Cambridge IGCSE History 0470 — 2015 May/June Paper 2 · Variant 1

This document consists of 11 printed pages, 1 blank page and 1 insert. DC (CW/SW) 121996 © UCLES 2015 [Turn over Cambridge International Examinations Cambridge International General Certificate of Secondary Education * 0 4 8 3 9 3 3 3 6 0 * HISTORY 0470/21 Paper 2 May/June 2015  2 hours No Additional Materials are required. READ THESE INSTRUCTIONS FIRST An answer booklet is provided inside this question paper. You should follow the instructions on the front cover of the answer booklet. If you need additional answer paper ask the invigilator for a continuation booklet. This paper has two options. Choose one option, and answer all of the questions on that topic. Option A: 19th Century topic [p2–p6] Option B: 20th Century topic [p7–p11] The number of marks is given in brackets [ ] at the end of each question or part question. The syllabus is approved for use in England, Wales and Northern Ireland as a Cambridge International Level 1/Level 2 Certificate.

2 0470/21/M/J/15 © UCLES 2015 Option A: 19th Century topic DID GERMANY PLAN A PREVENTATIVE WAR IN 1914? Study the Background Information and the sources carefully, and then answer all the questions. Background Information Some historians agree that Germany deliberately planned a preventative war in 1914. They argue that many German politicians believed that Germany’s position in Europe would become weaker unless something was done. Germany was worried by the fact that Russia was rebuilding her army and navy. It was also worried about being surrounded by Britain, France and Russia. The claim that Germany caused, and fought, a preventative war is based on the idea that Germany believed it was better to fight a war sooner than be faced with one later when the situation in Europe would have grown worse for Germany. Did Germany plan a preventative war? SOURCE A Was this a preventative war by Germany – to prevent the threatened formation of a more powerful hostile coalition in two or three years’ time? Was there really such a threat in the expansion of the Russian army? Was there a real danger that Russia and France together would attack Germany? Would Britain, the strongest partner in the Triple Entente, have given its approval and support to an offensive war by Russia and France against Germany? But what is a preventative war? Who threatened Germany? It was clear to the German government that France must be eliminated as a great power. The reason for this was France’s alliance with Russia. France would have to disarm, pay a huge sum of war reparations and be integrated into ‘Central Europe’, an economic bloc dominated by Germany. As far as Russia was concerned, the German Chancellor in early August 1914 already had a clear objective. He described his aims as the liberation and securing of the races subjugated by Russia, the pushing back of the Russian frontier to Moscow and the establishment of a number of buffer states. These plans for the expansion of the German sphere of influence amounted to German domination in Europe. Was it not the greatest of delusions that Germany believed it had to fight this war, and that it was necessary for its own security? Russia lagged far behind in its development and was threatened with internal revolution. Germany was rich, flourishing and industrially the most advanced country in Europe, having already overtaken France and even Britain in many sectors. Viewed politically, the question arises as to whether in the case of Germany it was clever, or wise, to aim in such a short time, with such impatience and vehemence, and by means of such an aggressive naval and military armaments policy, to alter the international political system; in short, to practise a policy which must inevitably lead to war. From a history book published in 1967.

3 0470/21/M/J/15 © UCLES 2015 [Turn over SOURCE B The post-Agadir period saw a waning of tension, especially between Germany and Britain. Viewed from this perspective, a general war was anything but inevitable. On the other hand, the Agadir and Balkan crises produced a drastic stepping-up of military preparedness. German policy reflected the incoherence and ambiguity of this larger picture. First, it is worth noting that the Germans were as impressed as everyone else by the spectacle of Russian economic growth. From the standpoint of the most influential German military commanders, it seemed obvious that the situation was shifting rapidly to Germany’s disadvantage. Moltke, as chief of the General Staff, adopted a bleak and aggressive view of Germany’s international situation. His outlook can be reduced to two assumptions. The first was that a war between the two alliance blocs was inevitable over the longer term. The second was that time was not on Germany’s side. With each advancing year, Germany’s prospective enemies, and Russia in particular, would grow in military strength. The second assumption was justified by a comparative analysis of the relative military strengths of the European powers. Obsessed with the dangers looming from east to west and convinced that time was running out, Moltke became the exponent of a ‘preventative war’. However, Bethmann Hollweg consistently pursued a policy focused on collaboration with Britain and France. Preventative war arguments thus never became the platform for policy in Germany before 1914 – they were rejected by the civilian leadership. Neither in 1905, nor in 1908–9 or 1911, did the German government consider launching a preventative war. As for the Kaiser, though prone to outbursts of belligerent rhetoric, he panicked and counselled caution whenever a real conflict seemed likely. Yet this does not mean that we should reject the preventative argument as irrelevant to the action of Germany or other policy-makers. On the contrary, preventative logic exerted a stealthy but important pressure on the thinking of the key decision-makers during the crisis of 1914. From a history book published in 2012. Content removed due to copyright restrictions.

