13/10/14
Part A Practise Question
How far do Sources F and G agree about the importance of mounting a militant campaign?
In the late 19th century, the WSPU (suffragettes) adopted a militant campaign in place of their once harmless and peaceful campaign for enfranchising women. The objective of this essay is to explore the importance of mounting a militant campaign in order for women to gain the vote, by comparing source F and G in how much they agree and disagree in the importance of forming militant campaign.
Firstly, source F, written by Ray Strachey, states that the militant ways Christabel Pankhurst and Annie Kenney used during the events in Manchester meant that “hundreds” of people who had never thought about women’s suffrage before, “began to consider it”. This goes to show that the fact that these bold and never seen before methods led to sparked attention by the public and gained interest in what the WSPU were trying to achieve. Source G reinforces source F’s point, as it implies that militancy would be the only way to promote women’s suffrage by the audacious and jeopardous acts. It reads “non-militant methods had failed” demonstrating that people weren’t listening to their leaflets and posters and they needed a new way to try and get “suffrage up the agenda” again agreeing with source F as they knew these dangerous and ungoverned methods would receive the attention their cause needed to succeed. These extracts agree in the sense that militancy is important in gaining women’s suffrage the attention and publicity it needs to success. Source F’s purpose is questionable, however. Strachey, who was a member of the NUWSS (a peaceful campaign for women’s suffrage) has mixed opinions on how the militancy benefitted the campaign, and since it was written in 1928, this was after women gained the vote; therefore she could be questioning the effectiveness of