Having the author and the date mentioned shows that this source’s reliability can be researched. As well as this the source is an eyewitness, so it is first hand therefore it is primary data. The author gives a good insight of what is around him e.g. the little pits. But this incident could be a one off because the witness is probably demoralised, exhausted and just wanted to go home therefore this would affect the reliability of his account because he would right negative things about Dunkirk because he had had enough. Anyway this is only one account, one sided and biased. I know that some of his account was written at night therefore some details maybe missing. When he said about the Officers using revolvers, this may have only been true for one group of soldiers, the rest may be fine. Also we must put into consideration who the audience of this account are, he might have purposely have written a biased account knowing the account would be published.
Source 15 is an extract from a book called ‘The last battle’ by Richard Hillary. The extract describes how the Allied forces were tired ragged, bitter and weary because they had just come back from a very scary evacuation. He is describing the troops on their return from Dunkirk. He says that they came back with German souvenirs; this is his sarcastic way of saying they have lost. Some of the troops were angrey, because they thought that the R.A.F did not do enough to stop the bombing from the Luftwaffe. The soldiers arrived without their equipment, this shows how rushed and disordred the evacuation was, all this was a result of their low morale. He says that the most frequent request was for somewhere to bathe their feet, this tells us that they wanted to relax because they were tired, and this shows us that their spirit was low. We would expect this source to be quite biased, because the writer is a British historian. But he does not seem to favour the Allied troops.
Morale was low in the Allied troops because there were too many soldiers dying and men not knowing when they would be evacuated. Men were demoralised and wanted no more involvement in the war. Many of the soldiers had seen the Luftwaffe bombs kill their friends; all these made the troops have low morale.
Other source such as source: 2, 3, and 8 also back up Dunkirk as being a morale defeat.
Below are 3 Sources that I have explained in detail that back up Dunkirk as being nature of the evacuation.
Source 7 is written by Private W.B.A Gaze of the Royal Army Ordnance Corps, he describes the scene on the beach at Dunkirk on the night of the 27th of May 1940. This source shows how panicked and disordered this evacuation was, he also describes how by dawn men were queuing, with water up to their necks, fighting over boats this is the nature of the evacuation, we would expect them to be panicked like this, because it is a matter of life or death e.g. if they do not take this boat waiting for the next boat might cost their life and this is why they are fighting over the boats. This source is written by a British Private so he would be biased, but it seems that he is quite negative about the Allied troops. This source is an eyewitness account, therefore it is first hand and it is primary evidence. Also the author and the date are mentioned making the source more reliable. But this account is one sided and it is only one persons account. The British Private may have been traumatised and tired at the time, this affects the way he describes the evacuation.
Source 8 is an artist’s impression of the Dunkirk evacuation by Charles Cundall who is an official war artist. His impression shows Dunkirk with many soldiers scattered on the beach waiting to be evacuated, also we can see a range of boats packed with troops all these things are natural of an evacuation. Source 14 (i) supports this artist impression; source 14 (i) says that 130 men were put on to a small yacht. The cloud in the background, which I know from my own knowledge is true, makes the source more reliable, also the author is mentioned, he is an official war artist so we would hope that he is not biased, because he should be used to painting war scenes and he has access to records, but this picture may only be his own impression, because artists do often exadurate to make their pictures stand out. Also he wasn’t there, therefore his drawing is secondary data, its biased and unreliable. Artists in those days had to draw only what the government wanted them to draw because at the end of the day it is the British public that are going to see these impressions, so they want to show them only what they want them to know, not the full truth.
Source 19 is an account by a R.A.F pilot, shot down near Dunkirk. He describes what he saw when he reached the beaches. He starts of by saying ‘Most of the men were exhausted’ this would be expected because they have been fighting for a long time and they are at the end of the battle. He said that the men were in lines waiting to be evacuated. He also said that when there was an air-attack everyone would run for cover, most of them would dive into the water, this shows how disordered and panicked they were and this is natural of an evacuation in such difficult situations. He says that ‘in a few seconds the raids were over. A number of British soldiers would not be needing transport to England’ this is typical of this kind of evacuation, not everyone makes it.
