Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
Turn on thread page Beta
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    thats the title of the essay i have to write
    i really dont like the title as i think it is pants but other than that i am finding it really difficult to find information on it, there is reams of stuff about the treaty and the critisisms of the treaty process but afterwards all i can find is that germany was resentful. i also cant find any good historiography (my teacher loves quotes) sources

    can anyone help? advice, anything would be appreciated
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mazraz)
    thats the title of the essay i have to write
    i really dont like the title as i think it is pants but other than that i am finding it really difficult to find information on it, there is reams of stuff about the treaty and the critisisms of the treaty process but afterwards all i can find is that germany was resentful. i also cant find any good historiography (my teacher loves quotes) sources

    can anyone help? advice, anything would be appreciated
    The German people despised it (many described it as a diktat and it lay the foundation of the dolschosstheorie that helped to undermine Weimar). It was criticsed by the right/nationalists especially, and one of Hitler's key aims was to destroy it. Even Weimar politicians e.g. Stresemann sought its revision (Locarno etc.). Particularly hated was Clause 231 The War Guilt Clause.

    Clemenceau and a lot of French thought it was not harsh enough - they had experienced the worst of the Western Front, trenches, poisoned wells etc. Later on in the 1930s they began to criticise it for being too harsh - partly due to fear of communism.

    The British people at the time thought it was not harsh enough, Lloyd George et al knew it was probably too harsh. Maynard Keynes did not like it.

    The Americans never even ratified it, indicating what they (orat least their government) thought.

    I don't suppose Austria/Hungary/Bulgaria/Turkey were too pleased, although they were dealt with separately anyway.

    Machiavelli argued that peace imposed upon the defeat must either placate or subjugate them. Versailles did neither. That is paraphrased from an historian (can't remember who, might be Stephen Lee, I'll check if I get round to it).

    Who were winners and who losers? This must be established. And of criticism; might be useful to divide it into constructive (e.g. debates at League of Nations) and destructive (like lots of it coming from Germany).

    Hope that helps - Enjoy :p:
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    here's some help with how to actually order the essay and the best way to write it:
    http://www.lancs.ac.uk/depts/history...13/writing.htm

    hope it helps!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    The Treaty was disliked by Britain and France as they felt that it was not harsh enough, the USA thought that it was too harsh and would only cause long term issues, the Germans obviously resented it as did the other Central Powers.
    Hope that helps
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I have two quotes for you:

    'The historian, with every justification, will come to the conculsion that we were very stupid men... We arrived determinded that a Peace of justice and wisdom should be negotiated; we left the conference conscious that the treaties imposed on our enemies were neither just nor wise.'
    --- Harold Nicolson, British Diplomat, 1919.

    '... A fair judgment upon the settlement, a simple explanation of how it arose, cannot leave the authors of the new map of Europe under serious reproach. To an overwhelming extent the wishes of the various populations prevailed.'
    --- Winston Churchill, 1919.

    Personally I think the treaty was the best everyone could of hoped for in 1919. The war aims of the 'big three' [UK, US, and France] were very different and all powers were weary of public opinion back home.

    France had a right to demand a tough treaty. They, unlike Germany had suffered hugely. As Molsaka G said, most of the fighting had taken place in Northern France. To the average Frenchmen in 1919, France was exhausted but Germany looked as meancing as ever.

    The US, under Wilson sought to build a better world out of the carnage of the past. Hence the reason for the 14 points. Although Wilson wanted to see Germany punished, he wanted a treaty which would be fair on both the French and Germans.

    The UK, I believe was in the middle. As Lloyd-George himself said 'We want a peace which will be just, but not vindictive. We want a stern peace because the occasion demands it, but the severity must be designed, not for vengeance, but for justice. Above all, we want to protect the future against a repetition of the horrors of this war.'

    I hope it helps!
 
 
 
Poll
“Yanny” or “Laurel”

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.