• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Source Work : The War On the Western Front

Extracts from this document...


Source Work : The War On the Western Front 1.Source A and B are different. A describes how ineffective the use of artillery was at the Somme. The second shows the effect artillery use has made. The photograph was taken in September 1916 most probably at the Somme. As it was the largest and most important battle of that time. To decide how reliable the sources are a number of aspects need to be considered. The purpose, Source A is taken from an educational textbook examining Britain at War. It does not deal directly with the issue of Artillery Bombardment. The writer has probably gathered evidence about artillery bombardment at the Somme and written a generalisation about its effects. It is clear the writer had access to information about bombardment as the piece contains lots of details about the tactics used in artillery bombing. The photograph shows the successful use of artillery there are also some aspects to consider, why was the picture taken, probably to be used as propaganda to the British people and other soldiers in the battle. It was obviously published or the picture wouldn't have been taken. It is a prime example of success that the allies needed to boast moral. From my own knowledge the best way to destroy barbed wire placed by the Germans was to use heavy Guns. But unless it was a direct hit it wouldn't normally destroy it completely. ...read more.


So the sources are so different because Haig was victorious at his battles by advancing the line and pushing the German Army Back off French soil. Only to have done this with huge loses to the allied army. Historians can look at his actions and take them both ways. That he was sending troops to be killed to work down the German army or that using attrition he won his battles and was victorious. This is why the interpretations are so different as the historians have looked at Haig both ways. 4.Source F an advertisement. It shows a calm view if trench warfare. From the picture it looks like there isn't a war going on. Maybe this is because it is not an accurate representation of war on the western front. The advert is at the time of D.O.R.A (Defence of the realm act 1914) this allows the government to censor if needed any images to do with the war. From what isn't shown in the picture shows the government did censor the advertisement. To raise moral of the British people at home and the soldiers at war. Displaying how good life is, its not boring or difficult to cope with. The picture is a bad piece of evidence if looked at only to describe warfare if the western front, because the picture only shows selective images. It doesn't show the opposition, true feeling of soldiers, the affect of trench life, any marks left by German shelling and attacks. ...read more.


This then meant that the senior officers had no idea how to win a mechanized war. Nobody was really sure what tactics to use against them. The British tanks, brought in 1916, during the Somme, failed to make a big impact. Another point the war lasted so long was the fact that the failure of the big offensives e.g. the Somme or Verdun, to break out of the stalemate situation between the two sides by piling in as many men as possible and as much ammunition as possible. . After all of this the offensives rarely gained anything. The war lasted a long time because these battles failed but lasted a long time. As is stated in the footage in Source H. Because the battle of the Somme didn't end quickly Haig used attrition to ware the other side down. And shown by Source D the fact that Haig couldn't accept defeat. The Sources do help to show why the war lasted so long. It Sources D,E and F tell of the incompetence of the generals who made mistakes. Sources A and B help to describe and show how it wasn't always plain sailing when using artillery. And this also slowed up the chances to win the war. Source G explains how terrible life was in the trenches and how low moral was. A soldier who is unwilling and not enthusiastic won't perform as well as a soldier who is. The sources do help to bring some understanding of why the war lasted so long. Instead of a few month's it was a few years. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level War Poetry section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level War Poetry essays

  1. "'Lions led by donkeys.' How valid is this interpretation of the conduct of British ...

    Douglas Haig was the leader who came under much of the blaze from the British soldiers. The extracts in source C3 are useful as they are written by ordinary soldiers and express a lot of hate towards Haig; however it is not certain that their feelings were shared by all of the army.

  2. Why was Trench Warfare so terrible

    Vaughan did not mind being in the trenches in the months before August (Passchendaele). During this period he actively sought patrol duty in no man's land, claiming that "Fighting patrols are the finest stiffeners of morale." Vaughan's optimism remained despite the fact that he did not get along with any of his fellow soldiers.

  1. The war on the western front.

    allows us to have insight in what other soldiers told him soldiers often felt Haig and his staff didn't understand trench warfare and didn't really care also he says they "slogged" this tells us they didn't really want to go.

  2. The Battle of the Somme 1916

    They were allowed to do anything to help the war effort and keep it popular. This meant that they could censor newspapers or letters from soldiers to their families that might reveal tactics, dampen spirits or turn people against the war.

  1. The impact of bombing during WWII

    The source is an extract from 'The twentieth century' by J Hamer 1980. It's purpose is to inform readers of the actual amounts deceased due just to air raids, to highlight the affect bombing had on the cities so we can predict the broader scale impact this might have on people living there.

  2. Were the British Generals like Sir Douglas Haig responsible for the high casualty figures?

    a quote says ' the Ypres salient was a disastrous place from which to launch an attack, it was surrounded on three sides by the Germans'. This quote tells us that Ypres was not the best place from which to attack.

  1. How Did the Blitz Affect Everyday Life in Britain?

    In 1983 he recalled; "I think the government of the day panicked. Of course, there might have been spies. But I can't believe it was necessary to lock up thousands of people, some of them great scientists and engineers who could have been useful.

  2. Why is it so difficult to know what soldiers thought? ...

    men joined the war the rations had to be reduced to just 6 ounces of meat a day. The main source of food was pea soup with a few lumps of horse meat. The soldiers just couldn't eat most of the food it was so disgusting.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work