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

Kristallnacht - source related study

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Kristallnacht Question F Source A is a summary by a historian of Fritz Hesse's account of a dinner on the evening of 9 November. This is a secondary source as it is a summary of someone else's account. Hesse was a journalist working for the Nazi's so source A is likely to be biased. In this source Fritz claims he hears Goebells telling Hitler about "mass attack" of Jewish businesses and synagogues. Goebells is telling Hitler about kristallnacht just a few hours before it actually happened. The content of the source suggests that Goebells planned kristallnacht, probably to get back in Hitler's favour. The source says that this news of a mass attack on the Jews went down very well with Hitler who was delighted and "slapped his thigh with enthusiasm". So, source A clearly says that kristallnacht was not a spontaneous event by the German people, and it was in fact the Nazi's who organized kristallnacht. However, whether this source can be trusted or not is another matter. The source was written in a "blame Hitler" period in the 1950's so this could have been exaggerated to make him sound bad. Source B is a secret report prepared by the Nazi Party Supreme Court after the events of Kristallnacht. This makes source B a primary source but it is likely to be biased because it is written by the Nazi's. ...read more.

Middle

This source agrees with the statement that kristallnacht was a spontaneous event by the German people because this source shows how the people were forcing the Jews away because they didn't like them: "Acts of terror forced Jews to sell their belongings and go away." This source therefore says that the German people were becoming restless with the Jews a few weeks before kristallnacht, so this source says that it was probably the German people who spontaneously carried out the attacks of kristallnacht. Source E was a note signed by "A Civil Servant". It was sent on 12th of November 1938, which means the source is primary. The person has remained anonymous which means they wanted to remain unknown probably so that they are under no threat of a Nazi action for revealing evidence like this. The note is clearly inside information that was intended to be kept a secret. We have no reason to believe that the source is biased because the person has remained anonymous. This source clearly states that the ordinary German people had nothing to do with it, or most of them anyway: "Most German people had nothing to do with these riots and burnings." This source claims that it was the Nazi's who carried out the riots and attacks of kristallnacht: "The police supplied the SA men with axes, house breaking tools and ladders" This shows that it definitely was not spontaneous at all, because these people ...read more.

Conclusion

The content of this source suggests that it was the Nazi's who carried out the attacks on kristallnacht. (talking about Goebells) "It was not acceptable to me that he should upset my difficult economic task s by destroying so much Jewish property of economic value and by causing so much disturbance in economic life" This shows that it was Goebells (a Nazi) who was responsible for planning Kristallnacht. Source I is an account of a conversation between Hitler and Frau Troost. It was recorded by a historian interviewing her in 1971; 33 years after the conversation took place. It is a primary source, but is quoted in a historian's secondary source. Frau Troost was the husband of one of Hitler's favourite architects. The content of this source agrees that kristallnacht was a spontaneous event by the German people and that the Nazi' did not plan it because Hitler is saying how bad it was for his campaign. He also says "the people responsible" which means it was by the German people and not his Nazi's because he would say it was his Nazi's if they had done it. So in conclusion only sources B, D and I support the statement that 'kristallnacht was a spontaneous event by the German people' which means that the majority of sources disagree and say It was the Nazi's who were responsible for kristallnacht. Also, from my evidence I can see that most German people were law abiding citizens and would not be involved in these horrific attacks. ...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. Why Did Kristallnacht Take Place? (a) A ...

    Ernst von Roth was an official for the German Embassy in Paris and the Jewish man shot him dead on the basis of revenge for the mistreatment of his parents by the Nazis. Buffman goes on to say that the local people were 'obviously horrified by the Nazis' acts'; he

  2. Source Investigation: Why did Kristallnacht take place?

    says 'the people responsible have destroyed everything for me', implying that Kristallnacht was as a result of ordinary German people impulsively rebelling against the Jews. However, as this is the image that Hitler wanted to project for these events, it is clear that by saying this, he was attempting to

  1. What was the main cause of Kristallnacht?

    One call tell the figure with the sword in his hand is a Nazi because he is dressed in Nazi uniform. He has a sword in his hand and a dead person lying on the ground between his legs so presumably, he has murdered him with the sword.

  2. What impression of 'Kristallnacht' does source c give? Explain your answer.

    Source B seems reliable - it was from a secret report prepared by the Nazi Supreme Court, the highest authority. It gives the true Nazi point of view, as it is secret and not meant to be read by the public.

  1. Nazi Germany: Why did Kristallnacht take place

    David goes on to say how even the local crowds were 'horrified' by the violence caused by the Nazis. He obviously believes that the Nazi press headline is out of order and unforgivable. This source is obviously accusing the Nazis of these acts but also that they were completely out of order even in the eyes of their own public.

  2. Nazi Germany - Why did Kristallnacht take place? Source based work.

    Also this source is very unreliable as Frau Troost reported it over 30 years later in an interview. Apart from the obvious shortcomings of memory the fact that Troost was a close friend of Hitler's could mean she could be trying to defend him.

  1. Which of these two sources would an historian studying Kristallnacht find the more useful?

    he may of notice, as well as the fact he was a Jew may make a reader feel he was exaggerating on the events. Source E backs up David Buffman's account on Kristallnacht saying the SA/SS men were involved in the attacks and the letter was written just after the

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

    Also, the title might be being sarcastic, saying that the Communists clearly aren't the real danger, but the Nazis are, as they have all this power now. If that is the case, the artist is against the Nazis, and does not like the fact that they are getting stronger and that Germany might be run as a dictatorship.

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