1. (a) Study Source A.

How can you tell that this source is propaganda?Explain your answer, using details of the source. [4]

Level Descriptor MarksL1 Answers based on provenance

E.g. This source is a piece of propaganda as it is a Nazi poster.

1

L2 Valid inference (s) unsupportedAward 2 marks for weak inference unsupported, 3 marks for strong inference supported.

Weak inference

I can tell that this source is a piece of propaganda as it is trying to gain the votes of the Germans / not support the Jews/ it painted a negative picture of the Jews/Jews were the cause of Germany’s problems/

E.g. I can tell that this source is a piece of propaganda as it is trying to portray the Nazi Party as the Party that would eliminate Germany’s enemies/ Nazi Party will protect Germany / Life will be better with the Nazi Party.

Not accepted:1. To show that the Nazi Party was strong2. The Nazi Party will kill the Jews3. The Nazi Party will remove the Jews

2-3

L3 Valid inference(s) supported (evidence + explanation)

Weak inference supported - 3 marksstrong inference supported - 4 marksI can tell that this source is a piece of propaganda as it is trying to portray the Nazi Party as the Party that would eliminate Germany’s enemies. In the poster, the Nazi Party is seen to have killed a snake, which represents ‘Versailles’, ‘Communism’, ‘Corruption’, ‘Lies’, and the Jews, represented by the Star of David (3m). This suggests that Hitler would be able to get rid of the problems that Germany faced after World War One, after it was humiliated by the Treaty of Versailles. The Party is also able to eliminate the Jews, who were seen as the root of the German problems. (4m).

3-4

(b) Study Source B.

Are you surprised by this source?Explain your answer, using details of the source. [5]

Level Descriptor MarksL1 Surprised/not surprised based on source content/provenance

E.g. I’m surprised that Source B shows that a Jewish nurse received a note expressing care from a German soldier during Nazi rule. [1]

OR

E.g. I’m not surprised that Source B shows that a Jewish nurse received a note expressing care from a German soldier during Nazi rule. [1]

OR

Alternative answers.I am surprised/not surprised that . . .1. Hitler’s rule did not cause suffering to the people living in Germany.2. Germans and Jews did not have hard feelings towards one another.3. It was difficult for the German and the Jews to have a relationship4. The German soldier supported a Jew/treasured a Jew/appreciated the Jew5. The German had a good relationship with the Jew/not anti-Jew/not hated

Not accepted:1. The soldier and the nurse were in a relationship2. The soldier was not loyal to Hitler.3. The soldier wrote a heartfelt letter to the Jewish nurse (lifting)4. The soldier wrote something nice to the nurse.5. Soldier liked the Jew (lifting)6. The Jews were treated fairly (there’s more to it than this)7. Hitler’s rue caused suffering to the people in Germany

1

L2 Surprised/not surprised based on source content/provenance, supportedAward 2 marks for one side supported, 3 marks for 2 sides supported.

I’m surprised that Source B shows that a Jewish nurse received a note expressing care from a German soldier during Nazi rule. I know this because the source states ‘I will tell you just one thing, I would give you everything your heart desires./You are the woman I have loved over everything else. ’

AND/OR

2-3

I’m surprised/not surprised that Source B shows that a Jewish nurse received a note expressing care from a German soldier during Nazi rule. I know this because the source states ‘I will tell you just one thing, I would give you everything your heart desires. /You are the woman I have loved over everything else.’

It was difficult for the German and the Jews to have a relationship. I know this because the source states ‘I do not want to hear it, because to know too much may destroy happiness’. x-ref source E

L3 Not Surprised/Surprised explained by cross-reference to other sources or contextual knowledge

E.g. I’m surprised that Source B shows that a Jewish nurse received a note expressing care from a German soldier during Nazi rule. As contradicted by my contextual knowledge, during the Nazi regime, Hitler was very outward with his anti-Semitic policies, and there were a lot of propagandistic materials to instil hatred in the Germans against the Jews. [3] The negative ideas against the Jews was prevalent in Germany, as seen in Source E, where the crowds of Germans mistreated a Jew by putting a brick through her shop window even though the Jew was an old lady. It is therefore surprising that there are still Germans who cared for the Jew.[4]

OR

E.g. I’m not surprised that Source B shows that a Jewish nurse received a note expressing care from a German soldier during Nazi rule. This can be supported by Source E. There were still Germans who did not view all Jews in a negative light. This is seen from the autobiography of a Hitler Youth, a group known to be outwardly supportive of Hitler’s racial policies. For the Hitler Youth to be defending for the Jewish shop owner, it showed that he cared for her.