4 0470/21/M/J/15 © UCLES 2015 SOURCE C Sunday: ordered to the palace to see His Majesty at 11 o’clock along with Tirpitz, Heeringen (Vice Admiral), and General von Moltke. His Majesty had a report on the political situation sent by the Ambassador in London, Prince Lichnowsky. The British government had informed Lichnowsky that if we attack France, England will come to France’s aid. His Majesty painted the following picture: Austria must deal firmly with the Slavs living outside its borders (the Serbs) if it does not want to lose control over the Slavs under the Austrian monarchy. Russia is apparently already supporting the Serbs. Russia will go straight into Galicia if the Austrians march into Serbia. War would be inevitable for us. According to His Majesty, the fleet will naturally have to prepare for war against England. The possibility of a war against Russia alone will not be considered. General von Moltke: ‘I consider a war is inevitable—the sooner, the better. But we should do a better job of gaining popular support for a war against Russia.’ Tirpitz called attention to the fact that the navy would gladly see a major war delayed by one and a half years. Moltke said that even then the navy would not be ready, and the army’s situation would continue to worsen, since due to our limited financial resources our opponents are able to arm themselves more rapidly. That was the end of the meeting. There were almost no decisions. Moltke says the sooner war comes, the better; but he hasn’t concluded from this that we should give Russia or France an ultimatum that would trigger a war for which they would carry the blame. An account of the meeting of the Imperial War Council, 8 December 1912, from the diary of Admiral Müller. Müller was the Chief of the Imperial Naval Cabinet. Moltke was head of the German army. Tirpitz was in charge of the German navy. Bethmann Hollweg, the Chancellor, was not at the meeting. SOURCE D The situation in Europe is extraordinary. It is jingoism run stark mad. Unless someone acting for you can bring about a different understanding, there is some day to be an awful disaster. No one in Europe can do it. There is too much hatred, too many jealousies. Whenever England consents, France and Russia will close in on Germany and Austria. A letter from Colonel House to US President Wilson, 29 May 1914. House was an adviser to Wilson. SOURCE E England, Russia and France have agreed among themselves to use the Austro-Serbia conflict as an excuse for waging a war of extermination against us. The famous encirclement of Germany has finally become a complete fact. The net has suddenly been thrown over our head and England reaps the most brilliant success of her anti-German world policy. We squirm isolated in their net. The Kaiser writing on 30 July 1914. This note comes from written comments he made on a telegram from the German Ambassador in Russia to Jagow, the German Foreign Minister.

5 0470/21/M/J/15 © UCLES 2015 [Turn over SOURCE F The more determined Austria appears and the more energetically we support it, the more likely Russia will do nothing. France and England also do not want war now. Russia will be ready for war in a few years. Then the number of its soldiers will crush us; then it will have completed construction of its Baltic fleet and railways. In the meantime, our groups will grow ever weaker. The Russians therefore desire peace and quiet for a few more years. If Russia attacks Austria we cannot abandon Austria. I do not want a preventative war, but if war there will be, we cannot shirk it. Jagow, the German Foreign Minister, writing to the German Ambassador in London, 18 July 1914. SOURCE G That calls for champagne. We must provisionally halt the march towards the West. If Britain guarantees the neutrality of France I will abandon all action against it. The Kaiser in a meeting on 1 August 1914 just after the German mobilisation order had been signed. A telegram from the German Ambassador had just arrived stating that the British government had promised that France would remain neutral so there was no need to attack France. SOURCE H The Crime of the Ages—Who Did It? An American cartoon published in 1914. Content removed due to copyright restrictions.

