States, nations and boundaries, and how borders changed after wars
Grade 9 Social Studies Worksheet
Circle the best answer.
Read this first
Boundary changes in Europe, 1918 to 1922
Event or fact Date or figure Wilson's Fourteen Points, point 13: an independent Poland with free and secure access to the sea January 8, 1918 Treaty of Versailles signed June 28, 1919 Treaty of Trianon signed, with Hungary June 4, 1920 Hungary after Trianon: share of its pre-war land and people kept 28% of land, 36% of people Ethnic Hungarians left outside Hungary's new borders about 3.3 million Upper Silesia plebiscite March 20, 1921: about 60% for Germany, about 40% for Poland Upper Silesia divided by the League of Nations Council, Poland's share just under a third of the land, almost half of the people, over 80% of the heavy industry Note: Versailles gave Poland a strip of land to the Baltic Sea through the settled province of West Prussia. The strip cut East Prussia off from the rest of Germany by land, and in 1922 Germany began a ferry service between the two. Danzig, a mostly German-speaking port, became a Free City under League of Nations protection, without a plebiscite. Hungary's lost land went to Czechoslovakia, Romania and the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes. The Allied Supreme Council could not agree on dividing Upper Silesia, so the Council of the League of Nations made the award. A physical boundary follows a landform; a cultural boundary follows differences of language, religion or ethnicity; a geometric boundary follows straight lines; an antecedent boundary is drawn before an area is settled; a superimposed boundary is drawn over an area that is already settled. Self-determination is the principle that a people should decide its own government.
Trianon left about 3.3 million ethnic Hungarians outside Hungary. Which kind of boundary does Ari call the new border, and why?
- Antecedent: it was drawn before the area was settled, so it cut across no existing community
- Cultural: it follows where Hungarians live, which is why the dispute is about culture
- Geometric: it was drawn as straight lines, which is how it ignored where people live
- Superimposed: it was drawn over settled land and cut across where Hungarians lived
Bo says the Polish corridor was an antecedent boundary. Check the claim against the note.
- No: it was a cultural boundary, because Poles lived along the whole strip to the sea
- Yes: an antecedent boundary ignores the cultural pattern of an area, and the corridor did that
- Yes: it was drawn in a new treaty before Poland used the strip, so it came before settlement
- No: antecedent means drawn before settlement, and the corridor cut through settled West Prussia
Point 13 called for a Poland with free and secure access to the sea. Which claim does it back, Jun?
- Germany's claim to keep East Prussia joined by land to the rest of Germany
- Poland's claim to a sea outlet, though it does not say Danzig must be Polish
- Poland's claim to Danzig, since a free port is needed for secure access to the sea
- The claim of Danzig's German speakers to decide their own government and borders
Danzig was mostly German-speaking and Poland needed a port. The Free City came without a plebiscite. What did that balance, Kira?
- It settled the matter by a plebiscite of Danzig's people, which chose the Free City over both Germany and Poland
- It gave Poland the port in full, since point 13 required it as a free and secure outlet for trade
- Poland's need for sea access against Danzig's German speakers, neither getting its full claim
- It gave self-determination to Danzig's German speakers and no sea route to Poland whatsoever
About 3.3 million ethnic Hungarians lived outside Hungary after Trianon. Which principle backs Hungary's complaint, and what stands against it, Luz?
- Point 13 backs it, since a free Hungary also needs a secure outlet to the sea for its trade
- Self-determination backs it; against it stand the three neighbors that received the land
- No principle backs it, since a treaty signed in 1920 settles any claim made after its signing
- Self-determination backs the three neighbors, since they gained land and so decided its fate
How did the Polish corridor shift access to the sea and to East Prussia, Milo?
- Poland gained Danzig's port in full, while Germany kept its land link to East Prussia unbroken
- Germany gained a land route to the Baltic Sea; Poland lost its link to East Prussia and began a ferry
- Poland gained a land route to the sea; Germany lost its land link to East Prussia and began a ferry
- Both gained a route to the sea: Poland by land and Germany by way of a ferry from 1922 onward
Poland received just under a third of Upper Silesia's land and over 80% of its heavy industry. What does Noah conclude about the line?
- Poland's shares of land, people and industry were near equal, close to one third each, so no district was favored
- The line ran around the industry: Poland's industry share was nearly three times its land share
- Poland's share of industry matched its share of people, almost half, so the line followed population
- Germany received most of the industry, since it kept the larger share of the land and people
The League protected Danzig and divided Upper Silesia. What do the two cases share, Ren?
- Just Danzig held a plebiscite, and the League decided Upper Silesia without any vote whatsoever
- In both the League stepped in between Germany and Poland, but just Upper Silesia held a plebiscite
- In both the League followed a plebiscite and gave Poland the larger share of the area at stake
- In both the League gave the area to Poland because Poland needed the industry and the port
Tala says the corridor was unfair to Germany because it cut East Prussia off. What do point 13 and the ferry add?
- The ferry shows Germany lost nothing, since it still reached East Prussia by sea
- Point 13 settles the argument, since a stated aim outweighs any cost the ferry shows
- The ferry shows the corridor failed, so point 13 should be set aside as mistaken
- Point 13 shows sea access was a stated aim; the ferry shows Germany bore a cost
Zee says self-determination decided every border in the chart. Test the claim.
- No: Danzig had no vote, and the Upper Silesia award and Trianon did not follow the people
- No: just Hungary's borders ignored it, and the other three followed the people's choices
- Yes: the Free City, the award and Trianon each protected a people's right to decide its borders
- Yes: the Upper Silesia plebiscite shows each border in the chart followed a vote of the people