The Beer Hall Putsch Sources Questions
THE BEER HALL PUTSCH
Question 1)
Source A is an eyewitness account of the events that took place at the Burgerbraukeller on the 8thNovember 1923. From source A I am able to suggest that the event that occurred on 8th November was premeditated. I know this by analysing the way the report opens, as the writer says: "Hitler was standing with Rosenburg near the entrance with a watch in his hand". From source A I can also claim that on the 8th November at the Burgerbraukeller there was a lot of commotion and riot like behaviour. I argue this because of the atmosphere, which is created by the writer, when he says "steel helmeted men burst through, pushing maxim guns into the hall." And "Hitler snapped his watch back into his pocket, seized his revolver and elbowed his way through the crowed"
From source A it is evident that Hitler was not very well known or respected by the people in the Burgerbraukeller. This, I am able to claim, because Hitler had to fire a revolver before he could get people to listen or pay attention to him. This is also expressed as the writer says: "Hitler jumped on a table and fired two shots in the air". This indicates that Hitler tried to take control of the situation he had created by inflicting fear into the people at the Burgerbraukeller. Hitler had to do this because the crowed was not aware of who he was or what he intended.
Source A also describes Hitler as "breathing heavily". This quote provides a sound idea of the way that Hitler may have been feeling. The impression that it gives me is that Hitler could be breathing heavily due to his efforts in pushing his way through the crowed or that he may be feeling scared or nervous. I believe that Hitler may be feeling nervous or scared because perhaps he may not have been fully confident that his plan was going to work or maybe because he realised that he was committing a dangerous act that could probably land him in jail.
Question 2a)
Source A and B are very different due to the fact that they describe the same event in different ways. Source A is an eyewitness report by an ex member of the nazi party who left Germany in the 1930s. Whereas source B is a 1923 painting of a reconstruction of the events that took place in Burgerbraukeller on 8th November and it is from a nazi artist's point of view.
In source A the atmosphere which is created by the writer is that the event was planned but had to eventually be controlled by infliction of fear on the rioting and troublesome crowd when "The hall was thrown into the wildest commotion". Hitler inflicted fear to the crowed by "jumped up on a table and fired two shots into the ceiling". Hitler had to this because he was being ignored by the crowed and this was his only choice.
In source B the impression that is given by the painter is that Hitler was in absolute control of the situation and had the crowd impressed by his speech, also the atmosphere is shown as calm and corporative. In source B all references to "steel helmeted men" and "maxim guns" have been disregarded, a reason for this may be because of the nazi propaganda in the 30's trying to justify the putsch as an opportunity which Hitler was confronted with.
Question 2b)
The difference between source A and B can be explained in the following ways. Both source A and B are from biased points of views but however one may be more then the other. I say this because I believe that source A may be more reliable because it is a primary source whereas source B is a secondary source. Another reason would be that source B is a painting by a nazi artist, which was painted ten years after the putsch. This gives me a reason to question its reliability and accuracy. I say ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
Question 2b)
The difference between source A and B can be explained in the following ways. Both source A and B are from biased points of views but however one may be more then the other. I say this because I believe that source A may be more reliable because it is a primary source whereas source B is a secondary source. Another reason would be that source B is a painting by a nazi artist, which was painted ten years after the putsch. This gives me a reason to question its reliability and accuracy. I say this because source B is a painting, and painting can be alter the event which it is describing to create a very one-sided view. On the other hand source A is an eyewitness account by an ex nazi party member on the events that took place on the night of the putsch. This gives me more confidence in believing that source A may be more accurate. However they are both biased in the way that they where produced by people who may be trying to create an impression of the people involved. For example source A was written by an ex nazi party member who left Germany in the 1930s. This leads me to question why he left Germany and why he was no longer member of the nazi party. It may be possible that author of source A disagreed with some of the nazi policies and decided to leave. If this were true this would give him a reason to try to create a bad impression of Hitler and the Nazis. On the other hand a nazi artist created source B at the time of the nazi rule of Germany. This simple fact leads me to believe that the nazi artist would try to create an impression that Hitler was great and that at the time of the putsch he only wanted what he thought was best for Germany.
