Free Essay

How Far Do Sources 1 and 2 Challenge the View That the Boer War Was Responsible for Social Change in Britain?

In: Other Topics

Submitted By Monsterkraft
Words 617
Pages 3
How far do sources 1 and 2 challenge the reasons for Britain’s involvement in the Boer war given in source 3?
Source 3, written by Chamberlain is an extract of a speech in parliament justifying the involvement of the British Empire in the Boer war, October 1899. It suggests that the main reasons for the involvement of the British Empire in the Boer war was to protect British subjects – people like Bates, Milner and Rhodes who had invested in mines and were subject to harsh treatment – and to protect the Empire, giving his speech a more old imperialistic view. Also, the quote “in the last resort” suggests that the Boers have already had chances, but Britain gave them their last chance.
Source 2 was an extract from Lloyd-George, a responding speech to Chamberlain’s. Source 2 suggests that the involvement of Britain in the Boer war was more to do with capitalism and profit instead of the defence of the Empire. “forces to defend our possessions”, this quote slightly agrees with source 3, as it shows we did have to defend ourselves in Boer territory. However, source 2 doesn’t agree with source 3 in other aspects, as Lloyd-George says that we are involved mainly for capitalism and profit, “the war has no connection with the civil rights of British subjects”. So source 2 does agree slightly with source 3 , on the basis that Britain did have to defend themselves, but Chamberlain wanted to defend the possessions (gold mines etc) to promote economic growth of the Empire. Also, source 3 was a speech in parliament. If Chamberlain went out right and said that ‘I want to get involved in the Boer war because I want to secure the gold mines and make us rich’, people in parliament wouldn’t vote for him. So by ‘sugar coating’ what he is saying, he is trying to gain the majority of the votes . So Source 3 has a degree of unreliability.
Source 1 is an extract from the Manchester Guardian, in March 1901. Source 1 suggests that the mining bosses (people investing in gold mines, etc Miler , Rhodes and Bates) were pressuring the government to help them as they were being oppressed by the Boers. It also suggests that the policy in South Africa was rigged by people with aristocratic links (business owners); “successfully rigged”. Source 1 also suggests that the Boer war was brutal, and it was a quest for conquest and expansion and involved the ideology of capitalism instead of helping British subjects. From the provenance, the extraction is from the Manchester Guardian in 1901. This is very important, as the Manchester Guardian was not as censored by the government as it was not near London. Newspapers like The Sun or The Times had more censorship because they were based in London by the government. The Manchester Guardian could display what really went on, however, this could be more critical as this source was in 1901, unlike source 2 and 3 which were in 1899. In 1901, the public thought the Boer war was too harsh due to the scorched earth policy and the established concentration camps. Source 1 does not agree with source 3, because source 1 states “not in the real interests of the Empire” while Chamberlain persists to say: “protect British subjects”. This makes source 3, fairly unreliable as Chamberlain had an ulterior motive. Source 1 does agree with source 2, to an extent, source 1 states that the Boer war was a pursuit of capitalists rather than protecting British subjects. Source 1 takes on an anti-war view, but this is in retrospect, after the events of the Boer war horrified the British public.…...

Similar Documents

Premium Essay

Using Sources K to N, and Your Own Knowledge, How Far Do You Accept the View of Source K That It Was American Foreign Policy That ‘Crystallized the Cold War’?

...Using Sources K to N, and your own knowledge, how far do you accept the view of Source K that it was American foreign policy that ‘crystallized the Cold War’? The emergence of the Cold War can, to some extent be seen as a result of American Foreign policy – as it merely intensified previous tensions and distrust within the two superpowers. However, the ‘crystallization’ of the Cold War can also be seen as being due to several other factors such as the individuals’ personalities, the power vacuum that emerged at the end of WWII and the fundamental clash of ideologies all, to a certain degree, combined to cause the emergence of the Cold War, (the factors are all interlinked with one another). Firstly, it can be considered (at least to some degree) that the emergence and ‘crystallization’ of the Cold War was due to American foreign policy, as source K stresses the importance of US foreign policy as a contributory factor as America were keen to preserve their economic interests and to maintain political control – it says that ‘the US [employed] its new and awesome power’, meaning that tension would be caused inevitably, as the Soviets did not want to see the Americans gaining too much influence. An examples of foreign policies launched by the US that were designed to help the European markets (to retain the Open-door policy) is the Marshall Plan, introduced in 1947, it was a programme designed to offer financial aid to countries that were economically damaged in the second......

