- I think source B could be useful because it shows us the types of people and the amount of people there was, it also shows us that there were marches and they were peaceful and the people had religious and political beliefs, However, it isn’t really useful because it only shows us one photo and that one could be staged. Source C is useful because its and eyewitness in 1968 this is also reliable. It also describes a march as well as the types of people and what happened in these marches. We can also see that the R.U.C intervened this is useful. Unlike the photograph source C tells us that there was violence used and marchers forced there ways through, However, the usefulness has its downsides, it is and autobiography and it was 6 years after the march there is also a different focus, it mentions violence it doesn’t mention ignoring the ban. In the third paragraph everything is useful its just they present different aspects of the marches. Having balanced both sources I feel that source C is more useful because I think it tells me and awful lot more than one single photo.
- Sources D and E differ in may ways such as source D is written by M Farrell a catholic Civil Rights student leader while on the other hand source E is by T O’Neill the prime minister of northern Ireland who was liberal. They differ because source D was in 1876, which is seven years after the incident, which means his thought, and ways could have changed over the years. While source E is the same year while the event is still fresh in memory. Also source D is sating the Catholics are innocent and the police are unfair unlike in source E where he has to be cautious about what he says but he isn’t going to say that the police acted inappropriately.
- There is much strength such as because it’s an official it would have been well researched and well financed also there is an accurate picture of events. The proportion is the same as in the House of Commons. There is a very wide access of information because there are different types of parties writing the report. However, there are also weaknesses such as because its written by the British government it maybe biased because they don’t want to loose Northern Ireland. What evidence did they use?
- Source B is a photograph of a civil rights march, which appears to be very peaceful, but marches they are provocative without the banners about religion and politics. I know from my own knowledge that many marches resulted in violence. I also know that a man called Mr William Craig the union minister of home affairs banned both marches through the diamond. Despite the ban the civil rights march still took place.
Source C is talking about a march, which had taken place in the bogside area of Londonderry. It is talking about the route being cordoned off by the police. Like I said above they marched regardless to the ban, which is causing tension. It also tells us that the marchers used force against the police during the march. Also I know that marches got more violent in 1969.
Source D is talking about the Burntollet Bridge incident. It also
Shows us an increase of tension because it tells us about
ambushers, and from my own knowledge I know that students
from Belfast University marched through protestant areas without any permission this to me means like they are looking for trouble. NICRA didn’t give any support so it was on there own will, which was provocative and increased, tension Northern Ireland. However, form my own knowledge I know that NICRA was very disorganised so it cant really be used as evidence but as there was no fixed membership I can see why this was used as evidence because it could have been mistaken as a Civil rights march. There is one think which I thought was very provocative is when the students we provoking the police. This was more to do with student rights because it was the time of the student revolution throughout Europe.
Source E is showing that marches in 1969 got more violent. However, as it’s a speech made by the prime minister he is very cautious and restrained by what he can say. But for him to call them ‘Hooligans’ then I think this proves that there was tension in Northern Ireland.
Source F suggests violence but not in any way does it prove it. I know personally that things became more violent. There was a big increase in tension because I know that civil rights marches were out of control, marches didn’t listen to the leaders they just took things into their own hands. I think that the fact NICRA made a programme contributed to the increase of tension in Northern Ireland. This was a result of the Londonderry march. I fell that people might have been joining for violence this suggests that people didn’t care about rights they just wanted to fight and cause more trouble than was needed.
These sources prove that the civil rights were escalating out of control of the leaders. They also prove in a few of them that people enjoyed the violent part of the marches not for their rights.