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

The events that occurred in Derry on 30th January 1979 became known as Bloody Sunday. Why have these events produced such different historical interpretations?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

The events that occurred in Derry on 30th January 1979 became known as Bloody Sunday. Why have these events produced such different historical interpretations? On January 30th 1972, civil rights activists were involved in a protest march against internment through Londonderry. British paratroopers, who were deployed on the streets, shot and killed 13 of the marchers and wounded others. Many people have different views on what happened and why. The main conflicting views are those of the paratroopers and their supporters and the views of the marchers and the friends and family of those killed. Source A is a newspaper report form the Daily Mail in September 1999. It is a report on new evidence released from the second enquiry into Bloody Sunday, led by Lord Saville. The headline reads "PARAS IN BLOODY SUNDAY EVIDENCE STORM". This headline states the situation that the report is based on. The report includes the opinions of different people on the new evidence. The new evidence suggests that the original tests, which confirmed that some of the protesters shot had been handling firearms or explosives, may have been contaminated. ...read more.

Middle

Source B is another newspaper report, from the Guardian. The headline reads "BLOODY SUNDAY REVELATION. This backs up what we have been saying all these years: the victims were innocent." This immediately indicated that the writer of the article supports the view of the protesters and the families of those killed. This also shows that the article may be biased. The article also does not include the opinion of the Paratroopers or their supporters on the new evidence. As the reporter seems to support the people who claim that the Paratroopers murdered the protesters, he may have decided that their opinions were false and not worth including. The article opens by saying, "The families of 14 people shot dead on Bloody Sunday last night hailed new and independent scientific evidence as a major breakthrough in their 27-year fight to prove that those who died were innocent and defenceless victims of British paratroopers." As with source A, the families would interpret what happened on Bloody Sunday this way as they had little faith in the government protecting them before, and they are certain that none of those killed had shot at the Paratroopers. ...read more.

Conclusion

He claims that the soldiers spoke of "clearing the Bog" and he told ITN "I understood that they would be clearing away the barricades. They said they would be landing with tanks. I got the impression they would be going to Northern Ireland pretty shortly". This statement does not include anything about the debated facts about Bloody Sunday. It is true that the British Paratroopers went into the Bogside area of Londonderry in armoured personnel carriers and cleared away the barricades. Also, Daniel Porter received this information from off-duty soldiers in a pub. This evidence does not support or discredit either the soldiers or the Protesters side of the story. It is possible that Mr Porter came forward with this evidence in an attempt to get media attention. In conclusion, what actually happened on Bloody Sunday is interpreted differently by different people, and always will be. Nobody can be completely sure what actually happened, as many things happened in different places and nobody was watching them all at the same time. The opinion of people living in Londonderry may be influenced by outside influences like IRA presence, and the views of the Paratroopers and the Government may be influenced by an attempt to defend themselves from repercussions. ...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. What happened on Bloody Sunday?

    The soldiers of Support Company were under the command of a Major in the Parachute Regiment (and were the only soldiers to fire at the crowd from street level). At approximately 4.10pm soldiers of the Support Company of the 1st Battalion Parachute Regiment began to open fire on people in the area of Rossville Street Flats.

  2. The build up to Bloody Sunday, and why it happened.

    These claims also state that the soldiers were not fired upon, and in fact no British soldier was hit by any bullet, nor were any bullets recovered after the fact. In the rage that followed, the British embassy in Merrion Square in Dublin was burned by an irate crowd.

  1. How realistic is a United Ireland in the context of past and present events? ...

    In 1689 the deposed English king James II, a Catholic, landed in Ireland hoping to raise a rebellion and restore the Roman Catholic Religion. He was defeated at the Battle of the Boyne in 1690 by William of Orange. James attempted to win the support of the Roman Catholics in 1687 only increased the religious tensions.

  2. Bloody Sunday - Why interpretations differ.

    A lot of evidence stands by the protesters. But if in fact they are not telling the truth there are reasons why this could be. The marchers were marching against the policy of interment in Northern Ireland, the unfair right for security forces to arrest without trial.

  1. Which of these two sources would a historian studying 'Bloody Sunday' find the more ...

    would mean that it would be easier for information to travel across the vast empire and so for the message of the workers to spread to others. The source suggests that a lot of money would have been made because of the increase in industry and, although the source does

  2. “Why has it proved so difficult to reach agreement about what happened on Bloody ...

    As already stated, Britain was at a point of virtual war with America, and had to stop things getting any worse. Even though Widgery may have wanted a fair deal, for many reasons, the Army's role had to be made less significant and bloody.

  1. The History of Conflict in Ireland.

    Equally, it persuaded their political leadership that they may have to go for something less than what they actually want to implement in one go. That they might have to accept something less than Irish unity. It has persuaded them that politics is about process and compromise and concession.

  2. Biran Friel, Making History, Historical Background

    Then all the Burkes loosened their swords in their scabbards and sprang into rebellion. The rebellion grew. The English simply rounded up all the Burkian pacifist Catholics and killed them. This horror led to the surrender of several of the garrisons.

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