Mr J L Rolleston 

SEC 2 HISTORY Revision Pack #4

THE ROAD TO WORLD WAR      II 

30/7/14

1

Sec 2 History Exam Revision Pack #4

30/7/14

2

CONTENTS

1. Introduction 2. Essential Knowledge Checklist 3. Multiple Choice Questions: Practice 4. Source Based Questions: Practice 5. Essay Based Questions: Practice 6. Mark Scheme

30/7/14

3

INTRODUCTION

Not another revision pack…

Don’t worry. This is the last one. If you’ve worked through the packs in order, you’ll have covered everything from the end of the First World War, through the 1920s and 1930s from the twin perspectives of the League of Nations and the emergence of Nazi Germany.

So what is this pack about?

This pack examines the outbreak of WW2, dating from around 1933 (when Hitler became Chancellor of Germany) to 1939, when the war broke out. The timelines overlap a little and all of the topics you’ve looked at feed into this, one way or another. See the outbreak of WW2 as the culmination of what you have studied so far. The key question to keep in mind throughout is why World War II happened. All of the knowledge you have should focus on this very, very big question.

Throughout you’ll want to draw on your knowledge of the Treaty of Versailles, the League and Nazi Germany.

In the same way, see this pack as a culmination of the skills you’ve learned so far. You’ll encounter another knowledge checklist and, for the first time, a full complement of question types. So that means…

3x multiple choice questions. 1x Type One SBQ (6-mark analysis) 1x Type Two SBQ (7-mark comparison) 1x Type Three SBQ (7-mark reliability) 1x EBQ (12 marks)

If you can tick every box in the checklist and can tackle each type of question without having to think too hard about how to approach them because of all the practice you’ve done thus far, you’re as well-placed to take the exam as you’ll ever be.

So no more revision packs!?

Well, there is one more after this one. It’s focused on Exam Skills, and gives you a few more practice questions which are taken from all of the topics, rather than from just one.

It’d be most useful to use that one in the week before your exam to get yourself in the right frame of mind.

(Also, the revision packs are wonderful.)

30/7/14

4

ESSENTIAL KNOWLEDGE CHECKLIST

I need to know… Know it?

What the map of Europe looked like in 1933; who owned what? What the map of Europe looked like in 1939; what had changed?

What Hitler’s ambitions for Germany were, as outlined in Mein Kampf. The meaning of the term Lebensraum.

Why Hitler disliked Communism so strongly. Why Hitler wanted to rearm Germany and how successful and popular the step was.

Why Britain and France did not attempt to prevent German rearmament. The size of the Germany armed forces in 1939, compared to 1932.

How leaders in the 1930s felt about the Treaty of Versailles. What went on in the Saar in 1935 and why it mattered.

What happened when Hitler stationed troops in the Rhineland. How other nations responded to Hitler’s occupation of the Rhineland.

The impact of the Spanish Civil War on the outbreak of WW2. The details and significance of the “Axis” alliance between Germany, Italy and Japan.

What Anschluss was, who wanted it and how it happened. What the Appeasement Policy was.

Why the Policy of Appeasement was followed. How the European people felt about Appeasement.

How Appeasement contributed to the outbreak of WW2. What I think about Appeasement. Was it a sensible policy, or a foolish one?

What the League of Nations did in Abyssinia and Manchuria. Why the League of Nations was not able to prevent war.

What the Sudetenland was. Why Hitler wanted to take over the Sudetenland.

What happened at Munich in September 1938 and how people reacted to it. How Europe reacted to Hitler’s invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1939.

What the Nazi-Soviet Pact was. Why Hitler signed the Nazi-Soviet Pact. Why Stalin signed the Nazi-Soviet Pact.

How the Pact contributed to the outbreak of war. Why Hitler invaded Poland.

Why Britain and France declared war when they did. Why Britain, France and Russia were unable to form a common front against Hitler in the

1930s.

Whether I think war could have been avoided, and if so, how? What I think the most important reason was for war breaking out in Europe in 1939.

Who I believe should take the blame for ‘starting’ World War II. How might the Treaty of Versailles be blamed for the war?

How might the failure of the League of Nations be said to have contributed to the outbreak of war in 1939?

