It is useful because she gives constructive information about how children were chosen by each family and how she felt towards that experience. Also she gives dates and information for example she clearly states the way in which the children were selected by the families taking in the evacuees and on how they were evacuated. A strength about this source is that it is a first hand account and it sounds fairly honest and she does not have any reason, that we know of, to lie. Another strength about this source is that it gives specific information for example what her parents did to help during the war in London and what school she went to.
However this source does have some weaknesses when it comes to using it to find information of the lives of evacuees during the war. The main reason for this being that it was written fifty years after the war broke out and there is a possibility that she hasn’t got the hole picture, when she states ‘But I’m not quite sure’ in the source. Another weakness is that of her memory. She might have a selective memory she might not want to remember certain things, or she might have an accumulated memory which suggests that she might have other peoples’ memories fused into her own. Also she is only one example of an evacuee so we have to take into account that not everyone’s experience of the war and evacuation was the same.
Even though Source L has more weaknesses, we have to take into consideration that it still adds up to the sum knowledge of what we know about peoples’ experience of evacuation during the Second World War.
Question 4
Sources H, I, J and K can be used as valuable evidence for an enquiry into the impact of war on the civilian population in the area of Hammersmith. However, these sources are only valuable to a certain extent and we need to ask ourselves if we can trust them. Also it is necessary to compare the value of all the sources so that we can see which one would be the most useful.
Source H is a photograph and along side this photograph it tells us that there was a bomb in Tunis Road in Shepherds Bush. It also tells us that several buildings were destroyed, a crater was made in the middle of the road and six people died and others injured. This source suggests that people’s lives were affected because some people lost their houses, utilities such as water pipes were destroyed and that public transport such as buses were affected because of the crater on in the road. However, you can not trust it completely because it was chosen for a competition forty years after the bomb had occurred which makes us question why the editor chose to use that specific photograph. Also we do not know who took it and it is only one road which means we do not know, based on this, one picture that this happened in every road.
Source I is also a photograph of bombed houses and partially destroyed buildings on Dalling Road in Hammersmith. The provenance alongside the photograph tells us the date in which the photograph was taken and also shows us that local authorities got involved such police and the ARP. It suggests that there was some damage to the road and possibly that the mains or utilities were damaged such as the electricity cables. It also suggests that people whose house had been affected went back to collect their possessions as there are, what looks like, furniture and personal items on the side of the road. However we can not trust it totally because we do not know who took this photograph or for what reason. Also it is only a photograph of one road so we can not assume by just one photograph that this happened in other roads.
Source J is a set of statistics on ten different boroughs of London. These statistics tell us that the borough of Hammersmith was affected by the bombs but not as seriously damaged in comparison to other boroughs. For instance the Borough of Hammersmith had a total of 13,235kg of bombs dropped and 681 serious casualties whilst the borough of Westminster had a total of 125,258kg of bombs dropped and 2,142 serious casualties. This source suggests that Westminster was one of the most severely affected boroughs because they were trying to aim towards the houses of Parliament and also Buckingham Palace. They also bombed boroughs in the east end which had docks for example Lambeth and bridges which suggests that they wanted to cut all the supplies and communications. However it is not completely trustworthy because it is difficult to keep an accurate record during war times and because we don’t know who produced it, why they produced these statistics, why they produced it and when they produced it. Also they don’t give us the specific definitions of some of the words they use such as ‘serious’ casualties and houses demolished and ‘beyond repair’. Finally, not all the London boroughs are included so we can not see the full impact of the war throughout the whole of London.
Source K is a very personal account of what someone went through written in a letter in 1940 which tells how some people felt during the war and how they reacted. It tells us that some people’s morale was not very high. It also tells us specific places of where there were explosions, times and dates in which these bombs took place and what types of victims there were. This letter suggests that people tried to lead a normal life despite what was happening. We can not trust this source fully because it says the letter is edited and it is incomplete. Also because not everyone during the war went through the same experiences and in the letter we can tell that the person wanted to get out of London as soon as possible, which might mean that they might have exaggerated.
In conclusion I believe sources H and I to be the most valuable. This is because by looking at the photograph it tells you a lot of information and you can actually see what it was like after a bomb had hit the area and also the provenance does give us some information as well alongside the image. I have taken into account that these sources are not completely trustworthy, however I chose these images based on how valuable they are not on reliability.
Question 5
Source M is written by Reginald Nicholson to the editor of the times stating the further problems to be faced as a cause of evacuation. However we need to discuss in further detail whether the concerns raised in his letter were justified.
In source M he states that some children had been evacuated without their mothers, which would lead to a very great strain on the women of the welcoming household and as a result of this the children would end up running wild. He also stated that once the days had become shorter and the weather colder the effects of over crowding would be greatly felt. Which would lead to great dangers of epidemics or sanitation problems therefore would also put a strain in the medical attention. This because of the sudden increase of the population which would lead to more doctors having to be called up. However we can not trust this source because in the last sentence he states ‘so I’m told’ which suggests that he has heard of these issues through others of which we do not know.
