Tell long-term causes from the event that set things off

Grade 10 Social Studies Worksheet - Challenge Me

Circle the best answer.

1. Read this first

   Use this

   Card A (today): "Treaty of Versailles". Who made it: historians at the US Holocaust Memorial Museum. For whom: readers today. Why: to explain how the peace of 1919 shaped Germany. Summary in our words, not a quotation: The 1919 treaty held Germany responsible for the war. Germany lost 13 percent of its land, and its army was limited to 100,000 men. Most Germans found its terms oppressive, and the museum says the settlement played an important role in the rise of Nazism. Context (what else was happening): Written decades later, with the records of both wars. Limits (what this source cannot tell us): It explains German anger, not the choices of other countries. Reading X (invented for this sheet): "The 1919 settlement set Germany on a path to another war. Its terms seemed oppressive to most Germans, and parties that promised to overturn it won support." Reading Y (invented for this sheet): "The 1919 settlement made another war possible, not certain. Germany joined the League of Nations in 1926. What changed in the 1930s was a government set on expansion, and other powers that did not stop it in 1936 and 1938."

3. 1.

   Readings X and Y disagree about 1919. Ari asks which statement card A and both readings allow.

   • The treaty did not matter, since Y says Germany joined the League of Nations in 1926, a sign of calm
   • The 1919 terms mattered; X and Y disagree on whether they made a new war likely or only possible
   • The treaty was the only cause, since X and card A both focus on it and neither names another
   • The treaty made war certain, since X says so and card A says most Germans found it oppressive
4. 2.

   The strip puts 1919 fourteen years before Hitler becomes chancellor in 1933. Esme asks how X and Y each treat that gap.

   Use the picture in question 1.

   • Both say the gap shows war was certain by 1919, but they differ on how long it would take to arrive
   • X carries 1919's anger across the gap; Y points to events inside it that could have led elsewhere
   • X treats the gap as empty, and Y says it shows the treaty caused nothing, since nothing happened in it
   • Both treat the gap as proof: X shows the treaty took fourteen years to work, Y shows it did not work
5. 3.

   Jun reads X and Y. Which evidence would most help decide between them?

   Use the picture in question 1.

   • Evidence that Germany joined the League of Nations in 1926, since reading Y alone mentions it
   • Evidence of how much land Germany lost in 1919, since that shows how oppressive the terms really were
   • Evidence that war broke out in 1939, since both readings need it to be true before they can be tested
   • Evidence of how far German voters in the 1920s backed parties that wanted to overturn the 1919 terms
6. 4.

   A historian says “Y is stronger, because it names Germany's choices in 1936 and 1938.” Which counterargument from card A and X is best, Kira?

   Use the picture in question 1.

   • Y ignores that the treaty was the sole cause of the war, which card A and X both state plainly
   • Y is wrong, since card A says Germans found the terms oppressive in 1919, so each later choice followed
   • Card A says the settlement played a role in the rise of Nazism, so the 1930s choices were partly its result
   • Y cannot be trusted because it was written for this sheet, while card A comes from a real museum

7. Use this

   Reading X (invented for this sheet): "The 1919 settlement set Germany on a path to another war. Its terms seemed oppressive to most Germans, and parties that promised to overturn it won support." Reading Y (invented for this sheet): "The 1919 settlement made another war possible, not certain. Germany joined the League of Nations in 1926. What changed in the 1930s was a government set on expansion, and other powers that did not stop it in 1936 and 1938." Card D (written for this sheet): three crises side by side. 1789 in France: long-term causes, war debt and unfair privileges; trigger, the king calls the Estates-General in 1788. 1914: long-term causes, rival alliances and quarrels over South Eastern Europe; trigger, the assassination on June 28, followed by Austria-Hungary's declaration of war on July 28. 1939: long-term causes, anger at the 1919 settlement and German expansion; trigger, the invasion of Poland on September 1, followed by the British and French declarations on September 3.

8. 5.

   Luz wants to use the 1789 case in card D to decide between X and Y. Which use is fair?

   • As a pattern only: conditions came first, then a decision; another case cannot settle 1919's role
   • As proof: 1789 shows long-term causes always decide the outcome, so X is right about the 1919 settlement
   • As a match: the war debt of 1789 and the reparations of 1919 are the same kind of cause, so X and Y agree
   • As proof for Y: in 1789 the king's decision mattered more than the debt, so choices outweigh the treaty

9. Use this

   Card A (today): "Treaty of Versailles". Who made it: historians at the US Holocaust Memorial Museum. For whom: readers today. Why: to explain how the peace of 1919 shaped Germany. Summary in our words, not a quotation: The 1919 treaty held Germany responsible for the war. Germany lost 13 percent of its land, and its army was limited to 100,000 men. Most Germans found its terms oppressive, and the museum says the settlement played an important role in the rise of Nazism. Context (what else was happening): Written decades later, with the records of both wars. Limits (what this source cannot tell us): It explains German anger, not the choices of other countries.

10. 6.

    A student says “Britain and France went to war to defend Poland's borders.” Milo checks the strip. What does it support?

