(b) (i) Use Sources 4, 5 and 6 and your own knowledge.
Do you agree with the view that it was largely as a result of the work of Florence Nightingale that medical care for British soldiers improved during the Crimean War?
Explain your answer, using Sources 4, 5 and 6 and your own knowledge. (40)
(From The Times newspaper, 12 February 1855)
Wherever there is disease in its most dangerous form, and the hand of death is distressingly near, there Florence Nightingale is sure to be seen. Her kindly presence is an influence for good comfort even amid the struggles of illness and death. She is a ‘ministering angel’ without any exaggeration in these hospitals, and, as her slender form glides quietly along each corridor, every fellow’s face softens with gratitude at the sight of her.
(From Trevor Royle, Crimea, published 1999)
Much of the medical mismanagement was to change with the arrival of Florence Nightingale and her nurses, not just because she helped to introduce reform, but because, through The Times, she had access to the funds which would bring the necessities for improvement. Had she not arrived when she did, the disaster would have been much worse, for on top of the hundreds of cholera patients came the wounded from the first great battles of the war at the Alma, Balaklava and Inkerman.
(From Alastair Massie, Crimean War: the Untold Stories, published 2004)
Although Florence Nightingale did much to alleviate the hardship of the sick, it was the work of the Sanitary Commission, which arrived from England in March 1855 and immediately set about purifying the water supply, that did most to reduce the mortality rate at Scutari. The rate fell from a catastrophic 42% in February 1855 to 5.2% by May of the same year.
(a) Study Sources 1, 2 and 3.
How far do Sources 2 and 3 challenge the impression given of Lord Raglan in Source 1?
Explain your answer, using the evidence of Sources 1, 2 and 3. (20)
(A letter from ‘A Guards Officer’ published in The Times newspaper, 3 January 1855, about Lord Raglan as commander-in-chief of the British Army during the Crimean War)
Lord Raglan is fast getting a bad name with all involved in the war for his total carelessness about everything; there will be a great outcry before long. There have been sixty or seventy from the English Army buried daily – all Lord Raglan’s fault in not seeing that clothing and shelter were provided for them, which is within his
power, but he does not care.
(Part of a letter from a British officer serving in the Crimea to his wife, dated 15 January 1855)
If ever a generous or kind-hearted man – yes, a soldier’s friend – was to be found, then that man’s name is Raglan. He is not only a brave soldier but his moral character stands second to none. I speak not only from my heart but from my long service under that glorious soldier and man. Forgive me in writing so fully but
my old soldier’s blood boils up with indignation at The Times and other abusive papers.
(Part of a letter by Lord Panmure, the Secretary for War, to Raglan’s Headquarters in the Crimea, dated 30 June 1855)
I feel it to be scarcely possible to estimate the loss which the country has sustained by Lord Raglan’s death. He not only possessed the finer qualities of a soldier but, in his courteous and conciliatory manners, his calm and even temper, he was able to maintain with rare success the kind feelings which have existed between us and our allies.