4-5

(c) Study Source C.

Is Source C useful as evidence that the Jews suffered under Hitler’s rule? Explain your answer, using details of the source. [6]

Level Descriptor MarksL1 Useful based on provenance/Describes, without answering the

questionAward 1 mark per undeveloped statement.

E.g. Source C is useful because it is a table showing the number of Jews in Germany.

1

L2 Useful based on content

E.g. Source C is useful in showing me that the Jews suffered under Hitler’s rule. As we could see from the table, during the period of Hitler’s rule, which is from 1933 to 1945, the number of Jews in Germany was decreasing from 503, 000 to 37, 000. This means that many of the Jews in Germany escaped or were even killed in Germany due to the harsh treatment given during Hitler’s rule.

2

L3 Limited in usefulness, due to incomplete information from the source

E.g.: Source C is limited in usefulness in showing me that the Jews suffered under Hitler’s rule. Although the table shows the number of Jews in Germany decreasing, it does not give the reason for its decrease. As we can see in both source B, the Jews still managed to live a relatively good life, as there were those who worked as nurses during Hitler’s rule. This goes to show that they did not suffer and the number of Jews decreasing in Germany could have been because of migration, as there were better opportunities outside Germany. Therefore I cannot say that Source C is useful in proving that the Jews suffered under Hitler’s rule.

3

L3 Usefulness based on provenance

It is from an Encycopedia = reliable

3

L4 Useful, based on cross reference/contextual knowledge

Award 5 marks for better developed answers, or use of contextual

4-5

knowledge.

E.g. Source C is useful in showing me that the Jews suffered under Hitler’s rule. As we could see from the table, during the period of Hitler’s rule, which was from 1933 to 1945, the number of Jews in Germany decreased from 503, 000 to 37, 000. This means that many of the Jews in Germany were killed in Germany due to the harsh treatment given during Hitler’s rule. It is supported by Source A, which depicts the Nazi’s stance against the Jews. Source A shows that the Jew, represented by the head of the snake, decorated by the star of David, the Jewish religious symbol, stabbed by a sword. Furthermore, through my contextual knowledge, I know that the Jews were subjected to the holocaust, where they were subjected to mass killings and torture in the concentration camps. Therefore, this reduction of Jews in Germany could have been attributed to the mass killings of the Jews in Germany. Since Source C is supported by Source A/contextual knowledge, it is reliable and therefore useful.

L5 Useful and not useful, based on cross reference and limitation of source due to incomplete information

E.g. Source C is useful in showing me that the Jews suffered under Hitler’s rule. As we could see from the table, during the period of Hitler’s rule, which was from 1933 to 1945, the number of Jews in Germany decreased from 503, 000 to 37, 000. This means that many of the Jews in Germany were killed in Germany due to the harsh treatment given during Hitler’s rule. It is supported by Source A, which depicts the Nazi’s stance against the Jews. Source A shows that the Jew, represented by the head of the snake, decorated by the star of David, the Jewish religious symbol, stabbed by a sword. Furthermore, through my contextual knowledge, I know that the Jews were subjected to the holocaust, where they were subjected to mass killings and torture in the concentration camps. Therefore, this reduction of Jews in Germany could have been attributed to the mass killings of the Jews in Germany.

Source C is limited in usefulness in showing me that the Jews suffered under Hitler’s rule. Although the table shows the number of Jews in Germany decreasing, it does not give the reason for its decrease. As we can see in source B, some Jews still had good relations with the Germans. This goes to show that not all Jews suffered under Hitler’s rule, and the number of Jews decreasing in Germany could have been because of migration, as there were better opportunities outside Germany.

6

(d) Study Sources D and E.

