Which of these two sources would an historian studying Kristallnacht find the more useful?
a) Study sources A and B.
Which of these two sources would an historian studying Kristallnacht find the more useful?
An historian studying Kristallnacht would find both the sources useful because, in my opinion everything including opinions and accounts are useful.
Source A shows that Goebbels planned Kristallnacht to try and impress Hitler and win his support back.
Source B implies that the German public performed the acts of Kristallnacht and suggests that Hitler wasn't involved.
Source A is a 'summary' and therefore may be reinterpreted recap of the events of Kristallnacht. It was also written in 1954 making it less reliable seeing as it was written 16 years after the event and therefore the sources memory may be blurred. Fritz Hesse was a journalist, present at the time of Kristallnacht and worked for the Nazis, who are more likely to defend the Party. Fritz Hesse view given in Source A, however completely contradicts what the Nazis said publicly at the time. This in my opinon makes it more reliable.
However, Source B seems slightly more reliable- it was from a secret report prepared by the Nazi Supreme Court. Therefore it gives the true Nazi point of view seeing as it was secret and not meant to be read publlically; there was no need to lie in this document.
Overall, I think that both the sources are reliable but the most useful source would be Source B. I think that this is because there aren't many reliable and truthful Nazi points of view that wouldn't have been censored around the time of Kristallnacht.
b.) Study Source C.
What impression of Kristallnacht does source c give? Explain your answer.
From source C, I get the impression that the SS and the stormtroopers carried out the violence of Kristallnacht. I get this impression because it mentions that they had been "provided with hammers, axes and firebombs" so therefore they may have caused the destruction. I can base my opinion of this source on this because the writer believes he has been informed by a 'reliable source'.
The source tells us that the official view from the Nazis was that Kristallnacht was a spontaneous impulse created by the German public but says the public were obviously horrified by the anti-Jewish behaviour. The German people could not talk of this feeling because "the slightest sign of sympathy for the Jews from the public for the Jews caused fury amongst the Nazi's".
He also tells us how "The most hideous part of the so-called 'spontaneous' action was the arrest and transportation to concentration camps of male German Jews".
c.) Study sources C, D and E.
Do sources D and E make it more, or less likely, that the account given in source C is accurate?
I think that source D and E does support what is said in Source C because there are certain factors in each that agree with source C.
Source C tells us that the official view of the Nazis was that Kristallnacht was "a spontaneous wave of anger" by the German people but that the German public was "obviously horrified" by the Nazi acts and this tells us that they would have no incline to do this themselves. Source C also tells us that the Nazis carried out the violence.
Source C is a well-balanced account of Kristallnacht and in my opinion is fairly reliable. David Buffman was an eyewitness of Kristallnacht and has interviewed many people concerning it. At the time, Buffman had a high status in society and this implies that one should not lie so openly. The account by him is not biased and shows both sides of the story.
Source D tells us that there is tension between the Nazis and Jews even weeks before Kristallnacht had taken place. Jews were banned from social events like the cinema, which is a major part of society at the time, and certain anti-Jewish shops. It also tells us that in the countryside, conditions were so bad that the Jews were forced to flee "acts of terror forced Jews to sell their belongings and go away". I think that this source is fairly reliable because it was written before Kristallnacht so it shows truth in how the Jews were being ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
Source D tells us that there is tension between the Nazis and Jews even weeks before Kristallnacht had taken place. Jews were banned from social events like the cinema, which is a major part of society at the time, and certain anti-Jewish shops. It also tells us that in the countryside, conditions were so bad that the Jews were forced to flee "acts of terror forced Jews to sell their belongings and go away". I think that this source is fairly reliable because it was written before Kristallnacht so it shows truth in how the Jews were being treated. There is no need to lie in this source so it shows the truth and is reliable. It shows the build-up to Kristallnacht and therefore supports source C. However, it doesn't mention the SA.
Source E tells us that this is the "true report" on Kristallnacht. It tells us the destruction's "of Jewish businesses, houses and synagogues" and suggests that the German people have nothing to do with the Kristallnacht but the SS and SA which is also mentioned in source C. It tells us that the Nazi police supplied the SA and SS with axes, housebreaking tools, ladders and a list of the addresses of all the Jewish residents and shops. Source E is very reliable as it is signed "a civil servant" and therefore is anonymous. However, anybody may have written this source. There is no need to lie and that's why I think that this source is truthful. This also implies that the nazi's are so threatening that the author of this source needs to hide their identity from them. The fact that it is sent to the British Console, I think, is a cry for help because the Nazis are treating the Jews appallingly and something needs to be done about it.
