Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Chronology of Boxed Section March 1936Rhineland July 1936 - 39 Spain March 1938Anschluss October 1938Munich 1920s – 1939Overview (8 marker) Issues:Factors.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Chronology of Boxed Section March 1936Rhineland July 1936 - 39 Spain March 1938Anschluss October 1938Munich 1920s – 1939Overview (8 marker) Issues:Factors."— Presentation transcript:

1 Chronology of Boxed Section March 1936Rhineland July Spain March 1938Anschluss October 1938Munich 1920s – 1939Overview (8 marker) Issues:Factors shaping Government reaction to events i.e. the use of appeasement -political - economic - military -public opinion - dilemmas (public and private concerns of the government at the time which influenced how they dealt with issues at the time

2 What happened?Government reactionPublic opinion Munich Sept April 1938, Hitler finalised plans to smash Czechoslovakia Henlein, Sudeten Nazi leader increases demands for autonomy for Sudeten Germans Chamberlain intervened personally by meeting Hitler at Berchtesgaden, Bad Godesberg and finally Munich on 29/30 Sept. Br., Fr., Ger. and Italy agreed to Czechoslovakia giving up the Sudetenland to Germany. German troops entered Sudetenland on 1 Oct. Chamberlain determined to avoid war at all costs This was more important than defending a democratic country Not willing to make commitments to Czechoslovakia Told Benes Either accept Munich or face Hitler alone Chamberlain feared German bombing of London + prepared for war Munich brought peace for our time, according to Chamberlain Immediate post-Munich reaction was one of relief that war had been avoided Chamberlain hailed as returning hero Hitler had signed agreement never to go to war with Britain again. However, in aftermath of Munich, growing concern emerged. Czechoslovakia had been abandoned; Hitler had got what he wanted Churchill: We have suffered a total and unmitigated defeat.

3 It was generally accepted that Czechoslovakia was one of the success stories of the 1919 peace settlement. It had become a strong, proud and free state in the middle of Europe and had been give a some security by a system of military alliances with France and Russia. Since 1935, its leader was President Edward Benes. Chamberlain had already decided, possibly before the end of August, that only his personal intervention could drag Europe back from the brink of war. He said, 'I thought of a plan, so unconventional, it took Halifax's breath away'. His plan was to fly to Germany to talk to Hitler, and on 13th September, he informed Hitler: 'In view of the increasingly critical situation I propose to come over at once to see you with a view of trying to find a peaceful solution.'

4 On 27th September, Chamberlain made a famous wireless speech to the British public, saying: 'How horrible, fantastic, incredible it is that we should be digging trenches and trying on gas masks here because of a quarrel in a far away country between people of whom we know nothing.' Shortly after the Munich Agreement had been signed by the four powers, its terms were implemented as agreed, with Czechoslovakia being partially broken up. Germany occupied the Sudetenland in October 1938 in what was to be a first instalment on the rest of Czechoslovakia.

5 THE LIMIT Herren Hitler and Henlein to Dr Benes – There! Now we can all chat together comfortably. Source C: a cartoon printed in Punch on September 14th 1938

6 Step 1 - Immediate Context Source refers to the issues in debate during the attempts by the Nazis to force the Czech state to give up the Sudetenland. Since success of the Anschluss in March 1938 the Nazis had pushed further their demands for self-determination for German speakers by claiming territory in the Czech state to be given freedom. In May 1938 this had nearly caused a war. The Czech state had alliances with France and France with Britain. A rumoured attack by the Nazis in May after the Czech leader had refused futher concessions to Sudeten Nazis leader Henlein (Karlsbad Decrees) had forced British action to warn off Hitler. Since May the issue had rumbled on and become of international concern. Both Britain and France used pressure to persuade the Czechs to resolve the issue- this had continued throughout the summer of 1938 – Source refers to the issues in debate during the attempts by the Nazis to force the Czech state to give up the Sudetenland. Since success of the Anschluss in March 1938 the Nazis had pushed further their demands for self-determination for German speakers by claiming territory in the Czech state to be given freedom. In May 1938 this had nearly caused a war. The Czech state had alliances with France and France with Britain. A rumoured attack by the Nazis in May after the Czech leader had refused futher concessions to Sudeten Nazis leader Henlein (Karlsbad Decrees) had forced British action to warn off Hitler. Since May the issue had rumbled on and become of international concern. Both Britain and France used pressure to persuade the Czechs to resolve the issue- this had continued throughout the summer of 1938 –

7 Step 2 – The Big Picture Drawn in the wake of continued demands by the Nazis, the cartoon offers a fairly critical view of the role of Hitler Pushing the Czech state over the edge despite concessions by the Czech leader Benes. (Benes had been forced to accept many concessions) It does capture the dilemma Benes is in - unable to satisfy Henlein or Hitler -this is precisely what Hitler had in mind -only the end of the Czech state would do (over the edge) He highlights many of the more critical views at the time of the relations between Germany and the Czech state. Overall it is a fairly critical view of the wisdom of appeasing Hitler -i.e.. he will push for more Drawn in the wake of continued demands by the Nazis, the cartoon offers a fairly critical view of the role of Hitler Pushing the Czech state over the edge despite concessions by the Czech leader Benes. (Benes had been forced to accept many concessions) It does capture the dilemma Benes is in - unable to satisfy Henlein or Hitler -this is precisely what Hitler had in mind -only the end of the Czech state would do (over the edge) He highlights many of the more critical views at the time of the relations between Germany and the Czech state. Overall it is a fairly critical view of the wisdom of appeasing Hitler -i.e.. he will push for more

