• 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...


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.


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.


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. 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."

  2. The Gallipoli campaign in 1914 went down as one of the worst military failures ...

    Had some of these mistakes not been made there could have been a very different outcome of the Gallipoli campaign. A big part of the failure was the poor planning and the ill thought out plan created by Winston Churchill.

  1. Is there sufficient evidence in sources A-G to explain why the Gallipoli campaign failed?

    what a waste just because there was no news.' Source D gives an overview of why the Gallipoli campaign failed suggesting that lack of men, supplies and room were partly to blame.

  2. Haig in sources

    The troops may well have been well informed about the operation, but when it has been changed then the plans are no longer useful to the soldiers. The artillery had pounded the German lines for seven whole days before the attack, to weaken the defenses, but there was no surprise

  1. Who was responsible for what went wrong at Gallipoli?

    It does, nevertheless, have certain limitations. Because it is a secondary source it may be found to contain untrue facts if the writer has got carried away or has been falsely informed by other sources. Source B does follow up the other two sources and makes them both more efficient.

  2. How important were Haig's tactics in bringing an end to WW1?

    submarine of the British and Allied shipping on which it depended for food and other supplies. At the outset, the German submarine campaign seemed likely to succeed. Towards the end of 1916, German submarines were destroying monthly about 300,000 tons of British and Allied shipping in the North Atlantic; in April 1917, the figure was 875,000 tons.

  1. "Dunkirk was a great deliverance and a great disaster". Is there sufficient evidence in ...

    He is also saying that the British army has got Great Spirit and those they refuse to accept defeat, which is the guarantee of victory. This source is saying that the evacuation of Dunkirk was a great success but also a great disaster.

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

    Both sides did not know how to use the new weaponry correctly, for example gas. Gas was a new form of defence, it was a very deadly weapon and it killed alot of people; mustard gas ensured that the lungs had dissolved in a matter of hours causing a slow and painful death.

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