Legacy IB – Paper 3 – Euro diplomacy 1871-1923 – Mr Allsop podcast links

Posted on

IB History revision podcasts – Paper 3 – Euro diplomacy 1871-1923

  1. The alliance system in Europe 1871-1890 – http://www.mrallsophistory.com/revision/category/a-level-and-ib-history-revision/european-diplomacy-before-the-first-world-war
  2. Breakdown of international system (LT causes) 1890-1914 – http://www.mrallsophistory.com/revision/category/a-level-and-ib-history-revision/european-diplomacy-before-the-first-world-war
  3. Causes of WW1 – the ‘alliance system’ – same link as above
  4. Entente Cordiale – link as above
  5. Origins of WW1 – militarism and the ‘arms race’ – link as above
  6. Launch of the ‘Dreadnought’ – link as above
  7. Conflict in the Balkans – link as above
  8. The ‘July Crisis’ and the outbreak of WW1 – link as above
  9. Historiography of the origins of WW1 – http://www.mrallsophistory.com/revision/category/a-level-and-ib-history-revision/european-diplomacy-before-the-first-world-war/page/2

101 years ago today….. The United Kingdom declared war on Germany

Posted on Updated on

Did you know….The declaration of war did not make most British newspapers until early on the 5th August 1914 because it was declared late in the evening of the 4th August!

How the Guardian reported the first world war: England declares war on Germany

source: Originally published in the Manchester Guardian on 5 August 1914

The Cabinet yesterday delivered an ultimatum to Germany. Announcing the fact to the House of Commons, the Prime Minister said: “We have repeated the request made last week to the German Government that they should give us the same assurance in regard to Belgian neutrality that was given to us and Belgium by France last week. We have asked that it should be given before midnight.”

Last evening a reply was received from Germany. This being unsatisfactory the King held at once a Council which had been called for midnight. The declaration of war was then signed. The Foreign Office issued the following official statement:-

Owing to the summary rejection by the German Government of the request made by his Majesty’s Government for assurances that the neutrality of Belgium will be respected, his Majesty’s Ambassador to Berlin has received his passports, and his Majesty’s Government declared to the German Government that a state of war exists between Great Britain and Germany as from 11 p.m. on August 4, 1914.

A statement made in London last night said the British Note to Germany was sent direct to Sir E. Goschen, the Ambassador in Berlin.

German troops have invaded Belgium. The Premier informed the Brussels Chamber yesterday, after King Albert had addressed the Deputies in a speech calling on the nation to defend its integrity. Mr. Asquith knew of the invasion when he made his statement in the Commons.

How it was reported over ‘the Pond’ in the USA & Canada


2nd August 1934 – 81st anniversary of the death of President Hindenburg

Posted on

On the 2nd August 1934, the 86 year old German Reichspräsident Paul von Hindenburg died of lung cancer and Adolf Hitler became both the Führer and Reich Chancellor of the German People. It effectively merged the offices of both the President and Chancellor into one role, and therefore completed what the Nazis referred to as Gleichschaltung (or “Co-ordination”) by establishing Hitler as both Germany’s head of stateand head of government.

Interfering with the post of President was illegal under the terms of the 1933 Enabling Act, and although Hitler merging the two positions removed any political checks and balances of his personal domination of Germany, a plebiscite held 17 days later on the 19th August saw an enormous 90% of people approving of the change.

Hitler’s assumption of the role of Führer also allowed the Nazi Party to more actively pursue its promotion of the ideology of Führerprinzip. This stated that Hitler possessed absolute control over the German government. Supported by a propaganda machine that relentlessly pushed the slogan Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer – which translates as “One People, One Empire, One Leader” – the Führerprinzip also confirmed the Nazi Party’s complete control over every element of German society. This ranged from local government to factories and even to the management and control schools, although in terms of government it sometimes meant that officials were reluctant to make decisions without Hitler’s personal input or approval. It was also used by Nazi war criminals at the Nuremberg Trials to argue that they were not guilty since they were only following orders.

600th anniversary of the Battle of Agincourt coming soon – 25 October 2015!

Posted on Updated on

In this year of big British related historic anniversaries (Magna Carta & Battle of Waterloo) we have another one on the horizon! How did an outnumbered army suffering from serious illnesses overwhelm a mighty French army? How important was the longbow and the strategies adopted by Henry V – how important was he as an individual in the fate of the battle?

25th October 2015 – 600th anniversary of Agincourt! As we approach this anniversary, you can read great articles and follow the route which King Henry V of England took during the campaign at http://www.agincourt600.com/

Source: Peter Hoskins – Can we follow Henry’s route today? http://www.agincourt600.com/can-we-follow-henrys-route-today/

By Peter Hoskins

The short answer is yes we can.

