The Women’s Auxiliary Air force launched barrage balloons. Barrage balloons were huge helium filled balloons suspended in the air by wires. These were especially effective at night as the German planes couldn’t see the wires and flew into them. The Germans also flew in groups, which not only made them an easy target for the British but also meant that they flew into barrage balloons together. This destroyed many more German aircrafts than first intended and proved as on of the essential factors in favour of Britain. Britain was also in possession of ‘Ultra’. This was a device that could crack the German codes and meant that the British could intercept secret messages from the Germans. Ultra meant that Britain could find out what Germany was planning and could act before these plans were carried out.
One event would transpire to alter the whole direction of the conflict, if not the war. On August 25th, one off-course German bomber dumped his bombs so he could have a better chance of getting home and accidentally bombed London, which the Germans were under orders not to do. The British didn't know this, and ordered a counter strike on Berlin, which understandably upset the Germans. Göring and Hitler believed such raids could never happen. Hitler, unable to let such a slight go unpunished, ordered a sustained bombing campaign on London from September 7th. Although horrific, this could not have been better for the RAF, as it took the pressure off them just when they were about to collapse. This move also made the British more defiant and determined to hold out. With the Germans no longer targeting factories and airfields, it meant that more British planes were able to go into the air and fight the advancing Germans. Once they regrouped, the RAF could continue to hit the Luftwaffe without sustaining anything like the damage they had been suffering. They could keep hitting the Germans until they could no longer afford to take any more damage. It soon became clear to the Germans that they were not going to destroy the RAF, and the Germans had suffered far more damage than they ever thought they would. As a result, Operation Sea Lion was indefinitely postponed on the 12th October, and despite further minor raids by the Germans, the Battle of Britain was effectively over. The war was far from over, but the Germans had suffered their first defeat. In four months, while Britain had lost 915 aircraft, the Germans had lost 1733. There was still a long way to go, but it proved to the world that the Germans were not invincible.
In the end, Britain had a lot to be thankful for. The skill and determination of the British pilots could not be underestimated, but luck played an even more important role. The weather, so often derided in England, caused more problems than the Luftwaffe could cope with. Yet, it was the unfortunate action of one German pilot that altered the whole pattern of the war, but saved the RAF. Hitler's ego got in the way and changed Germany's tactics just when they had the British were they wanted them. Ultimately, it could be argued that the Germans lost the Battle of Britain rather than the British winning it. However, while the Germans made tactical errors, it still took the bravery and ability of the RAF to exploit these mistakes and defeat the Germans for the first time in the war.
Study Source A. Do you agree with this interpretation of Dunkirk? Use the source and knowledge from your studies to explain your answer.
At face value, I agree with this source. It shows many boats of all sizes suggesting that these were civilian vessels such as pleasure boats and fishing boats. I know from my studies that ordinary men, not necessarily soldiers went to Dunkirk to help with the evacuation. Most of the soldiers were brought home by destroyers, which were helped by every sort of privately owned vessel. Also, the source shows masses of soldiers on the beaches clambering into boats. I believe this was a correct interpretation as there were 338, 000 men brought to England from the beaches between 27 May and 4 June. Source A shows many aircrafts in the air, although it is able to tell whether they were the RAF or the Luftwaffe, I think it is reliable as from my own knowledge I know that the men on the beaches were under constant fire from the Luftwaffe but they still escaped under the defence of the RAF. Most of the RAF’s pilots were inexperienced and had not faced combat before. By studying the source more closely, I understand that it is a contemporary painting meaning that it was painted at the time of the evacuation from Dunkirk. This adds reliability to the source. Charles Cundall who worked for the government as an artist painted the source. This may decrease the reliability of the source, as Cundall would have painted what the government wanted him to paint. The government at that time was portraying Dunkirk, as a miraculous victory so would have probably wanted the painting to seem very dramatic and heroic for propaganda purposes.
I do not know if Charles Cundall was actually there at the scene. He may have taken photographs or drawn quick sketches of events and then, when he returned to Britain, started to paint the things he saw. This could be a limitation of the source as he may have recorded incorrect events. The source could have also been affected by Charles Cundall’s personal views. The source shows billowing smoke, explosions and planes being shot down. I know from my studies that the RAF and the Luftwaffe were battling in the air and that the beaches of Dunkirk were being bombed, so I feel that this is fairly reliable. However, I feel the source may be exaggerated for propaganda purposes to show the scenes as a miracle, which Churchill used as a morale booster. Because of these points, I consider the events depicted in this scene are true but slightly overstated. I also feel the source is biased as the artist is British and works for the government, therefore painting what the government wanted him to paint, which may be inaccurate to the actual events.
Although the source shows factors of bias, I do agree with this interpretation of the events at Dunkirk.
“Dunkirk was a great deliverance and a great disaster.” (AJP Taylor). Is there sufficient evidence in Sources A to F to support this interpretation? Use the source and knowledge from your studies to explain your answer.