Overall, I think that Source D and Source E make it more likely that the account given in Source C is accurate as, like before, certain factors link up. For example, Source D comments on the build up of Kristallnacht and Source E supports the idea that the SS and SA had intervened with Kristallnacht. All three sources are fairly reliable and both source D and Source E supports the information given in Source C.
d.) Study sources F and G.
How similar are the messages of these two cartoons? Explain your answer with reference to the detail in the cartoons.
Both of the sources, source F and source G, agree that the Nazi's are responsible and to blame for for the event of Kristallnacht.
We know this because we see in source F Tsar Nicholas II who encouraged attacks against the Jews. It shows the reader of the Russian magazine that it didn't do him any good and tells the Nazi's to watch what they are doing. We see another man in the source representing the Nazi's. This man is looking at Tsar and listening to what he has to say. We know that this man is a Nazi as he is in uniform. The Nazi is holding a knife in his hand symbolises that the Nazi's clearly use violence to get what they want. The knife is dripping with blood and this encourages the reader to assume that he has just killed a Jew. In his other hand, he is holding a baseball bat with nails sticking out. This implies that the Nazis don't only stab the Jews, but use extreme violence in torturing them. The Nazi has watches hanging from him and this symbolises that the Nazi's has taken this from the Jews after killing them. It shows that the Nazi's have no heart and are very greedy.
Overall, I think that this source clearly blames the Nazis for Kristallnacht and not the German people. It shows the Nazi's violence and I think that the SS and the SA are responsible for Kristallnacht.
Source G gives a slightly different message but still implies that the Nazis are responsible.
We see a Nazi officer holding a baseball bat in his hands. This shows violence. Lying, by the officer's feet, there is a dead body. This is clearly a Jew that the Nazi officer has beaten to a pulp. However, tied up and gagged is a German woman. This symbolises that the German people are defenceless to the Nazis. It also symbolises that the German people don't go along with the Nazi ideas but they cannot do anything. The stormy clouds in the sky show discontent.
Similarities between the two sources are that violence is common among the Nazis and that the events of Kristallnacht are their doings. However, the most obvious similarity is that both of these sources blame the Nazis for Kristallnacht.
The differences of these two sources are that source F is Russian and source G is English. This is important as these are two very different cultures and different cultures do not always interpret the same things correctly. Also, source F shows the Nazi's looting of the Jews possessions and source G is trying to get the point across that the German public are defenceless. I know this because in source G, the German citizen who is tied up and gagged is the focus of the cartoon and the Nazi officer and dead Jew are in the background.
I think that the two sources are fairly similar because they are both trying to get the point across that the Nazis are responsible for Kristallnacht and this is the focus of agreement for both sources.
e.) Study sources H and I .
How far does source I prove that Goering was telling the truth in source H?
Source I proves that Goering was telling the truth in source H to a certain extent. Source H blames Goebbels for Kristallnacht "it was not acceptable to me that he should upset my difficult economic tasks by destroying so much Jewish property of economic value and by causing so much disturbance in economic life". This suggests Goerings anger at Goebbels for wasting so much. It also tells us that Hitler apologised on Goebbels behalf. The reliability though is questionable because if it were Goering organising Kristallnacht, he would have wanted to push the blame on someone else at the time because he was on trial for war crimes.
Source I tells us that Hitler disapproved with Kristallnacht, and that he was definitely not pleased with the person who organised it as he wanted to come with an understanding with France and that wouldn't happen after the events of Kristallnacht. It tells us that Hitler never wanted it to happen.
This source supports H by agreeing that Hitler disapproved of Kristallnacht, but has nothing it that mentions Goering's theory that Goebbels was behind it all. A factor of unreliability is that it is reported over 30 years later by Frau Troost in an interview. This factor suggests that she may have had a lapsed memory after all that time. I have learned that Frau Troost was a close friend of Hitler's and in theory, as a close friend, she would deny anything with Hitler being involved in Kristallnacht to try and defend him.
Overall, the only factors of source I that proves Goering was telling the truth in source H is that Hitler disapproved of Kristallnacht. I don't think that there is enough matching evidence in the two sources to prove Goering was telling the truth in Source H.
f.) Study all the sources.
'Kristallnacht was a spontaneous event by the German people'. How far do these sources support that claim?
To determine whether the statement, 'Kristallnacht was a spontaneous event by the German people' we must examine each source carefully. To do this, we have to see what the source tells us and how reliable it is.
