Contents gcse history Exemplars for Controlled Assessment Topic Area 2



Download 343.92 Kb.
Page2/6
Date conversion29.04.2016
Size343.92 Kb.
1   2   3   4   5   6

SOURCE B10

A considerable portion of the German soldiers are now practically beaten men, ready to surrender if they could, thoroughly tired of the war and expecting nothing but defeat. It is true that the amount of ground we have gained is not great. That's nothing. But we have proved our ability to force the enemy out of strong defensive positions and to defeat him. The German casualties have been greater than ours.



[Part of a report sent by Douglas Haig to the British cabinet following the Battle of the Somme (December 1916)]


SOURCE B11

So far during the war, our leadership has been flawless – perfect. There was an obvious genius for pure generalship which has made General Haig fit to rank with any general of past or modern times.

[Basil Liddell Hart, a Lieutenant in the Yorkshire Light Infantry who was gassed on the Somme and invalided back to Britain, writing in a letter to the Daily Express (21st December, 1916)]
SOURCE B12


The belief that the generals were responsible for the bloodshed quickly took root and has spread. There is a large literature of condemnation, including the scripts of plays - Oh What a Lovely War! - and films.


The British generals were no worse than those of any other combatant nation. All Great War generals faced an insoluble problem; how to break a strong front of trenches, barbed wire, machine-guns and artillery with the weak instrument of human flesh.
Blame Haig as we will, his soldiers proved ready to follow him to the end. They did so because the national will to sustain the war effort remained strong.
Britain was a different society at the time, a nation that was patriotic to a degree unimaginable today. The humblest Briton took pride in his country's possession of the history's greatest empire. Haig was, as he himself believed with religious intensity, actually doing the people's will in continuing to direct the war. We should remember that this November when we commemorate their suffering.

[John Keegan, a leading military historian writing in a feature in The Daily Mail on 7th November 1998. The newspaper was running a series of articles remembering the 80th anniversary of the armistice.]



SOURCE B13


The men are in splendid spirits. Several have said that they have never before been so instructed and informed of the nature of the operation before them. The barbed wire has never been so well cut, not the artillery preparation so thorough. All the commanders are full of confidence.

Very successful attack this morning... All went like clockwork... The battle is going very well for us and already the Germans are surrendering freely. The enemy is so short of men that he is collecting them from all parts of the line. Our troops are in wonderful spirits and full of confidence.

[Excerpts from the official diary kept by Sir Douglas Haig. The excerpts are dated 30th June and 1st July 1916. The official diary was used as a basis for his regular reports to the War Cabinet.]



SOURCE B14

As we read the history of the Great War and the mists created by prejudice, propaganda and false witness begin to scatter, the figure of Haig looms ever larger as that of the general who foresaw more accurately than most, who endured longer than most and who inspired most confidence amongst his soldiers.


Haig believed from the first that the German line could be broken and it was. In moral stature, Haig was a giant. It may be easy in history to find a more brilliant man, but it would be hard to find a better one.
[Alfred Duff Cooper, a soldier in the Grenadier Guards during the war, writing in his biography of Sir Douglas Haig. He was a friend to the Haig family and was officially invited to write Haig’s biography by his family after Haig’s death. He later became a Conservative MP and Secretary of War from 1935-1937]
SOURCE B15










[A photograph showing crowds welcoming Haig home from France, (12th April 1919)]


SOURCE B16

Blaming Haig the individual for the failings of the British war effort is putting too much of a burden of guilt on one man. Haig was the product of his time, of his upbringing, education, training and previous military experience. One argument goes that he was ultimately victorious and, even if he had been replaced, would there have been anyone better for the job? Even on the Somme a German officer called the battlefield 'the muddy grave of the German army'.



