Need help with coursework!

I'm doing my coursework on "assess the view that the holocaust was a predetermined plan by Hitler and the Nazi regime"

If anyone has done this, could you please send me your notes!
thanks!

Reply 1

TSR Jessica

19

Sorry you've not had any responses about this. :frown:

Are you sure you’ve posted in the right place? Posting in the specific Study Help forum should help get more responses. :redface:

Hopefully someone will be able to get back to you :h:

Reply 2

04MR17

Volunteer Section Leader

22

I've covered the topic but I'm not doing it for coursework.

Which exam board is it?

Look at the specification which will probably have a generic mark scheme.

All you need to do is give an argument for and against the statement and give your own opinion at the end. For instance, one the one hand, the extremist N.A.Z.I. party hated the Jews and other minority groups. Although the final solution was brought about as a results of Germany losing the war and encirclement. The question is was this solution planned previously, if so how long in advance, or was it a spur of the moment thing, similar to how they tried to destroy all the evidence.

Reply 3

TheHistorian19

3

You could even include another strand of argument questioning if the holocaust even existed. Personally, and obviously, I believe it did however their are several aspects which have been debated - just type 'holocaust denial' into wiki and look for yourself. I even think Mel Gibson is a holocaust denier. Regardless of your opinion though, at A2 you would score highly if you included the argument and the historians who've suggested it, and destroy/disclaim the evidence in your analysis if that's what you believe. As ultimately these historians would be against the question you have to do, they would deny it as they believe it wouldn't have existed in the first place.

Reply 4

ageshallnot

21

Original post by TheHistorian19

You could even include another strand of argument questioning if the holocaust even existed. Personally, and obviously, I believe it did however their are several aspects which have been debated - just type 'holocaust denial' into wiki and look for yourself. I even think Mel Gibson is a holocaust denier. Regardless of your opinion though, at A2 you would score highly if you included the argument and the historians who've suggested it, and destroy/disclaim the evidence in your analysis if that's what you believe. As ultimately these historians would be against the question you have to do, they would deny it as they believe it wouldn't have existed in the first place.

Have you found any reputable historians who believe it did not happen? (David Irving is not a reputable historian.)

Reply 5

TheHistorian19

3

Original post by ageshallnot

Have you found any reputable historians who believe it did not happen? (David Irving is not a reputable historian.)

Why does it matter if they're reputable or not, just by saying they're not is part of your analysis why the argument is invalid. Saying someone or something is reputable is a subjective issue, I have my own view of historians and think D. Starkey or G. W. Bernard talk bonkers in some of what they say but that wouldn't stop me using them; history is all about interpretation analysis and argument at A2 and even university.

I'll have a look for you though.

Reply 6

ageshallnot

21

Original post by TheHistorian19

Why does it matter if they're reputable or not, just by saying they're not is part of your analysis why the argument is invalid. Saying someone or something is reputable is a subjective issue, I have my own view of historians and think D. Starkey or G. W. Bernard talk bonkers in some of what they say but that wouldn't stop me using them; history is all about interpretation analysis and argument at A2 and even university.

I'll have a look for you though.

I don't think that including an obviously false argument simply so you can knock it down would earn you much credit. For example, say you were answering something like 'How revolutionary was the French Revolution?'. You could, following your train of argument, state 'Fred Smith says that no aristocrats were executed blah blah... This is arrant nonsense, as demonstrated by figures published by blah blah...' But what has that achieved?

Something similar was pointed out to me most forcefully many years ago in my second term at university when I used a quote from Paul Johnson in an essay on the American Revolution just so I could knock it down. My tutor told me in no uncertain terms that Johnson was in no way even a remotely serious historian, his views were of no merit and the particular quote I used totally nonsensical. (This was among many failings this essay had!)

OTOH I agree that several historians are nowhere near as sound as they appear to be - I would add Niall Ferguson to your suggestions.

If you find anyone serious, I'd be interested to read them.

Need help with coursework!

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you