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

Question 3 History Source D and E

Free essay example:

Study Source D and E. How useful are Source D and E in helping you to understand why the policy of British Government towards Independence for India changed after the Second World War.

Source D is a memoir written in 1945 by Stafford Cripps, a member of Labour Cabinet that won the election on reconstruction policies in Britain. Source D narrates to the historian that Britain was in a position where they could not cope with the concerns in India; therefore, they could not continue solving other issues that had a negative impact on Britain unless India participated. The Source clearly states that the British government was not prepared to stay for long in India. Stafford Cripps realizes that Britain needed to strengthen the control on their own home ground instead of ruling India. His motivation where: to give India independence and furthermore to use the resources to build up the defence of the British society. Cripps loyalty and effectiveness towards this occasion was reasonable, considering that he knew India inside out and wanted to improve the face of Britain. One obvious factor that was stated by Cripps was that it was hopeless to continue the responsibility with India. The memoir was written after the event, which suggests that he could be defending his own role by not telling the truth and not being neutral. This suggests that he could be exaggerating the belief of the historian of the true incident in some extents.

Source E is an eyewitness account in Calcutta in 16th of August 1946 during the Direct Action. The eyewitness is stating his view during the unpleasant issue in Calcutta. Calcutta was a city with all the religions, which could cause anger directed towards each other. Hindus and Muslims where fighting against each other because of their belief that the opposite religion wanted to rule India. The Source show that the situation in India was deteriorating rapidly. The Source is expressing that the policy in Britain changed because they could not manage to pay for the needed resources in India. The weakness of the source is that it is lacking details.

In conclusion, the sources imply to the historian that It was impossible to bring India together because of Direct Action, a time when The Muslim League where planning protests which followed by riots and this lead to religion antagonism. The conditions in which Britain was facing provoked them from ruling India. Therefore they had to persuade India to cooperate. Both sources combined are providing the historian with enough information to have an idea of the event. However, used on their own will give a different picture. Source D is useful because a member of the government published it but on the other hand, it was written after the incident. This demonstrates that the Source could be an exaggeration of what really happened. Source E is not useful because it does not answer the question directly but it may be useful for something else. I believe that there are other Sources, which would give a fuller view of the event.    

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE History Projects section.

(?)
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

Related GCSE History Skills and Knowledge Essays

See our best essays

Related GCSE History Projects essays

  1. Culture Wars: Forster's A Passage To India

    as the more powerful - more as a nuisance that is to be ignored or tolerated.

  2. The Rebecca Riots

    It is perhaps unreliable because it is unlikely that Rev. J. Evans visited every single area in South Wales, but apart from this, the evidence is fairly strong. It was written by a person on the outside, so does not seem to be in any way biased.

  1. History: India Independence Coursework

    Britain's main priority had changed to fighting Communism. Since the author is not Indian, we can be sure he was unbiased in a religious sense. Another strength of this source is that it includes the date and the place which the event was taken place in.

  2. Question 3 History

    I feel this shows immaturity on the man's part because after years and years of having it their own way they couldn't accept the fact that the females would bring another level to politics. Some men hated the women altogether.

  1. Suffragettes Question 3

    The government also had other problems of their own to deal with e.g. Ireland, which led to the women's request for the vote being pushed right to the back of the political agenda. It was reasons like this that led to the fall-out of women between themselves.

  2. Northern Ireland Question 3

    dedicated Republicans, allowed Anti-Sunningdale Unionists to take over half o the percentage of the vote and 11 of Northern Ireland's 12 seats in the UK House of Commons. This led to the end of the Sunningdale Agreement, however in 1985 there came another conference named the Anglo-Irish Agreement.

  1. History Question Answer

    Memory can become clouded and change over time, and 30 years is a long time considering the circumstances. We see that the author of the text was not there on the day of 'Bloody Sunday', which is a good thing because there is less chance his emotions will affect the writing.

  2. Study Sources D and E and use your own knowledge.

    This was another reason why women did not receive the vote. She continues to write 'In 1906 there was a very large section of the public who were in favour of women's suffrage', this may have been a large and biased exaggeration hence they did not succeed.

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