You are on page 1of 8

Turn over

Paper Reference
Advanced Subsidiary
Unit 2
Option C: Conflict and Change in 19th and 20th Century Britain
Friday 16 January 2009 – Afternoon
Sources Insert 6HI02/C
Do not return the insert with the question paper.
©2009 Edexcel Limited.
Edexcel GCE
Choose EITHER C1 (Question 1) OR C2 (Question 2) for which you have been prepared.
C1 – The Experience of Warfare in Britain: Crimea, Boer and the First World War, 1854–1929
Sources for use with Question 1 (a)
(Sir Garnet Wolseley, The Story of a Soldier’s Life, published 1903. Wolseley served as
a Captain in the Royal Engineers during the Crimean War and went on to become
Commander-in-Chief of the British Army. Here he is reflecting on the Crimean War.)
(In 1863, the Earl of Cardigan, who had commanded the Light Brigade at Balaclava, sued
an author who was critical of his performance in the Crimean War. This is part of the
judge’s summing up in that case.)
(From General Simpson’s first report to the British Government, sent from the Crimea,
in April 1855. Simpson had been appointed by the Government in February 1855 to
investigate the growing press criticism of the Army.)
Almost all our officers at that time were uneducated as soldiers. Many of those
appointed to the staff of the Army at the beginning of the war were absolutely
unfit for the positions they had secured through family and political interest. They
were not men whom I would have entrusted with a junior officer’s sentry duty in
the field.
There may be those who will say, Lord Cardigan, as a General, is open to criticism,
but it should be a generous and sympathetic criticism, not one that should seek to
cast a stain upon his courage and his personal honour as an officer.
The staff here at Headquarters have, I am convinced, been very unfairly criticised.
They are a very good set of fellows. I see no staff officer to whom I would object.
Not one of them is incompetent. You will see my views are very different from
those printed in the newspapers, but I judge from my own observation. I must say
I never served with an Army where a higher feeling and sense of duty exists than I
notice in the staff officers of this Army.
Turn over
Sources for use with Question 1 (b)(i)
(From The Times newspaper, 19 May 1900)
(From Jeremy Black, Modern British History since 1900, published 2000)
(From Richard Price, An Imperial War and the British Working-Class, published 1972)
The report that Mafeking has been relieved was received with great rejoicings all
over the country. In the clubs Colonel Baden-Powell’s health was enthusiastically
pledged. At the Theatre Royal, where the news was announced from the stage,
there was an impressive outburst of uncontrollable rejoicing.
The battlefield defeats in the early stages of the Second Boer War undermined
Britain’s imperial prestige. Yet the importance and influence of the Empire remained
clear for all to see: the jubilation surrounding the relief of the siege of Mafeking, in
May 1900, demonstrated this.
The working-class reaction to volunteering was based generally more upon
economic and social concerns than upon feelings of patriotism and a desire to serve
the mother-country. It also explains the rejection of good imperialist candidates at
the 1900 election. Imperialism had little or no meaning to working-class life and
society. One of the most important pieces of evidence which illustrates this point
is the marked difference between the working-class and the non-working-class
reaction to the war. It was those who considered themselves to be of the higher
social orders who volunteered because of the ‘needs of the country’. Young clerks
were more eager to volunteer than young labourers.
Sources for use with Question 1 (b)(ii)
(In June 1917 Siegfried Sassoon, a highly decorated soldier and famous poet, issued a
protest against the war which was read out in the House of Commons and published in
The Times newspaper. This is part of that protest.)
(From an interview with Captain C. Slack, East Yorkshire Regiment. Captain Slack was a
professional soldier who served throughout the war.)
(From Jeremy Black, Modern British History since 1900, published 2000)
I have endured the sufferings of the troops and can no longer be a party to
prolonging those sufferings for ends which I believe to be evil and unjust. I am not
protesting against the military conduct of the war, but against the political errors
and insincerities for which the fighting men are being sacrificed. 35
The morale in the regiment was there to begin with. It got a bit weaker later on as
the regular soldiers got thinned out by the end of the war. I mean, people came to
us from anywhere and they hadn’t got the regimental loyalty and pride in service
that we, the professional soldiers, had in the early days.
