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

Source H suggests that poor planning and Winston Churchill were responsible for what went wrong at Gallipoli - Is there sufficient evidence in Sources D-J to support this interpretation? Use the sources and your own knowledge to explain your answer.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Source H suggests that poor planning and Winston Churchill were responsible for what went wrong at Gallipoli. Is there sufficient evidence in Sources D-J to support this interpretation? Use the sources and your own knowledge to explain your answer. Source H, the basis of this essay, is an extract from a GCSE book written by Cate Brett. Brett says that Gallipoli was a complete failure due, in part, to Churchill's involvement. She also blames the British in general for the lack of planning. Perhaps the theme is both about bad planning and also that there was not enough of even that. This source was written for a GCSE audience. Usually GCSE versions of the truth are far more simplified than the view and writing of historians. Therefore it is safe to assume that this source may either be not entirely accurate, or not very detailed. The author does not say whether she blame the British civilian leaders or military leaders. It does not say anything of the spirit of the soldiers, nor how the campaign went in relation to other battles including the stalemate on the western front. ...read more.

Middle

I am more inclined to believe Captain Fermer's account as he was actually there and describes the reasons behind the failures. The intended audience is not clear. Source E comprises of two accounts of the campaign written by two soldiers who fought at Gallipoli. The account was written sometime after the war and so perhaps feelings could have changed. The intended audience is not clear. The first soldier tells us that the whole campaign was a complete failure and although more than sufficient numbers of men were allocated to take the peninsula, the planning and communication was so bad that whilst 2000 soldiers were sitting around, just a few miles away their colleagues were being slaughtered. Clearly not enough intelligence was gathered beforehand. This soldiers places the blame squarely on the shoulders of the generals (presumably Churchill included although technically he was actually first lord of the admiralty, not a general) for a distinct lack of planning. This part does, indeed, fully support Brett's source H although source E does not specifically name Churchill. The second soldier merely remarks that the generals had neither prepared the assault, nor informed the soldiers of their plans. ...read more.

Conclusion

as he was in charge of the naval attacks and it was Ian Hamilton who was in charge of the land campaign, which was ordered with protest from Churchill. This source does not support source H because it is of little relevance. According to Brooman, Hamilton did not even have access to maps and no experience of amphibious landings, so this means that perhaps the blame of source H on Churchill should be shifted to Hamilton and his advisors. The quote underneath the map seems to have no link to the map. Lloyd George says, " Expeditions which are decided upon and organised and organised with insufficient care generally end disastrously." This is true, as Hamilton did not prepare enough for the Gallipoli campaign ending in disaster. The quote, however, was written before the campaign, which means that it holds little relevance to source H although it may show us that the civilian leaders wanted a planned assault and it was the military leaders that did not do it properly. The intended audience is not clear. Source G "From this map, I can see the strategic importance of the Dardenelles and therefore Winston Churchill was correct to attack the straights with the aim of bringing Russia back into the war" Alex Lawrence GCSE 2002/3 History Coursework Analytical November 2002 ...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. How important were Haig's tactics in bringing an end to WW1?

    Austria-Hungary, and gave Germany a long-term lease on the Romanian oil wells. After the United States entered the war in April 1917, it moved rapidly to raise and transport overseas a strong military force, known as the American Expeditionary Force (AEF), under the command of General John J.

  2. Haig in sources

    to the Germans where the attack was coming from and that there was going to be a big offence. Haig wrote "... the barbed wire has never been so well cut." But when the men went over the top they faced machine gun fire and tangled barbed wire, Haig's prediction didn't come true.

  1. "Evacuation was a great success" Do you agree? Source based work.

    2 - 3 years in Wales, and that the host wanted to adopt him. Another example of where evaluation was a success was from a rich host who says that her 6 male evacuees's made the war bearable and enjoyable.

  2. Dunkirk and the Battle of Britain - 'Dunkirk was a great deliverance and a ...

    The men seem too calm to be real, which could be a sign that the source was staged, normally the atmosphere whilst a bomb attack isn't so calm. The photo is also at a distance therefore we cannot see as much detail as we would like.

  1. 'Lions Led by Donkeys'. Using the information in the sources and your own knowledge, ...

    He says 'first the absence of the enemy' and asks the sergeant the second difference which the sergeant replies 'the absence of the major, sir'. This caption attempts to make the reader believe the generals do not know what happens on the battlefield as he is not present.

  2. Sutdy G and H.Prove that F is wrong

    the strategic sense" as it actually was lead by very bad strategy due to the new artillery and movement methods. Another part which is correct is when the source is telling us about the German confidence. " The confidence of the German troops in victory was no longer as great as before."

  1. Some people have the view that British generals like Haig were incompetent leaders. How ...

    The source is reliable because Liddell Hart was actually present during the Battle therefore his opinion should be based on what he witnessed and leadership skills of leaders like Haig. The source is also useful because it helps us think of the other factors that caused the soldiers to die if it wasn?t because of the leadership.

  2. Some people have the view that British generals like Haig were incompetent leaders. How ...

    Although this source is useful in telling us that the generals had to make difficult decisions, it doesn?t tell us what these decisions were or why they caused so many people to think that the generals were incompetent. He also tries to make the point that the soldiers must have

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