This source is very unreliable, although it’s an eyewitness account; there is no date or named author. It could have even been made up by Germans for propaganda and to boost the German morale, even if he is an R.A.F pilot you would expect him to be that negative, but because he was shot down this may affect the way he writes. Also this maybe his diary for his own reference. So he would be the only person to look back in his diary.
The evacuation was unorganised and panicked this is evidenced in the above sources. We would expect the Allied troops to panic like this because of the frequent bombing of the Luftwaffe. Also this was not a very good port for such a major operation.
Other sources that back up Dunkirk, as being nature of the evacuation are sources: 2, 3, 8 and 14 (ii).
Below I have evaluated in detail the sources that back up Dunkirk as being a military defeat
Sources 3 are two pictures of the Dunkirk beaches after the British have evacuated. The pictures show sunken and beached vessels, also there are died soldiers. We can ammunition left behind, I know from my own knowledge that 500,000 tons of ammunition was left behind. The beach looks messy this tells us how the British were desperate to get away.
These pictures are first hand therefore they are primary because they show a scene at the time. But there is neither date nor author, there is no evidence that the died are British. The pictures are more likely to be German propaganda, to show the German public how good they were and boost the German morale. The Germans may have even made the beaches look more messier, by moving the died bodies around. Maybe these snapshots were taken on a bad day, were there was a lot of air-attacks.
Source 4 is by Basil Collier in a book called ‘History of the Second World War: The defence of the United Kingdom’ written in 1957. This source tells us that the Allied troops left behind particularly the whole of its heavy equipment ‘including about 600 tanks, more than a thousand field guns, some 850 anti-tank guns, many thousands of anti-tank rifles and large numbers of lorries, cars and motorcycles, besides huge quantities of ammunition and supplies’. From this source I can see the large amounts of equipment left behind, this was because there was neither time nor space to take all the equipment. Also this tells me that the British factory workers had to work hard to replace the vast amount of equipment lost in Dunkirk.
We would expect this historian to be biased, as he is British, but he tries to give an unbiased account. His extract is very negative towards the Allied troops. The book is written about the United Kingdom defence so he admits that they had a lot of mistakes, but the book is not based on Dunkirk so his full focus is not on Dunkirk so he may have missed some important points. Although there seems to be a lot of facts and figures, showing that he has done good research.
Source 20 is a short account by a German fighter pilot; it is his opinion of Dunkirk. He said that he went up and down spraying them (Allies) with bullets. The pilot claims it was ‘cold blooded killing’ this shows that he did not agree with the format of the battle, also it shows that the Luftwaffe killed a lot of Allied troops, this is indicated again when he said that the beaches were jammed with soldiers, this tells us how easily the soldiers were killed, this shows how badly prepared and trained the soldiers were. I know that soldiers only had two weeks of training at the height of the battle. From this information I gathered I knew that the soldiers did not have/use their anti aircraft guns. This is backed up b
Source 14 (ii) when none of the soldiers would volunteer to even show another soldier how to use a Bren gun. But this disagrees with source 19, because it says that the soldiers would fire their rifles at the German planes.
At the end of the day its only one persons account. The account is biased and because the source is primary evidence, it may have been used as a form of propaganda. But because there is no name and date, this may be totally made up by Germans for German propaganda.
A lot of ammunition and war material was left behind on the beaches of Dunkirk because there was neither time nor room to take this equipment with them. Also a lot of boats and planes were lost.
Using any relevant evidence, and your own knowledge of the topic, make a case for Dunkirk being a deliverance or victory for the British.
