Mary Seacole free essay sample

Mary Seacole is praised in both sources 1 and 2, but in source 3 it seems that Nightingale disagrees in terms of her method of helping the men, although ‘she did some good. ’ Source 1 and 2 both agree that ‘she was a great help’ but for different reasons. Source 1 is agreeing to this mainly because of the fact that it is written by Sir John Hall who I Head of the Army Medical Services and we know that Seacole was rejected by all hospitals, and he would not want to write about declining one of the most loved and charitable woman in Britain at the time, especially throughout the army, ‘the assistance she gave them, made her beloved by the rank and file of the whole army’. Also, as he is Head of the Army Medical Services it’s obvious that he would not want to write negative comments on his own services. I believe the motivation of the source is to shift away the negativity of not employing her. We will write a custom essay sample on Mary Seacole or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page I think source 1 can be seen as mainly reliable because he is Head of the Army Medical Services so he will be well informed but on the other hand he will not want to blame his own services for not employing her and will shift away the negativity from himself and his services, so from that point of view the source will also contain some element of bias. Much like source 1, source 2 will also be well informed because they are unpublished memoires, which also means that this source won’t be bias, but it will be limited by the fact that it’s only one man’s point of view. It is suggested by source 1 and 2 that men preferred to go Seacole rather than ‘reporting themselves to their own doctors’ which shows that she was not only a help, but more of a help to the men than other hospitals or services. Source 2 is from memoires of an officer, therefore he is likely to have felt her influence and impact upon the Crimean war; also he may have experienced he herbal remedies. This is also another reason to why men would go to her rather than normal Medical Services because they had no such treatment to which there was a chance of being healed or cured which is suggested in source 2 ‘That she did cure some patients is beyond doubt’. Similarly source 3 also mentions ‘no doubt she did some good’ but in this case it is begrudging praise from Nightingale, and we know she’s being honest because it is a letter that she instructed her brother-in-law to burn after being read, so we get an accurate view of Nightingale’s opinion. This source is linked to the other 2 sources because it is at the time which Seacole was getting a ‘rapturous reception’ and in the other sources Seacole is getting praise but also all three sources state somewhere in their content that she did help the men in the Crimea. Source 3 has both fragments of agreement and disagreement and it differs from the other sources because it doesn’t completely agree with the other 2 sources and it can be seen as an emotionally charged letter, as Seacole is getting so much praise in England, so it could suggest she’s jealous of the reception she’s receiving back in England. As well as this it seems that she is the odd one out, because everyone else has a huge love for Seacole apart from her. Nightingale also adds criticisms to her methods of helping the men as she calls Seacole’s hotel a ‘bad house’ and she says that she introduced ‘much drunkenness and improper conduct’ which could be showing her jealousy as she dismisses the fact that she helps the men, but she is ery picky on her methods. In source 3, Nightingale also comments ‘believe that respectable officers were entirely ignorant’ which is not true because source 2 is by an Officer from the war of the West Suffolk Regiment and he would want to get drunk because of all the horrors and the stress of the war. I think that all sources support the fact that Mary Seacole ‘was a great help to the men in the Crimea’ because at some point in all the sources, they al mention that Seacole was ‘a wonderful woman’ or they gie her some sort of praise. However in source 3, there is criticism of her methods but yet, Nightingale is honest because the letter was instructed to be burnt and she begrudgingly praises Seacole . overall I think that these sources do direct praise to Seacole and her services in the Crimea, even if it is begrudging praise.