How similar are the sources? Explain your answer, using details of the source. [7]

Level Descriptor MarksL1 General Comments/invalid claims

Jews were not welcomed in Germany not supported by D.Jews had no say not supported by E

1

L2 Simple comparison on source provenance, topic & source type, etc.

E.g. Both sources are different as Source D is published in a children’s storybook while source E was an autobiography of a Hitler Youth.

OR

E.g. Both sources are similar one another as they are about the Jews.

OR

Both are similar as they are by Youths.

2

L3 Valid comparisons without support3 marks for 1 valid comparison4 marks for 2 valid comparisons

E.g. Source E is similar to Source D in showing that the Jews were treated harshly. / Hitler’s rule caused suffering

OR

E.g. Source E is different from Source D in showing that all Germans were against the Jews.

3-4

L4 Similar AND/OR difference with support5 marks for 1 valid supported comparison6 marks for 2 valid supported comparisons

E.g. Source E is similar to Source D in showing that the Jews were treated harshly. Source D states ‘Nobody would trade with Jews: you couldn’t get supplies, customers and you couldn’t get people to work for you. A Jew had no rights in Germany. Nazis could steal, rob and there

5-6

was no remedy for the Jews’. This means that the Jews were treated harshly as they were not protected against the negative treatments by the Germans. Source E states ‘Someone had put a brick through her shop window.’ This means that the Jews were treated harshly as their businesses were destroyed by the Germans.

AND/OR

E.g. Source E is different from Source D in showing that all Germans were against the Jews. Source D states ‘The mass of the German population was entirely happy and fully supportive of Hitler’s way of treating Jews.’ This means that everyone in Germany worked together to make life difficult for the Jews, suggesting that they were against the Jews. However, source E states ‘I was frightened for her’. This showed that there was a Hitler Youth who disagreed with the German prosecution of the Jews and felt deeply for the Jewish old lady who came under attack.

L5 Difference, based on tone

Sources D and E are different in tone. In source D, the Jewish schoolboy has a bitter tone. This is reflected by ‘Nazis could steal, rob and there was no remedy for the Jews. The mass of the German population was entirely happy and fully supportive of Hitler’s way of treating Jews.’ He saw no hope in living a decent life in Germany. In source E, the Hitler Youth had a worried tone. This can be seen from ‘I was frightened for her’. Though it was written by a Hitler Youth, it does not have the expected negative tone towards the Jews. Rather, he was concerned about how the Jewish lady would be as the Germans were attacking her and the shop.

7

(e) Study all sources.

To what extent do the sources show that Hitler’s rule caused suffering to the people living in Germany?

Use the sources and your knowledge to explain your answer. [8]

Level Descriptor MarksL1 Describe source / General Statements 1m

L2 Agree or disagree unsupported

Sources A, C, D and E show that Hitler’s rule caused suffering to the people living in Germany.

Sources A and B do not agree that Hitler’s rule caused suffering to the people living in Germany.

2m

L3 Agree or disagree supported by source contentAward 3 marks for each supported source – evidence has to be explained, up to a maximum of 4 marks

Sources A, C, D and E seem to show that Hitler’s rule caused suffering for the people living in Germany. In Source A, the Jew, who was presented by the Star of David, was stabbed by the sword, representing the Nazis. This suggests that the Nazi will prosecute the Jews. In Source C, the number of Jews in Germany decreased during the Nazi regime. This seems to suggest that they migrated as the life in Germany was not beneficial for them. Source D states ‘A Jew had no rights in Germany. Nazis could steal, rob and there was no remedy for the Jews.’ This means that the Jews suffered as they were subjected official mistreatments by the Nazi Party. Source E states ‘A crash rang out. Someone had put a brick through her shop window.’ This suggests that the Jewish shop was targeted by the Germans.

OR

Sources A and B seems to show that Hitler’s rule did not cause suffering for the people living in Germany. Although source A shows that life was bad for the Jews, for the rest of the Germans, Hitler promised to eradicate the Treaty of Versailles, communism, corruption and lies and

3-4m

this meant that his rule did not necessarily add misery to the German people. For source B, it shows that a Jew was able to find a job and even be appreciated by a German soldier. I know this because Source B is a note written by a Jewish nurse, who was loved by a German soldier.