Words: 336 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

.How Far Do You Agree with the View That the Development of the Cold War in the Period 1945-50 Was the Result of Stalin’s Foreign Policy?

....How far do you agree with the view that the development of the Cold War in the period 1945-50 was the result of Stalin’s foreign policy? Development of the Cold War, in the five years between 1945 and 1950, could be argued as taking place for a number of reasons and due to various individuals. It could be easy to simply site Stalin as the main reason responsible for it’s outbreak and growth, clear through his approach on communist expansion, use of Red Army and inability to uphold agreements. However for a war of any kind to develop there is always more than one party involved and the USA and it’s president Truman could also be said to have contributed to the developing of Cold War, arguably being equally aggressive as Stalin – taking an Iron fist on dealings with Russia through policies such as the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan, as well as his direction over the US involvement in the Korean War. However issues such as Britain and Churchill’s Iron Curtain Speech, as well as the birth of McCarthyism in America, can also be seen as hindering relations between the two superpowers of the Cold War and therefore playing a role in it’s development. Whether Stalin was to blame for the Cold War can also be judged and evaluated through the use of sources, offering a number of interpretations, from extreme Orthodox and Revisionist views to the more diplomatic reasonings of the post revisionist stance. It is correct to say that development of the Cold War, between 1945 and......

Words: 3160 - Pages: 13

Free Essay

Some People Have the View That the Events of Dunkirk in 1940 Deserve to Be Remembered as a Triumph for Britain and Its People. How Far Do These Sources Support or Contradict This Interpretation

...Some people have the view that the events of Dunkirk in 1940 deserve to be remembered as a triumph for Britain and its people. How far do these sources support or contradict this interpretation Dunkirk was an important event during WWll. By 10th May 1940 the German troops had advanced through the parts of France and had advanced the beaches and ports of Dunkirk causing the Allies to retreat and to be trapped. Due to hesitation Hitler did not order the Germans to attack. This allowed Operation Dynamo to take place. This gave the Allies 10 days to be evacuated back to Britain. A variety of boats and ships, which were mostly privately owned, allowed the evacuation to take place. This meant that 140,000 French and 200,000 British troops were rescued. However the consequence of this made France surrender and over 100,000 pieces of ammunition left for the Germans to take or destroy. In addition to the 220,000 troops that were left behind. This essay would be considering both arguments through the evaluation and analysis of a range of sources. B3 taken from a GCSE textbook and supports this statement. It is portraying the fact that Dunkirk should be considered a triumph by stating that 340,000 men, 71 heavy guns and 595 vehicles were rescued. Furthermore it shows that the RAF fighter planes shot down 3 German planes for every RAF plane lost. The evidence from the source also shows that Dunkirk was a triumph and was emphasised by Churchill. However the source lacks detail by......

Words: 1755 - Pages: 8

Premium Essay

How Far Do You Agree with the View That Germany's Aggressive Actions Were Chiefly Responsible for the Outbreak of World War One? Use the Sources to Answer the Question.

