Source D supports source B because it shows a car going through the crowd and in source B it mentions a “motor car from the council” had to force its way through.
Although sources C and D support Source A and B to an extent there are some differences as well, for example in source B it says that there were a dozen Saracen cars and in source C it only shows one. However Sources C and D support Source A greatly. This is because Source C and D have many things in common with source A.
Source E is saying that the police are violent and that the protestors are completely innocent. This source blames the police for the Sharpeville incident. This is because in source E it states “I saw no weapons” this means that the protestors carried no weapons and the police were the first to fire. Source F also blames the police for the Sharpeville incident. Source D does this by saying that the witnesses give the same account of the shootings and they were all in different wards not having seen each other. Both sources say that the government is wrong. “All the witnesses contradicted the government.”
Sources E and F differ because the witnesses do not mention a policeman swinging his gun in the air. Whereas in source E it says “he was swinging it around in a wide arc.” In source E it does not mention the amount of people that were at the protest; however source F does, “no more than 4000”
Source F is likely to be most reliable. This is because it clearly agrees with source E about what happened at Sharpeville. For example both sources emphasise the fact that people were injured “They were either wounded or dead”. Source F is also reliable because of its writer, a bishop. This person is trustworthy because he is not allowed to lie because of his religion. This source is also trustworthy because the witnesses of the shootings were in different wards and they gave the same account of what happened at the shootings. They did not see or talk to each other meaning that they could not have come up with a story. Source F also says that the protestors were mostly shot in the back, this means that they were running away from the police.
Sources E and G are similar because they are from Tyler and his photographer. Source E mentions that people are running away from Sharpeville “hundreds of women rushed past us” and source G shows this. Source E also says that the police station was behind the protestors “In front of the police station” and in source G we can see that there is a building behind the running protestors.
Sources E and G are different because we cannot see what the people are running from and we cannot see any police. Though we can see a building behind the protestors we cannot be sure that it is a police station. In source E it says that there is “no living thing in the huge compound in front of the police station” however in source G we can see that people are running. In source E we are also told that the protestors are running from bullets“we heard the chatter of machine guns” however we cannot see the bullets.
Source E is the more useful of the two sources when wishing to discover what happened at Sharpeville because it explains in great detail what happened. The photograph however does not do this, as we can only understand what is happening because we are told about it in Source E. However if we combine the evidence provided by both of the sources we are given an overall view of what has happened. These two sources compliment each other and make Tyler’s account more reliable.
Source H is written by Colonel Piernaar a police commander at Sharpeville. He made this statement so that he could protect the police’s popularity. This source justifies police action by saying that black people become violent when in large groups “the native mentality does not allow African to gather for peaceful demonstrations” therefore saying that the police did not open fire first and when they did they did it in self-defence.
Source I is written by Dr. Verwoed the prime minister of South Africa. He was the initiator of the second phase of apartheid. Therefore he’d want to keep apartheid in a good light; he did not want to say that apartheid was violent because if he did then the second phase of apartheid would have been stopped. He tries to say that the black community are uncivil “2000 Africans demonstrated by entering people’s homes and forcibly removing their identity books.” Verwoed says that the police opened fire to scare away blacks but they were hurt accidentally, therefore protecting the second phase of apartheid.
Sources I and H have a similar view on what happens because source H concerned with keeping apartheid and Source I is concerned with keeping the reputation of the police. Both of the authors of sources I and H, due to their positions would be interested in justifying the actions that the police took. Both sources I and H disagree with source F. However source F severely undermines apartheid and police actions. Making sources I and H very weak.
Source A Supports Statement a by stating that “they were grinning and cheerful.” Source B does not support statement a as it is sating the protestors were violent. Source C supports statement a by showing that the demonstrators are standing around peacefully. Source D supports Statement a by showing the thumbs up sign which represented peaceful protest. Source E supports statement a by saying that “one little boy” this is because you would not bring a child to a violent protest. Source F supports statement a as it states the police fired in unison and that they were first to fire “all fired together”. Source G supports this statement as we can see that the protestors are running. Source H does not support statement a as it clearly states that the protestors were violent. Source I does not support statement a as this also states that the protestors are violent.
However Source A disagrees with statement a because the police have not opened fire as of yet. Source B disagrees with statement a because it clearly points out that the protestors are violent. Source C disagrees with statement a because we cannot see the police shooting. Source D disagrees with statement a because we cannot see any police. Source E disagrees with statement a because we are not told who opens fire first. Source F does not disagree with statement a. source G disagrees with statement a as we cannot see what the protestors are running from. Source H disagrees with statement a because we are told that the protestors are violent “my car was struck with a stone” Source I disagrees with statement a as it too states the protestors are violent “telephone wires were cut”
Source A supports statement B as it says that the police were present at the scene. Source B supports statement b as it says that the protestors were violent. Source C supports statement b as it shows a police station behind the protestors. Source D does not support statement b. Source E supports statement b by saying that there was shooting. Source F does not support Statement b. Source G supports statement b by showing a building behind the protestors; this may be the police station. Source H supports statement b as it says that the Africans were violent. Source I supports statement b as it says that “disturbances occurred”
However Source A disagrees with statement b as it says that the protestors are not violent “they were grinning and cheerful”. Source B disagrees with statement b as it says that a council car was present and in the statement there is no mention of the council car. Source C disagrees with statement b as it shows that the people are standing around. Source D disagrees with statement b as it shows that the people are doing a peaceful protest. Source E disagrees with Statement b as it says that “Hundreds of women rushed past us” Source F disagrees with statement b as it says that the protestors were completely innocent. Source G shows disagrees with statement a as it shows people to be unarmed, therefore they could not have harmed police. Source H does not disagree with statement b. Source I does not disagree with statement b.
There is evidence that sources a to I provide that support both statement to a certain point. It is important to note that some sources may be biased; this may be to justify or highlight the events. This brings reliability into question. However the most accurate statement seems to be statement a. this is because statement a is strengthened a lot more than statement b making it the more reliable of the two. This is because sources A to I almost have exactly the same thing in common with statement a, this is the fact that the protestors are not violent.
1875 Words in total.