L4 Agree and disagree supported by source contentAward 5 marks for 1 support each sideAward additional mark for every additional support, up to 6 marks

5-6m

L5 L4 + evaluation

Evaluation through reliability of sources/contextual knowledge.

E.g. All in all, majority of the sources show that Hitler’s rule was terrible for the people living in Germany. In particular, Source C which is a table depicting the number of Jews in Germany. This source is reliable as it is from an Encyclopedia, which is a neutral and non-biased source. This source can thus be trusted to support the issue, hence showing that majority of the Jews fled Germany or were eliminated due to harsh rule. [7]

E.g. Through my contextual knowledge, whether the lives of the people living in Germany caused suffering or otherwise largely depended on their race, sexuality and obedience towards the Nazi Party. For the minority groups and those who were disabled, many of them were sent to the concentration camps, where they died in the gas chambers. Women in Germany were also taken off their jobs and were expected to be staying at home to be mothers. [8]

For the Germans, however, many of them found employment when Hitler embarked on an aggressive expansion of the armed forces. Those who were obedient to Hitler also enjoyed leisure though schemes such as the KdF. However, the Germans were subjected to heavy censorship and propaganda, and there were secret police monitoring their moves. Therefore, the quality of life for these people was also not guaranteed. [8]

7-8m

2a) Describe Hitler’s expansionist policy and the appeasement policy

[8]

Level of Response

Band descriptor Marks Allocation

L1 Identifies what the policies are

e.g. Hitler’s expansionist policy was the policy of acquiring more territories to be part of Germany’s third Reich.

OR

Expand to unite all german speaking people together

e.g.The appeasement policy was conducted by Britain and France to give in to the demands of Hitler to prevent an outbreak of another war in europe

Award 1 mark for each identification

[1-2]

L2 Describes one factor

Award 1m for identification of one policy and 1m for supporting details up to a total of 5m

[3-5]

L3 Describes the two factors

Award 2m for the identification of both policies and award 1m for each supporting detail up to 8m.

[6-8]

e.g.

When Hitler came to power in 1933, he immediately challenged the Treaty of Versailles and adopted an aggressive foreign policy. Hitler wanted to restore Germany’s pride and strength after the humiliation of the Treaty of Versailles. He had planned a massive rearmament programme to build up Germany’s defences. From 1933-1934, the Nazis stepped up their secret rearmament and conscription programme.. Hitler announced his remilitarisation programme to the world after he took complete control over Germany. This included the sending of troops into Rhineland which was supposed to be a demilitarised buffer zone between France and Germany. Due to the pacifist mood of countries like Britain and weakness of the League of Nations, the Allies only made verbal protests and took no action. Hitler was thus free to transform Germany into a formidable and dangerous military power. The build-up of Germany’s military capabilities and machinery would later enable Hitler to put his expansionist plans into action such as the annexation of Austria into Germany and the reclaiming of Rhineland by Germany.

The policy of appeasement was adopted by Britain and France to appease Germany, giving into some of its demands in the efforts to prevent another war from occurring. Britain especially wanted to appease Germany as its economy was badly damaged by WW1 and the Great Depression. Furthermore, Germany had modernized its military but Britain and France were not ready to fight against Germany. Britain and France felt that they could not win a war against Germany yet.

Therefore, they thought of the policy of appeasement was necessary for them to buy some time for them to prepare for a war against Germany. The Munich agreement was signed between Germany, France and Britain as part of this appeasement policy. They had agreed that they would not stop Germany from taking the Sudetenland. In exchange, Germany promised Britain and France that it would not take any more land in Europe.

2 b) Explain how each of the following factors contributed to defeat of Germany in Europe

(i) Strengths of the USA;

(ii) Germany’s miscalculations.

Level of Response

Level of Response Band descriptor

L1 Describes defeat of Germany

e.g. Germany was defeated by the Allied powers during the war in Europe. The Allied powers consisted of USA, USSR, Britain and France.

Award 1 mark for each detail up to a maximum of 2.

