Year 9Week 8: Thursday 4th June:‘Hitler was wholly responsible for the Second World War’ – Do historians agree with

this view?Learning Objectives:• To know what is meant by an interpretation• To understand why interpretations of the past differ• To be able to complete an extended piece of writing on the causes of WW2

StarterTask 1: To recap, write 1 piece of factual detail next to each cause of WW2 – I have done the 1st one for you1. Economic impact of WW1 – In 1923 Germany suffered from hyperinflation after the Ruhr was invaded. This

made their money worthless.2. Treaty of Versailles3. League of Nations4. The Great Depression5. Manchurian Crisis6. Abyssinian Crisis7. Hitler’s Actions in 1930s8. The policy of Appeasement9. Nazi-Soviet Pact10. American Isolationism

What is meant by an ‘interpretation’?

In history, you have probably already learnt about sources. Sources are different to interpretations.

A source is:

Something produced during the period in history you are studying. So, for this period it could be a letter written by Neville Chamberlain, or a speech given by Hitler, or a cartoon drawn about the Treaty of Versailles.

An interpretation is:

Task 2: Write down the definitions of a source and an interpretation. It is important you know and remember these differences.

Why do interpretations of the past differ?History is all about debating!

If you asked 5 other people in your class what they think was the main cause of WW2, you are unlikely to all have the same opinion! This is because you will look at different pieces of evidence to form your argument. When you do a piece of writing in history, you are forming an interpretation of the past, based on evidence!

Even professional historians, who write books about the past, will argue and debate with each other. Today, we are going to look at a number of historians who have different opinions about why WW2 broke out and think about why their opinions are different.

An historian’s opinion about the past, produced after the period you are studying. They use sources to help them form their opinion.

Reason 1: When they wrote their opinion

Reason 2: Where the historian is from

Most interpretations of the causes of WW2 fall into 2 categories:

1. The main cause of WW2 was Hitler’s desire to expand Germany. He always wanted to expand and he made sure that he achieved his plan.

This is known as an Orthodox Interpretation. Orthodox means traditional. This was the opinions of most historians at the End of WW2.

2. The main cause of WW2 was the policy of appeasement. This gave Hitler the opportunities to expand, which he grabbed when he could – it had never been part of Hitler’s plan.

This is known as a Revisionist Interpretation. Revisionist means you look at previous interpretations and challenge it. This was the opinion of AJP Taylor, when he challenged the Orthodox interpretation.

Task 3:

If you were a British historian, which interpretation would you prefer? Explain why

If you were a German historian, which interpretation would you prefer? Explain why

So we can see that historians can be bias depending on which country they are from.

Reason 3: As propaganda, to make your country look better than others.

Between 1945-1991, The Cold War was fought between the USA and Russia (known then as the USSR). This war was ‘cold’ because there was no armed fighting between the two countries.

Instead, they fought each other using propaganda. They hoped to convince other countries that their country was better than the other. Most Western European countries supported the USA. Most Eastern European countries were controlled by the USSR.

This led to a 3rd category of interpretations on the causes of WW2:

3. The main cause of WW2 was the actions of Western European countries. Countries like Britain and France wanted Hitler to expand, as long as he moved East, towards Russia. This is because they hated Russia more than

Germany and is why they encouraged appeasement.

This is known as a Communist Interpretation. Communism was the Russian way of ruling after WW2. It was against Capitalism, which was the American way of ruling. So, anything that blames WW2 on Western countries trying to

force Hitler to invade Russia is a Communist Interpretation.

This interpretation is preferred by Russian historians.

End of WW2 Present day

1. Most historians, at the end of WW2, blamed Hitler for causing it. Why do you think this was?

2. In 1961, a British historian called AJP Taylor challenged this. He said that Hitler acted like any other statesman and did not plan for war. Why might he do this?

3. After AJP Taylor published his ideas, a number other historians began to challenge him. A big challenger was a historian called Hugh Trevor-Roper – he was AJP Taylor’s arch rival!

4. During the Cold War, a period of high tension between the USA and Russia (known then as the USSR), Russian historians looked to find ways to blame the USA and its Western allies, like Britain, for the war. Why?

5. Today, there is a lively debate about the causes of WW2. You are going to be part of this debate!

Let’s look at 3 major historians and see if we can work out their argument is, why they argue it and whether we agree.

We will do the first one together and then you will do the next 2 alone.

Step 1: Read the interpretation in the middle of the diagram.Step 2: Look up any words you don’t understand and write their definition.Step 3: Write his argument in your own wordsStep 4: Look at the information about the historian, go back to the timeline and the categories of historians. Write down why this historian is arguing that.Step 5: Go through your notes and find at least 1 piece of evidence that could be used to SUPPORT AJP Taylor’s argument

British historian, AJP Taylor, writing in 1961

“In principle and doctrine, Hitler was no more wicked and

unscrupulous than many other contemporary statesmen. In

wicked acts he outdid them all. The policy of Western statesmen

also rested ultimately on force--French policy on the army,

British policy on sea-power. But these statesmen hoped that it

would not be necessary to use this force. Hitler intended to use

his force, or would at any rate, threaten to use it.”