[S. Warburton, a teacher and historian, writing in an article on World War I generals in the history magazine, Hindsight. The magazine took a fresh look at controversial historical issues (1998)]


Topic area 2
The effects of war on Wales and England in

the nineteenth and twentieth centuries
Task 2: World War I: Recruitment and Conscription/

The Sinking of the Lusitania




Controlled Assessment Task part (a)
The British Army needed to recruit many soldiers in World War I.
Select any FIVE sources from your pack.
How useful and reliable are these sources in explaining for finding out about recruitment in the First World War?

Controlled Assessment Task part (b)
Some people believe that the Lusitania was sunk deliberately by the Germans in 1915 as an act of war.
How far do your selected sources support or contradict

this interpretation?




CONTROLLED ASSESSMENT TASK part (a)
The British Army needed to recruit more soldiers during

World War I


Select any FIVE sources from your pack.
How useful and reliable are these sources in explaining the recruitment of soldiers during World War I?


Notes for teachers/candidates about approaching this task
How can part (a) be tackled?
Underneath is a suggested structure to approaching part (a) which should be accessible to most candidates following a GCSE History course. It is offered as guidance and should not be seen as a writing frame or the only or best way to tackle this exercise.


This needs to have a clear focus on the set question.

It needs to briefly set the issue in its historical context.

A short paragraph is sufficient here.


  • An evaluation of the selected evidence connected with the issue in the question set.

Here candidates can examine developments and issues, while making analysis and evaluation of the evidence selected. It is recommended that the sources be integrated into supporting and reflecting on a narrative of the methods used to recruit soldiers during World War I. Candidates should evaluate up to five sources only, aiming to link the evidence to its use in the enquiry. Avoid a robotic trawl through the sources.
When looking at the evidence you should consider points such as:
What information does the source provide about …?

Does the source back up your knowledge about …?

Who was the author/maker?

When was the source written?

Why was it written?

Is there any doubt over the author/is she trustworthy?


It is recommended that the answer to part (a) should be about 800 words in total.
SOURCE A1

When war broke out in 1914, Britain’s professional army was small in comparison with the conscript-heavy standing armies on the continent. Lord Kitchener, the newly appointed Secretary of State for war, with conscription politically unpopular, decided to raise an army of volunteers. On 6 August 1914, Parliament sent out a call to arms. This was for 100,000 volunteers aged between 19 and 30, at least 1.6m (5’3”) tall and with a chest size greater than 86 cm (34”).



[From an article on recruitment, taken from the BBC History website (2012)]



SOURCE A2

[A photograph taken outside an army recruiting office in 1915. This was typical of what happened across the country]


SOURCE A3


The reasons for the enlistment of a million men between August 1914 and January 1915 were:

  • enthusiasm and war spirit

  • unemployment

  • some employers forced men to join up

  • some Poor Law Guardians refused to pay support for fit military-aged men

  • following the news of Mons, many joined up because the war seemed to threaten

the safety of their home, district and country.

[A view of the reasons for recruitment, taken from Wikipedia (2012)]


SOURCE A4


[A recruiting poster for the British army (1915)]



SOURCE A5

Patting goodbye, doubtless they told the lad

He’d always show the Hun a brave man’s face;

Father would sooner him dead than in disgrace,

Was proud to see him going, aye, and glad.

[From a poem called SIW written by Wilfred Owen, an army officer and famous World War I poet (1914)]



SOURCE A6


The call to arms was accompanied by the decision to form the units that became known as Pals Battalions. In Accrington, recruitment began on 14 September 1914, with 104 men accepted for service in the first three hours. Brothers, cousins, friends and workmates enlisted together and within ten days the Accrington Pals had reached full strength of some 1,000 men. Other towns across the country soon followed.