...History Essay. How far do you agree with the view that Germany's aggressive actions were chiefly responsible for the outbreak of World War One? Use the sources to answer the question. Germany's aggressive actions were significantly responsible for the out break of World War One. There were many factors and events that played a part but the main one is preparation for war. By 1913, the fact that Germany felt threatened by the upcoming and inevitable war suggests that they were the ones responsible for the outbreak, especially due to all the aggressive actions done. Source 2 states that this conclusion is correct, and that it was Germany's aggressive actions that caused, the outbreak, especially from 'pushing Austria into a premature declaration of war'. Source 3 on the other hand suggests that it has been exaggerated over time the extent that Germany were aggressive and that it was more tactical that it was aggressive. Source 1 sits on the fence slightly, with it just edging towards deciding that Germany were aggressive in their actions. Source 1, written by Blackburn, suggests that although Germany would have preferred to get what they wanted without war, then that would have been the way they would have gone. However, Blackburn contradicts himself when he says that their actions had done a lot create tensions suggesting that it was aggressive actions that were a responsibility of the outbreak of the 1914 war. Blackburn states that Bethmann-Hollweg was a sensitive man......

Words: 887 - Pages: 4

Free Essay

How Far Do Sources 1 and 2 Suggest That the Young Henry Viii Saw the Nobility as His Friends and Supporters?

...father. Henry was very different to his father in many ways, one being the manner in which he regarded the nobility. While Henry VII kept his friends and supporters in check, with limited power in order to be assured of their loyalty, his son, Henry VIII, seemed to have a very different view on how to treat the nobility, giving them more power and control of their own estates. Sources 1 and 2 give varying views on whether or not Henry VIII regarded them as his friends and supporters. Source 1 comes from a description of the festivities enjoyed by Henry and his ‘friends’ at Court in 1510. This source gives much evidence to suggest that Henry very much regarded the nobility as his friends. This can be seen through the description of the antics that Henry and co. took part in. They are said to have joked around a lot, seemingly having fun while playing a prank by coming “early to the Queen’s bedchamber one morning; dressed in short coats of Kentish cloth, with hoods, bows and arrows, like Robin Hood”. What this implies is that the King trusts his nobility enough that he allows them into the Queen’s chamber. They continued to enjoy themselves later at dinner, when Henry “arranged the seating and joked with all; and had [them] parade in strange costumes before they brought in actors to stage a play.” This could be seen as showing that Henry very much enjoyed the company of his nobility, counting them as his friends. However when taking a closer look at Source 1 you can infer...

Words: 705 - Pages: 3

Free Essay

How Far Do These Sources Suggest That British Rule Was Accepted in India at the Beginning of the Twentieth Century? Explain Your Answer, Using the Evidence of Sources 1, 2 and 3.

...How far do these sources suggest that British rule was accepted in India at the beginning of the twentieth century? Explain your answer, using the evidence of Sources 1, 2 and 3. Source 1 is a letter, written by the influence of Queen Victoria to the Prime Minister towards the end of the 19th century. To an extent, this source does not suggest that the Raj was accepted within the natives in India. One reason for this is that Queen Victoria is saying what the viceroy needs to do in order for the acceptance of the natives. This suggests that this is not the case already at the time when the letter was written – that the natives do not “like and love” the Raj. The British were seen as ‘alien-rulers’ by the Indians, which could therefore mean that this opinion and view may be hard to change. The Raj had a dominant, oppressive rule on the Indians. They had subservient roles, such as Ayahs, compared to the British who put themselves on top of the Caste system (of which they did not understand well) and were hierarchy towards them. One could argue, however, that Queen, is trying to make things better for the relationship between the natives of India and the British rulers in the source, and so it could show a good attitude – one that the Indians could respect and understand. Another reason for this is that from this source, there is no evidence to suggest that British rule was accepted towards the beginning of the twentieth century, because the letter was written in the......

Words: 1093 - Pages: 5

Free Essay

How Far Do These Sources Agree That Supplying the Troops Was a Significant Problem for Henry in the French War of 1513? Explain Using Sources 1, 2 and 3.

