peaks in western Europe — and a local shepherd led them to his hut to sleep for the night. "Carl was very strong and fit, and he could keep up with this guy, but the other three were really suffering, they were really debilitated and quite weak, but they eventually made it up there," Simon said. After leaving the shepherd's hut, the men zigzagged their way to the top of the Turlo Pass, to an altitude of 2,700m, skirting the eastern flank of Monte Rosa. Far from the goat track he expected, when Simon walked the trail, he found an engineered military-built road that was constructed in the late 1920s to protect against a possible threat from Germany and Austria. "Mussolini, in his paranoia, was worried that the Germans might attack," he said. "He had these stone roads built up at these strategic mountain passes so the Italian army could get cannons up there to hold off the Germans." Ironically, it was never used by the Italian army — only by partisans, allied POWs, and Jewish families fleeing Nazi persecution. From the summit, Simon looked down into the pine forests of the Quarazza Valley below. "It's the most wonderful view," he said. "There's a little emerald lake at the very end, and then a big wall of mountains and these jagged ridges — and that's Switzerland." After the men's arduous journey through the mountains, there was just a one-day "final climb" up the Monte Moro Pass to reach the protection of Switzerland. "You can imagine these guys after two and a half years in POW camps, and then this enormous hike that's taken eight days," Simon said. "But of course, they could see the end. So that would have been what kept them going." In the valley below, they met a teenage boy, Angelo, concealed among the trees who offered to guide them to the border in exchange for their watches and winter coats. Angelo took the men over the river and around the village, which was occupied by the Germans, and up the steep, 1,800m track to the Monte Moro pass. "It was a long, hard climb," Simon said. "Carl was able to keep up with the guide, but the other guys were really falling behind … and were at the end of their tethers." But, out of fear of being seen by soldiers in the village below, Angelo stayed under the cover of the pine forest. "His brother had been killed by the Germans a short time before that … leading other soldiers to their safety," Simon said. "So it was extremely dangerous. As they reached the edge of the tree line, the boy hung back. "He said, 'Switzerland's up there … I can't go any further'." It was a steep, hard hike with a 1,000m climb, but the men reached the border and crossed into Switzerland, where they were greeted by Swiss guards. It was October 1943 and the men were among about 500 Anzacs who were able to escape into Switzerland before winter descended and the route was shut down by the Germans. "By the arrival of March, they'd locked the whole thing down so that it was no longer an escape route," Simon said. "So these guys got over just in the nick of time." Once inside the borders of Switzerland, the men learnt to ski, were able to work, and many Anzacs fell in love, returning to Australia with Swiss brides. For Carl, after just under a year of freedom in Switzerland, he and his brother and their two mates returned to Australia. "Carl married … he had 10 children, and then he moved to Armidale so that his kids could have a good education," Simon said. "He had a number of grandchildren, and he died at 77, which is a little young, but he had a very fulfilled life." Listen to Simon Tancred's full interview on the Conversations podcast on the ABC listen app.
