British Social History Can you name these key people?

Answers at the back!

British Social History What do I need to know? The exam board expects you to know the answers to

these questions:

The Liberal Reforms

How were the social reformers reacting to the social problems of the 1890s? Why did the Liberal Government introduce reforms to help the young, old and unemployed? How effective were these reforms?

Women’s Suffrage

What were the arguments for and against female suffrage? How effective were the activities of the suffragists and the suffragettes? Why were some women given the vote in 1918?

World War I

How were civilians affected by the war? How effective was government propaganda during the war? How did women contribute to the war effort? What was the attitude of the British people at the end of the war towards Germany and the

Remember, whilst this is a source paper, you will still need to know quite a bit of detail as every question will rely on your own contextual knowledge to get full marks! Make sure you know the

The Liberal Reforms Why did people start to care about the poor?

What was the problem? The popular view in Britain was that if you were poor, it was probably your own fault. Poor people had a reputation for being lazy and wasting money on non-essentials like alcohol and tobacco. This meant that richer people were reluctant to get involved in helping them out. The Poor Law provided an escape route to those unable to help themselves by offering them accommodation and work in workhouses. It was hoped, however, that because the conditions in the workhouses were so terrible and accepting the offer of charity was so shameful, only the most desperate would actually go. A lot of wealthy people were against the government offering direct help to the poor as they viewed the

Charles Booth Thought that the problem of poverty was being exaggerated and so decided to find out for himself. He collected information in London where he lived and was shocked to find out that actually studies into poverty had been underestimating its scale. As he started his studies looking to show that the numbers weren’t actually that bad, a lot of people took his work very seriously. He published 17 volumes of his study which showed that around 30% of Londoners lived below what he called the poverty line which means they cannot afford clothing, food and accommodation. His studies also showed that laziness or criminality only accounted for 1% of London - so 29% of the poor were honest poor people! Crucially, his report concluded that poverty was the result of low wages, seasonal work (contracts that only last for a certain amount of time, e.g. shipbuilding), trade depressions (when demand for

Raising Awareness...

Seebohm Rowntree Was a committed social reformer (someone who looks to change the system to help out the poor). Like Booth, Rowntree was wealthy and, because of this, his studies were taken seriously as he would have nothing to gain from arguing that more help should be given to the poor. He wrote Poverty: A study of Town Life which was based on research of the poor in his home town of York. His findings were shocking as York was not a big industrial area like London with big slums - instead it was a respectable, average town. Rowntree concluded that: - 27% of the population lived below the poverty line - The causes of poverty were unemployment (5%), death of the wage earner (10%), illness or old age of wage earner (5%), low wages (22%), large family (52%) and other reasons (6%) This showed that poor people generally weren’t to blame for their poverty. Indeed, trade

John Galt (who??) Not as famous as Booth and Rowntree but he also played an important role in raising awareness of the problem of poverty. A deeply religious man and a keen amateur photographer, he worked in East London and helped the poor as best he could. He used his photos to show middle-class people the lives of the working-class. He used his images to show that the majority of the poor lived incredible hard lives and that they were not sub-human creatures (as some critics described them). He also used his images to show that, far from being lazy, the poor worked incredibly hard at

The Liberal Reforms How were the social reformers reacting to the social problems of the 1890s?

Children The Liberal Party came to power in 1906 and started making changes immediately. The Free School Meals Act (1906) allowed local authorities to provide these to the poorest children so they’d get at least one good meal a day. By 1914, 150,000 free meals were being served a day, 14 million in total! However, only half of the local authorities agreed to do this - the act didn’t force them. Free school medical inspections (1907) was forced upon the local authorities although treatment was not free until 1912. The Children and Young Persons Act (1908) also known as the Children’s Charter, was designed to protect children and give them special status as protected people. In the past, insurance companies gave out money to parents if a child died, whether their death was suspicious or not. This had to be addressed. Children were now protected from neglect, could not buy tobacco or fireworks, were tried in children’s courts and sent to young offenders institutes as called Borstals rather than adult prisons. It also set the amount of hours children were allowed to work.

