Source C is another statement made by Van Der Lubbe at his trial on 23rd November, 1933. His statement here remains unchanged. He again says, “I can only repeat that I set fire to the Reich Stag all by myself.” The statement made by him shows that Van der Lubbe supported Communist ideologies even after leaving the Communist party in 1929. This source shows that Van der Lubbe was responsible for causing the Reich Stag fire since he accepts this fact himself at his trial. Since this source again is a first person account, it is clear that it holds Van der Lubbe guilty for starting the fire.
Source D is an account of Rudolf Diels who was the head of the Prussian police. This account was written by him after World War II. The source describes the events during the period when the Reich Stag was on fire. He writes that Van der Lubbe was interrogated by his department and physically it looked as if he had done a tremendous task of arson. The source states that there was a wild triumphant gleam on his face which showed the sense of achievement inside him. The source also states that Van der Lubbe made voluntary confessions and his previous background made people believe that he was responsible for setting fire to the building. Van der Lubbe claimed that he set fire to the chambers using a firelighter during his interrogation and there is evidence that the Reich Stag officials had overpowered him while he was running with his burning shirt. Although the writer of this source felt that Van der Lubbe was a maniac and had thus caused the war, Hitler thought that his view was ‘childish’ since this was a big event that would help him gain more support in the upcoming elections. Since the guilty was a former member of the Communist party, Hitler left no stone unturned in proving to the people that this was the work of the Communists who used Van der Lubbe to set the Reich Stag on fire. He also ordered, “Every Communist official will be shot where he is found.” His officials such as Goering supported his views and planned an attack on the Communists. Therefore, this source also shows that Marius van Der Lubbe was responsible for the fire.
After interpreting the sources B, C and D, it can be concluded that they mostly show that Marius Van der Lubbe caused the fire. Although source D does not agree completely with this fact, there is great evidence in the source which shows that Van der Lubbe was guilty.
Q3. Study sources E and F.
To what extent do these sources support the view that the Reich Stag Fire enabled the Nazis to eliminate the Communist opposition? Use other sources and explain your answer.
Ans. Sources E and F describe the aftermath of the Reich Stag Fire which broke out in the Assembly Hall of the Reich Stag building on 27th February 933. A former Communist supporter called Marinus Van der Lubbe was found at the site and he confessed to have set the building on fire. The Nazis used this as evidence against their communist opposition for the upcoming elections. Hitler was a man with extremist ideologies and had great hatred for Communism. After the incident of the Reich Stag Fire, Hitler and the Nazis started an outcry against the communist party so that they would achieve support of the Germans.
Source E is a cartoon published by a British magazine on 8th march 1933 which was also the day of the German elections. This source depicts Hitler and the president of Germany at that time, Hindenburg in roman robes. Hitler is shown holding a stick with the ‘swastika’ on it which was a symbol of the Nazis. The background has a picture of the Reich Stag building which was allegedly set on fire by a communist supporter. The title of this cartoon is “THE RED PERIL” in which the “Red” stands for communists who were seen as a peril by both the Germans and the British. The British also wanted to wipe out communism as they saw it as a threat to the development of the world. The two countries wanted to establish a good relationship since the Nazis as well as the British were fighting against communism. The cartoon shows Hindenburg telling Hitler, “This is a heaven sent opportunity, my lad. If you can’t be a dictator now, you will never be.” Hindenburg in 1933 was a very old man and he knew that after him only the Nazis or the communists would control Germany.. He knew that the main opposition for the Nazis were the communists. Therefore, he is shown telling Hitler that he is the one man capable of controlling the whole of Germany and preventing it from becoming a communist nation. Hindenburg supported Hitler and thus he felt that the Reich Stag Fire was the biggest turning point for the Nazis. The source is from a British magazine which shows that the British knew what was going on in the minds of Hindenburg and Hitler because the Nazi party was the only capable party under the leadership of Hitler who would help in stamping out communism from the country. This source very clearly supports the view that the Nazis could eliminate the communists after the incident of the Reich Stag fire.