8 THE LIMIT

9 Hitler Henlein Hitler /Henlein – the smiling partners Reference to the role played by Hitler - pushing on Henlein from Germany -manipulating trouble and smiles hide ulterior motives i.e. to push to the limit and destroy the Czech state

10 Benes Portrayed as anxious, bullied This was accurate with hindsight

11 Source C: a cartoon printed in Punch on September 14th 1938 THE LIMIT Herren Hitler and Henlein to Dr Benes – There! Now we can all chat together comfortably. Source D: extract from a speech by Neville Chamberlain in the House of Commons, 3rd October The real triumph is that it has shown the representatives of four great powers can find it possible to agree on a way of carrying out a difficult and delicate operation by discussion instead of force of arms. Ever since I assumed my present office my main purpose has been to work for the pacification of Europe, for the removal of those suspicions and those animosities which have so long poisoned the air. The path which leads to appeasement is long and bristles with obstacles. The question of Czechoslovakia is the latest and perhaps the most dangerous. Now that we have got past it, I feel that it may be possible to make further progress along the road to sanity. 4. Compare the views of Sources C and D about the Sudeten crisis. 5

12 Compare the content overall and in detail.

13 In what ways and for what reasons do Sources C and D differ over the policy of appeasement? What is the question asking you to do? Set immediate context of sources - give a few sentences to put issue/event in context with our Paper 2 course Identify the basic difference in views of each source towards the policy - in a nutshell - i.e. the big picture - what is the overall difference! ! Back this up by selecting points from each source and compare/evaluate using terms such as 'whereas' Explain possible reasons for differences by referring to origin/authorship/purpose using recall What is the question asking you to do? Set immediate context of sources - give a few sentences to put issue/event in context with our Paper 2 course Identify the basic difference in views of each source towards the policy - in a nutshell - i.e. the big picture - what is the overall difference! ! Back this up by selecting points from each source and compare/evaluate using terms such as 'whereas' Explain possible reasons for differences by referring to origin/authorship/purpose using recall

14 Step 1 –The Immediate Context Both are contemporary sources from the time of the Czech crisis Source C is from the day before Chamberlains first flight to Germany at the height of the fear of war …while D is after the Munich agreement which was believed to have solved the crisis Both are contemporary sources from the time of the Czech crisis Source C is from the day before Chamberlains first flight to Germany at the height of the fear of war …while D is after the Munich agreement which was believed to have solved the crisis

15 Step 2- Big Picture Sources offer opposing views of the methods and potential dangers posed by Hitler's actions in Europe. Source C appears fairly critical of the role of Hitler and is negative about the prospect of peace through using concessions (i.e.. appeasing) …whereas in D, Chamberlain, the main figure in appeasing Hitler, offers a positive, optimistic view of the future and of the method of using negotiation/ concession to reach solutions/compromise. Sources offer opposing views of the methods and potential dangers posed by Hitler's actions in Europe. Source C appears fairly critical of the role of Hitler and is negative about the prospect of peace through using concessions (i.e.. appeasing) …whereas in D, Chamberlain, the main figure in appeasing Hitler, offers a positive, optimistic view of the future and of the method of using negotiation/ concession to reach solutions/compromise.

16 Notice that the question has parts: In what ways and for what reasons.. 1. In what ways do C and D differ over the policy of appeasement? 1. Only Hitler /Henlein happy at the concessions; Benes anxious 2. Hitler a manipulating bully 3. Dark picture of potential consequences 4. Czechoslovakia needs to be supported i.e. sympathy for Czech plight 1. Everyone should be happy and a 'triumph' achieved 2. Concessions discussed /negotiation 3. Pacification/ danger passed 4. Czechoslovakia has seen sense and given way i.e. another legitimate grievance of Versailles dealt with!

17 2. For what reasons do C and D differ over the policy of appeasement? Contemporary source which reflects relief that war averted after Munich settlement Chamberlain -main advocate/drive behind the policy of appeasement To justify/defend/encourage support for Govt. policy- pro- appeasement and a view supported by the majority at the time ie. in the initial period after Munich...press/public opinion similar in their tone of support/admiration of the common sense approach of appeasement Contemporary source which reflects worry over Hitlers intentions before the first flight of Chamberlain Punch -critical of Govt. policy To warn that the dangers/ concessions will not solve the crisis nor deal with the underlying threat Hitler poses -anti-appeasement view BUT a minority view at the time (save David Low/Eden/Churchill and a few others)

18 Conclusion The sources clearly disagree in their views of the danger Hitler poses to Europe Source C warns that Hitler should not be bought off Source D defends this method of dealing with Germany. The sources clearly disagree over the likely success of appeasing Hitler

19 Selects some evidence from one or both sources for positive use to illustrate the comparison. 1-2Selects some evidence from one or both sources for positive use to illustrate the comparison. 3-4Selects relevant evidence from both sources and makes a basic comparison in terms of the question. 5Selects relevant evidence from both sources and compares them thoroughly to reach an appropriate conclusion.


Download ppt "Chronology of Boxed Section March 1936Rhineland July 1936 - 39 Spain March 1938Anschluss October 1938Munich 1920s – 1939Overview (8 marker) Issues:Factors."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google