[1-2m]

L2 Describes factors

Award 3 to 4 marks for one described reason and 5 to 6 marks for 2 described reasons

The Strength of the USA

Eg: The Strength of the USA was one reason for the defeat of Nazi Germany. The US was the wealthiest and most industrialized country in the world at that time. She had a huge productive industry and a large population to support it. She had more resources and manpower than Germany. The US also had more fuel to run her war machine and industries than Germany. Although USA was not at war with Germany at the start, USA indirectly helped the Allies by providing resources and war equipment to Britain and later

[3-6m]

USSR via the Cash and Carry Policy and Lend-Lease Act.

Germany’s miscalculations

One of Germany’s miscalculations was Germany was too reliant on petroleum in its weaponry and machinery. Also, Germany had inappropriate command structure. The inappropriate command structure of the German army meant that information and communication was unclear. All decisions had to be made from the people on the top, Hitler and his ministers, and it was not up to the generals on the ground to decide what course of action they should next take.

L3 EXPLAINS REASONS

The Strength of the USA

Eg: The Strength of the USA was one reason for the defeat of Nazi Germany. The US was the wealthiest and most industrialized country in the world at that time. She had a huge productive industry and a large population to support it. She had more resources and manpower than Germany. The US also had more fuel to run her war machine and industries than Germany. Although USA was not at war with Germany at the start, USA indirectly helped the Allies by providing resources and war equipment to Britain and later USSR via the Cash and Carry Policy and Lend-Lease Act. This led to the defeat of Germany as the Allied powers could dominate the air and the sea. Furthermore, when US finally entered the war, it raised the morale of the Allies and they fought back even harder. The Germans could not conquer the whole of Europe because USSR and Britain remained fighting and were stuck in a two-front war that they could not win.

Germany’s miscalculations

One of Germany’s miscalculations was Germany was too reliant on petroleum in its weaponry and machinery. Also, Germany had inappropriate command structure. The inappropriate command structure of the German army meant that information and communication was unclear. All decisions had to be made from the people on the top, Hitler and his ministers, and it was not up to the generals on the ground to decide what course of action they should next take. This caused the defeat of Germany as their army was not able to function effectively when the Allied powers decided to bomb the oilfields to cut their supply of oil. The German Army grew weaker and could not maintain fighting

a two-front war and began to lose battle by battle, till they finally surrendered. The inappropriate command structure also caused the important battle decisions and strategies to not be made on time, causing the German’s defeat.

3a) Describe the agreements made at the Yalta and Potsdam Conferences in 1945.

[8]

Level of Response

Band descriptor Marks Allocation

L1 Describes the conferences

e.g. In February 1945, Stalin, President Roosevelt and Prime Minister Churchill met at Yalta to decide on matters regarding final strategies against the Nazis .

[1-2]

L2 Describes the agreements made at one conference

Award 3m for first agreement identified and 1m for each supporting detail up to a total of 5m

e.g At the Yalta Conference, Germany to be divided into four zones; Britain, France, USA and USSR would each administer one zone. The capital of Berlin would be also be divided into similar zones. Countries liberated from German Occupation (e.g. Poland) to hold free elections to choose their own governments. Emergency relief to be provided for the liberated peoples of Europe, and practical steps to be taken to help them set up democratic and self-governing nations. Soviet Union to help the USA in the Pacific against Japan in return for the occupation of North Korea and Manchuria

At the Potsdam Conference, Germany to be officially divided into four zones of occupation. Each zone will be governed by an Allied Power with the aim of removing all Nazi influence and democratic ideas to be encouraged. To recognize the Polish Provisional Government of National Unity and hold “free elections as soon as possible”. Germany to be administered by the Allies until the formation of a new Germany that would no longer threaten the peace of Europe.

[3-5]

L3 Describes the two factors

Award 6 marks for identifying agreements made at both the

[6-8]

Potsdam and Yalta conferences and 1m for each supporting detail

e.g.

At the Yalta Conference, Germany to be divided into four zones; Britain, France, USA and USSR would each administer one zone. The capital of Berlin would be also be divided into similar zones. Countries liberated from German Occupation (e.g. Poland) to hold free elections to choose their own governments. Emergency relief to be provided for the liberated peoples of Europe, and practical steps to be taken to help them set up democratic and self-governing nations. Soviet Union to help the USA in the Pacific against Japan in return for the occupation of North Korea and Manchuria

At the Potsdam Conference, Germany to be officially divided into four zones of occupation. Each zone will be governed by an Allied Power with the aim of removing all Nazi influence and democratic ideas to be encouraged. To recognize the Polish Provisional Government of National Unity and hold “free elections as soon as possible”. Germany to be administered by the Allies until the formation of a new Germany that would no longer threaten the peace of Europe.