Source A tells us that Goebles planned kristallnacht with the SA to gain Hitler's support towards him "it was clear that Goebbels, who at the time was out of favour with Hitler, was trying to win back his support" Factors that doubt the reliability of source A is that it is a summary and therefore a reinterpreted version of the events that took place. Also, the fact that it was written in 1954 makes it less reliable. I think this because it was written 16 years after the event and therefore ones memory may be blurred. Fritz Hesse was a journalist and he could of made some of these things up to make his work more interesting to the public; he could of heard rumours and broadcasted it. Overall, I think that this doesn't support the statement because the source clearly implies that Goebbels and the SA were involved and it was planned, not a 'spontaneous event caused by the German people'
Source B tells us that Goebbels had informed the party leaders at the dinner party that there had been "anti-Jewish demonstrations". I think that this implies that ordinary German people performed kristallnacht. It also says that it wasn't organised by the Nazi party but that they wouldn't discourage the demonstrations.
Source B seems reliable- it was from a secret report prepared by the Nazi Supreme Court. It gives the true Nazi point of view, as it is secret and not meant to be read; there is no need to lie. Overall, this source agrees with the statement as it implies that it was a 'spontaneous event by the German people', "such demonstrations were not organised by the party."
Source C tells us that the SA and SS were involved with Kristallnacht. This source is reliable because David Buffman was an eyewitness of Kristallnacht and has interviewed many people concerning the matter so therefore he produces a well-balanced source. He was a high status of society at the time. Overall, I think this source follows the idea that it was organised by Hitler, the SS and the SA and not a 'spontaneous event by the German people'.
Source D tells us that there is tension between the Nazis and Jews even weeks before Kristallnacht. Jews were banned from the cinema and certain anti-Jewish shops. I think that this source is fairly reliable because it was written before Kristallnacht so it shows truth in how the Jews were being treated. There is no need to lie in this source so it shows the truth. It shows the build-up to Kristallnacht. Overall, I think that this source implies that it was a 'spontaneous event by the German people' because, for example, people owning shops did not want them in there. This expresses their hatred towards the Jews.
Source E tells us the destructions "of Jewish businesses, houses and synagogues" and suggests that the German people have nothing to do with the Kristallnacht but the SS and SA. It tells us that the Nazi police supplied the SA and SS with axes, housebreaking tools, ladders and a list of the addresses of all the Jewish residents and shops. Source E is reliable as it is signed "a civil servant" and is anonymous. There is no need to lie and that's why I think that this source is truthful. Overall, I think that this source is reliable so we can believe what is written. It isn't supporting the quote because it suggests that the events of Kristallnacht were performed by the SA.
We see in the cartoons (source F and source G) that they go along with the theory that Kristallnacht was organised by the Nazi's and not by the German public like the quote suggests. Both of the sources are reliable.
Source H blames Goebbels for Kristallnacht "it was not acceptable to me that he should upset my difficult economic tasks by destroying so much Jewish property of economic value and by causing so much disturbance in economic life". It also tells us that Hitler apologised on Goebbels behalf, so therefore, I think that Goebbels MUST have done something wrong for Hitler to apologise about. The reliability of this source is good, with only a few exceptions to doubt it. Firstly, Goering and Goebbels were well known enemies. This suggests that Goering may want to blame Goebbels for Kristallnacht for the sheer fact that he hated him. Secondly, if it were Goering organising Kristallnacht, he would have wanted to push the blame on someone else at the time because he was on trial for war crimes. I think that this source disagrees with the quote because Goering is blaming Goebbels for kristallnacht, and, Goebbels being part of the Nazi party, proves that Kristallnacht was a Nazi-related event.
Source I tells us that Hitler disapproved with Kristallnacht, and that he was definitely not pleased with the person who organised it. Hitler never wanted it to happen. This source is fairly reliable because there is nothing to suggest that it is lies. However, a factor of unreliability is that it is reported over 30 years later by Frau Troost in an interview. This suggests that she may have had a lapsed memory. I have learned that Frau Troost was a close friend of Hitler's and in theory, as a close friend, she would deny anything with Hitler being involved in Kristallnacht to try and defend him. I believe that this source indicates that neither the German people nor the nazi party was involved with Kristallnacht.
In conclusion, I think that kristallnacht was not a 'spontaneous event by the German people'. This is because only three out of the nine sources supports this claim. There is far more evidence in the sources that Goebbels organised Kristallnacht with the SS and the SA in order to impress Hitler who he was out of favour with. However, Source A, Source G and Source I clearly show that Hitler did not approve of it "he agreed that such events must not be allowed to take place". I have also learnt that Hitler didn't discourage Kristallnacht once it had taken place "Hitler squealed with delight and slapped his leg with enthusiasm", and in Source B "such demonstrations were not to be organised by the party, but neither were they discouraged". Therefore, I think that the statement 'Kristallnacht was a spontaneous event by the German people' is untrue and the vast majority of the sources do not support this claim.
Kristallnacht Sam Botchey