    • That the promise was their only reason, because the strip lists it just before the declarations of war
    • That they had already decided on war after Munich, since the promise to Poland followed it in 1939
    • Nothing: a promise made in March says nothing about a decision made in September
    • That a March 31 promise and a September 3 declaration fit the claim, though not as their only reason

11. Use this

    Card A (today): "Treaty of Versailles". Who made it: historians at the US Holocaust Memorial Museum. For whom: readers today. Why: to explain how the peace of 1919 shaped Germany. Summary in our words, not a quotation: The 1919 treaty held Germany responsible for the war. Germany lost 13 percent of its land, and its army was limited to 100,000 men. Most Germans found its terms oppressive, and the museum says the settlement played an important role in the rise of Nazism. Context (what else was happening): Written decades later, with the records of both wars. Limits (what this source cannot tell us): It explains German anger, not the choices of other countries. Reading Y (invented for this sheet): "The 1919 settlement made another war possible, not certain. Germany joined the League of Nations in 1926. What changed in the 1930s was a government set on expansion, and other powers that did not stop it in 1936 and 1938."

12. 7.

    A student says “Munich in 1938 proves that giving in to Germany made war certain.” Noah tests this against the cards. Which reply is best?

    • The claim is true, because the leaders who signed at Munich already knew that war was coming in 1939
    • The claim is meaningless, because the Munich agreement and the war are two different events a year apart
    • The strip shows Munich and then war, but not that war was certain; what leaders expected would be needed
    • The claim is proven, because the strip shows war breaking out just one year after the Munich agreement

13. Use this

    Card A (today): "Treaty of Versailles". Who made it: historians at the US Holocaust Memorial Museum. For whom: readers today. Why: to explain how the peace of 1919 shaped Germany. Summary in our words, not a quotation: The 1919 treaty held Germany responsible for the war. Germany lost 13 percent of its land, and its army was limited to 100,000 men. Most Germans found its terms oppressive, and the museum says the settlement played an important role in the rise of Nazism. Context (what else was happening): Written decades later, with the records of both wars. Limits (what this source cannot tell us): It explains German anger, not the choices of other countries. Reading X (invented for this sheet): "The 1919 settlement set Germany on a path to another war. Its terms seemed oppressive to most Germans, and parties that promised to overturn it won support." Reading Y (invented for this sheet): "The 1919 settlement made another war possible, not certain. Germany joined the League of Nations in 1926. What changed in the 1930s was a government set on expansion, and other powers that did not stop it in 1936 and 1938."

14. 8.

    A student says “Reading X is proved by the invasion of Poland.” Pia checks it against the cards. What is the best reply?

    • X is disproved: the invasion came fourteen years after 1933, and X says nothing about the 1930s
    • X is proved: the invasion shows that the anger of 1919 led straight to a new war in 1939
    • The invasion fits X and Y alike, so it cannot decide between them without evidence on the treaty
    • X is proved, because card A says the settlement helped Nazism and no other cause is named

15. Use this

    Card D (written for this sheet): three crises side by side. 1789 in France: long-term causes, war debt and unfair privileges; trigger, the king calls the Estates-General in 1788. 1914: long-term causes, rival alliances and quarrels over South Eastern Europe; trigger, the assassination on June 28, followed by Austria-Hungary's declaration of war on July 28. 1939: long-term causes, anger at the 1919 settlement and German expansion; trigger, the invasion of Poland on September 1, followed by the British and French declarations on September 3.

16. 9.

    In card D the gap from trigger to war is 30 days in 1914 and 2 days in 1939. Ren asks what that suggests about triggers.

    • The gap is simple arithmetic and tells historians nothing about how the trigger worked in each case
    • A trigger is just the last event before war, so the gap from trigger to war should be a few days in each case
    • A shorter gap means a stronger trigger, so the invasion of Poland was a stronger trigger than the 1914 assassination
    • A trigger can open a crisis, as in 1914, or itself be an act of war, as in 1939, so the gap varies

17. Use this

    Card A (today): "Treaty of Versailles". Who made it: historians at the US Holocaust Memorial Museum. For whom: readers today. Why: to explain how the peace of 1919 shaped Germany. Summary in our words, not a quotation: The 1919 treaty held Germany responsible for the war. Germany lost 13 percent of its land, and its army was limited to 100,000 men. Most Germans found its terms oppressive, and the museum says the settlement played an important role in the rise of Nazism. Context (what else was happening): Written decades later, with the records of both wars. Limits (what this source cannot tell us): It explains German anger, not the choices of other countries. Card D (written for this sheet): three crises side by side. 1789 in France: long-term causes, war debt and unfair privileges; trigger, the king calls the Estates-General in 1788. 1914: long-term causes, rival alliances and quarrels over South Eastern Europe; trigger, the assassination on June 28, followed by Austria-Hungary's declaration of war on July 28. 1939: long-term causes, anger at the 1919 settlement and German expansion; trigger, the invasion of Poland on September 1, followed by the British and French declarations on September 3.

18. 10.

    Zee asks whether card D's three cases show that long-term causes matter more than triggers. What is the best answer?

    • Yes: card A says the settlement played an important role, so long-term causes matter most in any crisis
    • No: the cases show both present each time, not which mattered more; historians weigh them differently
    • No: three cases are too few to show anything about causes, even a pattern of both being present
    • Yes: each trigger is a single event, so the long-term causes must have carried most of the weight