3 b) Explain how each of the following factors worsened Cold War tensions between USA and USSR:

(i) the Marshall Plan,

(ii) the Berlin Blockade.

[12]

Level of Response

Band descriptor Marks Allocation

L1 Describes Cold war tensions

e.g. The USA and USSR were involved in a bitter rivalry in the post war period. Both wanted to outdo each other when it came down to who had more influence over the world

[1-2m]

than each other.

Award 1 mark for each detail up to a maximum of 2.

L2 Describes factors

e.g Through the Marshall Plan, USA gave economic aid to reconstruct Europe and its economies. Economic assistance from the USA would provide immediate relief and revitalise European economies to minimise the dangers of hunger, poverty and danger. Economic aid was considered a success. It came in the form of goods, loans and even gifts till 1952. Industries were rebuilt and employment levels rose rapidly. Trade relations were re-established and standards of living went back to the pre-war, post-Depression era

e.g Stalin had blocked West Berlin which belonged under the Allied zones. His long-term plan for Germany was that it would become Communist, and he hoped to achieve this through the influence of the Soviet-controlled government in the Soviet zone. Although the Soviets had agreed to ship food and basic commodities to the Western zones, this aid was not given

Award 3m for 1st detail and 1m for each supporting detail up to a total of 6m

[3-6m]

L3 EXPLAINS REASONS

Through the Marshall Plan, USA gave economic aid to reconstruct Europe and its economies. Economic assistance from the USA would provide immediate relief and revitalise European economies to minimise the dangers of hunger, poverty and danger. Economic aid was considered a success. It came in the form of goods, loans and even gifts till 1952. Industries were rebuilt and employment levels rose rapidly. Trade relations were re-established and standards of living went back to the pre-war, post-Depression era. This worsened relationship because it made communism less appealing to the nations that were in bad economic state, thus it worsened the cold

[7-12m]

war tensions. As the Marshall plan was also offered to communist nations, it was seen as a direct attempt of USA to claim their influence over those territories that were under Soviet influence. The economic rivalry to minimize each other’s political influence over the countries in Europe worsened the Cold War tension between USA and USSR. The Marshall Plan worsened Cold War tensions between USA and USSR when it succeeded to win over many European nations to its side. Through the Plan, USA gave economic aid to reconstruct Europe and its economies. Economic assistance from the USA would provide immediate relief and revitalise European economies to minimise the dangers of hunger, poverty and danger. It also made Communism less appealing. Economic aid was considered a success. It came in the form of goods, loans and even gifts till 1952. Industries were rebuilt and employment levels rose rapidly. Trade relations were re-established and standards of living went back to the pre-war, post-Depression era. This had escalated the Cold War tension when Stalin viewed the Marshall Plan as a form of economic warfare by the West against Communism. He also took it as USA attempting to showcase its economic power to the rest of the world in its attempt to win more supporters. Stalin refused to let the Communist countries to receive the economic aid and set up Cominform and Comecon to provide them with economic assistance. The economic rivalry to minimize each other’s political influence over the countries in Europe worsened the Cold War tension between USA and USSR.

Stalin had blocked West Berlin which belonged under the Allied zones. His long-term plan for Germany was that it would become Communist, and he hoped to achieve this through the influence of the Soviet-controlled government in the Soviet zone. Although the Soviets had agreed to ship food and basic commodities to the Western zones, this aid was not given. This worsened cold war tensions as USSR’s move on West Berlin in an attempt to seize the territory under Communist control, it showed that USSR undermined the Western powers’ authority over West Berlin. Hence due to this, the relations between the two worsened. USA became even more suspicious about the Soviet Union’s intentions towards Germany. The crisis over Berlin highlighted the conflicting visions which both superpowers had over the future of Germany. The presence of the military forces from both sides signaled the close proximity to an actual war.