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

The Munich Putsch Sources Questions

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

The Munich Putsch 1) Source A is an eyewitness account of the armed siege by Hitler and his forces into a large beer hall call the Burgerbraukeller on the 8th of November 1923. It is possible that the actual events might not completely be stated since the writer was a member of the Nazi party at this time. We learn of the precise timing of the incursion. Hitler times it to the minute with complete perfection, the moment his watch hit 8:30, hundreds of heavily armed personnel storm into the building, blocking all means of escape and completely dominating the population of the Hall. This tells us of Hitler's radical way of enforcing his influence amongst crowds using force and oppressive control. When his men move in, it creates an element of chaos and commotion amongst the patrons. But it states that Hitler simply moved through and fired his pistol to make people silent at once, and once they were silent, it says that they could even hear Hitler breathing heavily, which must mean that this was something he was determined to do. ...read more.

Middle

A large amount of property and furniture was broken, which may very well describe the ferocity in which the guards attained control of the hall; either that or the large amount of alcohol consumed may have caused riotous tendencies. And 148 sets of cutlery stolen, perhaps this was due to the lack of wealth of the patrons? I believe the speech to be secondary to the statistics in the interpretation of what happened in the Burgerbraukeller in 1923. 4) Sources F, G and H all give a description of what happened in Munich of 9 November 1934. The first difference that comes to mind is that sources F and G conflict on Hitler's heroism at the event, yet source H remains neutral. Source F, a biography of Hitler written by the Nazi party in 1934, seems to portray Hitler as a hero. It says that during a march, he linked arms with a man who was shot and flung up into the air, damaging Hitler's arm in the process. However he still manages to attempt to save a supposedly injured boy. However, in source G, written by a member of the German SDP, Hitler had wanted to flee before the march, however, he was convinced by General Ludendorff that no uniformed German would fire upon a hero of the first world war. ...read more.

Conclusion

A man shouting absurd political views in the middle of a public place is seldom taken seriously. It was pretty much the same here only Hitler had 600 armed men to help him out which meant he ended up in jail afterwards and did nothing really to increase support for the Nazi party, and possibly just gave his opposition the opportunity to condemn him further. It cost the Nazi party a fair amount with all the damage it caused while trying to incite armed uprising. We can see this in the bill for the damage to the bar in source C. Hitler himself pointed out in source K that he should change his approach to outvoting Marxist and Catholic parties instead of outgunning them, this way he can gain support of the majority instead of the fear. This would serve to be more stable in the long term if he was serious about gaining power in Germany, more violence would probably not alleviate the starvation and chaos in Germany at this time. It was also dangerous to him as he was injured and almost killed during the march on Munich where he was just a foot or so away from being shot dead, which he no doubt would have become if he hadn't changed his tactics. ...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. Munich Putsch 1923 - Sources Questions

    Question 2 Putsch- Armed revolution, a violent attempt to overthrow the government, illegal road to power. In November 1923, Hitler had finally achieved strength that he needed to overthrow the Weimar Republic. He wanted to do this because of the hatred that he had for them after signing the Treaty

  2. Holocaust Sources Questions

    We have to take into account this and also the fact that the film may have been dramatised for a modern film audience. The source shows us the views of common Germans such as the young girls in the street, and up the political ladder as far as a general

  1. The Final Solution - Sources Questions

    From this source information can be extracted to support the findings of other, reliable, sources. It is because of this that I think this source is useful. Question 5 Examine Sources 11-14 a) In what way were the Jews represented in in these sources?

  2. The Munich Putsch, November 1923 The Munich Putsch (arms revolt or coup) was an ...

    With this following, he developed and became the leader of a revolutionary wing of the Nazi party. Strasser was a socialist and opposed many of Hitler's views including his policy of trying to win the support of Germany's major industrialists.

  1. The Beer Hall Putsch Sources Questions

    not have only been by the nazis and could have been used earlier on in the night and it does not show what damage was caused. 4. Source F is a biography published by the nazi party in Germany in 1934. This describes Hitler closing the ranks of the lines.

  2. Kristallnacht Sources Questions

    David Buffman's eyewitness account proves that the Nazi propaganda that this was a 'spontaneous' reaction by the people to the 'cowardly' murder of Von Roth was not the case. Unlike Source B it does include information about the transportation of Jews to concentration camps.

  1. The Munich Putsch 1923 - source related study.

    retrieved thirteen years after the event in which he or she could have forgotten. The witness could lie or be biased because he or she might want Hitler to look bad, as he does in Konrad Heidens witness account. Witnesses can get confused over long periods of time if they

  2. Holocaust - Source related questions.

    Firstly, because the public opinion could have just changed. Secondly, and more likely, is that people were now happier with the harsher treatment of the Jews and now fell into the indifference category. The approval rate however stayed the same from 1939-42.

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