Source A is a contemporary painting by Charles Cundall and portrays deliverance as the source shows many vessels of all sizes and men lining the beaches boarding the boats. This suggests a rescue attempt from civilians. This alone shows great deliverance as ordinary people who had boats sailed all the way to Dunkirk to rescue the stranded soldiers. There is billowing smoke and you can see planes being shot down in the source, this shows both deliverance and a disaster. It shows deliverance as the scenes portrayed seem heroic and brave of the soldiers and indeed the civilians who brought the vessels to rescue them. It shows disaster as the men who were lining the beaches were under constant fire and I know that many soldiers were injured and had equipment and arms seized. This source may be biased though as Charles Cundall was a British government worker which could affect the reliability of the source. Also, he may have recorded incorrect events or emphasised them, which questions the painting’s realism.
Source B is a photograph of the Dunkirk beaches, which shows many troops waiting to be rescued. This source shows deliverance as the troops lining the beaches are waiting for boats to come and rescue them. There is no fire from the enemy or planes battling in the air like source A. The fact that the soldiers were waiting to be rescued is a disaster in itself. This is showing defeat and failure and there is actually no boat or vessel pictured that is seen to be rescuing them. This photograph is primary and I believe this source to be reliable as photographs depict actual events. But the photograph might have only been a part of the beach or at a time when there were no bombing raids – photographs only show a snapshot of what’s happening at a particular moment in time.
Source C shows British troops firing on German planes from the beaches of Dunkirk. This source shows deliverance. It shows deliverance as a British troop is firing on a German plane suggesting that the men where under fire from the enemy and were fighting back in order to be rescued. This itself shows a great rescue as it portrays the soldiers as being heroic and brave. Also, in the distance, it looks as though a ship is approaching implying that the soldiers are about to get rescued. Source C is another photograph and again I believe the source to be reliable as photographs depict actual events. This is a primary source. As in source B photographs only show a snapshot of what’s happening and therefore this source has to be treated carefully.
Source D is a speech made by the Minister of War, Anthony Eden, and shows more deliverance than disaster. The speech suggests that the BEF did not fail but gained experience from Dunkirk and self-confidence. Eden says that the most important factor of their victory was spirit and was the vital weapon of the army. The main point to suggest disaster is where Eden says: “We have had great losses in equipment.” This means that if another battle were to break out, the BEF and army would not have enough equipment and arms to fight as the enemy seized many of them. I consider this speech to be unreliable as it shows bias – Anthony Eden was British and giving a speech to the British public. He was the Minister of War, working for the government, so might have only said what the government wanted him to say or what they wanted the British public to hear – spin. This is a contemporaneous source.
Source E is a report from a British newspaper, The Daily Express, and within it contains many points, which suggest both disaster and deliverance. The opening sentence: “Through an inferno of bombs and shells” immediately suggests a great struggle and a miraculous rescue and is a strong point to imply deliverance. The extract says that tens of thousands of soldiers were home already, implying it was an easy rescue, that men were being rescued quickly and is also another strong point for deliverance. But the source does suggest that the events that took place in Dunkirk were a disaster as the report says that a large proportion of the BEF have been brought back to England. This means that some of the BEF, all be it a small proportion, were still at Dunkirk and waiting to be rescued. The source also mentions that the first to return back to England were the wounded which, from my studies I know totalled 68,000. The Navy also lost three destroyers, auxiliary crafts and a steamer. These also show that Dunkirk was a great disaster. The second part of Source E says: “Tired, dirty, hungry they came back – unbeatable.” This shows that against all odds, the BEF were supreme and indomitable. The source also mentions how the army was never defeated or dispirited showing great morale amongst troops. This source is from a newspaper and newspapers are notorious for exaggerating events. Because of this I feel this decreases the reliability of the source. I feel the quotes used may be overstated or emphasised in order to sell the newspapers. The source is however contemporary.
Source F is a view of a British historian, A.J.P. Taylor, and shows both deliverance and disaster. Historians interpret and make conclusions based from pieces of evidence, however this is still only one person’s view. The first point of deliverance is “Operation Dynamo succeed beyond all expectation.” This suggests that the victory and how it came about was unexpected and, in a way, a pleasant surprise. The source also goes on to say that 860 ships took part, some of which were civilian vessels that were there to aid the rescue. This must have been a great morale booster for the troops and also could be used in a propaganda campaign. According to the source the weather was benevolent in the rescue and how Gort and his force shrank. The source though is evened out with a great deal to suggest disaster: “Almost the entire BEF was saved.” This suggests that there was some of the BEF that was not saved and lost their lives. “It has lost virtually all its guns, tanks and other heavy equipment. Many of the men had abandoned their rifles. Six destroyers had been sunk and nineteen damaged. The RAF had lost 474 aeroplanes.” This means that if another battle broke out concerning England it would not have the facilities, weapons or arms to fight. The original question came from this source. The source is secondary which decreases its reliability and also may be biased, as the author was British.
Overall, considering the points of every source, I believe that there is sufficient evidence from sources A to F to support the interpretation that “Dunkirk was a great deliverance and a great disaster.” Every source shows either deliverance, disaster or both and I feel that there is not more of one than of the other. The points are evenly balanced but I feel some sources may be unreliable. In order to make a more substantial conclusion, I feel more reliable evidence would be needed, such as statistics and eyewitness accounts.