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

Who was responsible for what went wrong at Gallipoli?

Extracts from this document...


1. Target: Main Target - Evaluation of sources for their utility (AO 6.2 with AO 6.1) The sources show various views of Anzac soldiers from different perspectives. Source A, a primary source, shows a biased view of Anzac soldiers but does not give much information because it is a drawing and done by an Australian artist. It is limited because there are only so many things that can be learnt from pictures, to show the effectiveness of the source it needs to be backed up by another, more informative, source. It does show, however, how easy going and laid back the Anzac soldiers were but to validate this fact another source must be used. Source C, another primary source, even though it was only published recently, It was written at the time so it is still original, gives a good evaluation of Anzac soldiers but does not give the full picture as it is just a small subjective extract from a diary. It is very limited in the information that is given but this is because the extract is only small. It does, on the other hand, show how brave and spirited the Anzac troops were. ...read more.


Source E gives a good account of the poor planning at Gallipoli but it may be biased towards the troops if the soldiers were unhappy with the way the Generals had been treating them. It could be a good source but needs a more reliable, unbiased source to validate Source E so it can be used as evidence. The Turkish resistance was also much more fierce than expected. The Turks were ready for the Anzacs and most of the troops were totally taken by surprise due to this. Source D has a small part about poor planning but does not give enough detail. It is an original subjective source but it gives similar details as source E, showing that both are likely to be true facts and are able to be used as decent evidence. This document is fairly reliable as it is written by a Captain that fought at Gallipoli so he is unlikely to be making it up. Another reason for failure at Gallipoli was the involvement of Winston Churchill. Source H, secondary source, believes that it was his error of judgement that caused such vital losses at Gallipoli. ...read more.


up more than two wide and this would have been absolutely no use to the British as the ships would have been quickly sunk. Strategically the idea of going through Turkey was badly thought-out as the Russians were weak, the Western front was more important and most of the commanders were focussed on this. The final possible reason why things went wrong was the Turkish strengths. Generals and Commanders were amazed at how effective the Turks were at fighting and this could have been realised earlier had they taken the time to look into the depths of the manoeuvre and had a more thorough and detailed plan of attack. All of the Gallipoli beaches were in range of Turkish gunners and heavy artillery; this was totally overlooked by the British Commanders and Generals. The Turks were clever, they were under the hands of a good commander, Ataturk, who had fought in many battles and they were certainly no pushover. In conclusion I feel that it wasn't just Churchill or poor planning that were responsible for what went wrong at Gallipoli; it was a various number of things as set out above that all had an effect on the outcome of the operation. Jamie Symonds 10P GCSE History Coursework July 2003 ...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. Why was it Important that the Gallipoli Campaign should succeed?

    Also it would create a high-pressure attack on Germany and therefore their troops would be taken and so relieving pressure. There were both long term and short-term aims to this campaign. The long-term aims included the increased profile of Churchill, stopping oil supplies to Germany, showing the colonies that Britain

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

    This was a very bad way to plan the campaign because if he was wrong about how the Turks were going to fight, and he was, it would be costly to how successful the campaign was. The Turks did fight with determination and resilience meaning the plan had gone as

  1. Source H suggests that poor planning and Winston Churchill were responsible for what went ...

    Brett would have obviously done a great deal of research but, in my opinion, she clearly has no basis from which to attack Winston Churchill. It is very easy to criticize people in hindsight. Churchill merely created the plan in order that others might plan it meticulously.

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

    Source G is for the German Official History of the First World War, published in the 1930s. It is talking about good achievement and grate fighting spirits of British Troops. It is truthful in places for example when it talks about Battle of the Somme having "no great importance in

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