[Bruce Robinson, an historian writing in his book, The Pals Battalions in World War One (2011)]


SOURCE A7

A girlish figure wearing a badge of some sort on her breast sees a young man wearing tweed and a heavy overcoat. Her mother, seeing the young man’s ‘troubled look’, tries to stop her but the girl says, “I don’t care mother, I think it’s a shame that any healthy young man should be lounging here while his countrymen are training themselves, ready to meet the enemy” and the white feather was thrust into his buttonhole. However, she did not know that – like many others – his heart was breaking because the medical officer had refused him the desire of his young heart to serve his country.

[A comment about recruitment written by a journalist and published in Union Jack Comic, a popular magazine (December 26th 1914)]


SOURCE A8


At this grave moment in the struggle between my people and a highly-organised enemy, who has broken the laws of nations and changed the laws that bind civilised Europe together, I appeal to you.
I feel pride about my subjects all over the Empire, who have sacrificed home, fortune and life itself, so that another country will not take over the free Empire, which our ancestors have built.
I ask you to make good these sacrifices: more men are needed to secure victory and lasting peace.
I ask men of all classes to come forward voluntarily to share in the fight against the enemy and support our brothers, who have fought bravely to uphold Britain’s past traditions and glories.

[From a public statement issued by King George V on 11th October 1915]



SOURCE A9


Sir Douglas Haig considered Mametz Wood to be an important objective for pushing the German line northwards and the 38th Welsh Division, which included the Swansea Pals, played an important part in this. One outcome of this attack was that heavy losses in dead and wounded meant that the Swansea Pals needed reinforcements. The senior commanders were worried about the impact of high casualty numbers on local communities, which led in 1916 to conscription. By 1918, one in four of the total male population of Britain had joined up. Thus, by the end of the war more than 5,000,000 men had enlisted: 2.67 million of these were volunteers, while another 2.77 million were conscripts.

[Bernard Lewis, a local historian, writing in his local history book, Swansea Pals (2004).]



SOURCE A10

[A public poster displaying the Military Service Act of 1916]


CONTROLLED ASSESSMENT TASK part (b)
Some people believe that the Lusitania was sunk deliberately by the Germans in 1915 as an act of war.
How far do your selected sources support or contradict

this interpretation?


Notes for teachers/candidates about approaching this task
Underneath is a suggested structure to approaching part (b) which should be accessible to most candidates following a GCSE History course. It is offered as guidance and should not be seen as a writing frame or the only or best way to tackle this exercise.


  • An introduction

This needs to have a clear focus on the set question and also needs to show an awareness of what an interpretation actually is.

It needs a clear reference to the different interpretations of the issue / topic.

There is a need to briefly set the issue in its historical context.

There is NO NEED to evaluate any sources or evidence in this part of the assignment.


  • A discussion / explanation of the first interpretation

There should be a clear statement of this interpretation.

There should be a clear attempt to explain how people who support this interpretation have arrived at their views.

There should be discussion of evidence which can be used to support this interpretation. Both content and attribution need to be addressed


  • A discussion / explanation of the second interpretation

There should be a clear statement of this interpretation.

There should be a clear attempt to explain how people who support this interpretation have arrived at their views.

There should be discussion of evidence which can be used to support this interpretation. Both content and attribution need to be addressed


  • Summary

There should be a final answer to the set question.

There should be a judgement reached as so which set of evidence is considered to have most validity in addressing the interpretation.



It is recommended that the answer to part (b) should be about 1200 words in total.
It is also recommended that candidates use no more than four sources from each section to explain how and why each interpretation has been arrived at.



SOURCES WHICH SUPPORT THE INTERPRETATION


SOURCE B1


In February 1915, the German government announced a campaign of unrestricted warfare. This meant that any ship taking goods to Allied countries was in danger of being attacked. This broke international agreements that stated commanders who suspected that a non-military vessel that was carrying war materials, were only allowed to stop and search it, rather than do anything that would endanger the lives of the occupants.

