• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

History Sourcework - Do Sources D and E make it more or less likely, that the account given in Source C is Accurate? - Hitler's Germany

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

History Sourcework Do Sources D and E make it more or less likely, that the account given in Source C is Accurate? Source C was written by David Buffman, the American consul based in Leipzig. As a first hand witness of the events of kristallnact, he can relate to the events more but as he undoubtedly wrote this piece after the 10th of November, he may have had hindsight which would affect his judgement of events and the consequential account that he wrote. The Source is undoubtedly opinionated in the way that it blatantly decrees that the Nazi Party organised and carried out via its agents, all the rioting and damage. The language goes further by using words such as 'horrific', 'ruins' and 'violence', which give a sense of the helplessness and terror that was experienced at he time. The piece is very anti-nazi. The motive behind the text was to provide an alternate version of events to that of the propaganda ruled German newspapers, this account would ultimately be passed to the American government. It may have also been a chance to write down the events how he saw them to 'get it off his chest'. As he watched the buildings burn and the Jews beaten while the police and fire service standing back watching, I imagine that he felt helpless in the middle of the chaos by writing this it may avail to do some god and banish his demons. ...read more.

Middle

the Jews by the Nazi party during the invasion of Austria as the Nazi's tried to force the Jews out of Germany. The authors motive behind the scribing of this document was to simply give a Jewish account of the events that were occurring in Nazi German countermanding the propaganda that was constructed by the nazi party about the anti Semitism that was present in rural Germany. The authenticity of his account could be doubted as it lacks preciseness only briefly describing each event. Bitterness and hatred for the Nazi Party could have influenced the context of the piece, this hatred being strengthened and increasing the chances of slight maliciousness if the description was written after kristallnact which the chances of are high has there were only 9 days in November before kristallnact. There are quite a few gaps in this piece mainly due to the lack of preciseness. The mention of the ''various signs of unrest'' what was the signs, how strong and definite were they? The worsening of the conditions in the countryside is not described either to what extent they were worsening or how spread out was the hostility in the countryside? This lack of detail all leads to doubts on the reliability of the description. Where was the author living is another question, he may have been living in a city away from the events he is describing and so may not have had an accurate point of view. ...read more.

Conclusion

The Police state that Germany was under at the time meant that every order that the police received had to have come from the Nazi Party. From other sources and my own knowledge this note seems to be completely true. The SA was given housebreaking tools. There could be no other feasible way that this man could have obtained the information other than from being a High Ranking Nazi Official in which case he would have had to have been a loyal follower of Hitler or as I believe he was a civil servant who was caught up in it all. The only gap in the note is whether the note is about the riots on the 8th when Von Roth died or the 9th during what is known commonly as Kristallnact. Apart from that the note is fairly concise. In conclusion I believe that overall sources D and E make the account in source C seem more likely. Source D questions whether it was just the SA on its own as it depicts the local German people as being extremely hostile towards Jews, but confirms C in the mention f the troubles and unrest that had been brewing up. Source E goes further by talking about the SA being involved and being provided with various implements to aid their mission. The only disagreement is that there is no mention of the SS being involved and no mention of the activities of the fire brigade. Overall though these two sources give a very strong case for Source C. J.Harratt ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Germany 1918-1939 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Germany 1918-1939 essays

  1. Holocaust Sources Questions

    It makes the SS look innocent and the "Death's Head Battalions" were to blame for everything. In Source K and L both men are lying for their own benefit. A strength in their Statement is that they were there at the time.

  2. GCSE History Coursework: Reichstag Fire 1) ...

    Although it doesn't directly mention either Nazis or Communists, I think that the artist who created this source was obviously for the Nazi campaign. Otherwise, why would he have been a Nazi?

  1. Studies of Sources from the Reichstag Fire - who was responsible?

    Although, this again cannot be completely reliable as it was published outside Germany during the Second World War and because he left Germany due to a falling out with the Nazis, this may make him very anti-Nazi therefore he may be biased.

  2. The Final Solution - Sources Questions

    Using all the sources and your own knowledge explain whether you agree or disagree with this interpretation. 6) It is debatable whether or not all Germans knew about the fate of the Jews. The Sources previously analysed are very helpful in this debate.

  1. IGCSE History Coursework Assignment B - Source Analysis of the Reichstag Fire

    Van der Lubbe was used by the Nazis. Which interpretation is best supported by the evidence in these sources and your knowledge of the period? Explain your answer. Quote i was supported by sources A, B, and D. Source A quoted that van der Lubbe's confessions made Diels believe that he had acted alone.

  2. Modern World History Coursework - Reichstag Sourcework

    Van Der Lubbe would be under a greater deal of pressure which may have affected the content of his statement, and therefore adding bias and unreliability to the comparison between each. In conclusion, there is inconclusive evidence to say whether source A is fully supported by source B.

  1. Holocaust - Source related questions.

    Anger is show in Sources A and E. The crowd are angry and shouted abuse at the Jews in Source A. In Source E the extreme anger column represent 63%. These sources tell us that people were not satisfied with the way in which the Jewish community were treated.

  2. Kristallnacht. Source C is an account by David Buffman, from the American Consul in ...

    This supports his original opinion that Kristallnacht was not a spontaneous attack, as the SS men and Stormtroopers had already 'been provided with hammers, axes and fire bombs', even before the events had started. This source also make the Nazi's look bad, because it wants people to see that Nazi's are immoral and corrupt.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work