...How far do these sources agree that supplying the troops was a significant problem for Henry in the French War of 1513? Explain using sources 1, 2 and 3. These sources all agree to an extent that supplying the troops for the French War was a significant problem for Henry, whether it was because he couldn’t transport the large scale of his troops, support them with necessary victuals or he had been over ambitious about the whole campaign. All sources give sufficient evidence that Henry and Wolsey physically couldn’t provide for England’s Army, however each source support that supplying the troops was a significant problem to a degree, but some situations were worse than the other situations that Henry was facing, as well as rooting from separate issues with nothing to do with the troops. For example the transportation aspect was a major problem which source 2 and 3 explains. Source 2 and 3 agree on the potential problem of transporting ‘supplies, ordinance, artillery, victuals’. Source 2 voices this problem, ‘tonnage of fifty ships’ as it highlights that the large scale was the problem. Whereas source 3 highlights again another problem with supplying- how the actual transportation of the army and its supplies and getting it safely across the continent. However both show that supplying was a great problem. In source 3, for example it states ‘it is too great a shame to lose the ships that be lost.’- could not risk losing more men. Source 1 and 2 disagree on the problems......

Words: 703 - Pages: 3

Free Essay

How Far Do Sources 1 &2 Suggest That the Young Henry Viii Saw the Nobility as His Friends and Supporters?

...How far do sources 1&2 suggest that the young Henry VIII saw the nobility as his friends and supporters? Henry VIII saw the nobility as his entertainers and play things rather than his supporters or friends and did not show them any respect which differed massively from the way that his father, Henry VII, as his father respected his nobility and controlled them by limiting their power so that they stayed loyal to them. Source 1 describes how Henry interacted with the nobility whereas source 2 shows his anger towards him. Source one is “from a description of some of the festivities enjoyed by Henry and his friends at court in 1510.” It says in the title of the source “and his friends” indicating that Henry was friends with his nobles. Similarly in the source it goes on to describe the activities that Henry and his “friends” took part in for example “they all laughed and danced” and the King “joked with all” which is something that friends would do and this indicates that Henry enjoyed being around his nobility and not only had a work relationship with them but also a social one. Also in this source it says that the nobles came to “the Queens bed chamber one morning” which suggests that Henry trusted his nobles enough to go in an area that would usually be off limits and private showing that the nobles were some of Henry’s most trusted associates. In this source it also says that his nobles staged a play for him and dressed like Robin Hood. This could be seen as a sign of......

Words: 394 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

How Far Do Sources 1, 2 and 3 Suggest That in the Years 1945-59, the Conservative and Labour Parties Held Radically Different Views on the Nationalisation of British Industry? (20 Marks)

...How far do sources 1, 2 and 3 suggest that in the years 1945-59, the Conservative and Labour parties held radically different views on the nationalisation of British industry? (20 marks) Between the years of 1945 and 1959, there was much speculation as to whether or not there was a consensus or conflict between the Labour and Conservative parties in regards to their views on Nationalisation. Sources 1 and 3 completely disagree with each other. On the one hand, the first source is Clement Attlee, the leader of the Labour party in 1945, saying that something has to be done and that nationalisation is the way. Contrastingly, source 3 is from the Conservative party manifesto. It chooses privation over nationalisation, and therefore presents both parties as holding radically different views on the British industry, each with their own ideas. However, source 2 offers a variegated approach, with Hugh Gaitskell, the leader of the Labour party in 1959, showing the parties as having less radically different views, as he talks about a mixed economy, private and national, being perhaps a wise move on behalf of the government. Sources 1 and 3 agree, overall, that both the Labour and Conservative parties held radically different views on the nationalisation of British industry. Source 1 was taken from a speech by Clement Attlee, the leader of the labour party at the time. In 1945, the country was in economic ruin and a social divide was severely evident. Clement Attlee, alongside the......

Words: 1136 - Pages: 5

Premium Essay

How Far Was the Ussr Responsible for the Outbreak of the Cold War 1945-1949?