The election leaflet shown in source F shows the hatred that Hitler and the Nazis had for communists in Germany. This leaflet was published just before the elections that were to be held on 5th March 1933. The headline says “THE REICHSTAG IN FLAMES” in capital letters because it was the most recent evidence that the Nazis had to gain support of the German people. At that time, Hitler’s main opposition was coming from the communist party and he wanted to completely crush them. This leaflet is thus targeted at the communists. The line, “Farmers’ houses burnt down” refers to the roots of communism in Russia where according to the collectivization rule all farmers were made to work till they met the target produce set by the Russian government. If they failed to do so, their houses were burnt down and their land and animals were taken away. The Nazis used this against communists to get the support of the farmers who at first didn’t support the Nazis when the party had been founded in 1919. Along with the communists, the Nazis also cried foul against the Social Democrats who supported communism. They felt that the fate of Germans would be like the Russians who were shot if they did not follow the policies of the government. The leaflet also states that all the Germans must join the outcry against communism otherwise the whole country would suffer under the communists. This source supports the view firmly that after the Reich Stag Fire, the Nazis were able to eliminate the communist opposition to a great extent because finally the Nazis won the election after defeating the communist party.
Q4. Study source G.
How reliable is this account? Explain your answer.
Ans. Many observers reacted to the burning of the Reich Stag building on 27th September 1933. Some of them blamed the Communists for causing the fire and some thought that it was the handiwork of the Nazis so as to gain the support of the German people. People who thought that the fire was caused by the Nazis thought that the main people behind it were Hitler's leaders such as Dr.Goebbels, Herman Goering and Karl Ernst. However, it is still not clear who caused the Reich Stag fire because many of the facts generated by the writers contradict each other making it difficult for the readers to carve out a clear picture.
Source G is an account written by a Jew named Victor Klemperer in the form of a diary entry on 10th march, 1933. This was many days after the Reich Stag fire and he wrote this diary entry as a first person account because he himself had been at the site of the burning Reich Stag building. In the source he seems to be accusing Hitler and supporting the communists. He talks about the speeches made by Hitler after the fire aimed at gaining support from the Germans for the upcoming elections. He writes, “Hitler’s tone was unctuous, bawling, truly bawling, of a priest” which shows that he did not like Hitler. This is with reference to the rally held by Hitler in Koenigsberg on 4th march after the incident had occurred.
If one can trace down the history of Victor Klemperer, it can be found out that he worked as a physician for Lenin who was a communist leader of Russia. Therefore, one can think that Klemperer may be a communist or have communist links. Klemperer was also made to live in a Jew house and was later deported for being a Jew. Therefore, it is possible that out of hatred for Hitler and his party, he may have stated all this against the conclusion made then that the fire was caused by communists. However, after reading the other sources and comparing them to this, his account of the election rallies held by Hitler were quite predictable since the fire had given Hitler the opportunity to gain the trust of the Germans. The sources when compared to this make the readers think the Reich Stag fire was pre-planned by the Nazis so that their main opponents who were the Communists could be blamed.
Therefore, as a conclusion, it can be said that this source is not very reliable seeing the history of the writer of this source who was a person with communist links which could have caused his views to be biased. It is also confusing for the reader as some of the facts about the rallies were predictable from Hitler after the incident of the Reich Stag fire that would give him the full opportunity to attack the communists.
Q5. Study Source H and I.
How useful are these sources to a historian studying the role of Storm Troopers (SA) in the Reich Stag fire? Use contextual knowledge for explanation.
Ans. Sources H and I are accounts of two Germans who were present at the time when the German Reich Stag was set on fire. The sources talk about the SA or the Sturmabteilung set up by Adolf Hitler in 1923 to protect the Nazi party. It was a big organization that was known as the ‘brownshirts’ by the German people. They would normally engage themselves in brutal fights on the streets and had a reputation of terrorizing people.
The source H has been written in 1956 much after the end of the Second World War and it gives a completely different picture of the cause of the Reich Stag fire and about the people behind it. Martin Sommerfeldt who was a minister of the Interior’s press officer in 1933 wrote in his account that neither the communists nor the propaganda chief of the Nazis, Herman Goering could be blamed for the arson. He states the Dr.Goebbels was the person behind the fire so that his election campaign against the communists would become stronger. The Nazi soldiers or the Storm Troopers as they were called started the fire in the Assembly Hall of the Reich Stag building but they were all shot by the SS commandoes in Berlin. Martin also writes that Karl Ernst who was the chief of the Berlin Stormtroopers, reported it to him along with the police chief Dr.Diels. However, he also writes that Ernst hated Goebbels and thus he reported this. It shows that even though he knew the consequences of such an act, he did not fear Hitler and went on to tell the writer of this source the actual details of the Reich Stag fire. This source is useful in telling a historian about the role of the Stormtroopers in causing the Reich Stag fire because the writer highlights the fact that there were reports of the arsonists being the Stormtroopers themselves who may have done so with commands from a higher authority in the Nazi party. It is also confirmed by two very important people in the Nazi party who were not really supportive of Nazism.
