This, however is very unlikely, and it seems these are real American servicemen, posing for an American propaganda photograph, showing their relief that the war was nearly over.
Look at the video extract (source K). How was the dropping of the first atomic bombs represented here and why?
Why was some of the evidence not made public in 1945?
(ANALYSIS, REPRESENTATION/INTERPRETATION, RELIABILITY)
Source K is a video showing how the dropping of the atomic bombs were represented in the years following 1945. The power that the world had seemingly achieved was portrayed as a giant leap forward in technology and the art of warfare. This new source of energy was seen to be a clean, cheap and efficient way to bring electricity to peoples homes. Even the dropping of the bomb was seen as a great thing. Sheldon Johnson went as far as to describe the bomb as a “beautiful, great thing”. People saw the bomb as a lifesaver, not destroyer. This bomb would mean an end to the hand-to-hand combat currently being used on the Japanese islands. Rather than letting the war drag on and let many more die, the Americans felt it was their duty to kill many Japanese at once in order to save many more.
This source graphically tells us of the complete devastation caused by the bomb. It tells us of the thousands that died in each city, and of the fate of the many other victims of radiation poisoning. In Hiroshima 70,000 died of the initial impact of the bomb, and that amount again died of the mysterious illness that swept through the city. In the August 1945 bombing of Nagasaki, 40,000 died straight away, and another 30,000 taking ill and dying in the following year. The source also tells us that every single person within a half-mile radius of the drop were killed. People living up to two and a half miles away were severely burnt. To emphasize the horrific burns the blast caused, we are shown a young boy. The skin on his back is literally peeling away, and he describes the immense pain he was under during the 20 months he spent in hospital, lying on his back, with doctors reconstructing the skin. This video was kept away from the prying eyes of the public until recently, for obvious reasons. First of all, if the complete truth about the bombing was known at the time, America would have been severely criticised by other countries for this dreadful action. The governments of these countries may have refused to talk to America, and America’s reputation would have been damaged in the eyes of the world. On top of that, the American authorities wanted to carry out additional tests on the power of the bomb, and develop viable tactics to sweep areas devastated by the bomb.
During these further tests, American ground troops were unwittingly cajoled into being the ‘guinea pigs’. The soldiers were told nothing of the carcinogenic effects of radiation, or the illnesses cause by over exposure. Many of these troops have fallen ill with cancer since the tests, and some have won lawsuits against their own government.
Another important reason for the cover-up was the possible use of the atomic bomb on the Soviet Union during the upcoming Cold War. At this time America and the Soviet Union were still allies, so it was important for morale that the American people thought they were not aggressors. America also didn’t want to share their powerful knowledge of the atomic bomb with the Soviets.
The American government probably saw 1945 as a bad time, for their own safety, to reveal the devastating full affects of the atomic bomb to it’s people. Feelings in America were still raw from the wartime losses, and the government would have had to have been mad to destroy the high morale that now existed in their country.
Sources G, H and I are supplied by Allied POWs who were in Japan in 1945.
What are the strengths and weaknesses of this type of evidence to an historian writing about the atomic bomb?
(EVALUATION, ANALYSIS, UTILITY, RELIABILITY)
All of these sources were written by Allied POWs in Japan during the dropping of the atomic bomb in 1945, therefore they are primary sources. However, they are contained in secondary sources, which were written many years after the event. The authors of sources H and I seem to have witnessed the dropping of the bomb, whereas the author of source G seems to have only witnessed the after effects of the dropping of the atomic bomb.
These sources contain many strengths and weaknesses. First of all I will concentrate on the strengths. Sources H and I are both graphic eyewitness accounts, telling us about the horrendous effects of the bomb on the Japanese people. Source H is written by Ron Bryer, who was a prisoner of war. When the bomb fell on Nagasaki he was standing in a trench, and actually watched the bomb coming down from half a mile away, “There was no explosion – just a series of rocking vibrations”. The source tells us that that ”It was pitch black, except for the moving pin-pricks of people on fire. No noise. No screaming”. The deathly silence seems to have disturbed the author. This source is supported by authors of other sources, particularly Michihiko Hachiya’s Source J, from the book ‘Hiroshima Diary’. The fact that this source was written by a Japanese person further backs up the evidence in Source H, as it proves the author is not biased in favour of his country. This source tells us “There were the shadowy forms of people, some of whom looked like walking ghosts.” Again this source is very graphic.
Source I was written by Stanley Lawrence, a prisoner of war in Nagasaki. This source is striking in its depiction of the dropping of the bomb. It tells us of the horrible state of the people affected by the bomb, “It was … horrible to see the torn limbs and flesh hanging on so many of the Japanese”. This image is also supported by Source J (mentioned earlier). The stark realism in these sources does, to some extent, back up their authority. The authors are unlikely to make up such graphic and disturbing images.
