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

How far do the sources suggest that the British army leaders were not concerned with the welfare of soldiers in the British army during the Crimean War?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

´╗┐Olivia Clinton How far do the sources suggest that the British army leaders were not concerned with the welfare of soldiers in the British army? The sources overall show that the concern of the soldiers welfare in the British army is known and that the army leader were aware but had small intentions of doing anything to rectify the problem of their extremely poor conditions. Source one shows that the army leaders were not at all concerned with the welfare of the British soldiers. It is a report by the principle war correspondent with suggests that it is a reliable source and also that there is no attempt to ?hide? the awful conditions by the army leaders... There is the implication that ?not a soul seems to care for their comfort or even for their lives? which supports the statement because it proposes that the army leaders see the soldiers a dispensable and easily replaced. The soldiers are seen as unimportant as they ?have not either warm or waterproof clothing? in the middle of winter, just because they have are not in the same social class as the leaders. ...read more.

Middle

He also blames the “inefficiency of the staff” and uses them as scape goats to divert the problem from him, which seems to be the theme of the letter. It subtlety also, confirms that the soldiers are working too hard, which is the apparent idea of source one. Source three, like source one criticises the army leaders, but more so on the lack of services that are fundamental for the welfare of the soldiers. It is an extract from an ex-soldier from the Crimean war, Lieutenant Colonel Antony Sterling, which was judging the way the war was run. It is a first-hand account and so could be seen as a trustworthy source. He implies the mismanagement of the war departments and compares Britain to France, which slightly mocks GB. Sterling suggests that the British were naïve in thinking that peace would remain and services would not be needed. It agrees with the statement because it suggests there is no “permanent wagon-train…commissariat… or ambulance” for the soldiers, which is important for their welfare. ...read more.

Conclusion

Source two, because it is from Lord Raglan, shows that the army leaders are slightly concerned because if they weren?t, he would not praise ?their untiring efforts? and ?unwavering close attention to their duties? and say so to the queen of England. He also says that his ?whole time and all my thoughts are occupied in attempting to provide the various needs of your majesty?s troops? so indicates that there was some concern for their welfare, and from the highest person in charge. In conclusion, the overall concept of the British army leaders not being concerned with the welfare of the British soldiers is confirmed by sources one and three, as they both are useful in getting an accurate view in how the war was run and underscores the poor conditions thoroughly. And even though source two shows a little concern from Lord Raglan, the idea of substandard quality and treatment is known to him and not much is done about it, making the source slightly contradictory to itself and stresses the other two in their definitiveness. ...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 Modern European History, 1789-1945 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 Modern European History, 1789-1945 essays

  1. Vietnam war

    On April 27, 100,000 PAVN troops encircled Saigon, which was to be defended by 30,000 ARVN troops. In order to increase panic and disorder in the city, the PAVN troops began shelling the airport. With the closure of the airport, large numbers of people who might otherwise have fled the city found that they had no way out.

  2. Free essay

    To What Extent Was The Crimean War A Series Of Accidents? ...

    To play down the perception of Russia being seen as a threatening force, the Tsar in 1844 "protested to Prince Albert that 'He did not want an inch of Turkish territory'. Palmerston thought this a 'great humbug... one is denying the teaching of history if one believes that Russia is

  1. World War Two Sources Questions

    He and his generals and the remaining troops in the city surrendered without a fight. Therefore we can see that the source gives us a very good explanation of the background information as to why the Germans surrendered. However, the actual surrender could be misleading, and we also need to know of the Russians participating role in the whole situation.

  2. Paulus who was commander of the 6th Army, to the Germany army high command, ...

    He didn't fight with his soldiers as Chekov did and only cared about Hitler's orders. This drove his troops to surrender. Q2 Source B is a Soviet photograph taken in Stalingrad in February 1943 just after the German surrender of Stalingrad on the 31st of January.

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