6 0470/21/M/J/15 © UCLES 2015 Now answer all the following questions. You may use any of the sources to help you answer the questions, in addition to those sources which you are told to use. In answering the questions you should use your knowledge of the topic to help you interpret and evaluate the sources. 1 Study Sources A and B. How far do these two sources agree? Explain your answer using details of the sources. [7] 2 Study Source C. How useful is this source as evidence about German foreign policy? Explain your answer using details of the source and your knowledge. [8] 3 Study Sources D and E. Does Source D prove that the Kaiser was right in Source E? Explain your answer using details of the sources and your knowledge. [8] 4 Study Sources F and G. Are you surprised by Source G? Explain your answer using details of the sources and your knowledge. [8] 5 Study Source H. What is the cartoonist’s message? Explain your answer using details of the source and your knowledge. [7] 6 Study all the sources. How far do these sources provide convincing evidence that Germany was planning a preventative war? Use the sources to explain your answer. [12]

7 0470/21/M/J/15 © UCLES 2015 [Turn over Option B: 20th Century topic HOW FAR DID HITLER HAVE A CONSISTENT FOREIGN POLICY IN 1938–1939? Study the Background Information and the sources carefully, and then answer all the questions. Background Information Czechoslovakia was ethnically very mixed. Rather less than 50 per cent of the population were Czechs. There were also Slovaks, Hungarians and Poles. 23 per cent of the population were German speakers who lived in the Sudetenland which formed the country’s western margin. After the Anschluss Hitler’s attention turned to Czechoslovakia. Henlein, the Sudeten leader, began to complain that the German minority were being mistreated by the Czechs. This gave Hitler the chance to demand the Sudetenland be incorporated into Germany. This was agreed by Chamberlain at Munich in September 1938. In March 1939 Germany completed the takeover of Czechoslovakia. The events surrounding Czechoslovakia raise the question of whether Hitler had a consistent foreign policy, or whether he was merely reacting to opportunities as they came along. SOURCE A Hitler was convinced that the democracies would only posture and admonish. They would not intervene and, without them, nor would Russia. France, though bound by treaty to help Czechoslovakia, would be discouraged from doing anything effective by Hitler’s new West Wall. The British, Hitler thought, were still less ready and willing to defend Czechoslovakia. He sensed that the British and French governments wished to avoid at all costs a war. His confidence was sustained through the summer of 1938 when Britain and France sought a full settlement with Germany by extorting concessions from Czechoslovakia. In September President Benes accepted all Henlein’s demands, despite the fact that this gave the Sudeten Germans virtual autonomy within Czechoslovakia. Benes made the sacrifice in response to overwhelming pressure from the Western democracies, whose leaders clung to the belief that by appeasing Hitler they could avoid war. Not to be deprived of war, Hitler became more hostile and demanded more. Then, Chamberlain intervened and made his famous flight to Berchtesgaden on 15 September. Hitler proceeded to dupe Chamberlain. Above all, he convinced his guest that he was willing to start a world war over the Sudetenland but that the cession of ethnic German areas to Germany would bring a general peace. Chamberlain returned to England where he persuaded his government and the French that Czechoslovakia must concede the Sudetenland. On 22 September Chamberlain returned to Germany but Hitler now demanded more. Chamberlain appealed to Mussolini who added his voice to those of Göring and Goebbels, who argued that a deal could be made which would give Hitler everything he wanted except the blitzkrieg against Czechoslovakia. At the Munich four-power conference Chamberlain and Daladier accepted the Nazi proposals. They barely modified Hitler’s Godesberg demands. Czechoslovakia was to surrender not only the Sudetenland but important centres of communication, major industrial areas and fortifications. Churchill called this ‘total defeat’ but Hitler was angry at having been denied the conflict he craved. What might have swayed him away from war was the lack of war spirit in the crowds at a Berlin military parade on 27 September. The day after the agreement was signed Hitler made it clear that he intended to swallow the rest of Czechoslovakia as soon as he got the chance. Appeasement encouraged Hitler’s appetite for aggression and he ordered Göring to organise ‘a gigantic armaments programme’. The German Air Force would ‘burst upon the enemy’. From a history book published in 2000. Content removed due to copyright restrictions.

