Source A3 is showing the other side of the argument, and contradicts source A2, by saying that life on the front line varied according to where a soldier was stationed, and that many soldiers had time to keep a diary, write tales, make sketches or compose poems. This source shows that trench life wasn’t bad for everybody. This interpretation is likely to be a fair, as it was written by an Historian who analysed data thoroughly, however we do not know that the primary data that he did analyse was reliable, as it could have been exaggerated as well as censored by the government.
Source A6 ‘Life in the Trenches’, confirms source A3 in the first paragraph. It explains the soldier’s duties (e.g. night patrol in ‘no mans land’). The source explains how the troops lived in constant fear, and longed for ‘Blights’, which was army slang for Britain and home. Some soldiers went to desperate measures to get home. For example, they would shoot themselves in the foot so that they could be treated in hospital in Britain.
Troops at the front could send letters, although these were censored so that people at home would not know what was happening, or in the possible event of them falling into the enemies hands.
Source A6 also explains that charities like the Red Cross, sent parcels of luxuries to the troops – razor blades, soap, cigarettes, cake, chocolate, socks and gloves to raise morale, and to give the troops a better quality of life in the trenches.
Many men felt that the horrors that they lived through could never be fully understood by their friends and families: Their experiences at the front changed them. They felt this would cut them off from their old way of life forever.
This source is very useful, as it shows both sides of the story, and in a way, compounds source A2 and A3, as it shows both the good things – luxury rations, and the bad things – anxiety, night patrol. It also shows how, after the war troops never took life for granted. The source (A6) is a twentieth century text written by an Historian, who is unlikely to be biased, and researched the topic fully. Therefor this source is reliable.
During the war many paintings and photographs were produced, Source B1 is part of a painting called ’An Advanced Dressing Station at the Front’, painted by Henry Tonks in 1918. He was an official artist appointed by the government. The painting shows many men suffering from war wounds. As the government appointed him, the government would have had control over what he was painting, so although it shows many casualties. It is not nearly as graphic as it would have been, if it were a totally accurate portrayal of reality. The government may have censored or omitted certain parts of it, therefor it is not very reliable.
Source B2 is an official photograph of men of the 2nd Battalion Cameronians going over the top on 1st July 1916. As the photographer was appointed, I can assume that this photograph has been sanitised, as there is no bloodshed or machine guns. This source is therefore not very reliable, as it is not a good petrel of realty however; it is useful as it shows that the government had a lot of control over what the British public was seeing.
The next source I will analyse, source B3 is a photograph but a photographer appointed by the government did not take this photograph, so it has not been sanitised, used for propaganda or has been censored. The photograph shows the destruction (incinerated trees from shellfire, churned up mud, mangled barbed wire etc) which contradicts source B2. This photograph is likely to be reliable, as the photographer is not working for the government. It is also very useful when linking to source A2, as they are completely different interpretations of the war.
As we know, the government used a lot of propaganda to manipulate the minds of millions of young men and convince them that going to war would be the best thing they would ever do! Such as source B5, a recruiting advertisement placed in the Times. It is clearly written to be interpreted as an extract of a teller from the trenches. It has either been edited to a huge extent, or completely construed by the government, as it is far too chirpy and very persuasive. Another reason why this particular piece of propaganda was constructed was to whip up hatred towards the Germans. “I wonder if the men are responding properly”, (joining the army). “They would if they could see what the Germans have done in Belgium”. This is also used as inspiration to the British public to join in to help Belgium and with the war. This source (B5) although not at all reliable, is very important as it shows how the government used a lot of propaganda to cause great hatred towards the Germans, raise British morale. (“We are happy and as fit as fiddles”), and to persuade men to join the army. This source may also be useful when linking it to real letters and diary entries, written by soldiers.
Although source B8 looks like an advertisement for Mitchell’s Golden Dawn cigarettes, I have reason to believe that this advertisement is in fact a piece of propaganda in disguise as the soldiers pictured, appear to be ‘going over the top’, yet they look excited, happy healthy and clean. (This may be contradicted by later sources). The slogan ‘Time for one more’ implies that soldiers were relaxed when going over the top, and had luxuries like cigarettes. Again this source is not reliable, as it is propaganda. I also know that soldiers ran out of cigarettes; however it is useful as it shows how the government even used advertisements to convince people to enlist.
Section C is soldier’s accounts of fighting in the war. Source C1 is an extract of a teller sent by a soldier to his mother, due to previous research I am aware that letters sent home from the trenches were censored and sanitised. If the information in it were negative towards trench life, so the British public would not know what conditions their family and friends were living in. The soldier explains that they have their turns on and off duty, which is true as it is backed up by earlier sources. The extract says that there is not a lot of action. “A few tray shots, but little more”. This can be linked to source A4, “long periods of inactivity”. The quote “Soon there is the smell of frying bacon”, suggests that a soldier received bacon on a daily basis. Source A5 contradicts this by explaining that “Sometimes the soldiers had delights such as bacon”. This tells us that soldiers rarely had bacon. This source shows us that the soldiers did a lot of various tasks throughout the day. I think that this source is quite reliable, as there are other sources confirming the information in the text however; there are other sources that contradict this. But not that reliable as there is sufficient evidence to suggest that this letter has been censored/sanitised to make the solder’s daily lifestyle sound easier and less of a chore. Also this letter was written at the beginning of the war (October1915), when the soldier would probably have had a high morale, and he may have felt happier with his life in the trenches then than when he would have after spending a long period of time there. This is shown in source B9, where it says. “After many years of the war, the soldiers attitudes had changed and patriotism had faded. It explains that after many years of witnessing the same things, including the fear of air raids and restrictions, soldiers lost their enthusiasm and will to fight as they had done at the start of the war.
