IB History Historiography Guide

Causes of WW1

AJP Taylor – ‘No war is inevitable until it breaks out.’

Germany

The Treaty of Versailles blamed Germany for the war (War Guilt Clause)

Treaty of Versailles article 231

‘The Allied and Associated Governments affirm and Germany accepts the responsibility of Germany and her allies for
causing all the loss and damage to which the Allied and Associated Governments and their nationals have been
subjected as a consequence of the war imposed upon them by the aggression of Germany and her allies.’

Historian Views
Sydney B. Fay All the powers were more or less responsible
G.P Gooch “Germany was dragged in [the war] by Russia”
Fritz Fischer Germany deliberately engineered the war in pursuit of expansionist aims

Imperialism

A.J.P Taylor “The German bid for continental supremacy was certainly decisive in
bringing on the European war.”

Fritz Fischer German ambitions and Militarism led to WW1

Ruth Henig Failure of diplomacy and resignation of nations to War (arrogance and
enthusiasm for war)
Niall Ferguson Britain misinterpreted Germany’s ambitions and decided to act to
impede German expansionism.

The Alliance system

Historian View
AJP Taylor ‘Alliances were so fragile that they cannot be seen as a major cause of
war.’
B.E. Schmitt ‘The alliances which had originally served as the cause of peace when
put to the final test operated to convert a local quarrel into a general war’

The Situation in the Balkans

Historian Views
Gordon Martel The assassination of Archduke Ferdinand was the final straw in the
struggle for mastery in the Balkans
Christopher Clark "The First World War was the Third Balkan War before it came the First
World War, "

The arms race and militarism

 AJP Taylor The mobilization that was meant to serve as a threat and deterrent to war
instead relentlessly caused a world war by forcing invasion.
David Stevenson "A self-reinforcing cycle of heightened military preparedness ... was an
essential element in the conjuncture that led to disaster ... The
armaments race ... was a necessary precondition for the outbreak of
hostilities."

Hitler’s Germany Historiography

Historian Quote
Klaus Hildebrand “Fundamental to National Socialist genocide was Hitler's race dogma...Hitler's
(writing in 1979) programmatic ideas about the destruction of the Jews and racial domination have
still to be rated as primary and causative, as motive and aim, as intention and goal of
the "Jewish policy" of the Third Reich”.

Ian Kershaw “Within the Nazi Party, the beginnings of a personality cult around Hitler go back to
the year before the [Munich] putsch… Outside these small groups of fanatical
Bavarian Nazis, Hitler’s image and reputation at this time – so far as the wider
German public took any notice of him at all – was little more than that of a vulgar
demagogue, capable of drumming up passionate opposition to the government
among the Munich mob, but of little else.”

Richard M. “Hitler’s oratory moved people and appealed to their hopes and dreams. But his
Perloff speeches malevolently twisted hope into some gnarled ghastly entities, and
appealed to the latent, darkest prejudices of Germans.”

Walter A. P. “Before total war, Nazism was a pot-pourri. Racialism… and nationalism… jostled
Phillips shoulders with the socialistic revolutionary conservatism of many members of the
Mittelstand (middle class). Romantic ideas came from right-wing youth groups.
Hitler could utter the gospel of anti-capitalism to workers and the gospel of profits
to businessmen. [It was] a rag-bag of inconsistent and incoherent ideas.”

Gerhard Ritter The Weimar republic collapsed in 1933 to due its inability to win the confidence of
the general public. The popular resentment towards Weimar republic was a major
factor in helping Hitler seizing power in 1933.

E. Anderson A major factor contributing to the collapse of the Weimar republic was the
shrewdness of the political leaders in the Nazi party. The government believed they
could control Hitler in his new position as chancellor in 1933. However, they were
wrong Hitler managed to outmanoeuvre the government and establish a single party
state thanks to his position as chancellor.
 Treaty of Versailles

Historian / Figure View

Churchill believed that the treaty was the best that could be achieved, and that
Winston Churchill
“the wishes of the various populations prevailed”

Terrain “The War Guilt Clause was a stigma on an entire nation”