8 0470/21/M/J/15 © UCLES 2015 SOURCE B The French would not operate their alliance with Czechoslovakia; on the other hand they would not give it up. The French were dragging the British down with them. Britain was the country most remote from the Czech affair; yet she had to take the lead. The British must undertake to ‘solve’ the Sudeten question – how, it did not matter – as long as war was averted. Hitler remained the master of delay, refusing to show his hand. Preparations were pushed forward for attacking Czechoslovakia but this was far from a decision for war. The German generals continued to insist that they could not face a general war. Hitler steadily replied that it would not be necessary. Hitler’s patience was not exhausted. He still waited for the nerves of others to crack. Chamberlain flew to Germany on 15 September. Hitler’s main concern at the meeting was to keep the crisis going until Czechoslovakia disintegrated. Chamberlain remained faithful to his policy of appeasement: ‘I had nothing to say against the separation of the Sudeten Germans from the rest of Czechoslovakia.’ On 22 September Chamberlain again met Hitler. Hitler declared that the Anglo-French proposals were no longer enough. Sudeten Germans were being massacred – Sudetenland must be occupied by German troops at once. Why did Hitler take this line, when he was to receive by negotiation all that he had demanded? Did he want war for its own sake? There is another explanation. Others, such as the Poles and the Hungarians, were advancing claims to Czechoslovak territory. There was a good chance that Czechoslovakia would break into pieces. Germany would come in as a peace-maker. Hence, Hitler was playing for time. The Godesberg meeting ended in failure for Chamberlain. Hitler returned home where he spent his time drawing dream-plans for the rebuilding of Linz, the Austrian town where he went to school. Once more he waited for events to provide him with future success. From a history book published in 1961. SOURCE C A cartoon published in Britain, September 1938.

9 0470/21/M/J/15 © UCLES 2015 [Turn over SOURCE D A cartoon published in the Soviet Union, 1939. The signpost says left to western Europe and right to the USSR. SOURCE E The Sudetenland is the last problem that must be solved and it will be solved. It is the last territorial claim which I have to make in Europe. I have no further interest in the Czech state. We want no Czechs! The aims of our foreign policy are not unlimited. They are grounded on the determination to save the German people alone. In 1919 ten million Germans found themselves beyond the frontiers of Germany, Germans who wish to return to the Reich as their homeland. From a public speech by Hitler, 26 September 1938. SOURCE F Give thanks to your God. The wings of peace settle about us and the people of Europe. It was the war that nobody wanted. Nobody in Germany. Nobody in France. Nobody, above all, in Britain, which had no concern whatever with the issues at stake. If we must have a victor, let us choose Chamberlain. Millions of happy homes and hearts are relieved of their burden. Now let us get back to our own affairs. From a British newspaper, 30 September 1938. SOURCE G I will begin by saying what everybody would like to ignore or forget. We have experienced a total defeat. Silent, mournful, abandoned, broken Czechoslovakia disappears into the darkness. You will find that sooner or later Czechoslovakia will be swallowed up in the Nazi regime. And do not suppose this is the end. This is only the beginning. Churchill speaking in the debate in the British Parliament about the Munich Agreement, 3 October 1938.

10 0470/21/M/J/15 © UCLES 2015 SOURCE H A cartoon published in Britain, 6 September 1939. Hitler is saying to Mars, the God of War, ‘There’s some mistake. It was your small brother I sent for.’