Millions of men served without question. Habits of mass mobilisation had been
acquired prior to the war, thanks to industrial labour and the trade unions. This
contributed to the willingness to accept discipline and order, as also did passive
acceptance of the social order. Despite the strains of the war there was no hostility
to authority in the army as there was in the French and Russian armies in 1917.
Turn over
Choose EITHER C1 (Question 1) OR C2 (Question 2) for which you have been prepared.
C2 – Britain, c1860–1930: The Changing Position of Women and the Suffrage Question
Sources for use with Question 2 (a)
(From Viscount Ullswater, A Speaker’s Commentaries, published 1925. Here he is recalling
suffragette activities when he was Speaker of the House of Commons in 1913.)
(From Emmeline Pankhurst, My Own Story, published 1914)
(From Helena Swanwick, I Have Been Young, published 1935. Helena Swanwick was the
editor of the NUWSS journal, Common Cause.)
The activities of the militant suffragettes had now reached the stage at which
nothing was safe from their attacks. A bill was introduced, nicknamed the Cat
and Mouse Bill, the aim of which was to permit the release of suffragette hunger
strikers on licence. The Bill passed without much difficulty, but proved valueless in
preventing a continuance of the outrages. The feeling in Parliament, caused by the
extravagant and lawless action of the militants, hardened the opposition to their
Militancy never set the cause of female suffrage back, but on the contrary, set it
forward at least half a century. When I remember how the House of Commons, a
few years ago, treated the mention of female suffrage with scorn and contempt,
I cannot but marvel at the change our militancy so quickly brought about. The
Home Secretary’s suggestion that the government should take legal proceedings
against those who gave funds to the WSPU was, in itself, a token of the complete
surrender of the Government.
It has often been said that it was the militant suffragettes and not the constitutional
suffragists who won the vote. But I would claim for Mrs Fawcett’s NUWSS, her
devoted record of over half a century’s persistent toil and a national membership
far exceeding in numbers that of the militant societies. Without that long, steady,
controlled pressure, there would have been no deep cultivation of public opinion.
Turn over
Sources for use with Question 2 (b)(i)
(From Paula Bartley, The Changing Role of Women, 1815–1914, published 1996)
(From Joan Perkin, Victorian Women, published 1993)
(From the satirical magazine Punch, 7 October 1882. The main figure in the cartoon is
Osborne Morgan, the sponsor of the Married Women’s Property Act of 1882. The label on
the suitcase reads ‘Married Women’s Property’.)
Historians have sometimes viewed the Married Women’s Property Act as an
important milestone in women’s emancipation. It allowed women to spend
their own money as they wished and so encouraged them to develop their own
interests. As a result, by the end of the century, marriage was more companionable
than it had been at the beginning and the ‘angel in the house’ had ceased to be an
ideal image.
Continued pressure in the 1860s led to the Married Women’s Property Act of
1870, a half-hearted measure which gave women the right to their own earnings
and to the personal property that they had inherited. However, it gave rights in
other property to their husbands. Middle-class husbands could, by this time, see
considerable advantage in their wives holding separate property. For example,
a husband’s creditors could not claim for his debts against property held by his
Sources for use with Question 2 (b)(ii)
(From Martin Pugh, The March of the Women, published 2000)
(From a speech by Lydia Becker to the Manchester Society for Women’s Suffrage in 1885.
She was the Secretary of the National Society for Women’s Suffrage.)
(In 1914 the East London Federation of the Suffragettes met with the Prime Minister,
Herbert Asquith, to demand votes for women. This is part of Asquith’s response.)
The relationship between Liberalism and suffragism was complicated. This was
because of the inconclusive attempts by Liberals to weigh up the significance of
the growing support for the suffrage movement from the Conservative Party. As
a result, for the Liberals, questions of principle became hopelessly mixed up with
considerations of political advantage.
Every effort has been made to contact the copyright holders where possible. In some cases, every effort to contact
copyright holders has been unsuccessful and Edexcel will be happy to rectify any omissions of acknowledgement
at the first opportunity.
I do not believe that the Liberal Party cares a straw for the interests and wishes of
women. Their promises of greater freedom and desire for government founded on
popular consent are a mockery. 40
I welcome you as an association which has distanced itself from the criminal
methods of those who have done so much damage and put back the cause of
On one point I am in complete agreement with you. I have always said that if you
are going to give the franchise to women, give it to them on the same terms as
men. Make it a democratic measure.