case study of nazi germany notes

On a mission to end educational inequality for young people everywhere.

ZNotes Education Limited is incorporated and registered in England and Wales, under Registration number: 12520980 whose Registered office is at: Docklands Lodge Business Centre, 244 Poplar High Street, London, E14 0BB. “ZNotes” and the ZNotes logo are trademarks of ZNotes Education Limited (registration UK00003478331).

Case Study: Theresienstadt Ghetto

Philipp Manes, a German Jew and a prolific writer, and his wife Gertrud were sent to Theresienstadt in 1942. Whilst incarcerated, Manes kept a detailed account of life in the ghetto in several diaries. This map shows a hand drawn ground plan of the ghetto from 1943.

Courtesy of The Wiener Holocaust Library Collections.

This post-war report of Theresienstadt compiles figures from the ghetto. This page discusses the number of people who passed through the ghetto, where from, and the number of those who perished in Theresienstadt itself.

While all ghettos were unique , Theresienstadt was distinctly so.

Theresienstadt was a ghetto, but also had features of a transit camp. It was used as a temporary holding place for Jews on their way to camps further east.

The town of Theresienstadt, or Terezín in Czech, was a town established around a military fortress. Construction began in 1780. The town was divided into two parts, the small fortress and the large fortress. These fortresses were separated by River Ohře. Until the Nazi occupation, the town had an average population of just under 4000 people.

The Nazis established the ghetto on 24 November 1941. Following this, an average of 35,000 people were incarcerated at any given time between 1941 and 1945.

Kurt Gerron

Kurt Gerron was a Jewish film director from Germany. After fleeing from Nazi Germany to France in 1933, he was later captured in Amsterdam and deported to Westerbork in 1943. From Westerbork, he was sent to Theresienstadt in February 1944.

At Theresienstadt, Gerron was forced to plan and direct a propaganda film for the Nazis depicting Theresienstadt in a positive light. This film was entitled Theresienstadt: A Documentary Film from the Jewish Settlement Area but became unofficially referred to as  The Führer Gives a City to the Jews . It was filmed in August and September 1944, with many parts of the ghetto beautified to make it appear in a more positive light.

After directing the film, Gerron, and many of the prisoners featured in it, were deported to Auschwitz and murdered. The film was completed in March 1945, but due to its timing and the imminent end of the war, was never fully released or utilised for mass propaganda.

This document is one of the original draft overviews of the film, suggesting potential scenes.

Establishment of Theresienstadt

This letter was the last letter written by Otto Bendix to his wife, Gertrude Gurschke, shortly before his deportation. The excerpt reads: ‘Again, be strong and be happy, with or without me, that is my strong wish. Give my regards to my children if fate should decide against us. But again, I go full of faith in a good outcome. Love, as always since I have known you.’ Otto was deported to Theresienstadt from Berlin on 3 October 1942. He died in the ghetto just three months later on 8 January 1943, at the age of 64.

This list of names forms part of a deportation order of Jews living in ‘mixed-race’ marriages and stateless Jews to Theresienstadt. It was issued by the Gestapo in Bielefeld, a city in north-east Germany, on 8 February 1945 – just three months prior to the ghetto’s liberation.

The Nazis invaded and annexed what remained of Czechoslovakia in March 1939. As part of the Theresienstadt Ghetto had served as a prison previously, the Gestapo quickly re-established their own prison in the small fortress on 10 June 1940.

On 10 October 1941 Heydrich identified Theresienstadt as the desired Jewish settlement for German, Austrian and Czech Jews over the age of 65, First World War veterans , or well-known cultural or political figures. Theresienstadt was intended to serve as both a holding site for Jews on their way to extermination camps in the east or for Jews of cultural or political fame until their eventual deportation or death.

Later, Theresienstadt was also an important propaganda tool to disguise the nature of the Nazis treatment of elderly or prominent Jews. It was used to explain the deportation of elderly Jews from Germany, since it was implausible to suggest that they were being deported to complete forced labour due to their frail state and age. Instead, the Nazis claimed, these elderly Jews were sent for ‘retirement’ in the spa town of Theresienstadt.

The establishment and jurisdiction of the ghetto was assigned to the Gestapo, Adolf Eichmann and the Prague Office for Jewish Emigration.  Administration inside the ghetto was the responsibility of the elected Theresienstadt Jewish Council, led by chairman Jacob Edelstein.

On 24 November 1941, the first Jewish prisoners arrived in Theresienstadt. These prisoners were forced to convert the former military garrison into a ghetto. More prisoners soon arrived.

Just two months later, on 9 January 1942, the first transport of Czech Jews left Theresienstadt for other ghettos in the east. By the time the ghetto was liberated in May 1945, almost 90,000 Jews had been deported from Theresienstadt.

Conditions inside Theresienstadt

This savings book, issued by the self-administered Jewish bank of Theresienstadt, belonged to Max Hirschfeld. The book was used to record and receive pay for labour carried out in the ghetto. This pay was credited to a fake bank account and no money was received.

This letter also belonged to Max Hirschfeld, and, following liberation from the ghetto, requested refunds for the savings accrued by all surviving Theresienstadt inmates to compensate them for their work and their experience from the British Military Governor, Bielefeld. An annotation at the bottom of the letter states Max’s request ‘cannot be allowed’.

Conditions for prisoners held inside Theresienstadt were very poor. Of the 140,000 prisoners who were imprisoned there during its existence, 33,000 perished at the ghetto due to deprivation , starvation, and disease.

The ghetto was overcrowded, with between 40,000-50,000 people crammed into the living quarters. Initially, the first Jews to arrive at Theresienstadt were housed in the converted barracks, sleeping in triple decker wooden bunk beds, with several people sharing each bunk. However, overcrowding soon meant that some were also forced to sleep in the attics, cellars, and hallways.