Source G was written by an unnamed Allied POW in Japan. It was published in Fletcher-Cooke’s “The Emperor’s Guest”, published in 1971. It is an Allied justification of the dropping of the atomic bomb. It tells us what the dropping of the bomb meant to Prisoners Of War at the time. It tells us that although the bomb killed thousands of Japanese it saved the lives of “tens of thousands of prisoners of war, of hundreds of thousands of Allied service men and almost certainty of millions of Japanese”. The source is supported by Sources B, C, D, E and the video source K, which all tell us of the lives saved by the bomb. All these sources are justifications of the allied atomic bombing. These give a lot of support for Source G.
Having said all of this, there are weaknesses to each source, particularly the two eyewitness accounts of the bombing (Source H and Source I). Neither of these sources conveys the bitterness you would expect from Allied POWs during the war, in fact they show sympathy towards their Japanese captors. The POWs had every reason to be enraged at the Japanese and to be happy to see them in so much pain. Their rights as prisoners of war were constantly being violated by the Japanese. Their captors were going directly against the Geneva Convention. Their was torture against the troops and often they were malnourished and even starved. The Allied troops were also made to work on bridges and roads.
The fact that these sources were recorded long after the event took place may have something to do with the supposed sympathy the men felt. They were recorded at a time when anti-nuclear protests were at their height, and many of the troops feelings may have changed in the time since the war.
This, however, is unlikely, and the sources are of good use to an historian, as eyewitness accounts of the dropping of the atomic bomb.
Using the sources and your own knowledge explain why attitudes towards the use of the atomic bomb differ so dramatically.
Our coursework booklet contains sources from many different viewpoints, some completely support the dropping of the atomic bomb, whereas some think the dropping of the bomb was a huge injustice. Most of the sources are of the time of the dropping of the atomic bomb, although many are contained in secondary sources (i.e. books which tell us the thoughts of people around the time). These sources are from all sections of society at the time, from former President of the USA, Harry S. Truman, to US servicemen, reporters, Japanese survivors and Allied prisoners of war. Although some of the sources are private correspondence, many are for public consumption.
The sources that are in support of the dropping of the bomb include political and military justifications many of which were written at the time of the dropping of the atomic bomb. The author of Source G and Sheldon Johnson in the video source (K), however wrote or spoke their pieces at a latter date.
Source A is a front page from the Daily Express dated Thursday August 7 1945. It tells us that the bomb “changed the world”, and claims the sheer devastation the bomb has brought about will convince the Japanese to surrender, therefore ending the war. The source is very factual and gives us precise figures for everything, from the size of the bomb to the details on the explosion. It tells us that the bomb completely wiped out an area twice as large as the City of London. The source is positive about the bomb’s use. It tells us that the bomb was “a last warning” to the Japanese. This tells us that every other possibility had been exhausted, and the dropping of the bomb was the only thing the allies could have done to stop the war. The paper also calls the atomic bomb “The Bomb That Has Changed The World”. This source is obviously in support of the dropping of the atomic bomb. Source A is so positive because it wants the British public to support the American government’s action in this time of war.
Source B is a letter from a US serviceman to his son. It was meant as private correspondence between the two, but has since been used in the book “No High Ground”, by F. Knebel and C.W. Bailey, published in 1960. The letter tells us of the devastating effect of the bomb, but also tells us that the bomb can be used as a peace keeping mechanism in the future. Countries will be so scared of a full-scale nuclear war, that they will not dare to break peace with another country, “this terrible weapon we have created may bring the countries of the world together and prevent further wars”. This source is also in support of the use of the atomic bomb. In my opinion, the man’s commanders in his army base have almost certainly doctored this source. This would be done so as to portray the American government in as good a light as possible, so as to keep up military spending.
Source F shows a group of US servicemen celebrating the use of the atomic bomb on Japan, and the imminent end of war. They are pleased with the dropping of the bomb, because it means they will not have to go to the Japanese mainland and fight the notoriously brutal Japanese. The bomb has, more than likely, saved their lives. This photograph was taken to show the relief within the military over the dropping of the atomic bomb, so is obviously in support of it. Source F is probably a propaganda photo for the American Government.
Source G was written by an Allied prisoner of war, and was used in the Fletcher-Cooke book “The Emperors Guest”, published in 1971. The source is in complete support of the dropping of the atomic bomb. It tells us “these atomic bombs have saved many more lives than the tens of thousands they have killed”. The source also tells us that if the Emperor had have told his people to fight on, they would have fought to the death.