11 0470/21/M/J/15 © UCLES 2015 Now answer all the following questions. You may use any of the sources to help you answer the questions, in addition to those sources which you are told to use. In answering the questions you should use your knowledge of the topic to help you interpret and evaluate the sources. 1 Study Sources A and B. How far do these two sources agree? Explain your answer using details of the sources. [7] 2 Study Sources C and D. How far does Source D support the view in Source C? Explain your answer using details of the sources and your knowledge. [8] 3 Study Source E. How useful is this source as evidence about Hitler’s foreign policy? Explain your answer using details of the source and your knowledge. [7] 4 Study Sources F and G. Does Source F make you surprised by Source G? Explain your answer using details of the sources and your knowledge. [8] 5 Study Source H. Why was this cartoon published in early September 1939? Explain your answer using details of the source and your knowledge. [8] 6 Study all the sources. How far do these sources provide convincing evidence that Hitler, in his foreign policy, followed a consistent plan during 1938–1939? Use the sources to explain your answer. [12]

12 0470/21/M/J/15 © UCLES 2015 BLANK PAGE Permission to reproduce items where third-party owned material protected by copyright is included has been sought and cleared where possible. Every reasonable effort has been made by the publisher (UCLES) to trace copyright holders, but if any items requiring clearance have unwittingly been included, the publisher will be pleased to make amends at the earliest possible opportunity. To avoid the issue of disclosure of answer-related information to candidates, all copyright acknowledgements are reproduced online in the Cambridge International Examinations Copyright Acknowledgements Booklet. This is produced for each series of examinations and is freely available to download at www.cie.org.uk after the live examination series. Cambridge International Examinations is part of the Cambridge Assessment Group. Cambridge Assessment is the brand name of University of Cambridge Local Examinations Syndicate (UCLES), which is itself a department of the University of Cambridge.

® IGCSE is the registered trademark of Cambridge International Examinations. CAMBRIDGE INTERNATIONAL EXAMINATIONS Cambridge International General Certificate of Secondary Education MARK SCHEME for the May/June 2015 series 0470 HISTORY 0470/21 Paper 2 (Paper 2), maximum raw mark 50 This mark scheme is published as an aid to teachers and candidates, to indicate the requirements of the examination. It shows the basis on which Examiners were instructed to award marks. It does not indicate the details of the discussions that took place at an Examiners’ meeting before marking began, which would have considered the acceptability of alternative answers. Mark schemes should be read in conjunction with the question paper and the Principal Examiner Report for Teachers. Cambridge will not enter into discussions about these mark schemes. Cambridge is publishing the mark schemes for the May/June 2015 series for most Cambridge IGCSE®, Cambridge International A and AS Level components and some Cambridge O Level components.

Page 2 Mark Scheme Syllabus Paper Cambridge IGCSE – May/June 2015 0470 21 © Cambridge International Examinations 2015 19th Century Topic 1 Study Sources A and B. How far do these two sources agree? Explain your answer using details of the sources. [7] Level 5 Compares difference in big messages [7] i.e. the authors’ attitudes to the preventative war issue: critical of Germany in Source A, more understanding of Germany in Source B Level 4 Agreement and disagreement of detail or sub-messages [5–6] Level 3 Agreement or disagreement of detail or sub-messages [3–4] (Suggestions below may not be a definitive list) Agreements: • that there was a stepping-up of military preparations • that war was inevitable • that Germany fought a preventative war • that Germany thought a preventative war was necessary Disagreements: • Russia lagged far behind in A, growing in strength in B • preventative war inevitable in A, not in B • Germany strong in A, getting weaker in B Level 2 Identifies information that is in one source but not in the other or states that the sources are about the same subject [2] OR Compares the provenance of the sources Level 1 Writes about the sources but makes no valid comparison [1] Level 0 No valid response [0] 2 Study Source C. How useful is this source as evidence about German foreign policy? Explain your answer using details of the source and your knowledge. [8] Level 5 Useful: evaluates source by cross-reference to confirm the impression given by the source of German policy/policy making [7–8] 7 marks for cross-reference to contextual knowledge 8 marks for cross-reference to another (named) source Level 4 Useful: explains what can be learned from content (i.e. inferences) [5–6] Level 3 Useful because of what the source says: paraphrases or quotes [3–4] Level 2 Undeveloped use of provenance [2] OR Not useful because of what it does not tell you about German foreign policy (must specify what this is) Level 1 Unsupported assertions/answers not addressing utility [1] Level 0 No valid response [0]

