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

Why have later interpretations of the Battle of Britain not always followed the popular myth?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Why have later interpretations of the Battle of Britain not always followed the popular myth? Looking at later interpretations, I can see that they have not always followed the popular, for example interpretation 7 is an article taken from the daily graphic in 1944, bearing in mind that the war is still not yet over. It was written at a time when it was clear that the allies were going to be victorious. This interpretation is reliable because the writer Sir Arthur Bryant had very traditional views and in his writing of history he was not afraid to include his own views, which I suppose could be looked upon as biased but probably just looked at as a more realistic point of view. There are really three messages of this interpretation. These are 1) that the pilots played an important role in winning the war but there are several other reasons for Britain's victory. 2) Britain withstood terrible bombardment, survived and became triumphant. 3) Britain saved the world. This interpretation is different however because it considers many more factors why this war was happening etc. for example, this article has been written after there has been time to reflect and gather information and get a full range of reasons. ...read more.

Middle

war and I think that by writing this it is like his final word or what happened, coming from the prime minister is therefore going to be to the public "the truth" and maybe Churchill thought that by doing this it would stop so many different interpretations about the war. However, this was not going to be the case with such a big change in history, it was inevitable that there would be many interpretations and that they would not all be sticking to the earlier popular interpretation of "the few" and "their finest hour". The strengths of this are that there are more factors and more concentrated on Russia, and the fact that it is written by the most influential figure from the war at this time. It is also therefore going to be well researched and a good historical view despite all I have said. The weaknesses of this are that it is biased slightly as most things will be- depending who wrote it, and that Churchill fails to mention Dowding at all and the fact that he played a huge part in helping the RAF but because Churchill didn't get on with him at all he felt it far more important to talk about Lord Beaver Brook- his good friend. ...read more.

Conclusion

To stir up emotion and to be controversial? Maybe it was just to inform people that there was another side to what they believed in already and to sell this new information to students is much more effective because they are going to be open minded because they were not involved in the war obviously and they are most likely not to be biased. It was a new version of the Battle of Britain openly published, and it is saying aswel that the myth was highly distorted. It is not so much an argument that this is being brought to a discussion but more of a debate. Clearly this is easily achieved now as the war is many years over and people are willing to look at it from another perspective. The strengths are that it is well researched and accurate historically, it is also the first to discuss that the popular myth may have been taken out of context over the years- and that others have suggested this. The weaknesses are that is this his own idea to get the students active in having an open mind to interpretation or was he being serious in what he was saying. Another thing is that he omitted glorifying the pilots in any way and didn't mention that of course they had something to do with the British winning the war. ...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 International History, 1945-1991 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 International History, 1945-1991 essays

  1. Describe the historical claims of Britain and Argentina to the Falkland Islands

    So they stood up for the Falklanders and fought to keep them. Originally the British policy towards the Falklands was to leave them be and let them stand on their own if they were to be attacked. In 1980 a meeting was held between the British and Argentine governments.

  2. American History.

    The intent/result of the Spoils System was - In the Presidential Election of 1828, poor J.Q. was up against all the rabid Jackson supporters who had been waiting for their revenge. Mudslinging was the order of the day [think modern campaign tactics], but e/t the NRs were able to

  1. The popular myth of the battle of Britain quickly emerged during the early part ...

    These speeches were made to not only show the importance of Britains survival in saving the rest of the world from Nazi conquest, but it also shows that this victory rested on the efforts of "the few". These speeches are good examples of wartime propoganda as they describe to the

  2. A Battle Without Borders : Terrorism

    Everyone must see that the war against terror is one of these battles. They are the battles the U.S has been fighting for because this war is going nowhere. Bin Laden is a very intelligent man and over a long period of time, he's not going to get caught.

  1. Was Churchill a manufactured hero 1930-1945?

    Appeasement on the other hand would release Britain from all her European duties. With Britain forcing herself out of European affairs this left France vulnerable to old enemies. While France was prepare to act to prevent any Germany military action Britain was not prepared to enter another major war.

  2. Why was Britain able to win the Battle of Britain

    The R.A.F. used this information to concentrate its fighters in the areas where they expected the Luftwaffe were about to attack resulting to the British planes waiting for the German ready to attack them. This clever piece of cutting edge technology helped the R.A.F.

  1. The Battle of Atlanta.

    At this time after almost four months of a mix of siege, battle and trench warfare the total Confederate casualties were estimated at 35,000 and Union loss was around 31,000. Before Hood's evacuation he ordered all public buildings and possible union assets destroyed.

  2. Their Finest Hour - The Historical Significance of the Battle of Britain.

    The Poles, who fought bravely, had, in reality, little chance of surviving the German 2 onslaught. Forced to defend towns and cities using cavalry and aging biplanes against modern tanks and aircraft they could, at best, hope to delay their inevitable defeat.

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