The elderly In 1908, David Lloyd George was the chancellor of the exchequer (the man in charge of the government’s money). He introduced the government-funded (government pays for it) Old Ages Pensions Act (1908). A person over the age of 70 with no other income would receive 5 shillings per week. Married couples would receive 7s 6d. Anyone who had an income of over £31 a year would not qualify for the state (government) pension. Pensions were not new - you could pay a sum of money into a private pension scheme when you worked - but poor people couldn’t afford to do this. Richer people did. Whilst the money provided wasn’t great, its effect on the elderly was enormous. The state pension made them independent for the rest of their lives - they wouldn’t have to rely on their children necessarily. In the first year some 650,000 people collected pensions. This was a big turning point in British history for as it was non-contributory, meaning you didn’t have to pay into the scheme, meaning it was the government giving out free money for the first time to individuals. This was controversial.

The Workers and Unemployed The government firstly passed the Labour Exchanges Act (1909), which tried to make it easier for people to get jobs by putting them all into one place. This should make job-hunting more efficient. By 1914, there were 400 exchanges filling a million jobs a year! The National Insurance Act (1911), looked to help workers already in jobs by providing sick pay. All workers earning less than £160 a year had to sign up and pay 4d a week to the scheme. The employer added 3d and the government 2d. In return, the worker received up to 26 weeks of sick pay a year at 10s a week. They also received free medical care. The National Insurance Act Part 2 (1912) went a step further to help out people in seasonal (irregular jobs) such as building, shipbuilding and engineering where occasional unemployment was common. Workers had to pay 2.5d, the employer 2.5d and the government 1.75d into the scheme. During times of unemployment the worker would receive 7s a week for up to 15 weeks. This was only just enough to keep a family going, which meant the worker would have to look for work!

Reactions to the reforms These reforms were incredibly controversial. The Conservatives were dead against them, arguing that they were too costly and they created a ‘nanny state’ in which the government looks after its people like a nanny! Some workers resented having to pay money out of their hard earnings into schemes that they didn’t feel they needed, particularly the National Insurance for sick pay. The Labour Party agreed with the workers and said that it should be taxes on the rich which pays for the National Insurance Acts, not from contributions from the poor. The wealthy were also against the reforms. Lloyd George’s 1908 Budget, often nicknamed the “People’s Budget”, demanded that money for the Pensions Act came from the wealthy which the rich were dead against. They argued that pensions would make poor people lazy and discourage them for saving for their futures like richer people did. Lloyd George argued that the rich mostly inherited their wealth and didn’t actually earn it, therefore they should help pay for the reforms!

The Liberal Reforms Why did the Liberal Government introduce reforms to help the young, old

and unemployed?

The Boer War (1899-1902) When war broke out, half of the recruits were not fit to fight due to their poor diet, which was directly linked to their poor living conditions. In some poor areas, this number increased to 69%! The army had to reduce the minimum height entry! This came as a great shock to politicians who worried that if a great war was to break out in Europe, Britain's chances of success would be badly affected by unhealthy recruits. Something would have to be done to ensure basic

New Liberalism Before the 1900s, the Liberal Party believed in the 'old liberalism' which limited the amount of interference a government should make into peoples lives. By 1906, however, a 'new liberalism' had emerged which was supported by influential politicians such as David Lloyd George, Winston Churchill and Herbert Asquith. They argued that the government should interfere in people's lives to help out those in desperate need. Lloyd George was perhaps the most vocal

Local reforms Reforms had been occurring at local levels during the late 1800s which were helping people in particular cities. For example, the Liberal councillor, Joseph Chamberlain had transformed the public health of people in Birmingham with a series of impressive reforms. For example, he bought local water companies to oversee better cleansing of the water supply which was damaging health. This helped inspire similar schemes at a national level (affecting everyone in the

National Efficiency Britain was one of the most powerful countries in the world but others were catching up. The United States and Germany were becoming industrialised countries and it was quickly becoming obvious that if Britain was to be able to compete, it needed to be efficient. To do this, it would need to ensure that its workforce were fit and healthy to allow for more products to be made in the factories which could be sold for a profit. A poor and unhealthy workforce was

Political rivalry By 1900, half of those who could vote in England were working-class men. The Liberals main rivals, the Conservatives had passed their own reforms during their last government. The Labour Party (est 1900) represented the poorest people in society. This worried the Liberals that people who usually voted for them, would turn to Labour instead. To counter this threat, the Liberals realised that they would have to introduce social reforms or risk losing political support

The German idea The leader of Germany, Otto von Bismarck had been making several important reforms in Germany which greatly inspired Lloyd George and Winston Churchill. Among them was an early form of sickness insurance which meant that workers would receive money if they suddenly became ill. Germany's economic and military strength was greatly increasing so other European countries needed to adapt to keep up. Bismarck was widely respected in Europe for

The Liberal Reforms How effective were the reforms?