...How far was the USSR responsible for the outbreak of the Cold War 1945-1949? To a certain extent, the USSR’s responsibility of the Cold War cannot be underestimated as their policies following the Second World War may have been seen as aggressive by USA. The forceful take-over of Eastern Europe through the Red Army occupations, especially in distinctive cases such as Poland and Czechoslovakia, can be seen as being far from the “liberation” over which the two war-time allies had agreed, while the rigging of elections did not conform to the Yalta agreement of the organisation of free ones. Stalin responded to the Americans’ policies of containment by creating his own agencies, therefore creating even more hostility between the two superpowers, while also refusing the existence of anything but Soviet puppet states in Eastern Europe. However, the event which cemented the outbreak of the Cold War was Stalin imposing the Berlin Blockade, taking direct action towards weakening the Americans’ position. One may see that Stalin’s blockade resulted in the official creation of two separate German states, one of the most significant events of the Cold War. On the other hand, revisionists point out that the USSR was taking defensive measures to protect itself from anything that could have caused as much damage as the Second World War, while the Americans, who were superior economically, adopted provocative policies. They challenged the patience of the Russians by hiding crucial events......

Words: 4209 - Pages: 17

Premium Essay

‘How Far Do You Agree That the British Wish to Seize Control of the Boer Republic’s Raw Materials Was the Main Reason for the Outbreak of the Second Boer War in 1899?

...outbreak of the second Boer was because of the British wanting to seize control of The Boer Republic’s raw materials. The Boer war has produced a great deal of controversy among historians. The major area of the ‘historical debate’ are the roles of the so called ‘men on the spot’, who were Rhodes, Chamberlin, Milner and finally Kruger. Many Historians have stated other factors which started the second Boer war, such as J.A. Hobson who said that the second Boer war was caused by a shady conspiracy of financers, miners and ‘corrupt politicians’. After studying the debates carefully, it appears that the role of long term economics factors with the short term political decisions of the leading politicians caused the second Boer war. The first factor is the long term effects of Anglo- Boer antagonism. The Dutch East India Company established a small tracking station neat the Cape of Good Hope and this was to be known as the Cape Colony, There, there was a community of protestant farmers of Dutch/German decent. And this community was soon to be known as the Boers. The British ended the Boer dominance in the Cape colony is 1806, by capturing it, then having nowhere to stay the Boers made ‘the great trek’, where they crossed the Orange and Vaal rivers, in the more northern part of Africa. And then they set up two independent states known as the Orange Free State and the Transvaal. Then many years passed, and nothing occurred until 1877, when the Boers were Boers were losing to the......

Words: 1530 - Pages: 7

Premium Essay

How Far Do You Agree with the View That the Development of the Cold War in the Years 1945-49 Was Mainly Due to ‘Stalin’s Own Errors’?

...How far do you agree with the view that the development of the Cold War in the years 1945-49 was mainly due to ‘Stalin’s own errors’? I disagree with the statement - sources 7, 8 and 9 all suggest that the Cold War had many contributing factors, although it was ultimately the USA’s own economic and national interests to blame, rather than Stalin’s errors, as a result of acts and policies such as the Marshall Plan and Truman Doctrine in 1947. Both providing evidence to support this view are sources 8 and 9, with source 7 giving the impression that it was the errors of Stalin that contributed most. In addition to these two factors, conflicting ideologies also played a small role in provoking the Cold War, as shown in source 8. Despite this, it was fundamentally the economic and national interests of the USA that was mainly to blame for the start of the Cold War in 1945 and its development through to 1949. Europe was destroyed physically and economically after the Second World War. America saw this as a chance to become a world hegemony, as well as economically advancing the nation - source 9 proves this, saying, “The liberal capitalist US economy needed ever-increasing trade and investment opportunities”, as well as “The Marshall Plan was designed to implant an informal American Empire in Europe”. This shows that the USA not only used Europe’s fragile situation after WW2 to prosper itself, but more importantly increase its world influence, aiming to produce some sort of......