30/7/14

5

MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS: PRACTICE

MCQs should be easy fodder by now. Just make sure you know your stuff, take a moment to properly read the question and the options and choose the one that fits best with the (by now extensive) knowledge you have. Here are three practice questions testing your detailed knowledge of 1933-39…

1. Which of these statements about the German occupation of the Rhineland in 1936 is not accurate?

a. The German occupation of the Rhineland was a huge gamble for Hitler, as it was a direct violation of the Treaty of Versailles.

b. Hitler justified the occupation of the Rhineland by claiming that Germany was threatened by the new alliance between France and the USSR.

c. If France had responded immediately by sending troops into the Rhineland, fighting would have broken out there and likely led to war breaking out sooner than it in fact did.

d. Hitler did not fear British intervention over the Rhineland because he knew that most British people, not least Prime Minister Chamberlain, thought that Germany should not be forbidden from posting troops at its own border.

2. Stalin signed the Nazi-Soviet back at least partly because: a. He did not believe that France would honour the agreement they had

recently signed and that Nazi Germany would prove a more reliable ally for Russia in the long run.

b. Stalin and Hitler, both being authoritarian leaders who believed in Socialism, had a lot of ideological common ground and, despite some differences, believed they could work together.

c. Stalin knew that Hitler would invade Poland if he believed Russia would not stop him. Stalin planned to launch a rapid pre-emptive attack on Germany whilst Hitler’s army forces were tied up in Poland.

d. Stalin entertained no illusions that Hitler would honour the agreement, but believed that the time the Pact bought could be used to strengthen Russia’s armed forces.

3. The Anschluss between Germany and Austria in 1938… a. Was strongly desired by the vast majority of the Austrian people, who

demanded that their leaders allowed them to unite with Germany. b. Was desired by both Hitler and Schuschnigg (the Austrian Chancellor)

as it would strengthen both countries politically, economically and militarily.

30/7/14

6

c. Was strongly opposed by Britain and France, who both promised to prevent Germany from uniting with Austria, before backing down at the last moment.

d. Was eventually decided by a plebiscite in which many Austrians were coerced into voting in favour of Anschluss by armed Nazi troops.

You can find the answers to these questions in the mark scheme.

30/7/14

7

SOURCE BASED QUESTIONS: PRACTICE

1. Analysis of Purpose (6 marks)

A. A British cartoon from a popular newspaper, published in 1936.

The words on the backs of the kneeling figures read, from right to left:

Rearmament Rhineland Fortification Danzig ? ?? !? !!! Boss of the Universe

Study Source A. Why do you think this cartoon was published? Explain your answer. (6 marks)

30/7/14

8

2. Source Comparison (7 marks)

B. Extract from front page of The Daily Sketch, a popular British newspaper, published 1st October 1938.

“Tomorrow is Peace Sunday. Hardly more than a few hours ago it seemed as if would have been the first Sunday of the most senseless and savage war in history. This paper suggests that the Nation should attend church tomorrow and give thanks. The fathers and mothers who might have lost their sons, the young people who would have paid the cost of the war with their lives, the children who have been spared the horror of modern warfare- let them all attend Divine Service and kneel in humility and thankfulness. Tomorrow should not…pass without recognition of its significance”

C. Part of a speech given to Parliament by Winston Churchill on 5th October 1938. Churchill was a senior British politician but not in government at that time. Parliamentary speeches were given to other MPs but always printed in the newspapers the following day.

“…We have suffered a defeat without even fighting a war, the consequences of which will travel with us far along our road…we have passed an awful milestone in our history, when the whole equilibrium of Europe has been deranged…

And do not suppose that this is the end. This is only the beginning of the reckoning. This is only the first sip, the first foretaste of a bitter cup which will be offered to us year by year unless- by a supreme recovery of moral health and military vigour- we arise again and take our stand for freedom as in olden times”

Study Sources B and C. How different are they with regard to the significance of the Munich Agreement of October 1938? Explain your answer. (7 marks)

30/7/14

9

3. Analysis of Reliability

D. Extract from Mikhail Kushkushin’s Official History of the USSR published in 1981.

“Why did Britain and France help Hitler to achieve his aims? By rejecting the idea of a united front proposed by the USSR they played into the hands of Germany. They hoped to appease Hitler by giving him some Czech territory. They wanted to direct German aggression eastwards: against the USSR. The disgraceful Munich Agreement achieved this.

In 1939, the USSR stood alone in the face of the growing Nazi threat. The USSR had to make a treaty of non-aggression. Some British historians tried to prove that this treaty helped to start the Second World War. The truth is, it gave the USSR time to strengthen its defences.”

Study Source D. How reliable is it in explaining why Stalin signed the Nazi-Soviet Pact? Explain your answer. (7 marks)

Think about…

This is a secondary source. Does this make it more objective than a primary source?

What “purpose” might a work of history have? Surely it just seeks to tell the truth about the past?

Do a bit of research (the textbook from page 325 might be a good place to start…). What was the relationship between Britain and France and the USSR like in 1981? Consider this broadening your historical horizons as well as understanding why secondary sources can be dubious!

