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

To what extent is the account of the police chief in Source A supported by Van de Lubbes confession is Source B?

Extracts from this document...


Question 1 Study Sources A and B To what extent is the account of the police chief in Source A supported by Van de Lubbes confession is Source B? Explain you answer. Source A is an account by Rudolf Diels written after the Second World War. Rudolf Diels was the head of the Prussian political police. Source B is a confession Van de Lubbe made at his trial in 1933. In Source B Van de Lubbe makes the statement "I set fire to the Reichstag all by myself". He is taking all the blame for setting fire to the Reichstag, he clearly states that contrary to what some believed, he acted alone, without help from any other people. ...read more.


Diels explains how easy it would have been for Van de Lubbe to set fire to the Reichstag. Diels believed Van de Lubbe could have "rushed through the big corridors with his burning shirt which he had used as a torch to start more fires", this explanation sounds very believable. Diels describes Van de Lubbe as a "madman"; a "madman" may quite happily set fire to the Reichstag. However there are also a lot of ways in which source A is not supported by Van de Lubbe's confession in Source B. Diels tells us that the night of the fire he interviewed Van de Lubbe and found several "communists pamphlets". This suggests he was a supporter of the communists. ...read more.


Hitler uses the word "criminals" which is the plural of "criminal" so according to Hitler there was more than one person behind this crime. In conclusion, to a certain extent the account of the police chief (Source A) does agree with Van de Lubbe's confession in Source B. Reasons why the sources agree include the fact that Van de Lubbe was exhausted and Van de Lubbe been described as a madman. However there are ways Source A is not supported by Source B. There is a lot of information in Source A that doesn't appear in Source B, such as details about exactly how Van de Lubbe may have committed the arson. Although Diels seems to believe Van de Lubbe, the quotes from Goering and Hitler suggest that the communists were responsible for the fire and that there was more than one person involved. History Reichstag Fire Coursework ...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. The Reichstag Fire-Coursework B

    I think it shows that Van der Lubbe couldn't have done this by himself because there was too much damage for one man to have had done and Van der Lubbe was also physically handicapped. Question 7: There are two interpretations of the Reichstag fire.

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

    Another point to remember is that this account was written after the Second World War, at least 12 years after the Reichstag fire, so his memory of the event might have blurred a bit, although he was the Head of Police and it is quite likely that he might have taken notes.

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

    Source G was evidence from Goering's trial at Nuremburg in 1946. Like Halder, Goering had nothing to lose after the war and Hitler's death, so his motive to lie to get him out of trouble at any cost was strong, especially since Halder had accused him of starting it previously.

  2. Holocaust - Source related questions.

    Support is harder to interpret because it is stated in the form of ignorance. "German citizen won and defended his ignorance". The public were not actively supporting the treatment of Jews but a passive attitude towards the situation could have been interpreted as ignorance.

  1. Modern World History Coursework - Reichstag Sourcework

    One of the greatest and most significant disagreements between the sources is that one is of British origin; the other is of Nazi German origin. This means that both sources are very unreliable and will show a great deal of bias and difference of perspective.

  2. Reichstag fire coursework assignments

    the communists, they also had helped him come to power, they were committed to the Nazi. The reason for not supporting the SA was because they were beginning to get unruly, it was interfering in the running of the country and the law courts.

  1. History Coursework – the Reichstag Fire

    On the other hand, the first account could be more reliable as it was written after the trial and the writer had time to reflect on the events, whereas sources written at the time would be written as the events were still happening and may not have included all the facts.

  2. Who was responsible for the Reichstag fire?

    Both sources clearly overview and outline the involvement of the Communist party in the Reichstag fire. The title of the cartoon in source C is "The Red Peril", being the red closely associated with the red army: the Soviets or the Communists.

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