Source C4 is a photograph of men of the Australian Field Artillery in a dugout at Ypres in France in 1917. The dug out appears to be very muddy – this compliments source A5 -“Soldiers in the trenches had to face cold mud. The men appear happy and contented and one man seems to be smoking a cigarette. This may be contradicted by a later source explaining that they were miserable and rarely had luxuries like cigarettes. However we also know that conditions in the trenches depended on where the soldiers were stationed. This source disagrees with source B4, as the dugout looks clean, mud free and generally better organised by the government set-up to give the British public the idea that soldiers were living in good conditions. I feel that source C4 is reliable, as the government has not constructed it. This source is also very useful, as it shows what real trench conditions were like and can be linked to other sources.
Source C9 is a small extract from a book titled ‘The First World War’. It describes the rat infestation in the trenches. The extract begins. “To add to the general discomfort”. This implies that the trenches were bad enough without the rats. According to the source, “The trenches were alive with rats”. This is confirmed by source A5, where it explains that. “The trenches were swarmed with them”. The quote...”made the soldiers hate them more fiercely than almost anything else”, implies that they hated the Germans more, but for the rats to come close, shows that they were a big problem. This source appears to be reliable, as there are other sources backing it up. The government sources contradict it but they would, as they would want to cover up the rat problem. Source C9 is also very useful as it shows that the infestation of rats contributed considerably to the misery of the soldiers.
The last source I will analyse in this section is C11. This is an opinion of a soldier that has not been censored. The soldier is commenting on morality and bitterness towards the end of the war. They were so fed up that they would no longer sing ‘God save the King’. “It should be God save us!” This shows that their patriotism had worn right down. This source confirms source C6, as it says that all their energy was taken up by the jobs they did. Source C11 contradicts source B5 where it states. “We are happy and as fit as fiddles”. This source shows that attitudes changed towards the end of the war. This source is very useful when linking to government sources, as they are completely different interpretations of reality. The source is not very reliable as it is written at the end of the war, so emotions would be high, although it does show what the general feeling was, as it refers to ‘us’ and ‘we’, so it is not just the opinion of one man.
I will now analyse the final section; section D. source D1 is explaining the use of gas in the trenches. Poison gas was first used on 22nd April 1915 by the Germans, who, wearing gas masks were able to capture 2000 prisoners and take 51 big guns. By 1918, roughly one shell in four was a gas shell. The painting explicitly shows the effects of a gas attack showing many bodies on the floor (clearly not a sanitised government painting) there is a line of men, blinded by the gas. I have little reason to assume that the artist has exaggerated what he can see, as we know that many soldier casualties due to gas. This source is very useful as it shows the effects of gas attacks and to what extent. A short paragraph underneath this painting explains how the artist refused to paint what he was told (he was appointed by the government) so I have to take into consideration the possibility that he may have exaggerated to put across a point.
Source D3 is a poem composed by a man who served in the war. This poem is very important as it confirms and contradicts many sources for example, the poem begins with “You stand in a trench of vile stinking mud”, this confirms source A5 where it quotes Soldiers had to face cold, mud...”(I can confirm that there was a lot of mud as many sources including one official source state this). The source then briefly explains rat problems- previous sources also refer to the rat infestation.in source D3, it explains that men in the dugouts were ‘quiet for a time’ this confirms source A4 where it mentions ‘long periods of inactivity’. The source also explains that it was hard to sleep because of the ‘stench and slime’ this is confirmed by source A5 where it says, “regular sleep was impossible. This poem also confirms source A5 by emphasising the lice problem.
I think that this source is useful to a huge extent as it links many pieces of information together, making them more reliable. The poem itself must be truthful and reliable as so many other sources confirm it.
Conclusion
Both accounts- soldiers and government appear to be biased and unreliable in some way- the soldiers may have exaggerated to make them look more heroic, and the government kept the British public blind to what the trenches were really like to keep moral high and to recruit more men. The government sanitised the whole war by showing the public pictures, photographs etc of happy, clean and fit soldiers. It appears that the government tried to take over and show the public what they wanted to see – an idealistic picture of war, to keep everyone happy.
The soldier’s accounts however, were completely different and contradicted the official accounts in almost every way. There is a possibility (although unlikely as so many soldiers accounts complimented each other) that soldiers exaggerated the truth to make themselves look more heroic. The reliability of some soldiers accounts could be unbalanced due to emotions running too high, and then saying something in spite or hatred towards Germany, the British government, rats, lice etc.
In conclusion, I find that generally, the soldier’s accounts were more accurate than the governments as, at the end of the day, it was the soldiers who lived and fought in the trenches and would clearly be able to give a more accurate picture of trench life than official accounts.