30/7/14

10

ESSAY QUESTION

It seems very likely that one of the essay questions you’ll be faced with when the exam comes around will be about the causes of WW2. So it’d be smart to go into the exam having already thought about the key factors. History is about opinions and argument. After you’ve written the essay below, why not pair up with a classmate and read (or summarise) your essays to each, and then discuss why you have reached the conclusion you have. Try to persuade the other person that you’re right, and he is wrong!

How far do you agree that Hitler’s ambition was the most important reason for the outbreak of war in 1939?

Remember to be very clear on what Hitler’s ambitions were. Does ambition imply planning in advance? Maybe discuss this? Be sure to explain at least two other potential reasons for war.

30/7/14

11

MARK SCHEME

MCQs

1. Answer C is correct. It is not accurate because German troops had orders to withdraw immediately from the Rhineland should French troops move against them in any way. Fighting would not have broken out if the French had called Hitler’s bluff. All of the others statements are valid.

2. Answer D is correct. This was one of the key reasons for Stalin signing the pact. Answer A is incorrect because, although Stalin did doubt the reliability and trustworthiness of France he did not believe Hitler wold somehow be a better ally. In fact, he felt quite the reverse. B is very much wrong; Hitler and Stalin might both have been dictators, but their ideologies were extremely opposed and they were not fond of each other personally. C is incorrect as, despite Nazi rhetoric, there were no concrete plans for the USSR to invade Germany and the strategy suggested here is entirely fictional.

3. D is again correct. A is incorrect as there is no evidence that the majority of Austrian supported Anschluss. The Austrian Nazi party agitated for Anschluss, but the silent majority was largely against the idea. Hence why Hitler resorted to the measure of sending armed troops to “oversee” the referendum. B is incorrect as the Austrian Chancellor actively opposed Anschluss in the belief that he would lose all of his authority and Austria would become a German satellite. C is incorrect; France objected to Anschluss but did not suggest preventing it by force. Britain was largely in favour of Anschluss as it was believed the German-speaking peoples had a right to be united. Neither country responded to Austria’s call for aid.

30/7/14

12

SBQS

1. Why do you think this cartoon was published? (6 marks)

Level Descriptor Mark L1 No source reference / details taken from the source 1-2 L2 Inference(s), unsupported

2m: 1 inference unsupported 3m: 2 inferences unsupported

E.g: “The cartoon was published to portray leaders of Europe as weak and cowardly”, “the cartoon was published to warn of Hitler’s ambitions/the consequences of appeasement” or “to criticise policy of appeasement”.

2-3

L3 Inference(s), supported 3M: 1 weak inference supported “The cartoon wishes to show that the leaders of Europe as weak, which is why they are kneeling down and labelled “spineless”. 4M: 1 strong inference supported/2 weak inferences supported 5M: 2 Strong inferences supported E.g: “The cartoon implies that Hitler’s ambition is limitless and that actions already taken such as “rearmament” and “Rhineland fortification” are for him simply steps on the road to much grander aims, such as becoming “Boss of the Universe”, shown in the cartoon as his end-point. Although the latter is hyperbolic, it represents a real danger of Hitler’s growing power. This is why he is moving towards that goal, past smaller achievements.

OR “The cartoon implies that appeasement is a weak and cowardly policy which will allow Hitler to continue to get what he wants. This is why the democratic leaders, who include Briand and Lloyd George, are shown kneeling down, labelled as “spineless” and moving to Hitler’s tune, as shown by the piping gesture he is making with his hands”

OR “The fact that Hitler is effectively using the “spineless leaders of democracy” as stepping stones on his path to becoming “Boss of the Universe” is a very clear critique of appeasement. The cartoon clearly wishes to show that appeasement is exactly the policy that will allow Hitler to gain more and more power until he becomes the most powerful man in the world.”

3-5

L4 Purpose explained using source details andcontextual knowledge *answer must indicate author, audience, message and intended outcome.

6

30/7/14

13

Author: British cartoon/newspaper (extra credit for David Low, famous + popular, and/or popular Evening Standard) Audience: British public (extra credit for wide audience, linked to popularity of Low & newspaper). Also accept references to a wider European audience. Message: Hitler is very ambitious and will use appeasement to become extremely powerful. Democratic leaders are acting in a spineless fashion. Accept any well-developed response that implies a strong critique of appeasement. Outcome: Accept anything that suggests encouraging opposition to appeasement/trying to have appeasement stopped/challenging government policy. An answer that doesn’t get beyond the message (make people think appeasement is bad is not intended outcome) will only merit 5 marks. Extra credit for students who make reference to cartoon’s contribution to heated debate on subject of appeasement.