My conclusion is that it is easy to believe that source A is more reliable due to the fact that source B looks more like a artists a temped to justify nazi activities.
Question 3)
Source C and D are both useful in different ways. I say this because they are both different type of sources for example Source C is a table of the bill given to the nazis and D is a is written extract of Hitler speech.
Source C is a bill sent to the nazi party by the owner of the Burgerbraukeller. This is useful because it gives us an idea of how many people was there that night, and also gives us an idea of the way the people there behaved. From source C you can learn that on 15th November 1923 at the Burgerbraukeller there were 800 meals and 2372 pints of beer consumed. These figures give an idea of how many meals and pints of beer were consumed by approximately how many people. Therefore this tells me that a lot of alcohol was drunk because according to source D the hall was "occupied by 600 heavily armed men". This indicates that a lot of the people including Hitler and his men were drunk therefore many of them were not thinking straight. Also from source A you can learn that many things were broken: such as: 98 chairs, 143 tankards, 80 glasses and 2 music stands. This could be a result of the commotion described in source A. Or this may be the outcome of all the beer consumed by the people at the Burgerbraukeler that night. From source C it is also evident that 148 sets of cutlery were stolen this gives an idea of the type of people the Nazis were.
Source D is an extract from Hitler speech at the Burgerbraukeller; this source is useful because it give as an impression of the type of things Hitler was thinking when he was giving this speech. When Hitler was given this speech he was mostly lying because he wanted to make believe something that he hoped was true for example Hitler said, "the November Criminals and the Reich President are declared removed" He also said "troops and police are marching on the city under the swastika." An explanation for Hitler's lies and exaggeration may be that he was trying to convince the people that every one was on he's side and it was the right thing to do. Hitler thought that by doing this he would get the crowed to join he's party voluntarily.
Overall I find that source C is more helpful than source D because it gives precise information and it is easy to interpret.
Question 4)
Sources F, G, and H are very useful and interesting sources, I say this because through analysing all three of these sources I am able to suggests that they all put across three different points of view. From looking at source F I am able to suggest that it is a piece of propaganda written by the Nazi party in a bid to ensure that Hitler was depicted by the public as a brave and courageous man who even though was in pain was prepared to sacrifice his well being for the sake of others. By dong this the writer aims to make the readers see Hitler in a positive light so that when it was time for them to support him they would.
Source G a source that disagrees completely with source F, however what must be taken into account is that it was written by an anti nazi (social democrat) writer and this was done so 13 years after the event took place. The evidence provided by this source allows the reader to perhaps conclude that Hitler was a coward who only cared about himself. The words: "Hitler flung himself to the ground" and "he sprained his arm, but this did not prevent him from running" allow us to come to this view.
The evidence provided by source H lies in between sources F and G as it tries to give a clear and non-biased account of what happened. As a result it takes into account his attributes and capabilities as a soldier.
After closely analysing these sources I am able to confirm that sources F and G disagree with each other. One of them is written with the objective of praising Hitler whilst the other was produced for the sake of criticising him. On the other hand source H is clearly a more balanced piece of information that has been constructed to for the sake of strictly retelling the events. However when reading the source one must take into account that although it was written several decades after it was written b a non biased British historian.
Question 5
Source I is a photograph of Hitler with general Ludendorff a highly regarded war hero. The picture puts them in the centre suggesting that amongst important people Hitler is very highly situated and it suggests that although Hitler was only a corporal he had very strong links with the leaders. In effect the picture leads us to suggest that even though he is going on trial he has the backing of key figures of society.
Source J is an extract of a statement made by Hitler whilst n trial. In this speech he is trying to justify his actions by suggesting that he did them for the good of the nation. By mentioning the nation he is highlighting that although he is talking to the court he is in fact addressing the whole nation, he employs this tactic mainly to create a patriotic mood that in effect will ensure that the general public backs him. When he says, "the eternal court of history will judge us criminals" he reveals that even if is present trial is not a success ah history evolves the German people will forgive him and to him that is what is important. The main aim of Hitler in this speech is to attract the public as well as the media. It is due to this that he uses very strong and emotional language when putting is views across. In my opinion source J is very effective because it provides a clear picture of how Hitler used the trial as a tool to emphasize that he had a good character and that his actions were not for his own benefit but for that of the German people.