Nicolson “we were very stupid men... neither just nor wise”
“The treaty, by overstepping the limits of the possible, has in practice settled
Keynes
nothing”
“The difficulty was not that the treaty was very severe, but that the Germans
Sally Marks
thought it was”
“It is not surprising that they made a bad peace; what is surprising is that they
Gilbert White
managed to make peace at all”
“The fundamental significance of Versailles was emotional rather than
Anthony Wood rational. Allied statesmen, urged on by the pressure of public opinion, have
made peace in spirit of revenge and not to guarantee national security”
“The Treaty of Versailles should have made the victors either to conciliate the
enemy or to destroy them. The Treaty of Versailles did neither. It did not
Lentin
pacify Germany, still less permanently weaken her, appearances
notwithstanding, but left her scourged, humiliated and resentful”
“Severe as the Treaty of Versailles seemed to many Germans, it should be
remembered that Germany might have easily feared much worse. If
William Carr
Clemenceau had his way instead of being restrained by Britain and America
the treaty could have been much worse for Germany”
“I think one can say the Treaty was harsh, but understandable. It created in
Germany a political climate in which it was exceedingly difficult for a
Wolfgang Mommsen
democratic system to develop... The allied governments were under the
pressure of their own public which demanded the Germans to pay for it all.”

The League of Nations

Historian Quote
E.H. Carr  “The founders of the League of Nations, some of whom were men of political
experience and political understanding.”
 Labelled the founders as “a peculiar combination of platitude and falseness.”
 The League, in Carr’s analysis was “no more than an example of a treaty based on
international ethics, not law.”
 “The metaphysicians of Geneva found it difficult to believe that an accumulation of
ingenious texts prohibiting war was not a barrier against war itself.”
Senator William  He compared the United States joining the League as “the lion and the lamb lying
Borah down together with the gathered scum of nations.”
 “There is no such thing as friendship between nations as we speak of friendship
between individuals.”
F.S. Northedge  “There was general agreement that the League had failed because it lacked teeth, or
the means of enforcing its will.”
Ruth Henig  “Given the unstable and impoverished condition of large parts of Europe after 1919,
and the growing antagonism between Britain and France it is hardly surprising that
 the League…should have failed to make a significant political impact.”
Andrew Webster  ‘The pursuit of disarmament was central to the work of the League of Nations
throughout its existence’, but it ‘was never able to overcome the more powerful
imperatives of national self-interest.’
Raffo  By 1937, “All heart for collective action had gone out of the League.”
Christopher  “Collective security cannot work unless states disarm. But states will not disarm until
Thorne collective security has clearly shown that it merits confidence.”

Chinese Civil War – Historiography

The Long March

Mao Zedong (1935)

‘The Long March is the first of its kind ever recorded in history, that is it is a manifesto, an agitation corps, and a
seeding machine.’

Joe Rich (1970)

‘As the communists travelled they tried to win support; they confiscated the property of the wealthy, distributing
among the poor and in the villages they called the people into public squares, inciting them to hate, attack and kill the
landlords.’

Harrison Slisbury (1985)

‘…a great human epic which tested the will, courage and strength of the men and women of the Chinese Red Army.’

Great Leap Forward and famine

Zhisui Li, Mao’s doctor (1994)

‘…the leading cadres of the party and the first party secretaries were ingratiating themselves with Mao... The greater
the falsehoods, the more people died of starvation.’

Cultural Revolution

Mao Zedong (1967)

‘The present day Great Cultural Revolution is only the first; there will inevitably be many more in the future. The
issue of who will win in the revolution can only be settled over a long historical period. If things are not properly
handled, it is possible for a capitalist restoration to take place at any time.’

The Times (1974)

‘The programme of sending educated youth to the countryside is not the only social sphere in which alarm signals are
increasing about the extent of backsliding… Taken together with the recent encouragement for schoolchildren to
criticise their teachers, and for reforms of an anti0academic nature in the university entrance system, these various
campaigns seem to represent a new drive to prevent a slackening of political zeal.’

Jung Chang (1992) wrote about 1972

‘We visited many friends of my parents. Everywhere we went, they were being rehabilitated. Some had just come out
of prison. In almost every family, one or more members had died as a result of the Cultural Revolution… Tragic
stories cropped up in every household.’
J. Hans Van de Ven argues that it was the superior military tactics of the CCP which led to the Communist
victory in 1949, citing the use of Red Army’s use of guerrilla tactics. The tactics of the Red Army was based
on the realisation that “land could be retaken at a later date, [whereas] men could not be brought back to
life.”

Martin Wilbur and Julie How argue that flexibility and quality not only defined the leadership of the CCP
but were rather “…outstanding characteristics of the Communist approach to mass organization,” and that
by implementing various policies in order to integrate itself into the framework of the countryside, the CCP
laid the foundation for its eventual success. The CCP directed all their efforts into gaining positions in the
leadership of peasant movements in rural China, in which “party cells should be organized in every single
lowest-level peasant association to be the nucleus in guiding the activities of the association.”