[From an article on a history website for use in schools (2012)]



SOURCE B2


Saturday May 1st was the day on which the Lusitania was to sail. In order that there might be no mistake as to German intentions, the German Embassy at Washington issued a warning to passengers, which was printed in the New York morning papers directly under the notice of the sailing of the Lusitania. I believe that no British and scarcely any American passengers acted on the warning but most of us knew the risk that we were running. A number of people wrote farewell letters to their home folk and posted them in New York to follow on another vessel.

[Margaret Haig Thomas, a survivor of the Lusitania, writing in her memoirs, This Was My World (1933)]




SOURCE B3


The death roll in the Lusitania disaster is still not certainly known. About 750 persons were rescued but 50 of these have died since they were landed. Over 2,150 men, women and children were on the liner when she left New York and since the living do not number more than 710, the dead cannot be fewer than 1,450. Throughout the world the news has been heard with horror. In Norway, Sweden, Holland, Spain and Italy, as well as the territories of the Allied Powers, the newspapers express an unhesitating condemnation of this deliberate act of war by Germany.

[From an editorial in The Manchester Guardian newspaper (10th May 1915)]



SOURCE B4


The Imperial Government must point out that on her last trip the Lusitania, as on earlier occasions, had Canadian troops and munitions on board, including no less than 5,400 cases of ammunition, destined for the destruction of brave German soldiers. The German government believes that it acts justifiably when it seeks to protect the lives of its soldiers by destroying ammunition destined for the enemy.

[From a statement issued by a German government official soon after the sinking of the Lusitania (May 1915)]



SOURCE B5


The official British wartime view was that German U-boat 20 had deliberately fired a second torpedo at the Lusitania. This caused a second explosion which was clearly the cause of the Lusitania’s rapid sinking in just 18 minutes. This, in turn, led to the extremely heavy loss of life that followed.

[Keith Allen, an historian, writing in a magazine article about the Lusitania (1998)]




SOURCE B6

[A British government poster used to encourage enlistment after the sinking of the Lusitania (1915)]




SOURCE B7


[A poster used to encourage enlistment after the sinking of the Lusitania (1915)]
SOURCE B8


Divers have now revealed a dark secret about the cargo carried by the Lusitania on its final journey in May 1915. Munitions that they found in the hold suggest that the Germans had been right all along in claiming that the ship was carrying war materials and was therefore a legitimate military target.

[From an article published in The Daily Mail newspaper (20th December 2008)]




SOURCES WHICH CHALLENGE THE INTERPRETATION


SOURCE B9


Lusitania was not carrying a secret, illegal cargo of explosives. She was carrying a legal consignment of rifle cartridges and shrapnel shell cases. In international law this did not affect her status as a merchant ship and entitled her to a full warning before any attack. Therefore, the German U-boat had no right to sink her.

[Keith Allen, an historian, writing in a magazine article about the Lusitania (1998)]



SOURCE B10


The Germans claimed that Lusitania was a legitimate target because it was carrying Canadian troops. They were wrong. There were 360 Canadians on board on that fateful voyage. None of them were soldiers, although at least one of them was planning to enlist in the Canadian Expeditionary Force. But since he was not yet a soldier, he was still an innocent civilian.

[From a website dedicated to the history of World War I (2012)]


SOURCE B11


On May 5th and 6th 1915, U-boat 20 destroyed three small ships off the south-west coast of Ireland. Because his fuel was running low, the U-boat commander Schwieger decided to turn back for refuelling. This meant that the U-boat would cross the path of the Lusitania, which had

slowed down to 15 knots because of fog in the Irish Channel. This was against orders to travel at full speed in the submarine war zone around Britain. Moreover, unlike the Juno, a cruiser that avoided the U-20 by zigzagging (which made it very difficult for a U-boat to fire at it) Captain Turner of the Lusitania risked taking a straight course to save wasting time and fuel.


[Vincent Kan, an historian, contributing to an on-line article about the sinking of the Lusitania (2009)]


1   2   3   4   5   6


The database is protected by copyright ©essaydocs.org 2016
send message

    Main page