Analysing Historical Interpretations (GCSE History)

There Is No “Right Answer” In History - And That’s The Point

One thing I often say to students is that “there is no right answer in history”. While this may seem counterintuitive at first, it is in fact what history is all about.

History is the study of the past, but it is far more than memorising dates and statistics. History is about creating interpretations to help us understand why events from the past unfolded in the way that they did. There are almost always a variety of causes leading up to an event, as well as a multitude of consequences arising afterwards. We understand these causes and consequences thanks to historical sources, and it is the job of the historian to evaluate these primary sources to come up with their arguments.

Even though the historians are working with the same information and evidence from the past, the conclusions they come to are often quite different. As long as they don’t actually invent evidence, there is, in fact, no one right answer. Interpretations are valid as long as they are sufficiently backed up by the evidence. It is your job, as a GCSE history student but also a critical thinker about global events, to evaluate these arguments and assess how convincing you find them. In this blog, expect tutors provide a step-by-step guide on how to interpret and assess historical interpretations. 

The following examples come from the Edexcel GCSE History paper from summer 2022 and concern Hitler’s rise to power in Germany. Don’t worry if you’re doing a different exam board, (like AQA or OCR) or a different module; the skills we discuss here are useful for historical interpretations across the board. But first, here is a brief overview of the Nazis’ rise to power in 1933.

How the Nazis Came to Power

The Nazi SA (Sturmabteilung) during the Munich Putsch, 1923

After the failure of the Munich Putsch in 1923, a disastrous attempt by the Nazis to take over power in Germany by violent means, the party’s leader, Adolf Hitler, reorganised and reshaped the party so that they would appear more democratic. They began to take part in local elections, holding rallies to generate more popular support, giving the outward appearance of a conventional democratic party. Their message that Germany was in danger and needed major political and economic changes, however, was not well received by the German people in the 1920s. The Weimar Republic was settling down, quality of life was generally improving, and, thanks to Gustav Stresemann, the German economy was improving. That all changed following the Wall Street Crash in October 1929. The USA recalled the loans that were propping up the German economy, causing the German economy to be plunged into turmoil once again. Through a concerted propaganda campaign, the Nazis established themselves as the party that would solve all of Germany’s problems by providing job security and economic stability. In September 1930, they won 18% of the vote, making them the second largest party in Germany. Hitler ran for President against Paul von Hindenburg in 1932. While unsuccessful, he did establish himself as a major political player, and the party won 37% of the vote in the July 1932 election. Hitler’s increased power and popularity, as well as the Nazis’ disruptive behaviour in parliament and society, were causing concern for those in power. Eventually, political leaders including General von Schleicher and Franz von Papen managed to convince President Hindenburg that the best way to control Hitler would be to make him Chancellor, thereby allowing them to control Hitler and limit his powers. Or so they thought.

Two Interpretations

As you can see from this short summary, it is a complex topic with a variety of causes leading to Hitler’s appointment as Chancellor. So let’s have a look at two different historian’s interpretations as taken from the Edexcel GCSE paper from Summer 2022.

Interpretation 1: From Hitler’s Thirty Days to Power by H A Turner, published in 1996.

“In January 1933, Hitler did not seize power; it was handed to him by the men who controlled Germany. The Nazi Party had suffered huge losses in the Reichstag elections of November 1932 and it was starting to fall apart by January 1933.

“Hindenburg began to mistrust Chancellor von Schleicher. Meanwhile, von Papen managed to overcome the elderly President Hindenburg’s doubts about Hitler and persuaded him to appoint Hitler as Chancellor.

Hitler was supported by less than half the German population when he was appointed Chancellor by President Hindenburg.”

Interpretation 2: From Hitler by I Kershaw, published in 1991.

“It was an extraordinary achievement by the Nazis to win the votes of a third of the German people between 1929 and 1932. By 1932, Hitler was in charge of a massive movement of 800,000 Party members and 13 million voters were generally prepared to place their trust in him. Nazi propaganda suggested that victory was inevitable.

Mass support gave Hitler a key to unlocking the door to power. No other party leader had anything like Hitler’s support from the German population.”

The questions in the Edexcel GCSE paper are designed to help you in your analysis of these interpretations, so we’ll work through them one at a time.

Exam Questions Examples

1. Study Interpretations 1 and 2. They give different views about the reasons why Hitler became Chancellor in 1933. What is the main difference between these views? Explain your answer, using details from both interpretations.

This question requires you to read each interpretation carefully to establish what their argument is. If you are struggling to work it out, pay attention to if they ever use negative language, like “not.” If you can establish what it’s not arguing, you’re one step closer to working out the argument. The opening sentence in interpretation 1 gives us this clue: “Hitler did not seize power; it was handed to him.” Later on in the same interpretation, the author states that Hitler had the support of “less than half the German population.” Therefore the argument in interpretation 1 is that the most important reason why Hitler came to power was the actions of the political elite.

Interpretation 2, however, argues that it was due to “mass support,” i.e. popular politics. Notice that the author uses the same evidence - “a third of the German people” is still less than half - but crucially places it within the context of other political parties at the time. The support may have come from less than half of the population, but crucially “no other party leader” could come close to those figures.

The main difference between these two interpretations is that interpretation 1 argues that the actions of the political elite enabled Hitler to become Chancellor in January 1933, while interpretation 2 argues that he earned that role through popular support. We will now analyse why these interpretations differ.

2. Suggest one reason why Interpretations 1 and 2 give different views about the reasons why Hitler became Chancellor in 1933.

Interpretations often give different views because the writers choose to focus on different aspects of the same event. One reason these interpretations differ is that they emphasise different causes for Hitler becoming Chancellor.

Interpretation 2 focuses on the idea that mass public support brought Hitler to power, so it does not mention the Nazis’ electoral losses in late 1932, because that would weaken its argument. In contrast, interpretation 1 focuses on the role of the political elite and includes this point to show that Hitler’s rise was not purely due to popularity. In fact, the language in Interpretation 1 implies that Nazi popularity was falling, which strengthens its argument that the decisions of the elite - not public support - were decisive.

This difference in emphasis shows how the same event can be interpreted differently depending on what the writer chooses to focus on.

3. How far do you agree with Interpretation 2 about the reasons why Hitler became Chancellor in 1933? Explain your answer, using both interpretations, and your knowledge of the historical context.

By the time you get to this question in the exam, you've already explored what each interpretation argues and why they differ. This is the time to bring in your own knowledge and critically evaluate what the interpretations are arguing.

Remember: this is not about deciding who is “right” or “wrong.” These interpretations are written by professional historians. Even if you disagree with one, it’s still a valid, evidence-based view. In this case, it is undeniable that, as interpretation 2 argues, Hitler came to power at least in part thanks to his support among the German public. However, you could convincingly argue that his popularity played a minor role in him becoming Chancellor by using the argument from interpretation 1 as well as your own knowledge. Remember that you need to evaluate the arguments in both interpretations.

The key to accessing top marks with this question is to arrive at a substantiated judgement. This means answering the “how far” element of the question and backing up your argument with analysis of the arguments in both interpretations as well as your own knowledge. We focus on essay writing skills in our lessons at Humanitas, so book a session with one of our tutors for more information.

Conclusion

Working with historical interpretations is a key skill, not just for GCSE History but for thinking critically about the world around you. It helps you learn how to evaluate different viewpoints and evidence, both in exams and in real life. Remember to:

• Break down what each interpretation is arguing

• Think about why the historian might hold that view

• Assess how far you agree with each argument.

If you do this carefully, you’ll be well on your way to achieving top marks, and developing skills that will serve you well beyond the classroom.