**If any element of Author, Audience, Motive and Outcome is unclear, answer is weak – L4/5.

30/7/14

14

2. How do these sources differ with regard to the significance of the Munich Agreement? (7 marks)

Level Descriptor Marks

L1 Repeats information from the source/lists differences/comparison of provenance “These sources are similar because they were both written by British people” etc.

1

L2 Similarity OR difference in content, unsupported

2m: 1 similarity/difference unsupported

3m: 2 similarities/2 differences, unsupported

E.g. “These sources are similar as they are both responses to the Munich Agreement”, “these sources differ because Source B thinks that the Munich agreement was a good thing and Source B thinks it was a bad thing” OR any statement related to the sources but without direct reference to their content (as shown by, Source B says that…).

2-3

L3 Similarity OR difference in content, supported

3m: weak similarity/difference, supported

E.g. “The sources differ because Source B believes that the Munich Agreement was a good thing by saying that people should go to Church and “give thanks” for it, whereas Source C calls it an “awful milestone” and thus implies that it was a bad thing.”

4m: strong similarity/difference, supported

E.g. “Both sources are similar in that they both regard the signing of the Munich agreement as extremely significant. It claims that had it not been for the Munich Agreement, Europe would have been thrown into a “senseless...savage war”. Thus the implication is that the Munich Agreement was significant because it prevented war. Source C also sees the signing of the Agreement as a decisive moment, in that it was a “defeat…without war” and an “awful milestone” which threw Europe into disarray. In both sources, the Agreement is a moment of great significance.”

Differences: Positive vs. Negative Portrayal, prevented war for future vs. failed to prevent war at all (“beginning of reckoning”, “first sip etc.)

3-4

30/7/14

15

L4 Both aspects of L3

4m: 2W 5m: 1S1W

6m: 2S

4-6

L5 L4 + purpose

Audience: British public (similarity), C targets politicians more directly (difference).

Similarity of Purpose might be to highlight significance of Munich Agreement, but better (and more likely) “purpose” comparisons will focus on differences. Good vs. bad not enough for 7 marks, but a more nuanced comparison based on whether or not the Agreement was significant because it prevented war or because it precipitated war. Should note that Source C regards “peace” as less wonderful than Source B.

Intended Outcomes

Source B: To create positive atmosphere, to congratulate and celebrate, to make people feel happy/lucky/grateful and to support Agreement. Ultimately support Appeasement.

Source C: To criticise, to warn, to show weakness of agreement, to encourage a more aggressive/warlike approach. Criticise and not support agreement and/or appeasement (either other politicians, public or both).

Best responses will show awareness of context: policy of appeasement, what the Munich Agreement was actually about.

6-7

30/7/14

16

3. How reliable is Source C in showing why Stalin signed the Nazi-Soviet Pact? (7m)

Level Descriptor Marks

L1 Reliable OR not reliable based on provenance/unexplained

e.g: Reliable because secondary source/historian no reason to lie/access to facts, or unreliable because Soviet and biased toward Rusia.

1-2

L2 Reliable OR not reliable based on content

2m: answer unsupported/not explained

3m: answer supported and explained

e.g. Reliable because it tells us that Stalin signed N-S P because…<Reasons include>

Britain + France were “helping” Hitler/refused united front, USSR needed time to “strengthen its defences”, USSR was “isolated” because British and French wanted to “direct German aggression eastward” etc. Any point from the source that explains Stalin’s reasoning supported by quote.

Unreliable: Soviet historian, present a biased viewpoint in favour of USSR. “The truth is” or “stood alone”. Not objective.

2-3

L3 Both aspects of L2 3

L4 L2 (one-side) + reliability check using either cross-referencing to other sources or contextual knowledge or purpose

W = 4m

S = 5m

Positive Reliability Check: supporting any reason with reference to actual situation:

e.g. “Directing Communism eastwards” a legitimate British/French policy (cross-ref cartoons?), distrust of Communism. They did give Czech Territory to Hitler to appease him (Munich Agreement, Appeasement Policy), did give USSR time to strengthen defences (ref. army figures and/or Stalin’s own speech in ’41).

Basically any valid fact that supports a point given to make it “reliable”.

4-5

30/7/14

17

L5 L3 (two sides) + reliability check using cross-referencing to

other sources or contextual knowledge

1S1W = 5m

2S = 6m

Negative Reliability Check: highlight inconsistencies or misleading points, omissions.

e.g: Not reliable because implies USSR alone faced Fascist threat in 1939, but other nations opposed it too, inc. Czechoslovakia and, in reality, Britain and France.

