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

Authors Avatar

A Collection of Studies on Sources about the Reichstag Fire

I am going to look at both sources A and B, to see to what extent B supports A. Shortly after the Second World War, Rudolf Diels, the head of the political police, wrote Source A and Source B is a quote from Marinus Van der Lubbe’s confession. He confessed that he alone started the Reichstag Fire, ‘I can only repeat that I set fire to the Reichstag all by myself,’ (Van der Lubbe, 1933) and he was not part of a Communist plot, contrary to some of the views of Diels and others mentioned in Source A.

Even though Diels’ points do not always agree with Van der Lubbe’s, Diels contemplated the thought of him acting alone. An example is when Diels states in Source A ‘The voluntary confessions of Van der Lubbe made me believe he acted alone,’ which is in strong agreement with Van der Lubbe’s viewpoint of him not being part of any plot. Also when Diels says he ‘reported that after questioning Van der Lubbe he thought he was a madman’, this is saying he did it alone as it would be unlikely that there would be a whole group of mad people and he only did it because he was mad; not because he was part of a plot. This does show some agreement with Van der Lubbe

The way Van der Lubbe may have done it might have also led Diels to believe he acted alone. Diels said that Van der Lubbe ‘could have easily set fire to the old furniture, the heavy curtains, and the bone dry wooden panels” which could be ‘easily’ accomplished alone. As Van der Lubbe was so ‘busy’ starting ‘several dozen fires’ with his burning shirt, Diels must have thought he had no help otherwise other people would be helping and he would not be so busy.

        As Van der Lubbe was ‘naked from the waist upwards, smeared with dirt and sweating’, it would seem as if he did not have any help, as he would not be in such a state if he did have help since other people would be involved.

Some parts of Source A do not agree with Van der Lubbe’s confession. For example, it says in Source A, ‘I read the Communist pamphlets he carried in his trouser pockets.’ which is implying an accusation of him being a Communist and that he was in a Communist plot to start the fires. This disagrees strongly with Source B: ‘I can only repeat that I set fire to the Reichstag all by myself. The other defendants in this trial were not in the Reichstag.’ His view was that no-one had helped him.

        The Nazi view of events was that the Communists had planned to burn it down; Hitler said ‘This is something really cunning, prepared a long time ago’.  So obviously Hitler thought that this was a ‘beautifully’ well thought out plan, and the criminals were the Communists as a group, once again contradictory of Source B.

The Nazi attitude to the events was somewhat a little extreme. Diels quotes Goering saying ‘Every Communist will be shot or hanged. Everyone supporting the Communists must be arrested.’ This shows the Goering, without any ‘mercy’, accusing the Communists of starting it even though he has no evidence other than Van der Lubbe was a Communist, but that does not necessarily mean that it was a plot by a group of them, which was the complete opposite to the quote in s Source B which states Van der Lubbe was solitary when setting fire to the building.

To conclude, I think that Source B supports A to a little extent. Though B states that Van der Lubbe set fire to the Reichstag all by himself, backing the idea of Diels thinking that he may have done it alone, the other quotes from his account outweigh this. The only reason I believe it is really supported to some extent is due to Diels contemplating the idea of him starting it by himself from quotes such as ‘…made me believe he acted alone’, especially since quotes from Goering and Hitler cannot possibly be in agreement with Source B. The idea of Communism being behind the plot from his report is too great, so therefore too contradictory of Van der Lubbe’s view point of him acting alone.

I will be trying to see how useful Source C’s account of the events of the 27th February is. Source C is a quote from a book called ‘My Part in Germany’s Fight’ written by Josef Goebbels in 1935. As Goebbels was the Minister of Propaganda, this source may be unreliable therefore affecting the usefulness of it.

Being the Minister of Propaganda, Goebbels’ job was to influence the German citizens into supporting Nazi views. This job he had may then make this source unreliable as it would not necessarily be the complete truth due to people involved in Propaganda bend and exaggerate what really happened. In this source there are such phrases and words like ‘we raced to the scene at top speed’ and ‘suddenly’ that makes it seem as if this was unexpected and he had nothing to do with it, which shows exaggeration consequently affecting the usefulness of this account.

Join now!

Goebbels most likely wrote this book as a piece of Propaganda, in order to show the Nazi point of view to the public so they realise they should be supporting the Nazi Party. The title ‘My Part in Germany’s Fight’, suggests he wants to show himself and the Nazis in a good light and shun the Communists: ‘There could be no doubt that the Communists had made a final attempt to seize power by creating an atmosphere of panic and terror’. ‘No doubt’ and ‘panic’ are stretches of the truth.

Some elements of this report can be used as ...

This is a preview of the whole essay