What does he argue?

Step 3: Argument in my own words:He argues that Hitler was not completely to blame for WW2. He was not worse than other politicians, who were all prepared to use force if they needed to. But, they were too weak to threaten to use it, unlike Hitler. Hitler knew this weaknesses of the British and French and so was more confident to use his force. Therefore, lots of people made mistakes which led to war – it was not part of Hitler’s plan.

Step 4: Why he is arguing this:AJP Taylor argues this because he was challenging the argument that it was all Hitler’s fault. AJP Taylor is a revisionist historian which means he argued against the Orthodox argument because he thought people were too quick to blame Hitler straight after WW2.

Why does he argue this?

What evidence is there to SUPPPORT AJP Taylor?

Step 2. Definitions:Principle: truthDoctrine: beliefUnscrupulous: dishonestContemporary: others living at the same timeStatesmen: politicians

Step 5: Evidence to support-Britain and France failed to use the League of Nations properly. They showed Hitler he could do what he wanted when they failed to deal with the Manchurian and Abyssinian Crises.

-The policy of appeasement let Hitler get away with his aggressive actions.

-The policy of appeasement led to the Nazi-Soviet Pact.

Task 4: Your turn…This isn’t easy, Year 9, it is designed to be challenging. It is very important to persevere, be resilient and give it a go!

Step 1: Read the interpretation in the middle of the diagram.Step 2: Look up any words you don’t understand and write their definition.Step 3: Write his argument in your own wordsStep 4: Look at the information about the historian, go back to the timeline and the categories of historians. Write down why this historian is arguing that.Step 5: Go through your notes and find at least 1 piece of evidence that could be used to SUPPORT Hugh Trevor-Roper’s argument. Think about Hitler’s actions from 1933.

British historian, Hugh Trevor-Roper, writing in 1962

"Hitler meant what he said: that he was aiming... at world

conquest. He changed the mood of a nation (Germany) from a

passionate desire for peace to a determination for war. This

surely deserves some respect from the historian.

What does he argue?

Why does he argue this?

What evidence is there to SUPPPORT Hugh Trevor-Roper?

Task 5: Your turn…

Step 1: Read the interpretation in the middle of the diagram.Step 2: Look up any words you don’t understand and write their definition.Step 3: Write his argument in your own wordsStep 4: Look at the information about the historian, go back to the timeline and the categories of historians. Write down why this historian is arguing that.Step 5: Go through your notes and find at least 1 piece of evidence that could be used to SUPPORT Kukushkin’sargument. Think about the events he has talked about and how they contributed to war.

What does he argue?

Why does he argue this?

What evidence is there to SUPPPORT Kukushkin?

Russian historian Kukushkin, writing in 1981

Why did Britain and France help Hitler to achieve his aims? They hoped

to appease Hitler by giving him the Sudetenland. They wanted to

direct German aggression eastwards against the USSR and the

disgraceful Munich Agreement achieved this.

[In 1939] the USSR (Russia) stood alone in the face of growing German

threat. The USSR had to make the Nazi-Soviet Pact. 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.

END OF UNIT ASSESSMENT

‘Hitler’s actions were the main cause of the Second World War’. How far do you agree with Hugh Trevor-Roper’s interpretation of the causes of WW2?

This WOULD have been your T2. It is not going to be assessed the same way, but it is certainly important that you complete this piece of writing to show off your progress through Y9.

This will be ONE essay, and will require you to use sources, interpretations and knowledge. On the final page of this lesson you have the Interpretation and Source sheet, which have sources and interpretations you can use in your work.

On the next page you have a suggested structure. Below, you have some things you need to do to be successful –you can tick them off as you do them and use it to check over your work.

How will I be successful?

Communication and Application Structure your work into paragraphs Each paragraph must have a clear ‘theme’

(appeasement, league of nations etc) You include precise detail such as dates You use ‘history words’ Spelling is accurate

Understanding cause & consequence You explain how the different factors caused the war You include details about 3 different causes

throughout the essay You have specific examples of how each cause

contributed to the war You also talk about causes other than Hitler’s actions You explain why some causes were more significant

than others You make links between the causes of WW1 and the

causes of WW2

Use of Sources You include more than one source in your

work You explain how a source supports your

point You consider the usefulness of a source

by analysing the nature (type), origin (when it was made) and purpose of the source (why it was made).

