Do you agree with the view that Britains involvement in the Crimean War was a total waste of time and life Essays

Do you agree with the view that Britains involvement in the Crimean War was a total waste of time and life Essays Do you agree with the view that Britains involvement in the Crimean War was a total waste of time and life Essay Do you agree with the view that Britains involvement in the Crimean War was a total waste of time and life Essay Britains involvement in the Crimean War arose from the belief that British interests in India were directly threatened by the Russias army advance through Afghanistan and that their route to India would be threatened by the prospect of Russian control over the eastern Mediterranean, particularly the area around the Black Sea. Therefore, it can be argued that Britains involvement in the Crimean War was a worthwhile success, as the Peace of Paris stated that the Black Sea was to be neutralised. However, there are outcomes of the war that suggest the war was a total waste of time and life, such as the many deaths caused by poor health care.Source A supports this, as it argues through gangrene, fever, cholera, dysentery, rhmatism, the British army was reduced to 11,000 effectives with 23,000 sick. I can infer that this means the Crimean war was a waste of life, as not only did soldiers therefore die, but many were unable to fight, as they were ill. Furthermore, it could be argued that the war was a waste of time, because while men should have fought, as there were few battle casualities, they were in hospitals. However, Source A was written by a Lieutenant, which means he didnt have personal experience of being a soldier in the war and could also mean he was biased, as he may not have wanted to criticise other men in high positions in the army.For example, when he admits to the problems of food, he explains that there were many supplies that couldnt reach the soldiers due to no labourers, no tools to repair the track, instead of blaming aristocracy imcompetence. Also the exact date is unknown, so we cant be sure if this was a problem at the start of the war or towards the end. On the other hand, he is being honest when he explains the problems, which I know from my own knowledge. Also he has written it to go home and as it is going to be read by his family, he is unlikely to be biased.However, Source B suggests that Britains involvement in t he war was essential, as it explains that the war was due to the desire of seeing Europe saved from the arrogant and dangerous Russia. As Russia had been defeated at the end of the war, it can be argued that the war was worthwhile, especially as England had achieved what they wanted to at the start of the war through the Peace of Paris. However, Source B is biased, as it was written by Queen Victoria to the King of Belgium and therefore would potray Russia as being barbarous, while claiming England is unselfish. However, it is quite useful, as it is a primary source and has the exact date written, so therefore we know it was written at the end of the war. Also it demonstrates that Britains involvement was useful, as it mentions the peace negotiations, which demonstrate that the war wasnt a total waste of time and life. Source C also explains that there was a purpose for the war. The Crimean War did involve British interests. It also states that Russia threatens British trade routes. However, the Source then explains that despite the win, it did not go well.This is due to the consequences of the years of neglect suffered by the British army since 1915. From my own knowledge, I know that the British army suffered due to the incompotence of the aristocracy with supplies, such as Lord Raglan who had ordered only a small number of medical assistants (around four per hundred men), as he believed the space on ships should be given to troops. Also this was made worse by the captain of one of the two originally designated hospital ships off- loading all the medical supplies on board to make room for more troops. Therefore, I can infer that Britians involvement was a waste of time and life, because many soldiers lost their lives due to lack of medical provisions. Source C then explains that the Charge of the Light Brigade resulted from a woefully misinterpreted order. As the light brigade were sent up the wrong valley against the wrong guns, this is true as it was due t o confusion between the commanders.This source explains that it was richly ironic, that this wrong order was one of the most celebrated actions of the war. Due to the bravery of the light brigade, they advanced to the Russians, although 409 died. The source continues at the end to say that it was a total waste of time and life. However, this is a secondary source, so may be less useful, as it isnt a personal account at the time. Simultaneously though, as it was written by a historian, it is likely he would have collected information from a range of useful primary sources to write Source C. As it is from the book The Making of Modern Britain he will have written it for a purpose to entertain and may have tried to give a different opinion from most historians to sell more books. However, he is less likely to be biased as a historian.Although Source C agrees with the view that Britains involvement in the Crimean war was a total waste of time and life, it does include Tennysons poem abo ut the light brigade Theirs not to reason why, which conveys the idea of military inefficiency, as the commanders gave the soldiers the wrong path, but bravery from the light brigade. However, Tennyson had written the poem due to Williams Russells earlier report on the charge of the light brigade written in the Times.This changed public opinion, as it showed that many British soldiers died as a result. Russells reports showed contrasting ideas to the jingoistic heroic idea of conflict. This undermined the government and destroyed the reputation of the army commander in chief, Lord Raglan. This led to the Cardwell army reforms 1870-71, which improved military effeciency such as: various military departments being combined under one roof, the country dividing into local regimental districts with single battalion regiments being merged into two battalion regiments (one battalion would serve overseas while one at home for training,) the length of overseas service was reduced from 12 to 6 years, the purchase of commissions was abolished, the commander in chief was to answer to the Secretary for War and therefore Parliament, flogging of ordinary soldiers in peacetime was forbidden and soldiers could choose to spend time in the reserves rather than regular service.The abolishing of purchasing commissions was particularly useful, as it allowed more qualified men to have a high position, as it was replaced by a system of promotion through merit. Also civil service reform resulted, as in 1870 entry into the civil service came from undertaking examinations rather than traditional methods of patronage. This improved the efficiency and intelligance of he upper ranks. Despite this though, even by 1873, the Foreign office was excempt from this new method and the majority of high positions were held by Oxford and Cambridge graduates. Also the new army reserves were inadequate, as they were only a force of 35,000 compared to Prussias million.In conclusion, it can be argued tha t the view that Britains involvement in the Crimean War was a total waste of time, because it reduced the British army through death. This was mainly due to poor hygeine in hospitals, as only 1,761 of 18,058 were killed in battle rather than wounds or disease. For example, the main form of treatment was the amputation of shattered limbs, which carried a 25% chance of death from shock or infection. Lack of washing facilities caused lice infestation and increased the risk of typhus and typhoid. Also the lack of sanitation led to dysentery and cholera. Also as mid June 1854 the Russian forces were in retreat and by mid July they were safely back over the River Pruth, the war could have ended then, as Russia was no longer a threat to the Turkish Empire. However, the allied governments had convinced themselves that the Russian naval base of Sebastopol had to be taken.Therefore, the war does seem a total waste of time and life, because capturing Sebastopol was not a British aim at the sta rt of the war. However, sanitation and clean water problems reflected the state of hospitals in Britain. Also whether it arose from Florence Nightingale or not, sanitation did improve. Also the Crimean War caused the Nightingale fund which created the Nightingale Training school for nurses at St Thomas Hospital in London in 1860.This improved the standard of female nursing and caused more middle class women to see nursing as a respectable job. Also due to Russells war reporting, the Crimean War caused the British public to view soldiers as brave rather than as dangerous or as very low class. The Victoria Cross was a medal that awarded bravery and was made available to all ranks, showing that the war did cause better respect for ordinary soldiers. Furthermore, despite public outrage that Sebastopol was given back to the Russians, this hadnt been the reason for War. Therefore, as Britain had stopped Russia being a threat to them and due to the health and military reforms, Britains inv olvement in the Crimean War wasnt a total waste of time and life.