Mao

 Cultural Revolution, Roderick MacFarquhar: Contends the conventional view that Mao ignited the
Cultural Revolution by urging Yau Wenyuan to criticize Wu Han’s play, Hai Rui’s Dismissal from
Office, is probably a ‘red herring’ because he had unearthed evidence that Mao himself had made an
off-hand remark about Hai Rui’s virtues.
 Mao, Benjamin Schwartz: Concluded that the transfer of the Central Committee from Shanghai to
the Central Soviet territory of Kiangsi in 1932 marked the final passing on of power in the CCP into
the hands of Mao.
 Mao, Dr Karl Wittfogel: Denies Mao of all originality of thought and calls him a mere parrot of
Lenin.
 Mao’s aims, Maurice Meisner: Despite the political and human disasters of Mao Zedong’s late years,
China made remarkable economic and material progress during the quarter century of Maoist rule.
From 1952, when industrial production was restored to its highest pre-war levels (i.e., 1936–37), to
the end of the Mao era in 1976, the output of Chinese industry grew at an average per annum rate of
approximately 11 percent.
 Mao’s totalitarianism, Jack Gray: The redistribution of China’s land was carried out with a
remarkable degree of attention to legality and the minimum violence against landlords.
 Mao’s totalitarianism, Jung Chang and Lu Xinhua: Families suffered under Mao, ‘fuelled by an
unrelenting hatred of Mao, have produced scar accounts, stressing the suffering and negative aspects
off Mao’s rule.
 Mao’s totalitarianism, Jung Chang: Paints Mao in a sinister light portraying him as a murderer,
responsible for the deaths of 70 million of his people.

Mussolini’s Italy: The Rise of Fascism

Liberal historians

- the most prominent Italian historian on the period

Renzo de Felice - fascism was something of an aberration
- it was an unfortunate episode which separating Liberal Italy from
democratic Italy of post 1945
- a Liberal historian writing in the 1930s and 1940s
Benedetto Croce - one of the first to describe Fascism as a “momentary contagion”
- believed the rise of fascism had nothing to do with failings of the
 Liberal regime but was the result of the shock of the First World War
and Russian Revolution and their dire social and economic
consequences
- felt that the pre-Fascist regime represented progress and freedom

Marxist

-Liberal State aimed to form a ruling class but failed to integrate the
Antonio Gramsci people into this framework
-This led to rebellion amongst The Italian popular classes and ultimately
failure for the Liberals.

Rejection of Marxist view

- States that Mussolini didn’t seize power, but rather he was given
Nicholas Farrell power by the King.
- States that the Marxist Version is wrong, because fascism was
not big business, but rather had a mass appeal to the population
at the time.
- States that many Italians were exhausted by the constant
violence, and that they saw Mussolini as the best chance of a
return to order, and a return of resurrection

US perspectives

-First world war worsened class conflict, fascism grew out of the
Alexander De Grand reaction to the rapid rise of socialism
-Rich and middle classes were terrified when Socialists took over in 1919
-Italians with more conservative views began to look for a more dynamic
response that would restore law and order and protect their interests
-Anti-socialist violence increased credibility and support for Fascism

British perspectives

- accepts the importance of the Italian squadrisimo but emphasizes the

Denis Mack Smith key role of Mussolini in making political capital out of this disorder:
- his newspaper exaggerated the Socialist threat and depicted
Fascists and selfless individuals devoted to creating peace and
stability
- avoided committing to clear political programmes and altered
his messages based on his audience (to Fascists he spoke about
radically transforming society, but to Liberals he said he simply
wanted to destroy socialism and give the political system some
energy)
- does not accept the argument of Marxist historians (that Fascism was a
deliberate attempt of Liberals to crush the working class) and instead
believes that liberalism after 1918 was characterized by weakness and
division:
- mass democracy meant Liberals no longer dominated
 parliament but they still tried to maintain the old style of politics
- there was no coherent political parties, just a series of factions
based around prominent personalities, so the Liberal
governments were just fragile coalitions unwilling to grant
reform/direct the forces of the state to uphold the law
- governments lost control of events and politics began to take to
the streets
- many Liberals were convinced that only a Fascist presence in
government could crush the Socialists, revitalize parliament and
restore confidence
- when Mussolini was appointed Prime Minister the Liberals
were not upset but believed he could be a “normal” politician
rather than radical
- does not dismiss Liberal failings but argues that they should not be
Martin Clark judged too harshly
- argues that the Fascist rise to power was not inevitable
- “Although it is right to stress the longer term causes of Mussolini’s
victory … there was nothing inevitable about it … and the idea of
‘absorbing’ the Fascists …, allowing them a few posts in someone else’s
government was not foolish. It might have worked.”

Higher Level Topics

East Asian Societies – China and Japan

Tokugawa Decline / Meiji Restoration:

Stuart Fewster Foreign influence- “the arrival of Western ships… led

directly to its collapse” – believed that the foreigners were
responsible for the collapse of the Tokugawa
TC Smith Weak Government/ corrupt system – system was not
meritocratic which meant leaders were not always suitable
Harold Bolitho Lack of modernization- “The world was in the middle of a
scientific an technological revolution, and Japan remained
for the most part… ignorant of it”
Edwin Reischauer Outdated social system – internal problems – economic
Stuart Fewster instability
Tony Gorton
Jamie Allinson Modernization as a result of seeing what had happened to
 China - “were able to selectively borrow and improve
upon the innovations of Chinese civilization”

Qing Dynasty:

John Fairbank and Joseph Levenson
‘Impact-Response’ model.3 The basic assumptions behind
this explanatory model are: China is an ossified society
frozen in tradition and locked in cyclical motion. Lacking
as it does the internal strength to break out of its traditional
framework, it can catch up with the times only in response
to the challenges imposed by Western domination

James Peck ‘Imperialism’ is another broad explanatory approach that

commonly crops up in Sino-related research.5 This model
cites imperialism as being the root of all of China's
problems during the century between the Opium Wars and
the triumph of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).

Lian Bohua the late Qing government was reacting to Western

challenges but that in adjusting its external outlook and
behaviour it was also adapting to the new international
environment and advancing along the self-strengthening
path.10

Cheng Shenglin Challenge–Reaction’ model. He argues that during the

time of the Opium Wars, China faced the dual challenge of
an ‘an invading West’ and a ‘technologically advanced
West’. This led to three different policy reactions: a
detrimental policy of isolationism; a submissive policy of
traitorousness, and a patriotic policy of resistance and
learning.

Deng Xiaoping: historiography

Immanuel Hsu
‘The Rise of Modern China’
Maurice Meisner
‘Mao’s China and After, 1999’
-As a result of Deng’s agricultural reforms, both yield and productivity
rose sharply. Cash income quadrupled and the standard of living vastly
improved.
-Deng’s rapid revival of private entrepreneurship in both the city and
the countryside aided economic growth in China and the rising
consumption.

George Jochnowitz
N.B Professor George was teaching in
China at the time of the Tiananmen
Massacre in 1989.
Ezra F. Vogel
N.B Vogel is a Professor of the Social
Sciences Emeritus at Harvard
University and has written on Japan,
China, and Asia.
Jonathan Mirsky
N.B Mirsky is a journalist and historian
specializing in China.
- Deng left China a richer, more powerful, more belligerent country than
he found it.
- Deng abandoned the idea of a socialist economy, and the productivity
of China increased rapidly. Business is still growing, and China is ever
more important in a world that is turning into a single market place.
- Deng saved the Communist Party by ending socialism. He wanted to
preserve the strength of the Communist Party, with violence if it
seemed appropriate to him.
- Deng feared democracy and disorder (which allowed the Tiananmen
Massacre to occur).
-Hua Guofeng was the initiator for reforms.
- “for more than a decade before the Cultural Revolution” — 1966-1976
— “no one had greater responsibility for building and administering the
old system than Deng Xiaoping.”
- By 1978, Deng had become China’s “paramount leader”, and thus
must share the blame with Mao for the agony inflicted on China and the
Chinese. He also bears responsibility of the Tiananmen Massacre
(1989).
-Vogel contends that during his internal exile Deng concluded that
something had gone systemically wrong with China: it was economically
backward and isolated from the international scene; its people were
poorly educated.
- China under Deng became an increasingly urban society.
-The result of Deng’s China is that it is more corrupt than ever and its
environment more polluted.
- Although Deng believed science was important, he feared that the
social sciences and humanities could be ‘seedbeds for heterodoxy’. He,
like Mao, feared the intellectuals.
- “Deng was not vindictive.”
- Deng’s economic reforms; they made a substantial portion of Chinese
better-off, and propelled China onto the international stage.
- Jonathan Mirsky believes that the main message that arises from
Vogel’s book is that ‘for most of his long career Deng Xiaoping did less
for China than he did to it.’
- “Deng never shrank, either in Mao’s time or his own, from causing the
murder of large numbers of anonymous people.”
- “For most of his long career Deng Xiaoping did less for China than he
did to it.”