There are many historians that argue that Dunkirk is a victory. First I will define the three types of victory. A morale victory is when the nation and the troops have high spirits during the evacuation. A military victory is the amount of machinery and men saved. A nature of the evacuation victory is when the evacuation takes place in an organised and improvised manner, and when there is no panicked troops.
I think that the most important aspect of victory is the military victory, because at the end of the day it is the amount of men saved that counts.
Below are 3 sources that I have explained in detail supporting Dunkirk being a morale victory.
Sources 6 are two pictures. In the first we can see Allied troops up to their necks in water, queuing up orderly waiting to get evacuated. This source is backed up by source 7, it said that men were up to their necks and swimming, but in another way this source disagrees with source 7; when it says that men were fighting for the boats and naval officers were using their revolvers to calm them down also source 7 shows pictures of Dunkirk beaches but in a messy state. The second picture is also of men queing up, but on the beaches. The men look organised. The evacuation looks orderly and calm also the owners of the boats (who have come to evacuate the troops) look calm. It was a psychological victory. All these show how high their morale was at the time.
The pictures are not very reliable because they are most likely to have been used as British propaganda to boost the nations morale and to make the people think that the Allied troops are victorious. I think the pictures are propaganda because there is no date nor the name of the person that took the pictures is stated. After all it is only a snapshot of time, it could have been taken on a god day. We never know, maybe shortly after the snapshot was taken a German bomb fell, then the soldiers would start running for shelter and everyone will be panicked and everything would be destroyed. Although the pictures are primary evidence, they are clear and they are backed up by source 7.
Source 11 s an extract from Churchill’s memoirs. ‘The Second World War (1959). He says ‘In the midst of our defeat, glory came to the island people’ and ‘Dunkirk beaches will shine’. By these quotes he means that although they are nearly defeated they quickly turned it into victory by thinking of a speedy evacuation and he says that Dunkirk will always stand out compared to all there other affairs, because it was such an amazing operation.
We would expect this source to be reliable because it is by the prime minister and he should have all the facts. But it is obvious that Churchill is going to be biased towards the Allies, because he would only mention what he wants the nation to know. Even if he were biased/wrong the nation would believe him because they trust him. It is also obvious that this source was used as a source of propaganda, to keep the morale high and to keep the Dunkirk spirit going so that people would help in the War effort. The source is primary evidence and it is near the elections so Churchill wants to boost his popularity.
Source 16 is from J.B Priestley who was a very popular speaker. He says that Britain snatched glory out of defeat and then swept on to victory, and he says about the little holiday streamers and how they made an excursion to hell and came back glorious. He describes Dunkirk as being hell. Here again just like source 11 (Churchill's memoir) say that they were close to defeat but by the speedy evacuation, they were victorious.
This source is very biased towards the Allies, because he is British and he is very good at spreading propaganda (as important as Churchill). He gave talks every Sunday evening on the radio. But these speeches are very unreliable. By propaganda he kept the Dunkirk spirit alive.
All the above sources show how the morale of the British nation was kept high, Churchill’s speeches encourage people to help in the war effort. A lot of propaganda was also used e.g. posters, newspapers and radios,
Other sources that back up Dunkirk, as being a morale victory are sources: 12, 14 (i) and 22.
Below are 3 sources evaluated in detail the back up Dunkirk being a military victory?
Source 1 is taken from a book ‘English History 1914-1945’ written by A.J.P Taylor. In his extract he says that Operation Dynamo ‘succeeded beyond all expectations’ this shows how well the evacuation went. He mentions figures, he says the number of men saved on the first day, all together and the number of ships used for the evacuation. This source also shows that it was a psychological victory because a lot of the B.E.F. were saved. As well as being a military victory, this source also backs up Dunkirk as being a deliverance (escape), this is also seen as an aspect of victory, e.g. the weather helped them to escape. This is shown when Taylor says that the weather is bad, but this is an advantage, because it makes it more difficult for the Luftwaffe to bomb the Allied troops, therefore making it easier for the troops to escape.