Source I is a confession of Karl Ernst which was published by the German communists in 1934 after he was killed by Hitler in the Night of the Long Knives. He stated, “I declare that on February 27, 1933 I and two SA men set fire to the Reich Stag. This source gives evidences that the fire was not caused by the communists but by the Nazis to win the upcoming elections on 8th March 1933. However, the confession of Ernst in this source can be linked to his reference in source H where he reported the fact that the Nazis had set fire to the Reich Stag immediately after performing the task. He also confessed that they had ‘used’ Van der Lubbe to help them achieve their objective so that the people would think that this was the work of the communists and turn against them. Karl Ernst also stated in his confession that he had done the deed because he thought that he was ‘serving’ the Fuhrer. However, this source doesn’t completely agree with the facts of source H. source H states that there were 10 SA men who had set fire to the Reich Stag building whereas in his confession, Ernst states that only two other men and himself had done the work. The source also says that they used Van der Lubbe so that he would ‘blunder’ about but in source H which is an account written by the Minister, there is no reference to Van der Lubbe or the fact that he had confessed to the German police.
After reading and comparing the two sources, it can be said that they are not useful to a historian because of the contrasting fact generation of the two writers although they agree about the fact that the people behind the fire were the Nazi Stormtroopers.
Q6. Study sources J and K
Do these sources prove that Goering was telling lies? Explain your answer.
Ans. Herman Goering was Hitler’s right hand man. He was the Prussian minister of the Interior and he was taking care of all the police affairs. Some of the given sources suggest that Goering was involved in the arson of the German Reichstag. It is known that there was a passage leading to the Reichstag from Goering’s house through source I. Also in that source, his own friend Karl Ernst has confessed that they used the passage to reach the Reichstag on the night of the fire. According to the source A which is written by one of the observers, Goering had a “flushed” expression on his face and seemed excited about the fire. However, the Interior’s press officer Sommerfeldt states in source H that the fire was not caused by the communists or Herman Goering but by Dr.Goebbels.
Looking at the main sources to be studied for this question, source J is a compilation of the statements made by Franz Halder who was the commander- in- chief of the German army between 1938 and 1942 and Herman Goering himself at their trials in Nuremberg, Germany in 1946. The statement made by Halder is at the time when he was not the commander- in- chief and was attending a luncheon on Hitler’s birthday. He said, “I heard with my own ears when Goering interrupted the conversation and shouted: The only one who knows about the Reichstag is I, because I set it on fire!” Contrary to this, in the second statement made by Goering himself at the Nuremburg trials of 1946, he states that he did not cause the Reichstag fire and that he would have never used the inconvenient way of setting the Reichstag on fire to blame the communists. The statement made by Halder is not completely reliable since he may have revenge in mind after he was removed from his post by Hitler during the war in 1942. The statement made by Goering too is not completely reliable since he was the main accused and he was trying to defend himself till his trial. Therefore, source J cannot be used to judge if Goering was telling lies.
Source K is a description of “the brown book on the Reichstag fire and Hitler’s terror.” The book was published in 1933 in Switzerland under the editorship of Willi Munzenberg. The book had German émigrés proving the fact that the Reichstag fire was caused by the Nazis themselves in a secret operation that was run by the SA leader Herman Goering. However, the author of this book was the leader of the German communist party which was the main opponent of the Nazi party. Therefore, it can be said that he would always write something blaming the Nazis. In the same source, it is written that everyone abroad was convinced that the Nazis had set fire to the Reichstag building. Although the source suggests this, there are no statistics to prove it and thus it cannot be used as an evidence to show that Goering was telling lies.
After reading both the sources, there isn’t enough evidence to show that Goering was telling lies and therefore in conclusion I would say that there is no solid proof that Goering was lying.