We are fortunate that there are many contemporary reports of the campaign. There are some differences between these accounts, but by and large the main axis of advance of Henry’s army from his landing near modern Le Havre through Harfleur, on to the battlefield and then to Calais is well established. Much has, of course, changed over the centuries. Henry landed on the Normandy coast near what is now known as Sainte-Adresse, now part of the agglomeration of Le Havre near the mouth of the Seine. In 1415 Sainte-Adresse was a small village and the main port in the area was Harfleur, about 8km inland on the Seine. Le Havre did not exist and the land between the Sainte-Adresse and Harfleur was open country with a few scattered settlements. Harfleur has long since given way to Le Havre as the main port, and Henry’s route to Harfleur today is through the sprawling modern town. However, the sites of the siege camps used by Henry on Monte Lecomte and the Duke of Clarence on Mont Cabert are on undeveloped land above Harfleur, and the priory of Graville where Henry stayed on his first night ashore can still be seen. Harfleur itself still has much to show of its medieval heritage.Henry27s Itinerary02


Beyond Harfleur some places on Henry’s itinerary have grown in importance, while others are now little more than names on the map. Nevertheless, much of the countryside remains relatively sparsley populated, and it is easy to visualise the country as it would have been seen by the men in Henry’s army, with villages marked by their churches visible from long distances across the open countryside. Along the route many buildings, including vestiges of town defences, castles and churches survive from the period. An example of a town with substantial elements of surviving town defences is Montivilliers, only 5km north of Harfleur. Perhaps the finest example of surviving military architecture is the magnificent castle of Arques-la-Bataille. Henry drew up his army in view of this castle and the garrison responded by firing guns. However, Henry did not wish to squander resources and time assaulting such fortresses, and Henry negotiated a safe passage and victuals in return for sparing the adjacent town and the surrounding area from burning and looting. A fine example of the rich ecclesiastic heritage along the route is the priory church of Notre-Dame built in 1130 in Airaines, through which Henry passed in his search for a crossing of the Somme.

The route from modern Le Havre to Calais via the battlefield covers a little over 500km, a comfortable tour of a few days by car, a week or so by bike or around four weeks on foot. Of course, there is no need to follow the whole route to gain a flavour of the campaign itinerary. However, retracing even part of the itinerary of Henry’s army, particularly on foot, is a useful aid to understanding the challenges faced by Henry and his commanders in moving a large army, encumbered by wagons and with many men on foot, across northern France on roads of poor quality with the search for food a constant challenge. In particular, the approach on foot from the valley of the Ternoise up onto the higher ground near Maisoncelle and Agincourt as the area of the battlefield comes into view is striking. One can almost feel how many of the men in Henry’s army would have, perhaps for the first time, now been aware of the challenge awaiting them as the larger French army gathered ahead of them, blocking the road to Calais.

Discussion of Henry’s itinerary can be found in Agincourt, a New History, by Anne Curry, (Stroud, 2005), paperback edition 2006. The sources of the itinerary are in The Battle of Agincourt, Sources and Interpretations, Anne Curry, 2nd Edn (Woodbridge, 2009). Detailed information for tourist’s wishing to follow the itinerary of Henry V in 1415 can be found in Agincourt 1415: A Tourist’s Guide to the Campaign (See below).

Peter Hoskins is, with Anne Curry, the author of Agincourt 1415: A Tourist’s Guide to the Campaign (Pen & Sword 2015), http://www.pen-and-sword.co.uk/Agincourt-1415-Paperback/p/7902.

Photographs taken by Peter Hoskins: top image is of the castle at Arques la Bataille, bottom left image is of Graville Priory, bottom right image is of the twelfth century Church of Notre-Dame in Airaines

The map was drawn by Scott Hall, ©Peter Hoskins. Photographs ©Peter Hoskins.


‘Big Brother is watching you’ – East German life under Stasi surveillance in the GDR

Posted on

Watch this excellent TED talk on living under arguably the most effective surveillance orientated secret police in the Eastern bloc. Did you know that 20% of all East Germans were informers in the Cold War period?

USA 1917-29 Revision: Race relations in USA before WW2

Posted on

The status of black Americans (BBC ‘Bitesize’ History)

After the end of the American Civil War in 1865, legislation was passed to end slavery. For the first time since their transportation to the nation, black Americans were legally free. Further legislation followed soon after to make it illegal for people to be denied the vote or discriminated against because of the colour of their skin.

Despite these good intentions, black Americans still faced hostility, bigotry and persecution.

Most whites believed that blacks were inferior in every way. Politically, socially, and economically, black Americans were second-class citizens. They had to be kept in their place. For most white Americans, the question of equal rights for black Americans simply did not arise. The ‘negro’ was inferior – that was just the way things were.

Segregation in the South

Although migration to the North and the West began soon after the Civil War ended, the great majority of black Americans still lived in the Southern states where white superiority was enforced and where the slavery culture was still warmly remembered and embraced.