Page 3 Mark Scheme Syllabus Paper Cambridge IGCSE – May/June 2015 0470 21 © Cambridge International Examinations 2015 3 Study Sources D and E. Does Source D prove that the Kaiser was right in Source E? Explain your answer using details of the source and your own knowledge. [8] Level 6 Compares the sources and evaluates one of them to conclude the Kaiser is wrong [8] Level 5 Compares the sources and evaluates one of them to conclude the Kaiser is right [7] Level 4 Evaluates E but no valid use of D [6] Level 3 Answers based on agreements/disagreements [3–5] Level 2 Answers based on undeveloped provenance [2] Level 1 Writes about the sources but does not address the question [1] Level 0 No valid response [0] 4 Study Sources F and G. Are you surprised by Source G? Explain your answer using details of the sources and your knowledge. [8] Level 6 Yes/No: cross-reference to another (named) source to explain surprised or not [8] Level 5 Yes/No: cross-reference to contextual knowledge to explain surprised or not [6–7] Level 4 Yes/No: matches or mismatches with Source F [4–5] Level 3 Yes/No: answers based on everyday empathy/reasoning internal to G [3] Level 2 Valid analysis of source but fails to state whether surprised or not [2] Level 1 Writes about sources but fails to address the question [1] OR Identifies something in the source that is/is not surprising, but no explanation

Page 4 Mark Scheme Syllabus Paper Cambridge IGCSE – May/June 2015 0470 21 © Cambridge International Examinations 2015 5 Study Source H. What is the cartoonist's message? Explain your answer using details of the source and your knowledge. [7] Level 5 the American point of view [7] I.e. the Americans are criticising all the Europeans /European militarism for starting the war. Level 4 Interprets big message of cartoon [5–6] They are all to blame for the war. 5 marks for the message, 6 marks for supporting it with reference either to ‘Crime of the Ages’ or to the dead body ‘Peace of Europe’. Level 3 Interprets sub-message of the cartoon [3–4] e.g. they all blame each other for the war. Level 2 Misinterpretation of the cartoon [2] Level 1 Surface description of the cartoon [1] Level 0 No valid response [0] 6 Study all the sources. How far do these sources provide convincing evidence that Germany was planning a preventative war? Use the sources to explain your answer. [12] Level 3 Uses sources to support and reject the statement [7–10] Award up to 2 bonus marks for developed evaluation of sources (no more than 1 per source). Source use must be reference to a source by letter, by provenance or by direct quote. There must be examples from source content. There must be an explanation of how this supports/does not support the statement. Yes No A,B,C B,C,D,E,F,G,H Level 2 Uses sources to support or reject the statement [4–6] Level 1 No valid source use [1–3] Level 0 No valid response [0]

Page 5 Mark Scheme Syllabus Paper Cambridge IGCSE – May/June 2015 0470 21 © Cambridge International Examinations 2015 20th Century Topic 1 Study Sources A and B. How far do these two sources agree? Explain your answer using details of the sources. [7] Level 5 Compares big messages, i.e. on Hitler wanting war [7] In Source A Hitler wants war, but in Source B he does not Level 4 Agreement and disagreement of detail or sub-messages [6] Level 3 Agreement or disagreement of detail or sub-messages [3–5] (Suggestions below may not be a definitive list) Agreements: • Britain followed a policy of appeasement • Britain determined to avoid war • Chamberlain flew to Germany on 15 September • Chamberlain willing to give Hitler the Sudetenland • Another meeting on 22 September • Hitler demands more at 22 September meeting • Hitler was hoping for more concessions • Some Germans did not want war • France would not honour its alliance with Czechoslovakia Disagreements: • Hitler wants all of Czechoslovakia in A, prepared to share it in B • In A Hitler is making the running, in B he is biding his time • In A Hitler is making the running, in B Chamberlain is making the running Level 2 Identifies information that is in one source but not in the other or states that the sources are about the same subject [2] OR Compares the provenance of the sources Level 1 Writes about the sources but makes no valid comparison [1] Level 0 No valid response [0]

