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

From studying all of the sources I do not think that it is possible to make an accurate judgement about what happened on bloody Sunday because all of the sources are contradictory and one source contradicts the next.

Extracts from this document...


History coursework. From studying all of the sources I do not think that it is possible to make an accurate judgement about what happened on bloody Sunday because all of the sources are contradictory and one source contradicts the next. The only source that I think is reliable is Source I because it is the only source that is not biased or exaggerated in some way it just says that cold hard facts and that is that the reporter didn't see anything because he was one of nearly one hundred people pinned to the ground and this source only tells you that there was gun fire of some description, but can't help you to find out who started bloody Sunday because the reporter doesn't know and he couldn't see who started firing first either. This is also a good guide to the behaviour of others and helps us to understand the why so many eyewitnesses can not be trusted and are confused. Source A is a picture it shows us a picture of the Irish Frankenstein a big beast which is towering over a cowering scared little Englishman about to be killed by the big Irish beast. ...read more.


The main motive of this source is to defend the British soldiers. The audience is mainly school children from England and Wales. The source does not really help us to find out what happened on bloody Sunday because it doesn't say who shot first and it contains to much bias and opinion, it also contains too much exaggeration like the 'slap' and the 'fire' which was also after the event of bloody Sunday. But the source is useful in a couple of ways because it tells us the date of bloody Sunday and how many people died. Source F is an eyewitness account told by the army commander he said that when he got up to William Street he came under fire from the Rossville flats he and his troops were petrol bombed and had acid poured on them from the top of the flats, he went onto say that when the army are attacked they must protect themselves. This source is exaggerated because the way the commander makes the acid incident sound is that he had bottles full poured on him but really it was only drips of acid. ...read more.


The report goes onto say that even though the people took part in a parade that was banned it did not justify the firing of live rounds. The coroner also said with 'sheer reservation' that bloody Sunday was sheer unadulterated murder. This source is exaggerated because the coroner said that during bloody Sunday the army ran amok but if they had there would have been a lot more damage and deaths than there was. This source is also an official report that tells us a biased point of view for the Irish this is not what we expect because the coroner is probably a protestant and is against the marchers, but again it helps us to understand what happened on bloody Sunday because it give us a point of view and this can also be compared to opposing opinions and views like the one in Source J. Therefore I conclude that although I have got many different opinions of what happened on bloody Sunday I can't say for definite who fired the first shot and started bloody Sunday, but I can say that from the evidence I have seen and read I think that the Irish took the first shot and the army fired upon known or identified targets to protect themselves and other innocent people in the surrounding area's. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Northern Ireland 1965-85 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 GCSE Northern Ireland 1965-85 essays

  1. Free essay

    Bloody Sunday

    Source B was written again on the same day as source A, but this source is about the other side to the leaked evidence. This source shows us how innocent and defenceless the Catholics where. The author of this piece is a Mr John Mullin's an Irish correspondent for the guardian.

  2. What happened on Bloody Sunday?

    Brian Faulkner, Northern Ireland's third Prime Minister in little over a year, introduced internment without trial to counteract IRA violence but his strategy backfired. At 11.15am, that morning Faulkner announced that his government was at war with the terrorists. The Unionist government had previously used internment successfully against the IRA

  1. Free essay

    Ireland-sufficent sources

    of Protestant people felt victimised against by the Catholics as they being the majority had laws favouring them.

  2. bloody sunday assignment 1

    Devlin was quite open about their aims and a three day march was organised from Belfast to Londonderry. They were constantly re-directed as the police would not let them into certain towns. On the third day they were ambushed by a loyalist mob.

  1. bloody sunday assignment 2

    Now there were even more soldiers in Ulster, to settle the situation but this only fuelled the Catholics with more anger. More and more extremist action was taken- and there was an increase of support from abroad for this. The IRA even began to carry out assassinations and bombings, and

  2. Bloody Sunday

    For many years the two communities lived together but with differences between them. In the early 1960's, black Americans began to protest using non-violent methods to demand for civil rights. They wanted to be able to: sit on the same buses as white people, go in the same shops as

  1. Why is itdifficult to give an accurate picture of what happened on Bloody Sunday?

    The Catholics say they were unarmed; the army say there was a member of the official IRA present. The doctor even left his equipment in his car, so great was his belief there would be no violence. The Catholics say they were shot at indiscriminately, and that someone was shot

  2. What Happened at Sharpeville on 21st March 1960?Massacre or Self-Defence?

    Some of the pictorial evidence can be related to the statements from both A and B. The photographs are not as easily linked to one side of the argument because they don not present a biased point of view. The picture from Source C shows similarities with both previous Sources.

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