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

How far does source I prove that Goering was telling the truth in

Extracts from this document...


Question E Study sources H and I How far does source I prove that Goering was telling the truth in Source H? Source H is Herman Goering's account of a conversation between himself and Adolf Hitler. At the time of the conversation, Goering was in charge of the economy and the four year economic plan, to make enough money to re-arm Germany and the Nazis. Goering gave this account during his trial for war crimes at Nuremberg in 1945. Herman Goering was in charge of the rearmament of the Nazis, and to achieve this he helped build up Germany. To make enough money for the mass rearmament, he used businesses, helping them to grow and become wealthy parts of his economic plan. He also used the income from the taxes. He was responsible for many businesses, many of which were run by the Jewish citizens. ...read more.


He could have been telling the truth, but because of the position he was in, we have to treat it suspiciously. Nethertheless, both sources A and B back up this idea of Goebbles being responsible for Kristallnacht, which Goering is saying is true. Throughout the whole of the source, Goering is trying to distance himself from the events of the Holocaust, and is explaining that he and nothing to do with it. We cannot be certain of the reliability of the source as it was written in 1945 during Goering's trail for war crimes at Nuremberg. This was a long time after the events of Kristallnacht. This means that he could have forgot his conversation with Hitler, and could have just made it up to distance himself from the Nazis so he was not punished at the trials. Source I is Frau Troost's account of a conversation with Hitler shortly after Kristallnacht. ...read more.


Overall, we cannot be certain how reliable the source is. Source I tells us that Hitler was annoyed with the events of kristallnacht because they destroyed German property as well as his plans with the French. This implies that Hitler was not behind Kristallnacht. I feel in relation to source H, source I does go some way in saying that Goerings account is true. Both sources agree that Hitler was unhappy about the events of kristallnacht. We know this as in source H it says "he agreed that such events should not be allowed to take place", "he" being Hitler, and in source I were it states "the people responsible have destroyed everything for me". These quotes both show that Hitler was unhappy, even angry about the events of kristallnacht. In source I there is no mentioning of Goering though, and also source I does not say that Goebbles was responsible for the attacks. It does not name the person responsible in source I, only implies that it was not Hitler. 1 Connor Richardson ...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 History Projects 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 History Projects essays

  1. Were contemporaries correct in blaming Hitler for the Reichstag Fire?

    The only possibility is that the guards were aware of what was happening and were paid off by somebody. The SA would have had the keys, and unless the doors were left conveniently unopened, then it is highly unlikely that Van der Lubbe could have carried out the fire with no assistance.

  2. To what extent has the truth about the Spanish Inquisition been distorted?

    When we consider their numbers (it was run by no more than a handful of people, perhaps no more than 80 Inquisitors at any one time), the limited powers they exercised and the limited budget they operated on, it becomes difficult to think of them as a tyrannical machine imposed on the Spanish people.

  1. The Holocaust

    began killing operations aimed entirely at the Jewish communities. Nowadays, in everyone's point of view, this was really unfair to the Jews. Basically the Germans were using slave labour from the Jews. The concentration and death camps were probably the most cruel one out of all of them.

  2. How far is it possible to say when Wollaton hall was built?

    Willoughby was a new man with learning and knowledge. His house, 'Wollaton hall' helped to show this. We know what Wollaton hall and its grounds looked like and what alterations were made to the hall, by looking at a sketch of the hall and it's surroundings created by two Dutch artists back in 1707.

  1. How does source I prove that Goering was telling the truth in source H?

    This disagrees with source H and a number of other sources for instance Fritz Hesse described Hitler to be completely consensual to Kristallnacht and notes that Hitler gave an indication of immense pleasure when he heard of Goebbels plans also contradicting source I as a negative view of Kristallnacht is transgressed by Frau Troost in source I.

  2. How far do these two accounts agree about Prohibition?

    They appear to be neglected and deprived of food. This is strongly displayed through the empty plate on the table that the child is holding, the mother who has her head down on the table as she cries helplessly as she has no money to buy food for her hungry child and through the comment above them "...It keeps their families and their families always poor."

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