Not reliable because claim that Britain and France “helped” Hitler is hyperbolic, Appeasement fairly legitimate.

“The truth is…gave time to strengthen defences” not necessarily the whole story, only one part”. (doesn’t discuss Stalin’s ambitions in Poland, for example).

“Dismisses legitimate claims re: N-S P starting war without evidence. 

5-6

L6 L5 + purpose/enhanced reliability

6m: weak support/explanation

7m: strong support/explanation

Purpose: Attempts to “whitewash” signing of N-S P as something USSR was forced to do because of Britain and France. Not mention of possible sinister motives. Dismiss claims that N-S P helped start the war and instead shifts the blame to Appeasement and anti-Communism of B and F. This makes it less reliable.

Enhanced Reliability: Written at time when East and West were ideologically opposed/did not get along. Therefore author seeks to make USSR look good compared to Western Powers and put blame on them for war, thus not reliable, even though a secondary scholar there is still a political. However, best answers (7 marks instead of 6) will weigh this up with the many legitimate point the passage gives that do tally with the facts and may conclude that it is still a fairly reliable guide, if not 100% trustworthy or that the bias outweighs the truths. Side of fence doesn’t matter, so long as tension between factual truths and motive are drawn out.

 

*L3 (S) + purpose = 6m 

**L4(S)+purpose=7 

6-7

30/7/14

18

EBQ

How far do you agree that Hitler’s ambition was the main reason for the outbreak of war in Europe in 1939? Explain your answer (12m)

Level Descriptor Mark

L1 Writes about the causes of the war without answering the question Award 1 mark for each detail, to a maximum of 2 marks.

[1-2]

L2 Describes reasons [3-4]

L3 Explain one reason 5m: Weak 6m: Strong “Hitler’s ambitions were a major reason for the outbreak of war in 1939. Hitler as a leader who was determined to conquer as much of Europe as possible and to take risks in order to get what he wanted. Hitler’s aggressive foreign policy revealed his ambitions and allowed him to put them into action. He wished to overturn the Treaty of Versailles by recapturing lost territories, to expand further into the East to gain Lebensraum for the German people. As part of these ambitions he also rearmed Germany in defiance of the Treaty. He wanted to create a strong, powerful Reich to restore German pride and increase German power. Actions such as marching into the Rhineland, uniting with Austria, demanding the return of the Sudetenland and invading Czechoslovakia proper all brought Europe gradually closer to war as Britain, France and Russia all became more and more concerned until Hitler’s last ambitious and aggressive gamble, his invasion of Poland, triggered war. Had it not been for Hitler’s constant flouting of the Treaty due to his grand ambitions, there would have been no cause for war in 1939”. Explanations of this factor must show a detailed knowledge of Hitler’s ambition (his overall goals) and the actions he took in pursuit of them and how they contributed to war.

[5-6]

30/7/14

19

L4 Explain other reasons 7m: 1S+1W/2W 8m: 2S/3W/1S+1W 9m: 2S+1W 10m: 3S Other Reasons may include: Appeasement: Explained by showing understanding of the policy, its motives, examples of appeasement and how this allowed the situation to deteriorate. The Treaty of Versailles: How its terms brought Hitler to power, shaped his ambitions, gave them support and how inherent unfairness of the Treaty made other nations (esp. Britain) feel some sympathy for Germany. Failure of the League: How could the League have prevented war? Why was it discredited (ref. Manchuria, Abyssinia and failure of Disarmament Conference). Nazi-Soviet Pact: What is was, why it was signed and how it led to war: primarily because it allowed Hitler to invade Poland, which finally caused B+F to take a stand. If USSR had firmly opposed Germany, would war have broken out in 1939? Anti-Communism: Lack of united front, policy of “directing Nazis eastwards”. Accept any other well-reasoned, well-supported and logical factors proffered, or factors that appear to be composites or subsets of the above.

[7-10]

L5 L4 + weighs the relative importance of the reasons and draws a conclusion A strong conclusion should make it clear why “most important reason” offered is so important compared to other potential factors. For example, if proposition is agreed with it should be made clear how Hitler’s ambition would’ve led to war had it not been for appeasement, or if the opposite is argued (appeasement as most important factor) then should be shown how a different policy could have prevented war in 1939 despite Hitler’s aggression. A 12-mark answer that disagrees with the proposition must directly refute it. 12 marks will only be awarded to answers which as well-written, well-argued and persuasive, coherent, well-linked and containing a good degree of precise factual detail and only minimal spelling/grammatical/factual errors.

[11-12]

30/7/14

20