In many of these states discrimination was not just commonplace – it was legal. States such as Alabama introduced a series of laws to keep the races separated and the black population under control. These measures were nicknamed the ‘Jim Crow’ laws, after a fictional character in the popular minstrel shows that made fun of black people. These laws enforced the strict segregation of the races and rigidly maintained the inferior status of black citizens. Typical laws included:

  • Public transport waiting rooms were strictly segregated.
  • Places open to the public such as shops, hotels, cinemas, theatres and libraries had to provide separate rooms and facilities for the different races.
  • Education. Legally, black children could be educated in separate schools, so long as the schooling was of an equal educational standard. In reality, schools for black Americans were far from equal, and the quality of education provided was inferior. In 1896, the Supreme Court upheld that this policy was legal and fair.
  • In most of the Southern states, inter-marriage between blacks and whites was illegal.
  • In employment, blacks received lower pay than whites and they were restricted to work of lower status, such as janitors, cleaners, and porters.
  • Southern towns were strictly segregated into black and white residential areas.

Violence and intimidation

It was virtually impossible for black Americans to challenge segregation in the South. To do so ran the risk of serious violence at the hands of white racists, particularly the Ku Klux Klan.

To unite native-born white Americans in the preservation of American institutions, and the supremacy of white race.

From a KKK newsletter

In the years after World War I, there had been a major revival in the strength of the Ku Klux Klan, the most well known of the racist organisations. By the mid-1920s, the Klan had over 100,000 members across the South and had begun to extend its influence into Northern and Western states. Its campaigns of hate and violence intensified and Klan violence, beatings, burnings, brandings, attacks with acid and lynching increased rapidly.

  • In 1919, 70 black Americans were lynched, 10 of them former soldiers.
  • A major race riot was sparked in Chicago, when a black youth accidentally entered a ‘whites only’ beach. Race hatred was not simply confined to the South.
  • In 1921 in Tulsa, Oklahoma, a serious race riot took place and 25 blacks and 9 whites were killed.

The result of this was inevitable. Blacks were intimidated and terrified by these frightening levels of violence, and were afraid to challenge white racism.

As the political power of the Klan grew, Southern politicians often depended on its support, and were reluctant to challenge its power. The Klan even held a huge demonstration in the centre of Washington – the seat of American Government.

Why didn’t the Government do something?

Throughout the nation and especially in the Southern states there were millions of black Americans. The USA was a democracy. So why didn’t black citizens vote for change or petition the Government to intervene and defend them? Why didn’t the Government step in regardless?

The Southern states were very effective at limiting the political power of the black populations in their boundaries by making it difficult for them to register as voters. Quite often they demanded residential or educational qualifications that had to be met before black people were eligible to vote.

In addition, the Klan would intimidate blacks attempting to register as voters. Even though they formed the majority of the population in the states of Mississippi and Louisiana, they were not able to develop any effective political power of their own.

Also, in the 1920s the federal government was not particularly powerful or active. The general policy during the 1920s was to intervene as little as possible in the affairs of the individual states, which were largely left to get on with running things in their own way. The Republican administrations of the 1920s turned a blind eye towards racism and segregation in the South.

In the 1930s there was a major change in policy with the Roosevelt administrations. Under President Roosevelt the federal government intervened very actively indeed to attempt to deal with the social and economic problems of the Depression.

However, Roosevelt was a Democrat and so were most of the political leaders of the South. Roosevelt needed their support at elections so, although he was sympathetic to the problems facing black Americans, Roosevelt did not attempt to challenge segregation.

Political movements for black Americans

At this time there were some attempts by black Americans to work to try to improve their status in American society. However, there was no single, united movement or leader. Black political movements remained relatively weak and divided and were incapable of mounting an effective challenge to racism and segregation.

National Association for the Advancement of Colored People

The first leader of the NAACP was W.E.B. Du Bois, who campaigned actively to improve the conditions of black Americans. Working strictly within the law, Du Bois and the NAACP drew attention to the difficulties facing black Americans in many areas, such as housing, education, jobs and voting rights. However, the NAACP’s campaigns had little success in bringing about real change.

Universal Negro Improvement Association

The UNIA was led by Marcus Garvey who delivered scathing criticisms of white racism and urged black Americans to assert themselves and their own identity. At one point Garvey urged black Americans to return to Africa. Garvey was convicted of fraud and deported from the USA in 1925.


Recognition of the injustices faced by black Americans during this period was almost as hard to come by as changes to the legislation.

The first significant laws to be passed to try and address the inequality of black Americans came in 1941 – some 76 years after slavery had been abolished. President Roosevelt established the Fair employment Practises Committee (F.E.P.C.)

American involvement in World War II from 1942 until 1945 focused attention away from the plight of the black population as Americans, both black and white, became involved in the war effort.

The fight for equality and an end to discrimination would continue afresh after the war ended.

Film: ‘The birth of a nation’ (DW Griffiths 1915)

Documentary on USA & Birth of a Nation

Lynching in USA

Mitsubishi apologises for using American POWS during WW2

Posted on


Better late than never! You would be stunned at the names of successful global corporations who used Nazi-Axis pows and other prisoners to work like ‘slaves’ during WW2? These businesses were treated very lightly by the victorious allies at the end of the war. Did you know that it was the British military who restored and got the VW complex in Wolfsberg working again at the end of the war!