Reform For Against

Free school meals By 1914, 150,000 children getting a good meal a day, 1 million a year!

Only half of the local authorities agreed to the scheme - weren’t forced to provide this for children.

Pensions Kept many people out of the workhouse.

Only available for 500,000 elderly (British total population = 45m). Had to be over 70 (many of the very poor didn’t make 70), and worked as much as they could during their life.

Labour Exchanges

By 1914, 400 exchanges filling 1m jobs a year

Most of these were temporary or part-time, the government did not actually increase the number of jobs available.

National Insurance

A vital safety net to help workers during the hard times. Part 1 (sickness) covered 10m men and 4m women. Part 2 (unemployment) covered 2.25m workers.

Part 1 (sickness) was restricted to people who earned less than £160 a year and only covered the wage-earner (family could not receive free medical care). Part 2 (unemployment) only covered seasonal employment - e.g. building, shipbuilding and engineering

Free Medical Treatment

Literally a life-saver Only for wage-earner, not for their family.

Most historians agree that the Liberal Reforms were extremely significant. They marked a change from past attitudes. Here is how historian professor Eric Hopkins described them in 1979. “an impressive body of social legislation, the greatest ever passed by any one government up to that time… A radical new plan of campaign had been developed to meet the most urgent social needs

...now we want to go on living forever, because we give them [his son’s family] our pension and it pays them to have us along with them. I never thought we should be able to pay the boy back for all

An old man talks about his pension, 1912

How can any sensible man regard the situation [the introduction of pensions] without dismay? The strength of this kingdom has been its wealth and the independent nature of its people. The bill which is being pushed through the House of Commons [the Pensions Act] will destroy both these strengths. It will encourage people not to rely on their own hard work and savings,

A letter to The Times about the Old Age

Pensions Bill (1908)

Women’s Suffrage What were the arguments for and against women getting the vote?

Parliament’s decisions affect men and women, so women

Some wealthy women pay taxes just like men. That

Women can vote in local elections, can serve on local government bodies. They have proved they can be

Many uneducated men can vote but educated women

By 1914, women can vote in parts of the USA and Australia, in New Zealand and even in the Isle of Man. If Britain is a proper democracy, women should have a vote

Women were becoming more and more involved in politics, with tax payers being able to vote in local elections, and some women were involved in campaigning for better conditions in workhouses, and Annie Besant led a strike over pay and conditions for match-

Giving respectful women the vote will also encourage them to develop their careers and neglect their children. Only the undesirable classes will have children.

Giving the vote to women will mean giving the vote to all men - including layabouts and the riffraff!

Why worry about the vote? There are far more pressing concerns such as Ireland, the trade unions (there were strikes in 1910-12),

Women do not fight in wars for their country. So they should not have a say in whether the country should

Women are not rational. They are too emotional to be

It is mainly middle-class women who are campaigning for the vote. They will have little interest in laws to help the working class people.

Men and women have different interests and responsibilities. Women are home-makers and mothers. It is the role of men to debate and make

In the 1800s women were very much considered second-class citizens. However, most men and wom-en probably thought that it was perfectly reasonable that women earned less than men, had fewer le-gal rights, and lost even more of these rights when they married. However, some people did challenge this view and campaigned passionately to provide women with more rights and ultimately try and se-

Many women did not want the vote. The Anti-Suffrage League was created in 1908. A postcard poll, of 200 postcards sent out, only 40 were returned by ladies wanting a vote.

Women’s Suffrage How effective were the activities of the suffragists and the suffragettes?

Nickname Suffragists Suffragettes

Proper Name National Union of Women Suffrage Societies (NUWSS)

Women’s Social and Political Union (WPSU)

Created by Millicent Fawcett (1897) Emmeline Pankhurst (1903)

Tactics Peaceful - NUWSS almost spells WUSS Violent and Peaceful - WSPU almost spells WASP which stings!

