How Far Do the Sources Suggest That Captain Nolan Was to Blame for the Disastrous Charge by the Light Brigade at Balaclava?

794 Words4 Pages
There was a lot of confusion between the Commanders at the Charge of the Light Brigade, centring of the gestures of the bearer of the written order, Captain Nolan, and the verbal explanation he gave, led to Lord Lucan sending the Light Brigade up the wrong valley against the wrong guns. In Source One, the provenance states that it is written from Captain Nolan’s obituary, which means that it will be in favour of Captain Nolan; therefore we are to presume that Source One is biased. Source One is not blaming Captain Nolan, we can tell by the terminology that is used in the Source, such as “It is alleged” and “We are aware”, showing us that the writer of the Source wants us to think different, think about faults of other Generals, not Captain Nolan. Also, the date of this extract, shown in the provenance states it was written in November 25th 1854, which is just after ‘The Charge of the Light Brigade’ was taken place, which automatically tells us that there was no evidence to blame Nolan at that time, it would have had to be assessed carefully by journalists at the time of the Charge, to come to a conclusion who was to blame for the disastrous charge. At the end of the Source, it says that Captain Nolan had “an excess of enthusiasm”, and this is cross referencing into Source Two where it says that Lord Lucan was influenced by the “eager spirit of Captain Nolan”, this is showing us that he could have been very forceful towards the attack, making sure that it goes ahead, however not realising the disastrous outcome that will unfold because of his lack of organisation. Source Two, is written by a father of one of the survivors from the Charge of the Light Brigade, therefore is most likely to be a reliable Source, as he did not link and communicate with Captain Nolan, therefore he does not have any reason to defend him. However, all of the information that
Open Document