Source L is an account of the experiences of a seven year old girl, Barbara Walsh, fifty years after the Second World War. According to source L it suggests there wasn’t a great strain on the welcoming women even though the child was not with their parents. As for the children running wild, this was not the case as Barbara Walsh only behaved as a typical girl her age would behave. This source suggests that there was no overcrowding as Barbara Walsh only shared a room with her sister. As for epidemics and sanitation, there seem to be no concerns because she states that they kept their potties in the cupboard and the bathroom had heated towel rails. Finally, in this source it suggests that there were doctors available in the village Barbara Walsh was evacuated to. This is because Mr. Watson, the head of the family with whom she was staying, fractured his skull but survived which suggests that he probably was assisted by a doctor. However, we cannot trust this source completely because it was written fifty years after the war and there is a possibility that she might not have remembered everything exactly as it had happened. Also she the fact that she is only one example of an evacuee and we have to take into account that not everyone had the same experiences, for example not everyone went to a wealthier home.
Having studied a few sources in the Peace and War history text book I have gained extra information about the issues mentioned in source M. According to the War and Peace text book some mothers did accompany their children during the evacuations. This is shown when in one of the sources it says both mothers and children were bed wetters. In another source it states that even when people were evacuated to poorer homes, they were still concerned with sanitation. In one of the sources in this text book it gives us an example of a thirteen year old boy who dammed a stream which caused the village church and six houses to flood. In the text book there was a report from the women’s institute about the state of which the children arrived. To avoid epidemics they checked the children’s hair for head lice. According to the source in this text book there seamed to be no strain on the welcoming women, quite the opposite in fact when one source states that the six lads one woman was taking in, made the lonely war not only tolerable but often enjoyable. However we can not trust this source completely because the sources are only one example of certain concerns, this means that we do not know if the rest of the country was like this as well.
By looking at source L and through my own knowledge I can clearly say that the concerns raised in source M were not clearly justified. In his letter to the editor he does not give evidence to back up what he is saying. Also we do not know if what he states is the full truth as he has not confirmed it him self, this is shown by when he says ‘so I’m told’.
Question 6
A hero is someone who has carried out a brave and selfless deed to help others around him. During the Second World War, many civilians pulled together like heroes to withstand Hitler during the Blitz. However this was not always the case in some situations.
Source F is an article published in the evening standard, in 1943, of a court allegation involving two men. This allegation stated that these two men were being accused of selling metal to the council which was not in a very good condition for building bomb shelters. These two men were selling these pieces of scrap metal to the council for the same price as they would sell metal in a good condition, which means they were taking advantage of the war to make profits for themselves. However this source can not be trusted completely as it is a court allegation which is not yet proven, and also because we do not know who wrote this source.
Source M is also an article published in The Times in 1939. This article states what Reginald Nicholson believes to be problems to be face as a cause of evacuation. He believes that the evacuations during the Second World War caused different problems including overcrowding, epidemics and sanitation. In this article he only states the problems caused by the evacuation but he does not give any idea of how to solve them. This article makes us think that he is being very pessimistic about what people are trying to do to help during the war. However we can not trust this source completely because he states in the last sentence of his article ‘So I’m told’ which suggests that he has heard this information from another source which we do not know who it is.
Source E is a statement made by a woman called Vera Godden who was a member of the Civil Defence Corps also known as the ARP during the Second World War. In her statement she says that a range of different groups of people helped out during the war as volunteers to help patrol the streets at night. These groups which included men and women, teenagers from the age of fifteen to eighteen, also the elderly and disabled people were organised so that everyone felt that they were helping during the war. However, this source cannot be given our full trust because she states that she is always sad that there has not been much recognition of the part played during the war by the Civil Defence Corps. By this statement it suggests that she might have exaggerated in certain aspects so that the Civil Defence Corps would get the recognitions she had wished for.
Having studied a few sources from a GCSE paper two from 1994 I have gained extra information to say whether or not I agree with the statement that civilians pulled together like heroes during the Second World War. According to Source J from the GCSE exam paper it states that whenever the sirens went off, people began running around not knowing what to do, showing that they did not take the initiative to remain clam in order to help the situation. However we do not know who wrote this secret report to the government or how they found this information. Source K which is a diary entry of someone who knew several members of the government, wrote that as the King and Queen visited the destroyed areas, they were booed by the civilians. This suggests that people were very bitter and they’re morale was not very high. However there are some complications with this source as he states ‘it is said that’. This suggests that he does not know for certain that this event took place. Finally, Source L, which is from the book Don’t You Know There’s A War On states that many men and women continued to turn up for work even though there was widespread fear during the Blitz. This suggests that people were willing to do what it was necessary to help they’re country, even if it meant facing danger. However this source is not very reliable as we do not know who collected this information and for what reason they did this.
From looking at Sources F, M and E and my own knowledge I can clearly say that there were some people who were extremely helpful during the war and did a great deal for their country. However we can not ignore the fact that there were some who took advantage of the war and others who were very pessimistic about the war and did not do a great deal to help.