Taylor is a very respected historian so we would expect this source to be very reliable and balanced. But he is British, so he could be biased and he is nationalistic. Also he was not there, which makes his writing secondary evidence. As well as this, the book containing this extract is a general book on English history, not concentrated on Dunkirk and there is no date to tell us when he wrote the book. Although he does mention a lot of true statements (the number of men saved) and he gave all the correct types of boats. What he says about Gort is also true. This source connects to source 9, as source 9 also gives figures about how many men were evacuated. Overall this source is useful yet unreliable.
Source 10 is a table of the number of soldiers saved on each day of Operation Dynamo. The table shows that the evacuation went on for 9 days and that there was 338,226 soldiers saved overall. The table is extracted from the ‘Admiratty Records’ quoted from Winston Churchill. The source is primary evidence, so it may be a part of propaganda (We can see that the title of the book is called ‘Their finest hour’) and he tells the nation the amount of troops saved, he probably increased the figures a little, however the figures do look accurate. But he does not mention how many troops were on the beach in the first place; therefore he leaves the number of troops that died out. Without this information the number of troops saved may look like a lot, but in reality comparing the number of troops saved with the number of troops originally on the beach, it may not seem like a lot of men were actually saved. Because this source is by Churchill the nation would believe him because they trust him.
Source 9 is written by Allan Bullock in a book called ‘Hitler and Stalin’. In this source he says that they were victorious but only because of the German tanks halting. He says that they saved 340,000 men, including 139,000 French, were taken by a swarm of boats, but he does not mention the types of the boats. I know from my own knowledge that assortment of destroyers, passenger ferry steamers, paddle streamers and self-propelled barges were used. He also says that the evacuation was ‘a remarkable improvised Operation’ because of the large number of troops saved, which is a military victory.
The source is written by a famous British historian. He should be reliable, but he is biased because he is British. Although his extract looks like it has been well researched, because it has figures in it. It links with sources 1 and 9 as both of these sources have figures of the amount of troops saved. But it is not a detailed book about Dunkirk. It is an overview of Hitler and Stalin. There is also no date, so we do not know when this source was written.
The above sources show how Dunkirk was a military victory. Churchill only expected about 30,000 troops to be evacuated, but to everyone’s surprise around 340,000 troops were actually evacuated.
Other sources that back up Dunkirk, as being a military victory are sources: 13 and 14 (i)
Below are 3 sources that I have explained in detail backing up Dunkirk as being a nature of the evacuation victory.
Source 14, part (i) is an extract by Charles Lightoller, a retired sailor who took his yacht to Dunkirk. This source is a description of a scene of a yacht getting boarded with troops ready to get evacuated. This source makes it sound like the evacuation was so easy. He says that he had 130 men on his small yacht. The soldiers are ‘cheery’ because they are happy to return home. We would expect them to be happy because it’s the end of the war for them. It is a psychological victory. It shows that the people that own the boats are proud of what they are doing.
This source is quite reliable because the author is mentioned. He was there, therefore his account is primary evidence and he is an eyewitness. Also he is very positive. But the source is biased because the author is British. Also he may be only playing up his role, in other words he has made this account up because he knew that his account was going to be used for propaganda. Also he is a retired sailor, so he had already served his country, so he wanted Britain to look good. His account is only a snapshot of time, so they may have been one of the lucky boats, other boats may have sunk. Also there is no date mentioned so we do not know when this source was written.
Sources 6 are two pictures. The first one shows Allied soldiers neck high in water walking to the boats ready to get evacuated. The second picture is queues of men on Dunkirk beaches also waiting to be evacuated. Underneath the pictures it says ‘An orderly line of British troops’. I would expect men to line up not panicking waiting for boats; this sort of orderly evacuation would be victorious. If the evacuation going well, then we would expect the troops to line up organised, this is the nature of the evacuation.
