• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month
  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. 9

Which of these two sources would a historian studying 'Bloody Sunday' find the more useful?

Extracts from this document...


a) Study sources A and B Which of these two sources would a historian studying 'Bloody Sunday' find the more useful? Both of these sources are from the time but they are written from different viewpoints and in different styles. Because of this, a historian would find both sources useful in different ways. As source A is a diary, it was probably not meant to be read by other people and it would therefore be useful to the historian in discovering how the Tsar actually felt about the events of 'Bloody Sunday'; finding out if he agreed with the government's reports of the incident. Source B is a newspaper article written to influence the readers and so it would be useful to the historian because they could find out how 'Bloody Sunday' was portrayed to the public. I think source B is useful to a historian because it does not seem extremely biased. For example, the journalist does say that warning shots were fired, this was mentioned in many accounts and is so thought to be a fact. He also uses the words 'finally they fired' which suggests that the Cossacks (soldiers) were reluctant to fire and not, as other accounts say, that they just fired without warning at the crowd. However, the journalist does paint a very dramatic picture in the mind of the reader with a lot of violence mentioned and details added to provoke emotion such as 'women and children', suggesting that the Cossacks fired at the weak. This overly descriptive language would not be useful to the historian trying to find out facts but would help show why so many people were angry about 'Bloody Sunday'; because the way it was portrayed made them feel sympathy to those who were there. Source A is also not extremely biased. It could be used to show that it was perhaps more the advisors to the Tsar rather than the Tsar himself that wanted to portray the workers as entirely to blame for the 'Bloody Sunday' massacre. ...read more.


To the French people, the picture may seem reminiscent of the French revolution, a part of their history that they would obviously feel connected to and so they would feel connected to this picture and the people in it. The building in the background looks like the Arc de Triumph, a famous French landmark; the French people could therefore feel empathy for the marchers, as it would appear 'closer to home'. All of these elements, along with the fact that the picture is drawn as if the person viewing it was one of the marchers, are there to influence those seeing the picture to the marcher's 'side', to make them feel sympathetic towards the marchers and angry at the Russian government and so to get more revolutionary supporters. e) Study sources G, H and I These three sources are not about 'Bloody Sunday'. How far do you agree that they have no use for the historian studying 'Bloody Sunday'? Although the three sources G, H and I are not about 'Bloody Sunday', I do not agree that they have no use for the historian studying 'Bloody Sunday'. They do not give details about the actual day of the massacre and so if the historian wanted only facts about that day the sources would be of little use. However, they are useful in informing the historian of the situation in Russia and so helping the historian to understand the motives of the marchers. Source G is useful because it informs the historian of the events of the Japanese war. It shows how the Russian Empire was starting to lose a little of its prestige and also shows how the Tsar was not always right. The Russian government assumed that they would win the war with Japan as they had a much larger population and they thought this would be good as the nation would 'rally behind the Tsar'. ...read more.


Source I shows that there was a very rapid increase in the amount of industry in Russia in the time leading up to 'Bloody Sunday'. This would probably mean bad working conditions in the factories because they had to be built quickly and so would probably not be very safe etc. It would also probably lead to overcrowded living conditions in the industrial cities as the population would also have increased rapidly with the many peasants moving to the cities to work in the factories. This is also shown in source K where we can see that most of the industry was in a small area, leading to overcrowded houses because there was little room to expand outwards. St Petersburg was also at the very edge of the country, showing us that not all of the country was involved as much of it was very far away. Source J seems to suggest that the zemstva (district councils of Russia) were to blame for the discontent within the workers and that they encouraged people to think against the Tsar. Tsar Nicholas specifically mentions the word autocracy (rule by one person), this was important to him but also something that many disagreed with and felt that there should be an elected parliament or Duma to run the country. So, source J does not support the view that 'Bloody Sunday' was caused by the poor living and working conditions in St Petersburg. However, as the source is from the Tsar, he would probably not want to admit that the workers were unhappy with their situation as this might make him look bad. Also, the source was written nine years before the incident of 'Bloody Sunday' and before many of the problems began in St Petersburg. Overall, I think that the sources mostly support the view that the poor living and working conditions in St Petersburg caused 'Bloody Sunday'. Although there are some sources that do not seem to give any information on the subject, almost all others seem to support this view. 3668 words Laura Coles 10R - Miss Breene - 1 - ...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. Free essay

    Bloody Sunday

    This was set up by Tony Blair, this was because he was a labour prime minister therefore if the enquiry blamed the soldiers he couldn't get blamed. Then if the soldiers where found guilty, it would be conservatives fault, this allowed Tony Blair to stay as a neutral party.

  2. Bloody Sunday

    At 3:25pm approximately the march passed "The Bogside Inn" then came to Westland Street before going down William Street. There is confusion as to how many marchers there were at this point.According to observers there were as many as 20,00. The widgery report estimated around 3,000 and 5,000.

  1. How far do these two sources agree about what happened at Sharpeville on the ...

    A, the reporter says 'A constable shoved his rifle against my windshield. Another pointed rifle at my chest. Another leaned into the car shouting, "Have you got a permit to be here?" I said no whereupon he shouted, "Then get out, get out!

  2. What Happened at Sharpeville on 21st March 1960?Massacre or Self-Defence?

    His strong religious character would be assumed to give a truthful opinion of what happened at Sharpeville. However, knowledge of the Anglican Church's opposition to the Apartheid system would have meant that even the Bishop could have portrayed a biased point of view.

  1. Why Did ‘Bloody Sunday’ Take Place? (Russian History Sources Question)

    It shows the Arc D' Triumph in the background, with the soldiers just in front, and opposite the soldiers are the peasants who are trying to improve the situations that they are having to work in. The Arc D' Triumph represents the French revolution and freedom for the French.

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

    Those present that day on the march and Nationalists disputed the report's conclusions. Since then, the report has been discredited entirely. A second commission of inquiry was recently established to re-examine 'Bloody Sunday'. The Saville Inquiry is engaged in a far more wide-ranging study, interviewing all the key witnesses; the locals, soldiers, journalists, politicians, etc.

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

    Whilst a report can sum up a deal of personal views and stalwart defence of a belief, the individual statements can seem biased in their own right. As Bishop Edward Daly said afterwards, "What really made Bloody Sunday so obscene was the fact that people afterwards, at the highest level of British justice, justified it.".

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