Can anybody help me with this sources question? Im so bad at infering and the sources paper it always drags down my history mark as im alright at doing essays!
How far do the sources suggest that british army leaders were not concered with the welfare of soldiers?
and the sources are the first 3 here:
I have points about william russel being in crimea and that the 2nd source is not truthful as you wouldn't tell the queen about the incompetent army
x Turn on thread page Beta
AS sources question..help! watch
- Thread Starter
Last edited by emma237; 31-01-2010 at 16:59.
- 31-01-2010 16:51
- 31-01-2010 19:26
This very much as to do with the supplies + weather as it has to do with Leaders attitudes to the Army I reckon?
Because you see, upon the arrival to the Crimea, the British managed to lose supply ships (because they sank in a storm)
On top of this the winter would have added to this calamity, probably bringing more illness.
I don't believe Source 1 is critical of the army leaders. Actually, I think its sympathy for the soldiers. It doesn't seem geared at the Leaders. I believe this was written to gain more sympathy for readers back home. He was the first international war correspondent after all. So take provenance from that.
Source 2 - Lord Raglan would not admit to failures in the Army even if it were blatantly obvious to everyone else, including HRM Q. Victoria. Its not really a reliable source to use in conjunction with determining the leaders concern about welfare to the Army. But actually you could argue that it would be a kick up the arse to show welfare and show concern - or at least appear to.
Source 3- Aha - Well this one is about French supplies comparative to British. The French were better supplied. I believe the French did an awful bit more fighting as well. But they had more morale I believe. It is critical of the speed in which supplies come. However take into provenance that the supplies ships for the British collapsed/sunk because of the storms.
There is a lot more you could add but this should be good to work with, sources wise, for now.
Of course, if this is a long question, I expect you need to use own knowledge as well.
Talk about the people writing the sources and use provenence with it.
The other events taking place that undermimed the supplies/welfare to the army.
The attitude of the leaders.
Try and bind own knowledge with the sources. It really isn't difficult. Just use the sources to tip nicely to what you've written.
P.S Im not sure whether Russell was even in the Crimea anymore in late November. He went somewhere warm during the winter period. Check that out because it severaly undermimes the source then.Last edited by username202682; 31-01-2010 at 19:29.
- Thread Starter
- 31-01-2010 20:11
Thank you so much! Russel wasn't present in december 1854, just looked it up
- 31-01-2010 20:33
No problem! Happy writing...or not