Source E is an extract from a speech by former President Truman. It justifies the use of the atomic bomb by recalling the memory of the Japanese attacks on Pearl Harbour, which brought America into the war in the first place. Truman also tells us that they would have kept using the atomic bomb until the whole of Japan was destroyed if the Japanese had not surrendered. The source is obviously in support of the dropping of the atomic bomb as it was Truman himself who ordered the dropping of the bomb.
All these sources were written from an Allied viewpoint. These sources are so positive due to many reasons. The Japanese refused to surrender to the Allies, even after several requests, and this enraged the Allies. Memories of Pearl Harbour were still fresh in the American nation’s mind, and the people felt that the dropping of the atomic bomb was adequate revenge for these surprise attacks. The American public was also conscious of the huge numbers of causalities inflicted by the Japanese in the fights for Okinawa and Iwo Jima. The Japanese treatment of POW’s was also horrendous, and the American people wanted some sort of retribution. Overall the Americans were angry at the Japanese people being ‘stubborn’.
Other sources stress the use of this new atomic technology in energy saving appliances and power stations. These sources are all factual and contain scientists view for the future.
Source N contains a source by Prof. James P. Kendall. He claims the real use of the discovery of the technology is “for times of peace”. He tells us that “in the next 10 or 15 years it would be developed as a power for heating and industrial application”. This source is not in clearly in support of the dropping of the atomic bomb, merely in the research surrounding it.
The video source (K) contains propaganda films from the early 50’s, put about by the British and American governments. These show the upside of atomic energy, and claim that hundreds of jobs will be created around atomic research and power.
All these sources are again from an Allied perspective, and do not give the general consensus of world thought in the 1940’s and 50’s.
However, many other sources portray completely negative views of the dropping of the atomic bomb. These sources are written by a spectrum of people, from former Allied POW’s, to Japanese survivors of the bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. These sources were all written a time after the atomic bombs were dropped, so there is some doubt whether or not these views are the same views the people had at the time of the bombings.
All the Japanese survivors fell that the bomb was a huge injustice dealt by the American people. Sources J and M give detailed accounts of the effects of the atomic bomb. Source J tells us people were “holding their arms out to prevent the friction of raw surfaces rubbing together” after they had been burnt by the bomb. The source also tells us of the deathly silence surrounding the area, “one thing was common to everyone I saw – complete silence”. Source M tells us of the horrible effects of radiation sickness on the author’s young daughter. It tells us that “she had spots all over her body. Her hair began to fall out. She vomited small clumps of blood many times”. Source K (the video source) also supports these accounts. In Source K we see the effect of a radiation burn on a young boys back. His skin was melted away from his body, and he had to lie on his back for 1 year and 9 months, before he was well enough to roll over or walk. Source L also supports these sources and, although it was in the same newspaper as Source A, it takes a completely different viewpoint. It tells us of the “atomic plague” caused by the radiation in the air, and its disgusting effects. The author tells us that people who were not affected by the bomb dropping were “dying from strange after-effects”. He describes the state of the bodies he saw, and tells us every victim died of this disease. This article was probably not published in 1945 as it is seen as defamatory to the American and British government’s image.
Attitudes towards nuclear weapons also changed after time. People began to see the weapons as potential Armageddon instruments. The shocking after-effects were now known about. The arms race between the USA and Russia was beginning to worry people by the mid 60’s and anti-nuclear groups sprung up, and gathered support. This changing viewpoint may have ‘clouded’ the memories related in Sources H and I. These sources were written many years after the attacks. The POW’s both tell us of the enormous sense of guilt they felt at the time of the dropping of the atomic bomb. This, however seems unlikely, as these men were most probably being tortured by their Japanese captors. They may have embellished the truth with bits of fiction, to make them selves appear in a better light.
In this question I fell I have looked at a variety of Sources with negative and positive views. I have noticed a pattern in the sources. I found that the stance of the source is determined by two factors: nationality and the date the source was written. Generally, the sources that come from a British and American angle, in the early years after the war, are in agreement with the dropping of the atomic bomb. Any other source is generally completely opposed to the dropping of the bomb. This is because the authors are more aware of the effects the bomb had, and since the war years, America and Japan have become big trading partners, with the emergence of Japan as an economic superpower. It would not be good for the Americans to risk damaging this relationship, by publishing anti-Japanese sources. The world today is also more aware of the effects of nuclear weapons due to the American/Soviet Union arms race during the Cold War, and incidents such as Chernobyl, where the effects of the reactor leakage are still being felt nearly 20 years after it first leaked.