Page 6 Mark Scheme Syllabus Paper Cambridge IGCSE – May/June 2015 0470 21 © Cambridge International Examinations 2015 2 Study Sources C and D. How far does Source D support the view in Source C? Explain your answer using details of the sources and your knowledge. [8] Level 6 Comparison of authors’ opinions [8] EITHER Disagreement: Hitler is being criticised in C, but Britain and France (and Hitler too – but not just Hitler) in D, OR Agreement: in both sources the Western powers are the ones being criticised (i.e. for not standing up to Hitler). Level 5 Disagreement on the extent of Hitler’s ambitions: limitless in C, limited in D [7] Level 4 Answers based on agreements and disagreements [6] Level 3 Answers based on agreements or disagreements [3–5] e.g. Hitler is warlike in both: there will be war everywhere in C, only in Russia in D Level 2 Answers based on undeveloped provenance [2] OR Comparison of surface details Level 1 Writes about the sources but does not address the question, or no valid comparison [1] Level 0 No valid response [0] 3 Study Source E. How useful is this source as evidence about German foreign policy? Explain your answer using details of the source and your knowledge. [7] Level 7 Useful: explains what can be learned from Hitler’s purpose [7] Level 6 Not useful because unreliable: evaluates purpose of source [6] Level 5 Useful/Not useful: judged on whether Hitler is lying/not, determined by cross-reference [5] Level 4 Useful: explains what can be learned from content (i.e. inferences) [4] Level 3 Useful because of what the source says: paraphrases or quotes [3] Level 2 Undeveloped use of provenance [2] OR Not useful because of what it does not tell you about German foreign policy (must specify what this is) Level 1 Unsupported assertions/answers not addressing utility [1] Level 0 No valid response [0]

Page 7 Mark Scheme Syllabus Paper Cambridge IGCSE – May/June 2015 0470 21 © Cambridge International Examinations 2015 4 Study Sources F and G. Does Source F make you surprised by Source G? Explain your answer using the sources and your knowledge. [8] Level 6 Yes/No: compares the sources and evaluates either source to decide [7–8] 7 marks for cross-reference, 8 marks for purpose Level 5 Yes/No: Evaluates Source F or Source G, no comparison of content [6] Level 4 Yes/No: Matches/Mismatches between Source F and Source G [4–5] Level 3 Assertions based on everyday empathy/reasoning internal to G [3] Level 2 Valid analysis of source but fails to state whether surprised or not [2] OR Yes/No: explained by undeveloped provenance Level 1 Writes about sources but fails to address the question [1] OR Identifies what is/not surprising, but no explanation Level 0 No valid response [0] 5 Study Source H. Why was this source published in early September 1939? Explain your answer using details of the source and your knowledge. [8] Level 6 Reason based on purpose (must have intended impact on audience) in context of early September 1939 (i.e. Britain now at war) [8] Level 5 Reason explaining the big message in the specific context of September 1939 [7] Level 4 Reason based on the big message [6] i.e. to show that Hitler had unleashed a large war, which he did not want (must have both elements) Level 3 Reason based on context only [3–5] OR Reason based on a valid sub-message OR Reason based on purpose (but no specific context) Level 2 Reasons based on misreadings of the cartoon [2] OR Interprets cartoon or describes the context – but not used as a reason for publication Level 1 Surface descriptions of the source [1] Level 0 No valid response [0]

Page 8 Mark Scheme Syllabus Paper Cambridge IGCSE – May/June 2015 0470 21 © Cambridge International Examinations 2015 6 Study all the sources. How far do these sources provide convincing evidence that Hitler, in his foreign policy, followed a consistent plan during 1938–1939? Use the sources to explain your answer. [12] Level 3 Uses sources to support and reject the statement [7–10] Award up to 2 bonus marks for developed evaluation of sources (no more than 1 per source). Source use must be reference to a source by letter, by provenance or by direct quote. There must be examples from source content. There must be an explanation of how this supports/does not support the statement. Yes No A,B,C,E,G,H A,B,D,H Level 2 Uses sources to support or reject the statement [4–6] Level 1 No valid source use [1–3] Level 0 No valid response [0]