Question 6
"THE EVENTS IN MUNICH OF 8/9 NOVEMBER 1923 GREATLY INCREASED THE INFLUENCE OF HITLER AND THE NAZI PARTY IN GERMANY."
The events of 1923 were important learning curb for Hitler and his Nazi dream of a strong and powerful Germany. Hitler planned to begin his National Revolution on the 91b of November 1923 by marching directly into Munich and taking the city by force. When he marched on the city, be met resistance from the police and fighting broke out between the 2 groups. Hitler and his men were beaten badly and Hitler himself was injured. Hitler's great Munich Putsch was a complete failure and to some point, a humiliation for the Nazi's. This failure, at first, put Hitler in a very bad position but somehow Hitler managed to turn this failure into a success.
Hitler's Putsch had not only failed, but it had put Hitler in jail. The Putsch couldn't have given Hitler any positive press because it went so badly wrong. Hitler was now the political joke of Germany and so was the Nazi party. In any other circumstances, this would have reduced Hitler's influence on Germany but Hitler s tenacious attitude toward his German goals allowed him to make the very best of a bad situation, and transform it into a publicity opportunity.
We know that Hitler was highly charged up on the night before the Putsch on the 81b of November 1923. Source A describes the events on this evening. The source states bow Hitler and his men burst in to the Burgerbraukeller, a local beer hall, and prepared to brief the drinkers and political activists on what was happening. We hear how he and his men burst into the ha11 and demanded silence and attention. We hear that in the silence, Hitler could be heard 'Breathing hard'. The source describes and gives the impression that Hitler was running on adrenaline and was obviously passionately charged before during and most importantly after the putsch had failed so badly. Sources like this allow us to observe the motivation for Hitler's conquest.
Even though the Putsch had failed, the implications the Putsch helped Hitler to no end. Because of his involvement in the Putsch, Hitler faced a prison sentence from the Weimar government. This was the same government Hitler had accused of being the 'November criminals' during his Beer hall speech. Hitler could have given up his beliefs but instead be cleverly used his mal to broadcast his ideas throughout the land and establish himself and build his public appearance and their perception of him. This was Hitler's 1st exposure to the masses. Ire knew this and made sure be used the international coverage of his trial to appeal to his nation. Source J is a statement made by Hitler during his trial. He accuses the government of 'High treason' for losing the war for Germany. He exploits the patriotic side of the Germans by saying be wanted the best for his 'German people' and that he would 'Fight and die' for his 'Fatherland'. Soon Hitler had household recognition and had won over the court so much so that they allowed him to talk and express himself. In some ways, the failure of the Putsch was the most successfu1thing that could have happened. If the Putsch had been a success, Hitler would have power, but most people wouldn't have known anything about him and thus would have questioned and doubted his right to authority.
Although be had used the failure of the putsch to his advantage, Hitler had pulled of somewhat of a 'Great Escape'. Hitler knew that he couldn't afford to make any more errors like that if he was to accomplish his dream of a Nazi Germany. This is why Hitler made it a point to learn from the mistakes he made during the Putsch and in my opinion, Hider came out of the Putsch a wiser man. Source K shows Hider realised that be would have to 'pursue a new policy' to gain control of Germany. The source indicates that Hitler's new plan was to enter the 'Reichstag' and by 'Out voting' the others to have ' A majority and after that Germany'. This shows that during Hitler's time in jail, be changed his fundamental beliefs on bow to gain power and as we now know, this change of political tactics won the prize of Germany for Hitler and the Nazi ' s. In source K, Hider also mentions using the 'Catholic and Marxist members' to enter the Reichstag. Hitler was always strictly a right wing fascist but in jail he realised that he had to take advantage of the communist and socialist's positions in the Reichstag. This would leap frog him into power and show his true right wing colours when he no longer needed the help of his left wing. This shows that Hitler learnt how to manipulate other people to get what he needed and the stubborn Hitler of before the Putsch had learnt how to bend his rules to achieve what he wanted.
.
Nino Gomez
History Course Work The Beer hall Putsch