Other information Emmeline Pankhurst was in the suffragists but grew frustrated at the lack of progress. Created the WSPU as an alternative, more radical group. NUWSS and

WSPU work together until 1908 when they split as NUWSS feel the WSPU activities (e.g. being arrested) is making the government hostile to Women’s

Suffrage

Meetings and demonstrations Both WSPU and NUWSS held many public meetings. Demonstrations could get quite large with 20,000 people or over. The NUWSS Women’s Pilgrimage in 1913 was very successful with thousands of women taking part and positive coverage from the newspapers as it was peaceful.

Propaganda Both WPSU and NUWSS were good at this. The WSPU published newspaper called Votes for Women which gave them greater publicity. By 1914, had a circulation of 40,000. Also had a range of merchandise with their colours - purple, white and green - including dolls, clothing and jewellery.

Putting pressure on Parliament Most efforts had to be aimed at MPs as they had the power to vote on the issue. NUWSS were keen petitioners - a petition in 1910 supporting the Conciliation Bill which offers women the right to vote. Women met with MPs to try and sway them to support their cause - women canvassed for pro-suffrage MPs

Civil Disobedience One argument was that, as you could only vote if you paid taxes, those who couldn’t vote shouldn’t have to pay taxes, so many women refused to pay. Some also boycotted (refused to take part in) the 1911 census, saying that if they couldn’t vote they wouldn’t be part of the official record of the day.

Attacking people WPSU sometimes targeted people for attack - a doctor who did not criticise force-feeding of female prisoners was whipped. Women spat at policemen and in 1912, Mary Leigh (a suffragette) threw an axe at the carriage with Prime Minister Asquith in, which only narrowly missed him!

Attacking Property The WSPU started window-smashing started in response in 1908 when a proposed bill to allow women the vote ran out of time in parliament. Arson began in 1913 when Emily Davison planted a bomb at Lloyd George’s house (odd as he supported women’s right to vote). Also targeted post boxes and galleries.

Hunger strikes When arrested, the suffragettes expected to be treated as political prisoners not regular criminals. The advantage of this is that you get extra privileges. However, the government refused so women went on hunger-strike, which brought them sympathy from the public. Accounts of force-feeding were published in Votes for Women which caused outrage and led to the Cat and Mouse Act.

Women’s Suffrage How effective were the activities of the suffragists and the suffragettes?

Were we successful? Some historians (e.g. Harold Smith and Sandra Holton) argue that the suffragists were more effective than the suffragettes. By 1914, NUWSS had 500 branches and around 100,000 members. It was far larger than the WSPU. They used posters, leaflets and marches - some of which were filmed. Film shows were very popular and would have increased interest in their cause. In many respects, they got a lot of respect because, whilst people heard about the issue due to the WSPU, the NUWSS became popular as they were not using violence! The suffragists were also good at rallying members of the political parties to support them. Worryingly for Asquith, this included Labour candidates who were competing with Liberals. That said, a lot of suffragists felt that they could be easily ignored by MPs and the press due to their tactics.

Suffragists

Suffragettes

Were we successful? Undoubtedly brilliant propagandists - achieved maximum publicity for their cause. The suffragette magazine Votes for Women had a circulation of (sold) 40,000 copies. Also managed to get their message on the packaging of a brand of bread! In 1908, they sailed a boat down the Thames with their flags and posters on display past Parliament. Their violent campaigns made it impossible to ignore the issue. When they were roughly treated by the police, male opponents, and prison guards, they gained sympathy. However, despite this sympathy as individuals, it did not gain great support for their cause. Their increasing use of violence from 1911 onwards turned people against them. They weren’t massively popular - at their peak they only had 2,000 members. As it was mainly middle-class, by 1914 they were mainly campaigning for votes for women with property rather than all women! The government now couldn’t be seen to be giving in to terrorism (if they did, it would encourage other groups to use violence to get their way). From 1911 onwards, more and more MPs opposed women getting the vote due to violence.

