Although they have been reluctant to use illustrations and pictorial evidence in the past as elements of the document questions in the old Advanced-Level examinations the Examination Boards should be using the changes in the new AS and A2 examination structure to be more adventurous and inventive in their use of historical evidence. Students should be learning to ‘read’ and interpret all forms of pictorial evidence as much as they use written source extracts.

Here are three pieces of evidence about the events of the period 1815-1820. One is taken from the work of a modern historian, another is a contemporary cartoon and the third is an extract from a letter written by the Prime Minister at the time, Lord Liverpool. Read and observe them carefully before tackling the questions that follow.

Source A. Adapted from Aristocracy and People by Norman Gash, 1979.

The sinister reputation of the Six Acts … is hardly borne out by an examination of their contents. The real criticism of the Six Acts is not that they put a powerful instrument of coercion in the hands of government, but that for the most part they were misdirected and ineffective.

Source B. A political cartoon by George Cruikshank that appeared in 1819 (see below).

Source C. An extract from a letter written by Lord Liverpool to Lord Grenville, 14 November 1819.

Though it cannot be denied that the great increase in our manufacturing population, the dependence of a great part of that population on foreign demand, and the refinements in machinery (which enable manufacturers to perform that work in weeks which formerly occupied months, and which lead consequently to extravagant wages at one time, and to low and inadequate ones at another), have recently subjected, and must in the nature of things subject this country to evils with which in the same degree we were formerly unacquainted; yet all these circumstances would not have accounted for the present state of the public mind in certain parts of the country, if the events of the French Revolution had not directed the attention of the lower orders of the community, and those immediately above them, to political considerations; had not shaken all respect for established authority and ancient institutions.

You need to ask the same questions of the picture evidence as you would if it was a written source. What is it about? Who produced it? What is its provenance? Who were the intended audience? What purpose or motive lies behind it? Is there any prejudice or partiality to be guarded against? If it depicts an event how accurate is the evidence likely to be?

This piece of evidence is relatively straightforward. There is a date, August 1819, and the title contains the words ‘Massacre at St Peter’s’. It is an illustration of the events of the Peterloo Massacre in Manchester, August 1819. Which side is the cartoon on? How do we know?

The cartoonist has drawn a horrendous scene. Unarmed men and women are trampled under the hooves of the cavalry horses and the soldiers are wielding axes dripping with blood. Why do you think that Cruikshank has placed a woman holding a baby in the centre foreground? Why might that help you to decide the ‘bias’ of the artist? Consider the difference between the plump and obviously well-fed yeomanry and the more careworn appearance of the workers they are cutting down. Does the speech bubble add to our understanding of the point that is being made? The officer is saying:

‘Down with ’em! Chop ’em down my brave boys, give them no quarter. They want to take our Beef & Pudding from us, and remember the more you kill the less poor rates you’ll have to pay. So go to it lads show your courage & your loyalty.’

Is this picture an accurate representation of what happened at St Peter’s Fields in Manchester, or is it propaganda making a political point? What about the rest of the title ‘BRITONS STRIKE HOME!!!’? You must also remember that these cartoons were drawn for sale, so the cartoonist had an audience in mind when he produced his work, and he was responding to the likely prejudices of the market.

(a) Using your own knowledge explain briefly the meaning of ‘the Six Acts’ (Source A) in the context of the period 1815-1820. (3 marks)

(b) With reference to your own knowledge explain how useful Source B is as evidence that a revolutionary situation existed in the period 1815-1820. (7 marks)

(c) Study Sources A, B, C and use your own knowledge to answer the following question: ‘The actions of Lord Liverpool’s government after 1815 was the main reason for the unrest and disturbances up to 1820.’ With reference to the social and political unrest of that period explain why you agree or disagree with the statement. (15 marks)

Part (a), for 3 marks, is a ‘starter’ to get you into the question and the topic. The examiner will be looking for a response that briefly outlines the Six Acts and the events preceding their passing in November 1819. A reference to the harsh repressive reputation they acquired would certainly secure a higher level mark.

Question (b) directs you to the cartoon. The simple answer is that it is not really very useful as evidence that Britain was threatened by revolution in this period. It is an image of one event, the Peterloo Massacre, drawn by an artist who was not there. Some comment on the detail of the illustration which suggests that it is a one-sided portrayal of the incident would reinforce your answer. However, events surrounding the Manchester meeting in August 1819, the tensions of 1816 and 1817, the Spa Fields riots in London, the Pentrich Rising in 1817, all generated a threatening atmosphere in the industrial areas and in large population centres which made some contemporaries fear a violent upheaval.

You will also be expected to refer to the cartoon in your answer to question (c). Remember, if you are asked to refer to both the sources and your own knowledge in an answer you will lose marks if you do not follow the instructions and only use the sources or only your own knowledge. For a question with more than 10 marks the examiners are probably expecting a short essay and you should have planned your time in the examination to write this. The cartoon could be used to suggest that the popular view of the time blamed the authorities for the Massacre by showing the armed might of the State cutting down the people. The assumption was that the magistrates who ordered the troops into the crowd were acting with the approval of the government. Here, it would seem, is a fine example of the repressive policies of Liverpool’s government that culminated in the Six Acts three months later. On the other hand, Source A challenges the view that the Six Acts were the manifestations of a repressive state by suggesting that they were weak and ineffective. Other government measures that should be referred to in the context of this question would be the abolition of income tax in 1816 and, of course, the passage of the Corn Laws in 1815. How did they contribute to the unrest and discontent? How were the radicals able to use them to make their case for parliamentary reform? Source C gives a different perspective. Here, Lord Liverpool reviews the situation and picks out two factors he feels are responsible for the discontent - the consequences of the industrial changes and, for him the more important, the influence of the French Revolution. This should give you a lead into writing about the context for the events 1815-1820 and the part they played in creating the difficult circumstances which the government faced. You should have enough material from the sources and from your own knowledge to either agree or disagree with the statement in the question.

• Treat picture evidence as carefully as you would written sources.
• Jot some notes around the illustration in the same way as you might highlight sections of text. For this cartoon it might be ‘well fed soldiers, gaunt workers, women and children prominent, Union Jack flying, hint of a victory’.
• Read any text with care and try to put it into context.
• Establish prejudice through your analysis.
• Any illustration raises the questions - was the artist there? Does he show an event as it really was? Can inferences be made about his purpose?
• It is easy to ignore the implications or point of an illustration when answering the questions - you are used to text and illustrations seem irrelevant.
• Make sure that you refer explicitly to the picture source in the way you would indicate your use of other extracts to the examiner.