Afraid, businesses implored the government to make modifications to the Apartheid regime to restore confidence in the economy. The source is written by a historian, and therefore Tony Howarth the author of the history textbook The World Since 1900 would be erudite in the Apartheid era. He would also have conducted extensive research into the time period in order to corroborate his knowledge. Therefore he would hold the view that the economic recession was a fundamental cause to the collapse of Apartheid. The book is however a very broad topic, covering the World since 1990 meaning the book would involve worldwide history.
Therefore the research acquired would not be as deeply as a book specifically researched on the ending of Apartheid. The extract is also only involving a fragment of the book, and therefore further expounding may take place further into the book. This therefore means that Tony Howarth has disregarded the role played by Nelson Mandela, but rather has taken the time to consider a variety of reasons that Apartheid collapsed. White people during the Apartheid of South Africa felt deeply and passionately towards rugby.
The boycott placed on the Springbok rugby tours was so traumatising to the South Africans at the time, that the news passed into the prison of Robben Island as the wardens were such rugby fanatics. White people took such pride in rugby because it was supposedly a superior sport to football, which the Bantus played, meaning that when the boycott was placed it infuriated the white population as it reflected badly on them. Boycotting was a method which punitively protested against Apartheid, and had huge influence over the ending of Apartheid.
The extent to which the boycotts affected them was severe, because rugby was considered a religion to them. He clearly has the views that the Apartheid diminished as a result of the Springbok Rugby boycotts, because previous methods had failed, and there were always holes to get round penalties placed on South Africa. The source is written by MP Peter Hain for Neath, renowned for playing rugby and so he would be appealing to the rugby population to flaunting his part in assisting to catalyse the anti-apartheid movement.
He is one of the leading anti-apartheid proponents, and therefore would be well researched of the Springbok Rugby boycott. The interview was given in 2004, thirty-four years after the boycotting and therefore all the facts may not be corroborated by critiques. The facts may therefore have been somewhat hyperbolised, in order to gain attention from the public, and to dramatize the situation so that he gets more appreciation for his work during the time.
Some believe that there were many other influential figureheads, and women played an important role involved in the ending of the Apartheid, shown by source B15. The source is a eulogy for Lilian Ngoyi, which emphasises that she was a saviour to the Black population of Apartheid. She is named in a lexis of people who were important in ending the Apartheid, juxtaposed with Nelson Mandela, showing her significance. She is also said to have been sent by God, showing the grave respect she has made of herself.
The oration intends to inspire the younger generation, to have the determination she inherited, and to strive for equality, men will catch the disease suggesting that women have equal abilities to inspire and make a difference. It cannot be ignored that the eulogy is present of relatives and friends, and therefore condolences would be amiable and sympathetic. The oration would not reference anything negative, to concentrate on the goodness Lilian brought to the world. Therefore, it may be biased.
Moreover, she was the first women elected to the executive committee of the ANC, and therefore colleagues would wish to preserve her legacy as a determined women. CONCLUSION SOURCES A The sources are all very useful because they provide a perspective as to how people felt particularly the black population and therefore provide a baseline to distinguish between the quality of life of different races. Though some sources may be particular misguided, in that the content may be biased depending on the origin of the source, they still prove useful, because the intention of the content can be appropriately judged.
For example, Source A3 may have been twisted somewhat to elicit attention from the audience of the book, however, we can still fathom that the underlying prejudice of white people towards the blacks is existent. However, two indisputable sources which are completely representative of attitudes towards blacks include sources A2 and A6, both presentative of the government attitudes and intentions of Apartheid which defies the original intentions of separate development. Rather, the intentions that the two sources infer, are too marginalise and intimidate black persons, which in hindsight, is exactly the principle of the Apartheid.
In my opinion, source A6 is more useful, for two main reasons. Firstly, it is published in a textbook, therefore entrenching the racist ideology in future generations, which really conveys the treatment of blacks and the prejudice the government held. Then secondly, Source A2 in my opinion does not really quantify the extent to which the government felt about black people, as the sign only enforces the initial idea of separate development by disallowing black people in an area of whites. I also feel sources A4 and A7 are particularly reliable.
Firstly A4 published in a student book would have to be factually correct, and present its information impartially to avoid misleading students this would have also likely have been corroborated by editors and publishers, further giving me confidence in the source. Therefore, it provides me an opportunity to configure my own opinion and interpretation. Finally, it was written in hindsight, allowing for the historian to acquire and collate a myriad of resources to accurately configure a reliable source.
The source is useful, as it insinuates that white people wanted to warrant their actions by blaming black people therefore justify their irrational prejudice. A7 is also accurate and reliable, because there is no plausible reason for the government to interfere with the statistics, as the statistics arent meant to be propaganda, or otherwise convincing. The statistics would be rendered useless if altered, and therefore are almost definitely factual.
The statistics are useful to visualise and quantify the extent of the social gap between black and white peoples, and therefore conclude that black people were unjustly discriminated. CONCLUSION SOURCES B Sources B all provide varying perspectives of whom was most responsible for the deconstruction of the Apartheid, and I feel they all show pragmatic and insightful reasoning. However, to be the most useful and reliable, the sources must not be influenced by external factors.
For example, the autobiography would have been influenced by the fact Nelson Mandela was standing for candidacy, and would want to appease his audience. Likewise, Source B5 is an interview, presented on the day of Mandelas 90th birthday, and therefore it would only be respectful to provide compliments. The most plausible source in my opinion for convincing me of the main instigator to end apartheid would be Sources B2 and B9. B2 demonstrates the extent of Nelson Mandelas support, and how extensive his trust lies in the desperation of South Africa.
The photograph is also indisputable, as it is provided as photographic evidence. B9 is also very reliable because it is found in a history book and therefore would be surely factual, as the author would be well researched and knowledgeable in the subject. It references how Mandela was released by F. W. de Klerk, the reason I feel the two sources work well in conjunction with each other as I feel F. W. de Klerks work gave momentum to the work of Mandela. Mandela could not have achieved the work he accomplished without being released from prison.
However, I am more convinced that Mandela was the priority instigator, as it was his publicity in prison that coerced F. W. de Klerk into releasing Mandela, and therefore F. W. de Klerk, may or may not have released Mandela out of compassion, but rather to satisfy society and the international public. I also feel that the B sources reinforcing Mandela as the main instigator for the ending of Apartheid are more convincing because without a figurehead to admire, and glorify, and act dependently, there would have been no hope and passion for black people to unite and work in unity.
Sources disputing that other factors were more influential than Mandela are mainly standalone, are minor factors in the overarching situation, but however all contribute to the work that Mandela contributed. Therefore, I feel all sources have somewhat logical convictions, but Mandelas work was the pinnacle of the decommissioning of Apartheid. Show preview only The above preview is unformatted text This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE History Projects section.