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

How useful are sources A, B and C in understanding what the battle of Dunkirk was like?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

How useful are sources A, B and C in understanding what the battle of Dunkirk was like? To determine the usefulness of sources A, B and C we must first look at the value, limitation and reliability of the sources towards the question, what was the battle of Dunkirk like? Source A tells us what the state of the army was like at the time of the battle. It does not however tell us what the battle of Dunkirk was like. The person who wrote the article is a commander in the navy. He is commenting on the state of the army so he does not have as much expertise as a commander in the army. However, he was there at the time of the battle so it is a primary source which makes it more reliable than something written after. ...read more.

Middle

The source does show us what the state of the army was like but that is not the question. Source B is a lot different from source A because it does relate to the question. Bill Elmslie was there at the time so he did have access to information about the battle. Although Elmslie is in the navy, he speaks about the army in a much nicer way than Kerr so Elmslie can be trusted more. However, it does not corroborate with my own knowledge because the army and navy did not get on. This leads me to believe that it may be propaganda which makes it a lot less reliable. Although it may not be reliable, it is still has some value in answering the question. It tells us that they were still being attacked on the boats and that they were getting attacked on the beaches. ...read more.

Conclusion

However, as the information corroborates with my own knowledge and Source F I would say that it is not bias or propaganda. In conclusion, I think that sources B and C are useful in understanding what the battle of Dunkirk was like. Source A however, does not help us at all. It tells what state the army was in but this is from one person's point of view and it is only one section of the beach. Source B may be propaganda but it still tells us that the danger was not over once you were on the ships. This corroborates with my own knowledge because in Major Taylors talk he said that they still got attacked on the boats. Finally, source C tells us that they got attacked from the air and that the troops were still fighting back. As this source corroborates with my own knowledge and Source F it a very reliable source. ?? ?? ?? ?? ...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 Britain 1905-1951 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 Britain 1905-1951 essays

  1. Analysis of different sources of information about Dunkirk.

    Both sources are limited because the sources may have been affected by hindsight and that they may have had a particular view about the evacuation. In source K J.Burn is offering opinion rather than fact making the source limited. Whereas with source F Sources C and E agree the statement,

  2. Was Dunkirk a defeat?

    morale for the people and to uplift the "Dunkirk Spirit", and also to boost his leadership. Another aspect of victory was the nature of the evacuation; this is because many lives were saved in such a short period of time.

  1. Defeat, Deliverance or Victory? Which of these best describes Dunkirk?

    so Churchill could just be too involved in the evacuation to give a fair depiction. With such a short space of time to plan this evacuation it was never going to be orderly with dishevelled troops left to fend for themselves and Luftwaffe bombing panicking the troops and left them just wanting to return to Britain.

  2. How successful was Dunkirk

    Also the source is Admiralty Records so the figures should be correct. However the source is limited in its usefulness as it fails to mention the amount of dead soldiers so success is hard to measure. Another aspect of victory is the nature of the evacuation.

  1. How useful are sources A, B and C in understanding what the Battle for ...

    This source offers little to help change our understanding of events, apart from the comment that there were very few soldiers, hardly any officers, and they were not all lined up neatly, but in a 'rabble'. Source B again here does not tell use anything new about the battle; in

  2. Source A, B and C are useful when finding out what the Battle of ...

    Source C contradicts source A, as source A says that the men were completely useless, where as source C demonstrates the bravery of this one man although there was still a lack of organisation. In conclusion, none of the sources have dates with them, so they could have been written at anytime.

  1. Defeat, Deliverance or Victory? Which of these best describes Dunkirk?

    More importantly 68,000 troops did not make it safely home being killed, captured or injured. From my research I know that once on a boat, troops were still not safe from air attack, mines or submarines many ships and boats were sunk or badly damaged whilst returning back to Britain.

  2. Defeat, deliverace or victory? Which of these best describes Dunkirk?

    This lessens te credibility of his evidence. The source was written at a later date and so some aspects may have been omitted or exagerated, there may also be bais but this is difficut to establish. This source does provide a date which is the 27th of may.

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