410 Michelle FA3 SBQ.docx - Notes from RGS Batch'13 Web viewY4 2013. RP RA History . Origins & Causes of the Second World War . Worksheet ( ): Policy of Appeasement - Source Analysis

Y4 2013RP RA History Origins & Causes of the Second World War

Worksheet ( ): Policy of Appeasement - Source Analysis Exercise

QuestionHow far do the sources show that the policy of appeasement led to the outbreak of war in September 1939?

Source A: A cartoon published in the British newspaper on 3 October 1938. Mars is the Greek god of war.

Source B: A cartoon published on 21 September 1938. In the pie are papers saying “Collective security”, “Franco-Czech Security”. The line above the dove says “rather doubtful dove of peace.

Source C: A cartoon published in 1938 around the time of the Munich Conference

Source D: A cartoon published around the time of the Sudetenland Crisis, September 1938.

Source Shows? Does not show?Inference & Evidence

ReliabilityCross-refer to prove reliability

A

B

C

D

Sources B, C and D support the statement that the policy of appeasement led to the outbreak of war in

September 1939, while Source A challenges the statement.

Source A challenges the statement. The source shows the British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain

facing Mars, the god of war over a table, with both sides refusing to back down. The mere presence of

Mars shows that war was impending, yet Chamberlain’s determined stance indicates his determination to

not back down in the face of impending war and indeed stop the war from happening. From this, we can

imply that Britain was determined to stop the impending war from happening and that Chamberlain was

taking a clear stance against the war, therefore challenging the statement that appeasement led to the

outbreak of WWII.

However, this source is unreliable, as can be seen from contextual knowledge. The cartoon was

published in the British newspaper on 3 October 1938, with the background of the Munich Agreement

signed three days previously. The Munich Agreement allowed Germany to annex Sudetenland on the

borders of Czechslovakia with Hitler promising not to make any more territorial demands in Europe in

return. This was popular with the British because it was seen by many as an act that prevented war and

guaranteed peace. However, in hindsight, Chamberlain’s signing of the Munich Agreement was the

deciding factor in the policy of appeasement, and showed Chamberlain’s reluctance to take a stand

against Germany (and therefore forestall the war) rather than resolutely refusing to back down as is seen

in the cartoon. The message of the cartoon of Chamberlain’s determination directly contradicts what we

now know about the Munich Agreement as the key turning point that foreshadowed the Second World

War. The source is further proved unreliable by its date of publication, a mere three days after the signing

of the Munich Agreement and before Hitler marched his troops into the rest of Czechslovakia, when the

British public was still basking in the “triumphant” aftermath of the Agreement. At the time, the treaty was

seen as one that would prevent war from happening rather than having the opposite effect (as is seen in

historical hindsight), and in the jubilant direct aftermath, Chamberlain would naturally be seen as making

use of the policy of appeasement to stop the war from happening. Source A is also not directly useful in

proving that appeasement led to the outbreak of war in September 1939, since it does not directly

address the policy of appeasement against the historical background in the aftermath of the Munich

Agreement, but simply as an abstract representation of Chamberlain’s stand against war.

Source B supports the statement. Source B depicts Chamberlain feeding a (rather doubtful) bird of peace

from the humble pie with the caption “when the pie was opened the bird began to sing”. This source is an

allusion to the well-known nursery rhyme Sing a Song of Sixpence (‘When the pie was opened / the birds

began to sing / wasn’t that a dainty dish / to set before the king?’). In the popular interpretation of the

nursery rhyme, the bird takes revenge on its captors by pecking off the nose of the maid. Similar to the

rhyme, the dove is seen as having been freed from the pie and is now ironically feeding on the cage that

once contained it. The rather doubtful dove of peace is a representation of the supposed benefits the

policy of appeasement purports to bring. From this source, we can infer that the policy of appeasement is

a double-edged sword, with the intent of stopping war but instead making it all the more inevitable. The

satire of this cartoon is further underscored by Chamberlain respectfully feeding the bird, increasing the

depth of the ironic message because Chamberlain thinks he is bringing about peace by feeding the dove

of peace (or getting Hitler to eat the “humble pie”), but this peace is seen as rather doubtful and fragile. As

such, it is evident that Source B supports the statement.

Source B is proved reliable by its historical background. This cartoon was published a few days after

Chamberlain decided to relegate part of Sudentenland to Hitler, despite the obvious moral flaws in

allowing Hitler to annex parts of a country that did not belong to Britain and therefore undermining its

sovereignty. The cartoon’s inference of appeasement as a double-edged sword is proved reliable the very

day after it was published by Hitler’s demanding the entire Sudetenland instead of accepting

Chamberlain’s compromise, and again in March 1939 when he marched his army into the rest of

Czechoslovakia, illustrating that despite its original intention of satisfying Hitler by compromising, it in fact

only served to embolden Hitler in his endeavour to rule Europe.