There is no date or author on this source, which makes it unreliable. After all it is only a snapshot, therefore it may only be luck that the troops look so organised, maybe after the snapshot was taken a bomb would fall, then everyone one would start to panic and run for shelter (source 2 shows a snapshot of the beach after a bomb had fallen). The pictures are more likely to have been British propaganda, to show the British nation how well they are doing. This source is primary evidence. These pictures are supported by source 7, as source 7 says that the troops queued up waiting for boats. Overall the pictures are insufficient and unreliable.
Source 21 was written by General Sir Harold Franklyn, Divisional Commander at Dunkirk (1962). In this source he says that people say the Dunkirk is hell and he thinks that this is not true. He says that he walked along the beaches and he ‘never saw a corpse’ this means that no/hardly any troops died. This tells us that the evacuation was well improvised, organised and calm leading to no deaths.
This source is biased, because the author is British and he is a Commander at Dunkirk and this would make the source even more unreliable. He may want to keep the Dunkirk spirit alive and he wants to look good because he is a Divisional Commander. This source was written about 20-22 years after the evacuation (so some information may be missing), so by know the German side of the argument was being heard, so this is a reason for the British to lie. We have some format of identity for the source because we know the author and the date.
If the evacuation is well organised and the troops are calm and not panicked-we call this the nature of the evacuation
Defeat, deliverance or victory? Which of these best describes Dunkirk? Reach your own balanced conclusion based on the case made in Parts 1 and 2, any relevant evidence, and your own knowledge.
After evaluating all these sources and taking all the facts into consideration. I have come to a conclusion that Dunkirk is a military defeat. I came to the conclusion that Dunkirk was partly a military defeat because the Allied troops lost:
- 2,472 guns
- 90,000 rifles
- 63,879 motor vehicles
- 20,548 motorcycles
- 500,000 tons of ammunition
The soldiers had to leave a lot of machinery behind because the evacuation was very speedy, so they did not have the time. Also there was not enough space in the boats. A lot of boats aircrafts were lost. Out of 860 boats used to save 340,000 men the bombing of the Luftwaffe sank 243 boats. The Germans already outnumbered the R.A.F., but it still lost 474 aircrafts trying to fight off the Luftwaffe. The sources that support my view of Dunkirk, as being a military defeat are sources: 3, 4, and 20.
However I do feel the Dunkirk was a military and a morale victory. As source 1 states ‘Operation Dynamo succeeded beyond all expectations’ this is true because Churchill had predicted that 30,000 men could be evacuated, whilst Admiral Ramsay had hopped for 45,000 men but to everyone’ astonishment about 340,000 men were saved. Considering that this was a speedy evacuation thought up in a few days.
I also think that Dunkirk was a morale victory. Churchill and the government had done a good job in using propaganda as a way of keeping morale high, this encouraged people to help in the war effort. People offered to sail their boats to Dunkirk. I know that vessel-pleasure boats, river ferries, fishing boats and even the smallest yachts went to Dunkirk to evacuate the troops.
Although I seem to be favouring Dunkirk as being mostly a victory, overall my thoughts are that Dunkirk is a defeat, because if we think about it in reality the Allied troops were literally ‘running away’ from the Germans (however when the troops arrived home the nation saw them as being victorious), because if there was no other way Allied troops would have been killed by the Germans, but I think by halting the tanks Hitler purposely wanted to give a chance for the Allied troops to get away, because I know from my own knowledge that Hitler never wished to enter into a war with Britain. Because he ‘admired the country whose empire he believed powerfully reinforced his ideas of racial domination’.out then all the
So overall I conclude that although Dunkirk was partly a military defeat (amount of ammunition and machinery left behind) but it was also a military victory (number of men saved/evacuated) and a morale victory (all the nation had high spirit and helped in the war effort)
Dunkirk Coursework
Fatima Abbas
Cardiff high School
January 2004