Shhh ladies, my turn! Most would agree that the suffragettes did a great deal of work getting the issue in the newspapers and keeping people, including the politicians, talking about it! However, some would argue that, had the suffragettes not used violence, women may have gotten the vote eventually through peaceful methods. Either way, some historians argue that, actually, it was the women’s contribution in World War I that actually scored them the right to vote!

World War I How were civilians affected by the war?

Volunteering Britain only had a small army of 250,000 and Lord Kitchener, the Secretary of State for War told the government he needed 1m. Enthusiasm for war was high due to patriotic speeches by MPs, posters and the sense of adventure. 500,000 volunteered in the first month and by March 1916, 2.5m men had volunteered. Pals Battalions were set up when enthusiasm dropped where friends could sign up together and would be allowed to fight alongside each other rather than be split up. Orchestras, football teams, bus depots all signed up en masse!

Conscription In 1915, as the death toll and injury rates increased, getting volunteers to get involved proved more difficult. The Derby Scheme was trialled in which men were asked to promise that they would fight if the government asked them to. Less than half the men of military age were willing to make the promise. This showed that voluntary service was no longer an option. In Jan 1916, the Conscription Act was passed in which single men aged 18-41 would have to fight if called upon. In April, this was extended to married men as well.

Conscientious objectors Some men argued that for religious or humanitarian reasons, they could not kill another man. They had to convince a tribunal that there beliefs were honest ones. If they succeeded, that could be sent to do non-violent work such as driving ambulances on the frontline, or working in the mines at home. If they refused to have anything to do with the war, they would be imprisoned or sent to a labour camp. If they went to war but refused to follow orders, they could face a court martial (military arrest) and could ultimately be shot for cowardice.

Rationing DORA had introduced the ‘Land Army’ to try and grow more food in Britain as much of this came from abroad. By April 1917, German ships were sinking 1 in 4 merchant ships (carrying supplies into Britain). Wages barely increased during the war but the price of food shot up as there were shortages. In South Wales, there were serious strikes due to poverty-like conditions. The government agreed to increase wages and started voluntary rationing in 1917, backed by the royal family. By 1918, compulsory rationing of sugar, butter, meat and beer was introduced

Attacks on Britain This was the first international war that saw attacks on the British mainland. In December 1914, German battleships shelled Scarborough, Whitby, and Hartlepool, killing 119 men, women and children. In January 1915, huge German airships called Zepplins began bombing raids on Britain. Starting in Great Yarmouth and Kings Lynn (East Anglia), in total the Zepplins made 57 raids of British towns killing 564 people. In May 1917, German Gotha bombers (planes) raided Folkestone killing 95 people. In total, 27 bomber raids on Britain resulted in 835 deaths and 1990 injuries.

World War I was a total war meaning that all parts of society were affected by the war

someway or another.

What did the Defence of the Realm Act (DORA) do? On the 4th August 1914 Britain declared war on Germany. On the 8th August, parliament agreed to

the Defence of the Realm Act giving the government more power to interfere in people’s lives.

Controlling censorship At the start of the war, the government was very strict on what it would let newspapers

report. For example, no newspaper was allowed to report the sinking of HMS Audacious. The

government decided that it would allow specially-selected war reporters, (called

accredited correspondents) such as Philip Gibbs and Herbert Russell, on the frontline who

would write reports for the newspapers home. There reports had to be checked before they

could be published to make sure they weren’t going to turn people against the war. Anti-war

newspapers such as the pacifist Tribunal were closed down.

Controlling industry The government was allowed to take over

companies that in DORA. Firstly, the government took control of mining to make

sure coal could go directly to the factories. Miners were protected from conscription to

ensure they could carry on their vital role. The government took control of the railways as

they were vital to ensure troops could be moved from training camps to barracks and to

ports when they shipped out to France. Shipping was also taken over by the

government to make sure that replacement merchant (trade) boats were being replaced - in Spring 1917, Germans sank 3.7m tons of ships.

Controlling munitions In April 1915, the Daily Mail published the

munitions crisis story. Recruits had to practise with sticks as there were not enough rifles to go around, artillery could not fire enough shells, and some reports suggested that soldiers were restricted in the amount of shots they could fire a day. Lloyd George became minister of munitions and the government took over

factories and forced munitions workers to stay in their jobs rather than look for better paid ones. This led to strikes and the government

had to increase wages. Lloyd George also organised women into the factories but had to

promise soldiers would get their jobs back.