Use of Interpretations You include 2 interpretations in your work You state which interpretation you

agree/disagree with and explain why You explain why the historian holds that

view You use the sources to explain why you

agree or disagree You use your own knowledge to explain

why you agree or disagree

Paragraph 1: Introduction The reasons for the outbreak of the Second World War have been interpreted in many ways. Hugh Trevor-Roper argues that [summarise his argument here]. Whereas [Interpretation1/3] argues that…. I agree/disagree with interpretation [1/3] because I believe that the main cause of WW2 was… [state

your assertion] In order to explore how I have come to this assertion, I will be investigating the different causes. These will include… [list the 3 causes you will focus on in your essay]

Paragraph 2: Hitler’s Actions were the main cause POINT: One cause of the Second World War was… INTERPRETATION: This is support by Interpretation 1/2/3 [Is there an interpretation which agrees that

Hitler was the main cause?]. They also argue [What do they argue? Why do they argue this?] EVIDENCE: The evidence to support this interpretation is that..[What actions did Hitler take? Be precise

and detailed.] SOURCE: Source A/B/C/D/E supports this argument. This source shows/says [describe or quote from the

source]. This is/is not useful because [What type of source is it (Nature), Who was it made by? When? (Origin) What is its purpose? How does that affect its trustworthiness?]

EXPLANANTION: Hitler’s actions caused World War Two because… [How did Hitler’s Actions cause World War Two? How did it make other countries react? What is so significant about his actions?]

LINK: This links to my next point because… [Do his actions link to your next point? How?]

Paragraph 3 & 4: Another cause POINT: Another cause of the Second World War was… INTERPRETATION: This is support by Interpretation 1/2/3 [Is there an interpretation which agrees that

Hitler was the main cause?]. They also argue [What do they argue? Why do they argue this?] EVIDENCE: The evidence to support this interpretation is that..[What actions did Hitler take? Be precise

and detailed.] Source A/B/C/D/E supports this argument. This source shows/says [describe or quote from the source].

This is/is not useful because [What type of source is it (Nature), Who was it made by? When? (Origin) What is its purpose? How does that affect its trustworthiness?]

EXPLANANTION: Hitler’s actions caused World War Two because… [How did Hitler’s Actions cause World War Two? How did it make other countries react? What is so significant about his actions?]

LINK: This links to my next point because… [Do his actions link to your next point? How?]

Paragraph 5: Conclusion CLEAR OPINION: Overall, I do/do not agree with Hugh Trevor-Roper’s interpretation. In my opinion, the

main cause of WW2 was… EXPLAINING WHY: What is your most CLINCHING and PERSUASIVE evidence to argue this? Did your most

significant factor cause other things that contributed to WW2??

END OF UNIT ASSESSMENT‘Hitler’s actions were the main cause of the Second World War’. How

far do you agree with Hugh Trevor-Roper’s interpretation?

Interpretation 1: British historian, AJP Taylor, writing in 1961

“In principle and doctrine, Hitler was no more wicked and

unscrupulous than many other contemporary statesmen. In

wicked acts he outdid them all. The policy of Western statesmen

also rested ultimately on force--French policy on the army, British

policy on sea-power. But these statesmen hoped that it would

not be necessary to use this force. Hitler intended to use his force,

or would at any rate, threaten to use it.”

Interpretation 2: British historian, Hugh

Trevor-Roper, writing in 1962

"Hitler meant what he said: that he was

aiming... at world conquest. He changed the

mood of a nation (Germany) from a

passionate desire for peace to a

determination for war. This surely deserves

some respect from the historian.

Interpretation 3: Russian historian Kukushkin, writing in 1981

Why did Britain and France help Hitler to achieve his aims? They hoped to

appease Hitler by giving him the Sudetenland. They wanted to direct

German aggression eastwards against the USSR and the disgraceful

Munich Agreement achieved this.

[In 1939] the USSR (Russia) stood alone in the face of growing German

threat. The USSR had to make the Nazi-Soviet Pact. 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.

A British cartoon of Hitler from July 1936. Hitler is walking over the backs of the ‘Spineless leaders of Democracy’. Underneath it says ‘Stepping stones to glory’A British cartoon from 192. The

Keystone ‘USA’ is missing from the League of Nations bridge.

A cartoon about the Treaty of

Versailles from the German perspective

1919

War is a disease whether it be declared or undeclared….We are determined to keep out of the war. We are taking measures to minimise our risk of involvement… American President Roosevelt’s ‘Quarantine Speech’ in 1937, explaining why America are following an isolationist policy.

Source A:

Source B:

Source C:

Source D:

It will be the duty of German foreign policy to get large spaces to feed and house the growing population of

Germany. Destiny points us towards Russia. Hitler, Mein Kampf, written in 1924, 9 years before he got

into power and started invading other countries.

Source E: