YISS E-Hist 2025 Prelim Ans

1Secondary 4 Prelim Examination 2025 ExpressHumanities (History)Mark SchemeSection A: Source-Based Case Study(1a)Study Source A.Why do you think this cartoon was published? Explain your answer.[5]L1Description of the cartoon e.g. Germany was threatening Austria. Britain did not want to get involved. 1L2Specific Context of the start of the Cold War. e.g. This cartoon was published because Germany was threatening to send its troops into Austria. Hitler was using the excuse that Austria was suffering from disorder and he needed to take action to save the people, who he viewed as ethnically German. 2 L3Main Message (Award 4 marks for evidence and explanation of the Main Message)Main Message: Hitler’s aggressive actions would impact Britain eventually.e.g. The cartoon was published because the cartoonist wanted to persuade the British public that Hitler’s aggressive actions would impact Britain eventually. This is evident from how the characters are lined up side by side. When Austria completely falls, the impact will reach Britian. Britian will slip onto the rock and fall badly. This implies that the events in Austria would eventually affect Britain. Britian should care about what was happening in Austria even though the events were taking place far away Britian. 3-4 L4L3 + Intended Outcome of the Cartoon e.g. The cartoon was published because the cartoonist wanted the British public to support Austria in resisting German aggression. The British public should pressurise the government to stand up to Hitler and stop Hitler’s aggression in Austria. By doing so, the British would prevent Hitler from taking further aggressive actions. [Outcome must be an action. Award 3 marks if Outcome is Accepted but not the Message.](1b)Study Source B.How useful is this source as evidence about the Munich Agreement? Explain your answer.[5]

2 L1Useful / Not Useful based on undeveloped use of provenancee.g. Source B is useful because it was from the British Ambassador to Germany. He would know what was going on behind the scenes. 1 L2Useful or Not Useful based on source contentAward higher mark for comparisons supported with evidence and explanation.e.g. Source B is useful because it tells me that there were British in the government who believed that the Nazis would honour their commitment to the Munich. This is evident from “I do not regret having tried to believe Germany’s honour and good sense.” This implies that the British believed that they could reason with the Germans. The Germans would honour their word and fulfil their part of the Munich Agreement. Accept: Useful as evidence that the Munich Agreement was not wrong. 2-3 L3Useful or Not Useful based on cross-reference to another source or contextual knowledge Award higher mark for cross-references supported with evidence and explanation.e.g. L2 + Source B is not useful because it is not reliable when I cross reference it to Source C. Source C states “I am afraid I remain profoundly doubtful of Nazi promises”. This implies that there were people in the British government who did not trust the Nazis to honour their commitment to the Munich Agreement. To them, the Nazis were lying and could not be reasoned with. Since Source C contradicts Source B, Source B is not reliable and thus, not useful. For other sources, Accept:C.R. to Source E for UsefulC.R. to Sources D for not useful Contextual Knowledge: Note that Invasion of Czechoslovakia and World War Two are not C.K. 4 L4L3 + Not Useful based on critical analysis of Provenance Source B is not useful because it is from the British Ambassador to Germany. As ambassador, he represented Britian and was involved in the Munich Conference. He had supported the Munich Agreement. As this source was published after the outbreak of war, the ambassador would have wanted to justify the Munich Agreement was the right thing to do in 1938. This would enable him to receive less criticisms and more sympathy from the British people. Since he had a self-serving motive, the source is not reliable and thus not useful. 5

3 1cStudy Source C.How surprised are you by what this source says? Explain your answer.[6]L1Surprised based on provenancee.g. I am surprised that a member of Chamberlain’s government would oppose the Munich Agreement. 1 L2Surprised or Not Surprised based on Source Content Award 3 marks for supporting evidence.e.g. I am surprised that a British politician would openly lie to the public by supporting the Munich Agreement when he personally did not believe in it. This is evident in “I am prepared to play my part in defending the Munich Agreement publicly but I am afraid I remain profoundly doubtful of Nazi promises”. e.g. I am not surprised by the source because it shows that there were British politicians who did not believe in the Munich Agreement. This is evident in “I am afraid I remain profoundly doubtful of Nazi promises and shall do so until I see peaceful words accompanied by peaceful deeds.” 2-3 L3Surprised or Not Surprised based on cross-reference to another source or contextual knowledge Award 5 marks for a more developed and supported answer.e.g. I am not surprised by the source because it is supported by Source D. Both sources agree that there were British politicians who did not believe in the Munich Agreement. Source C states “I am afraid I remain profoundly doubtful of Nazi promises and shall do so until I see peaceful words accompanied by peaceful deeds.” Source D states “I have believed Hitler was more open to the language of military might. I tried to persuade myself that the terms of the Munich Agreement were good enough”. Both sources show that there were British politicians who did not believe in the Munich Agreement. They viewed Hitler to be untrustworthy and would not keep his commitments to the Munich Agreement. Contextual Knowledge: -Use of Churchill as evidence of opposition to the Munich Agreement. -Invasion of Czechoslovakia and World War Two are not C.K. 4-5 L4L3 + Not Surprised based on Critical Analysis of Provenance i.e. I am not surprised by Source C because Oliver Stanley wanted Chamberlain to make use of the time provided by the Munich Agreement to prepare Britian for war. He did not believe that Hitler would keep his promise not to threaten the peace of Europe. Britain had to be ready for war when Hitler threatened Europea again. As a member of the government, he saw it as his duty to warn Chamberlain while continuing to support the Prime Minister in public. 6

4 1dStudy Sources D and E. Does Source E prove that Source D was wrong about the Munich Agreement? Explain your answer.[6]L1Undeveloped use of Provenance e.g. Source E does not prove that Source D was wrong since both men were members of the British parliament. 1L2Analysis of Source E content Note: Evidence must show the contradiction to Source D (For Does prove)Or Evidence must show the agreement with Source D (For Does not prove)e.g. Source E does prove that Source D was wrong because it tells me that Munich Agreement was the right way to ensure peace in Europe. Source E states “We ought to recognise that Hitler contributed significantly to this peaceful solution by agreeing to discuss this matter on Sudetenland” and “the new Czechoslovakia will find greater security”. This implies that the Munich Agreement was the right approach as it benefitted Czechoslovakia by having Germany to any further aggressive actions against Czechoslovakia. In addition, Hitler was willing to negotiate for a peaceful solution, instead of going to war.Or e.g Source E does not prove that Source D was wrong because it tells me that Britian had to use the time provided by the Munich Agreement to rearm and to increase its ability to fight a war. Source E states “we must continue our efforts to rearm this country, a programme which is daily increasing in pace and in volume. We must remain on guard”. This implies that the Munich Agreement was a way for the British to hold off any direct conf