Source C supports the statement. The source shows a Brit sitting in a deck chair reading the newspaper

casually on a rocky ledge, showing that majority of the British were not aware that war was imminent. The

policy of appeasement is represented in this cartoon by the precocious arrangement of the rocks above

the Brit with Czechoslovakia at the bottom of a stack of rocks that look ready to topple t any moment, with

the rock at the top being Anglo-French security. This shows the fragility of the situation that Britain and

France were in, as though it were a game of dominoes and once Czechoslovakia falls, so would

everything above, with Romania and Poland falling and ultimately undermining Anglo-French

security.This is representative of the policy of appeasement as a dangerous and ultimately one that leads

to war as when one stone falls, the others will come crashing down at an increasing rate. However, the

Bri reading the newspaper is still utterly apathetic to the dangerous situation he is in, and is indeed just

reading the newspaper (a representation of international affairs) calmy, seemingly oblivious. From this

source, we can therefore infer that appeasement is a fragile strategy doomed to fail from the start, since

when one seemingly unrelated block falls, the rest will come tumbling down and that trying to appease to

Hitler would only increase his ambition, supporting the statement.

Source C is reliable as it corroborates with contextual knowledge. This cartoon was published around the

time of the Munich Conference, and can serve as a warning of the consequences of appeasing Hitler by

agreeing to allow him to annex Sudetenland.The source’s claim that appeasement was a strategy

doomed to fail since it would lead to a domino effect is proved reliable by how Hitler became emboldened

by the Munich Agreement and invaded the rest of Czechoslovakia and eventually Poland and France,

putting the Second World War in full swing. This source is further proved reliable by cross-referencing

with Source B (previously proved reliable), with both sources presenting the policy of appeasement as a

fragile one which backfires on itself. Source B states that the policy of appeasement is a double-edged

sword that although had good intentions eventually backfires, and Source C states that appeasement was

doomed to fail from the beginning as giving Hitler any piece of the pie would only serve to embolden him

and therefore causing the undermining of international security and WWII. Seen together, both sources

point to the idea that the policy of appeasement led to the outbreak of war in September 1939. Thus,

Source C is reliable.

Source D supports the statement. This source illustrates Chamberlain sitting at a table with his back

facing the door and stating that the Sudetenland crisis was simply a “quarrel in a faraway country

between two peoples of whom we know nothing”. In the meantime, a larger than life Czech and grim

reaper wearing a Nazi helmet are arguing at the door labeled the “door to European and British

domination”, with the grim reaper glaring at the Czech guard with a dagger between his teeth, while

Chamberlain seems completely oblivious. The significance of the size of the figures is also not lost, with

Germany seen as the giant while Chamberlain is a small and unconfident figure, illustrating his lack of

nerve and determination (and indeed inability) to stand against Hitler’s dominance. From this source, we

can infer that appeasement was a strategy of denial rather than one of any value, as can be seen from

Chamberlain’s carefully selected pose of having his back to the action and choosing to dismiss

Germany’s claim on Czechoslovakia as insignificant rather than taking it seriously. It also shows that

appeasement was a strategy doomed to fail by the sheer size and menace of the Nazi grim reaper. The

symbolism of the grim reaper itself should not be ignored, and combined with the “door to European and

British domination” represent Germany’s annexation of the Sudetenland as the beginning of the war.

Source D is proved reliable by contextual knowledge. This was published around the time of the

Sudetenland crisis where Britain was struggling with the decision of the Sudetenland to Germany to

appease him, and this particular crisis was later seen as the decisive turning point where the war was

made inevitable rather than simply a possibility. The decision of the British and the French to give

Sudetenland to Germany was the decision that made Hitler sure that his plans would not be opposed by

either of the countries, emboldening him to precipitate the war with the invasion of Poland in September

1939. This source is also proved reliable by cross-referencing with Source C. Both sources illustrate the

British as seemingly oblivious of the threat that giving Sudetenland to the Germans would pose, with

Source C using the Brit reading the newspaper and Source D using the caricature of Neville Chamberlain

to illustrate the idea. Seen together, they show that appeasement was a strategy that is doomed to fail,

even if it was not seen by the British at the time it was conceived.

In conclusion, the sources largely support the statement that the policy of appeasement led to the

outbreak of war in September 1939. Source B states that appeasement is a double-edged sword that

despite its good intentions would fail, and both Sources C and D assert that appeasement was doomed to

fail from the beginning because of the domino effect it would bring about in the state of affairs. Source A

challenges the statement, asserting that Chamberlain was taking a clear stand and determined to stop the

war. However, Source A is proved unreliable by contextual knowledge, as is also not directly useful in

addressing whether the policy of appeasement led to the outbreak of war. As such, we can conclude that

as a whole, the sources support to a large extent that the policy of appeasement led to the outbreak of ar

in September 1939.