Controlling food Government needed to deal with food supplies as Britain imported 80% of its wheat. German

boats would stop this! DORA allowed the government to take over land and turn it into

fields for farming. However, by 1917, German U-boats were sinking 1 in 4 merchant (trade)

ships with supplies. By April 1917, Britain down to just 9 weeks supply of wheat. In response the government created the Women’s Land Army

to help grow more food. Shortages led to higher prices and workers went on strike as they

could not afford these. The government cheapened the price of bread but by 1918 had to

introduce rationing to deal with shortages.

Controlling propaganda In the first year of the war, between 2-5m

copies of 110 different posters were printed, mainly encouraging recruitment. None showed

the true horrors of war. Newspapers printed cartoons showing Germans acting cruelly. In

1916, Britain used 4 official photographers and artists to portray the war. 240 war films were

made between 1915-1918, most not even made by the government, rather British film makers. In August 1916, the government released the graphic but popular film Battle of the Somme

which sold 20m tickets in two months.

Did the public support the war effort? There was some anti-war feeling at the start of the war. An anti-war leaflet called Common

Sense about the War (1914) sold 25,000 copies though and Ramsay Macdonald, the Labour

leader, resigned in protest against the war. 50 Liberal MPs voted against conscription.

However, the vast majority of people supported the war - of 8m people affected by

conscription, only 16,000 refused to fight. Criticism against the army leaders after the

Battle of the Somme did not damage people’s desire to see the job through and win the war.

How far did Women contribute to the war effort? On the 4th August 1914 Britain declared war on Germany. On the 8th August, parliament agreed to

the Defence of the Realm Act giving the government more power to interfere in people’s lives.

We suffragists and the suffragettes stopped our campaigning and instead focused on the war. We suffragists used our propaganda skills to create posters encouraging men to fight and Emmeline Pankhurst organised a march to get women into the factories. Right at the start of the war, all the suffragettes were released from prison to help. The Order of the White Feather was an organisation that arranged for men to receive white feathers (sign of cowardice) for not signing up. The Mothers Union published posters encouraging mothers to get their sons to sign up to fight.

By early 1916, Britain had up to 2m fewer workers than needed. We quickly replaced men in offices and by 1918, there were 700,000 new female workers in offices.

We trade unions don’t want women in the factories. If women go in-to the factories, the employers will pay them less wages than men. If they then do a really good job, the soldiers who were fighting for our country might well return home and lose their jobs to women! That is unacceptable!

The Munitions Crisis made the government see sense. They needed women in the factories so agreed to force the employers to pay the women the same as men and allow the soldiers to keep their jobs once they returned. Working in the munitions factories were dangerous though. For example, in January 1917 there was an explosion at Silvertown in East End London and the TNT caused illnesses!

Area of work

Women in 1914

Women in 1918

Women replacing men

Metals 170,000 594,000 195,000

Chemicals 40,000 104,000 35,000

Food and Drink

196,000 235,000 60,000

Timber 44,000 79,000 23,000

Transport 18,000 117,000 42,000

Govern-ment

2,000 225,000 197,000

Women took on roles never previously open to them - it was like a mini-revolution! Some 1.6m women took part in war work. Their jobs ranged from grave-digging, postal work, bus drivers and even a Women’s Voluntary Police Service in the bigger cities. All their work was changing attitudes about women and their roles in society. However, we shouldn’t get too carried away! For example, in 1914 there were 5m women at work. By then end of the war this figure rose to only just over 6m. The Women’s Land Army only recruited 16,000 women - most of the farming in the country was done by female labourers anyway

How to answer the questions Below are some sample questions and information on how to go about answering them!

Rich Fare

The Giant Lloyd-

Gorgibuster:

Fee Fi Fo Fat,

I smell the blood of a

plutocrat,

Be he alive or be he dead,

I’ll grind his bones to

make

my bread.’

What is the message of this cartoon? Use details of the source and your own knowledge to explain your answer [6 marks]

Remember: Message/purpose Source Contextual Knowledge Message reworded!

