What Do Historians Think?

Part of Steps to War · Section 6 of 13

InterpretationsUnit: Conflict and Tension 1918-1939GCSE

This interpretations covers What Do Historians Think? within Steps to War for GCSE History. Revise Steps to War in Conflict and Tension 1918-1939 for GCSE History with 8 exam-style questions and 15 flashcards. This topic appears regularly enough that it should still be part of a steady revision cycle. It is section 6 of 13 in this topic. Use this interpretations to connect the idea to the wider topic before moving on to questions and flashcards.

🔎 What Do Historians Think?

"Hitler was in many ways an opportunist, always ready to take advantage of others' mistakes. He was not a careful planner, and he made many mistakes himself."
— A.J.P. Taylor, The Origins of the Second World War (1961)

Interpretation 1 — Hitler was an opportunist, not a master planner (A.J.P. Taylor): A.J.P. Taylor caused enormous controversy in 1961 by arguing that Hitler had no fixed programme for European domination. In Taylor's view, each step in Hitler's foreign policy was a response to opportunities created by others' failures — the Rhineland happened because France was in political crisis; Anschluss happened because the Austrian Chancellor miscalculated; Munich happened because Britain and France were desperate to avoid war. Hitler was "a politician in search of a programme," reacting rather than planning. Taylor argued the real responsibility for war lay with the appeasers who gave Hitler the opportunities.

Interpretation 2 — Hitler had a deliberate master plan (Hugh Trevor-Roper): Hugh Trevor-Roper insisted that Hitler had a consistent ideological programme laid out in Mein Kampf (1925) and confirmed by the Hossbach Memorandum (1937). The steps to war — Rhineland, Anschluss, Sudetenland, Czechoslovakia, Poland — were not opportunistic reactions but the deliberate execution of aims Hitler had stated publicly years before. Trevor-Roper argued that to treat Hitler as a conventional politician responding to circumstances was to fundamentally misunderstand the nature of Nazi ideology and the Holocaust that resulted from it.

Why do they disagree? Taylor and Trevor-Roper differ on whether Hitler's actions were driven by ideology or circumstance. This debate matters for AQA exam answers: Taylor's interpretation shifts blame towards the appeasers, making Chamberlain and the democratic powers more responsible; Trevor-Roper's interpretation makes Hitler the primary cause. The Hossbach Memorandum (1937) is the key piece of evidence — Taylor dismissed it as informal speculation; Trevor-Roper used it as proof of deliberate plans. The mainstream historical consensus today leans towards Trevor-Roper, but Taylor's emphasis on appeasement's enabling role remains significant for balanced essays.

Practice questions for Steps to War

In which year did Hitler remilitarise the Rhineland?

  • A. 1933
  • B. 1936
  • C. 1938
  • D. 1939
1 markfoundation

What was the result of the rigged plebiscite held after the Anschluss in March 1938?

  • A. 51% voted in favour of union with Germany
  • B. 75% voted in favour of union with Germany
  • C. 88% voted in favour of union with Germany
  • D. 99.7% voted in favour of union with Germany
1 markfoundation

Quick recall flashcards

Rhineland remilitarisation date?
March 7, 1936 — Hitler's biggest gamble, democracies did nothing
Anschluss date and result?
March 1938 — Austria united with Germany. 99.7% rigged plebiscite.

8 questions on Steps to War — practise free

Instant marking, adaptive difficulty and spaced-repetition flashcards — all aligned to your exam board.

Start revising free →