All three sources agree on several points; however they also differentiate a lot. All sources agree on the character of Nolan. According to the sources Nolan was ‘enthusiastic’, ‘an eager spirit’ and ‘head strong and brave’ even though they never directly blame Nolan or like source 1 strive to defend his reputation. This could be good and bad as being enthusiastic about war could have caused Nolan to act rashly or make decisions based on the coveted glory of bloodshed. Similarly being head strong and brave can often also suggest that he was stubborn but also that he jumped into situations without thinking them through therefore the sources could be interpreted entirely differently, laying more blame on Nolan than we initially read.
Sources 3 blames Nolan more than the other two as it says ‘he was ill suited to deliver Raglans orders for the charge’. This shows us that despite critising the cavalry, he was still intent on delivering the order. On the other hand source 2 seems to focus more on Lucan, saying that he should not have been so easily influenced by Nolan, we can infer that this could mean Nolan was a distraction on the battle field, thereby being partially to blame.
Both sources 1 and 2 agree that Nolan was falsely accused in the first place, and we can infer from knowledge outside the sources that this was probably due to convenience of his death. Source c however doesn’t mention the misplaced fault at all.
Sources 1 and 3 are critical of the tactics used. We can see this as source 1 tells us Nolan was opposed to the tactics used that ‘he could never have suggested it…’ whereas source 3 also says that as Nolan was ‘critical of the cavalry’ he was ‘ill suited’ to deliver the order. From this we could infer Nolan had some sort of responsibility as he still carried through the orders given to him despite disagreeing with...