Words: 1496 - Pages: 6

Free Essay

How Far Was the Labour Party Election Victory in 1945 Due to the Changes in Social Attitudes During the Second World War?

...The Labour party election victory in 1945 was due to changes in social attitudes during the Second World War more than other factors. It produced different political views to that of those before WW2 such as equality and the level of state intervention. This benefitted the Labour party’s electoral victory greatly and outweighs the other reasons that contributed to the victory. Firstly, the social attitudes changed in regard to the significant leftward shift in public opinion and the amount of state intervention that the public wanted. The success of total war showed the public that state involvement was a positive thing and could actually benefit the public. The massive extension of State control, regulation and planning seemed to have led to full employment and a sense of working together for a common goal. Many of the poor population was benefitting from the wartime rationing systems and demand for materials and soldiers as it gave them a substantial meal than what they were used to and they were also able to have a secure income in the household instead of scraping by. The rationing system, along with the conscription of both men and women and the raising of taxes created a feeling of equal involvement and fairness in society, which reflected Labour’s socialist characteristics. The public felt that if these methods were so successful and produced so much positivity in Britain at wartime then they should also be applied in times of peace. Labour’s nationalisation plan...

Words: 969 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

How Far Do You Agree with the View That the Development of the Cold War in the Period 1945-50 Was the Result of Stalin’s Foreign Policy?

...How far do you agree with the view that the development of the Cold War in the period 1945-50 was the result of Stalin’s foreign policy? Development of the Cold War, in the five years between 1945 and 1950, could be argued as taking place for a number of reasons and due to various individuals. It could be easy to simply site Stalin as the main reason responsible for it’s outbreak and growth, clear through his approach on communist expansion, use of Red Army and inability to uphold agreements. However for a war of any kind to develop there is always more than one party involved and the USA and it’s president Truman could also be said to have contributed to the developing of Cold War, arguably being equally aggressive as Stalin – taking an Iron fist on dealings with Russia through policies such as the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan, as well as his direction over the US involvement in the Korean War. However issues such as Britain and Churchill’s Iron Curtain Speech, as well as the birth of McCarthyism in America, can also be seen as hindering relations between the two superpowers of the Cold War and therefore playing a role in it’s development. Whether Stalin was to blame for the Cold War can also be judged and evaluated through the use of sources, offering a number of interpretations, from extreme Orthodox and Revisionist views to the more diplomatic reasonings of the post revisionist stance. It is correct to say that development of the Cold War, between...

Words: 3196 - Pages: 13

Free Essay

‘German Aggression Was Responsible for the Outbreak of a General European War in August 1914.’ How Far Do You Agree with This Judgement?

...tensions, and war in 1914. The use of strategies such as the Anglo-German Naval Race, as stated in Joll’s source, highlighted the aggression by Germany prior to war. Moreover, this type of tactic also demonstrated the desire and hunger Germany obtained for continental power, another factor towards European tensions. The sources in question both support and contest the set statement, to an extent. Sources 1 and 3 by Corrigan and Joll, respectively, argue how Germany’s use of tactics agitated European powers, thus causing war. However, Source 2 by Turner disagrees with the statement, arguing how other European powers were to blame for the outbreak of general war. Nevertheless, all sources will be taken into account and analysed with the support of other relevant in the build-up to war, before reaching a final judgement. Corrigan’s source thoroughly argues how Germany used the tactic of aggression to stipulate war. Corrigan includes the historian within the source, Fischer, to highlight how Germany were to blame for general war. Fischer states that “at least as early as 1906, Germany had in place a plan for an aggressive war based on the premise that Germany would have to fight Russia and France simultaneously”. The quote demonstrates how Germany aimed to use methods of aggression to agitate other nations. Additonally, the quote also implies how Germany had been planning for war for a substantial period of time; “as early as 1906”. Furthermore, this indicates how Germany had......

Words: 1222 - Pages: 5

6.2 | Скачать | Xing Chen Bian