This triggered the production of this cartoon which is saying(message) that Lloyd George is unfairly targeting rich people to pay for his liberal reforms. It is seeking to persuade people that Lloyd George is being unfair and that they should not support this reform.

This is shown in the source as the artist has decided to draw Lloyd George as the giant from Jack and the Beanstalk is ready to use his club, labelled ‘budget’, to smash up the rich plutocrat who hides on the floor. When Lloyd George says “I’ll grind his bones to make by bread”, his bread almost certainly refers to the payouts the poor will receive from the Liberal Reforms.

Lloyd George received some criticism from his 1909 Budget (nicknamed the People’s Budget) as the wealthy argued that they were being unfairly targeted in having to fund the Old Age Pensions Act (through direct taxation) which gave poor people over the age of 70 a free pension.

So the message of this source is that the rich are being forced to pay for Lloyd George’s liberal reforms and the artist clearly believes that this is wrong by showing Lloyd George as a threatening giant.

How to answer the questions... Comparison questions

Comparison Questions E.g.

Do you trust Source B or Source C more about the role of propaganda in WWI? [8 marks]

Study Sources F and G.

Is one of these sources more useful than the other in explaining why the Liberal Government passed the

Pensions Act [8 marks]

You need to evaluate each of the sources to get full marks and answer the question. You will need to consider purpose, the tone or language that the source uses, cross reference to another source, or use your own knowledge. The more of these you consider, the better position you will be in.

Who was the author of the source and what was their purpose? Always look at the italics before you read the source - this will help you discover the purpose. Was it a rallying speech at a public event - in which case the purpose of the speech might be to persuade people rather than tell the full facts. Was it a private memo? It should be more trustworthy if the author didn’t expect the public to read it.

What tone or language is the author using? This will affect the usefulness and reliability of a source. For example, a WWI recruitment poster might use emotionally-charged words to describe the enemy e.g. Barbarians, murderers, butchers, evil to demonise them and encourage people to sign up to deal with them. Bare in mind that propaganda is usually crammed emotive and persuasive language to try and convince people of their message.

Use own knowledge to help you to evaluate the purpose of the source as well as the similarities/differences if that is in the question. Think about why this source was produced at this particular time—which event would have triggered it? Remember that you need to be as specific as possible when using own knowledge to support your evaluation. The sequence of events is key—remember those big timelines?!!

How to answer the questions... Purpose

Why was this source published in 1917? Use details of the source and your own knowledge to explain your answer [6 marks]

This source is not asking what the message is so you don’t need to worry about that! Instead the question is asking - why was this published in 1917 - so you need to explain the purpose of it!

Remember: Purpose Source Contextual Knowledge Purpose reworded

The source was published to try and convince women to join the Women’s Land Army and help grow food for Britain.

This is shown in the source by a women working on the farm ploughing up ground in which wheat can be sown. The “God speed” of the poster is blessing the women who help grow food for Britain. At the bottom of the poster it directs you your “nearest post office” for sign up sheets. The rising sun in the background suggests that this is a new dawn for women by taking on more roles to help in the war effort.

Before the war, Britain imported 80% of her wheat. By 1917, German U-boats were sinking 1 in 4 British merchant ships with supplies such as food on. By April 1917 Britain only had enough wheat to survive for 9 weeks. It needed women to go into the countryside to help grow food so that Britain became less reliant on imports from overseas. 16,000 women joined.

This poster was published in 1917 as increased German U-boat attacks meant that the government needed to convince more women to join the Women’s Land Army to grow more food.

How to answer the questions... The Final Question

Final Question

‘Women were respected in the period 1890-1918.’ How far do you agree with this interpretation? Use your knowledge

of British society 1890–1918 and the sources to explain your answer [16 marks]

Top tips to plan a good answer: Read the question carefully. • The exam board wants you to explain how an attitude has changed over time – therefore consider what they want you to say has changed… • What the thoughts about this were at the beginning of the period? • What were they like at the end of the period? • Consider whether there has been change throughout the period – Clearly there will be some changes, and these will be highlighted by the sources • What contextual (own) knowledge supports each argument? • Attach some of the sources to each argument – remember this is not the central part of the answer; it is not as important as contextual knowledge. • Evaluation of provenance is not as important as in the previous papers – focus is on use of contextual knowledge. • Reach a firm conclusion based up contextual knowledge: • Has the factor in the question changed over time?

