| Date | November 2021 | Marks available | 4 | Reference code | 21N.1.BP.TZ0.10 |
| Level | Both SL and HL | Paper | Paper 1 - first exams 2017 | Time zone | TZ0 |
| Command term | Analyse | Question number | 10 | Adapted from | N/A |
Question
Source I Adolf Hitler, Führer of Germany, writing in a letter to Benito Mussolini, Il Duce of Italy (25 August 1939).
The relationship of Germany to Poland, as a result of the policies of England, has become more unsatisfactory since spring and in the last few weeks the position has become simply unbearable. The reports about the persecution of the Germans in the border areas are not invented press reports but represent only a fraction of the terrible truth. The current policy of Poland has brought about a complete standstill in Danzig’s entire economic life for the past several weeks and would, if it were continued, destroy the city.
The readiness on the part of the Soviet government to negotiate with Germany has made it possible for me to send my Foreign Minister to Moscow for the conclusion of a treaty which is the most extensive non-aggression pact in existence and whose text will be made public.
[Source: Hitler, A., 1939. Letter from Hitler to Mussolini, August 25, 1939. [online] Available at:
https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/ns057.asp [Accessed 14 December 2020]. Adapted.]
With reference to its origin, purpose and content, analyse the value and limitations of Source I for an historian studying the Nazi–Soviet Pact.
Markscheme
Value:
- It is a letter by Hitler himself, Fuhrer of Germany, after the Nazi–Soviet Pact was signed.
- Its intention is to justify to Mussolini why the Pact was necessary and to gain Mussolini’s support.
- It clearly identifies the reasons why Hitler wanted an agreement between Germany and the USSR.
Limitations:
- The source only gives an unofficial statement of policy while events were still unfolding.
- The aim behind the letter is to gain Mussolini’s support and it may be merely exaggerating the reality of the situation.
- It only offers a German perspective on the agreement and does not consider a Soviet perspective.
The focus of the question is on the value and limitations of the source. If only value or limitations are discussed, award a maximum of [2]. Origin, purpose and content should be used as supporting evidence to make relevant comments on the value and limitations. For [4] there must be at least one reference to each of them in either the value or the limitations.
Examiners report
As highlighted above, and in previous reports, candidates demonstrated an understanding of how to identify the origin, purpose and content of a source and most were able to offer some sound analysis of value and limitation derived from these. However, there remains a tendency for lengthy descriptions of the origin, purpose and content of the source, at the expense of actual evaluation or analysis. Related to this, some candidates, for example, offered an identification of the purpose of the source without going on to explain how this was a value and/or limitation. Candidates should also be cautioned against a note-form response as these tend to lack clarity in terms of explanation of value and limitation. In addition, it was disappointing to find that a small number of candidates had analysed the wrong source, which reinforces the recommendation that questions should be read carefully.