This is a bit different to the rest of the paper—think 10

mark question whilst using the sources as well. This will need careful planning,

follow the advice and guidance below—this

is key!

On the next page are some example answers from the exam board using the sample paper which you all have a copy of. You will quickly see the importance of contextual (own)

knowledge and the way in which to structure and answer (think 10 mark question). This should be very straightforward for you, just make sure that you are clear on what the question

is asking…!

Example answers

Level 6 (15–16 marks) Candidates demonstrate comprehensive knowledge and under standing of the position

of women in the period 1890–1918 to produce a fully developed response that evaluates effectively the interpretation.

They make sophisticated use of a range of sources to support their response and demonstrate thorough understanding

of the past through explanation and analysis of the relevant key concepts, and features of the period to justify a valid

conclusion. Written work is legible and spelling, grammar and punctuation are accurate. Meaning is communicated

very clearly.

I partially agree with this interpretation, however at the beginning of the period, women were not really respected.

Very few were properly educated and they did the most mundane and low paid jobs. This is why the women in

Source A wanted the vote to improve their pay and conditions. Many people believed in separate spheres, where

women should not bother themselves with politics or important issues. Their job was to look after the family. It was

believed that women were more prone to hysteria and acting childishly, and were incapable of logical thought.

Later, when Suffragettes started their campaign, many of these views of women were reinforced. When Suffragettes

burnt down buildings or smashed windows, this was regarded as proof that they were irrational. Men argued that

there was no point giving them the vote if they were incapable of understanding political issues as shown in Source

C.

Many of these attitudes changed during the First World War. Both the Suffragettes and the Suffragists stopped their

campaign and instead helped the country in the war effort. Women worked in munitions factories as shown in Source

D. Source F tells us that women were leaping out of bed at 5:15 in the morning because they were so keen to

contribute to the war effort. Some women joined the Women’s Land Army and helped to produce food for the

country, while others worked as nurses, mechanics and drivers.

Many men were really impressed by women’s contribution to the war effort. They had shown themselves to be

sensible and hard working and capable of doing jobs that previously had been thought of as only jobs that men could

do. This earned women a lot of respect and explains why they gained the vote in 1918. Overall, women were far more

respected at the end of the period than at the beginning and so the interpretation is only partially correct.

Answers for front page: PM Herbert Asquith, Milicent Fawcett, John Bull (symbol for Britain), Lord Kitchener (Minister of War), Charles Booth, Emmeline Pankhurst, Emily Davison, General Haig, David Lloyd George.

Level 4 (9–11 marks) Candidates demonstrate sound knowledge and understanding of the position of women

in the period 1890–1918 to produce a developed response that either effectively supports or challenges the

interpretation. They make sound use of several of the sources to support their response and demonstrate

understanding of the past through explanation and analysis of some relevant key concepts, and features to reach a

conclusion. Written work is legible and spelling, grammar and punctuation are mostly accurate. Meaning is

communicated clearly.

I think this interpretation is wrong because women were not respected in this period. Even when women finally got

the vote in 1918 many men were opposed to it. Women suffered discrimination in areas like work. This is shown in

Source A where the women complain that they are competing with men but only men have a vote about issues like

pay and conditions and so their standing is lowered. This obviously agrees with the statement. So does the fact that

most of the workers in sweated trades were women – they got the lowest pay and the worst conditions. Source B also

shows that women were not respected. They were not treated equally in areas like marriage and divorce. As Source B

says any section of the population which does not have the vote is not treated fairly. Even as late as 1916 Source C

shows that some men opposed women getting the vote. The man in the factory talks about women getting the vote as

being a load of ‘cackle’ which is very disrespectful. Even when women got the vote in 1918 some men in Parliament,

like Lord Birkenhead, said it was a disaster. There were many other areas where women were not shown respect.

When Suffragettes started campaigning for the vote the papers made fun of them and published cartoons and posters

which showed them as ugly and stupid. Many MPs opposed women’s suffrage as well, particularly the Conservatives

but also the Liberal Prime Minister Asquith.

This should give you a good idea of what you need to do. You need to be achieving at least a level 4 in this

question to be gaining your target grade.