Food was scarce. It was handed out three times a day and typically consisted of bread, soup made with lentils or potatoes, one slice of salami or meat (although this was rare), and coffee. When coupled with the lack of sanitation, the poor quality and lack of food often resulted in starvation and poor health. Food packages (which were a lifeline) could be received in the post from those outside of Theresienstadt, but as the war continued, and many of the prisoners’ family and friends disappeared, these often dwindled.

There was also a hospital within Theresienstadt. Although the lack of medicine meant that chances of recovery from illness still remained low, care was significantly better than care in other ghettos and camps in Nazi occupied Europe.

Running water in the ghetto existed, but was often temporarily faulty or broken. As a result of this, the overcrowded living barracks and the small amount of facilities, hygiene and sanitation were extremely poor.

Many of the prisoners in Theresienstadt were elderly or too sick to be able to work. Those who did work had jobs either working in the ghetto itself or carrying out hard labour outside of the ghetto. Whilst hard labour was often more demanding, it also provided an opportunity to leave the camp, and potentially to smuggle extra food to supplement their diets.

Culture inside Theresienstadt

Philipp Manes, a German Jew and a prolific writer, and his wife Gertrud were sent to Theresienstadt in 1942. Whilst incarcerated, Manes was key to the cultural life in Theresienstadt. He documented his experience in great detail in several notebooks, as well as organising a regular lecture series of over 500 talks. Manes’ Theresienstadt diaries also contain contributions by other incarcerated prisoners, such as this portrait of Manes in 1944 by Arthur Goldschmidt. Both Manes and his wife were deported from Theresienstadt on the last transport to Auschwitz in October 1944, where they were murdered.

Another prisoner who contributed to Manes Theresienstadt diaries was Hedwig Brahn. This image shows a drawing by Brahn completed in 1944 depicting a street scene in Theresienstadt.

This poem, entitled ‘Transport to Theresienstadt’, was written by dancer and poet Grete Salus following her incarceration in Theresienstadt between 1942 and 1944. An excerpt from the poem reads: ‘Suddenly I hear the steps of many people, but no human voices. It appears before me, a ghostly procession. I see women, men, children heavily loaded with cardboard signs around the neck, passing below me. They walk very slowly with bowed heads, some hardly drag themselves forward, nobody speaks a word, you just hear the banging of the crockery on their backpacks. Here and there one looks up and lets a longing glance slide along the rows of houses, eyes so sad, desperate. I feel tears running down my face‘. Many people incarcerated in Theresienstadt used poetry as a war of recording their experiences and expressing themselves.

As well as poets and writers, there were also a number of artists imprisoned in Theresienstadt, such as Peter Kien. Kien was a Jewish artist from Czechoslovakia, who was deported to Theresienstadt in December 1941. Here, Kien is pictured in the middle of the photograph.

In Theresienstadt, Kien continued his artwork, sketching many of his fellow inmates, and also immersed himself in musical and theatrical activities. This image shows part of Kien’s original text written for the opera Kaiser von Atlantis oder der Tod dankt ab (The Emperor of Atlantis) , with music by Viktor Ullmann, whilst imprisoned in the camp .

Prominent Jews who were famous for their professions nationally or internationally made up one of the main prisoner groups at Theresienstadt. As a result of this, and the Nazi desire to use the ghetto as a propaganda tool, culture within the ghetto flourished.

Artists, poets, philosophers, writers, musicians, professors and scientists all depicted life in the ghetto through paintings, poems, drawings, essays, books, pamphlets, lectures and more.

Culture also provided a means of temporary escape, as the over 2,300 lectures which took place there show. Many focused on expressing themselves on pre-war topics, transporting prisoners’ minds away from the harsh realities of their situation.

The ghetto also had a functioning lending library, which held more than 60,000 volumes, 10,000 of which were in Hebrew. Many of these texts supported religious life in the ghetto, which was practiced widely and with relative freedom.

Actors also performed several plays, such as Faust by Goethe. Musicians also put on performances, including a rendition of Giuseppe Verdi’s Messa da Requiem .

Red Cross visit

This fifty kronen bank note was issued in the Theresienstadt Ghetto in 1943. The currency was initially designed by Peter Kien, a Jewish artist incarcerated in the camp, but the image of Moses was edited from the original to create a more stereotypical image of a Jew. On arrival at the ghetto, all residents had to convert their money into this ‘local currency’. This made escape from the camp more difficult, as the currency was worthless outside of the camp. The existence of this currency also added to the façade presented to the Red Cross during their visit to the camp in 1943, to make life in the camp resemble normalcy.

By 1943, word had spread about the Nazis’ treatment and mass murder of Jews. Following the deportation of 476 Danish Jews to Theresienstadt in October 1943, the Danish Red Cross, the International Red Cross , and Danish Government pressured the Nazis into allowing them a visit to inspect conditions at the ghetto.

The Nazis were keen to allow such a visit in order to counteract reports which had leaked the true conditions and functions of the camps and ghettos being established across Europe.  The visit was scheduled for the 23 June 1944.

In order to ensure the Red Cross reported positively on Theresienstadt, the Nazis attempted to mask the true conditions there by presenting it as a model ghetto.

The Nazis removed 7503 Jews from Theresienstadt between 16 and 18 May 1944 to reduce overcrowding at the ghetto, holding them in a special camp at Auschwitz in case the Red Cross requested to visit them there.

Buildings along the inspection route were painted, a football match was staged and cultural activities were promoted to add to the façade .

As the Red Cross arrived and toured the ghetto, they followed a specific route, which had been pre-planned to portray the camp in the best light possible. They met prisoners who had been warned in how to act and what to say. The Red Cross were duped, and their report did not reveal the ghetto’s true purpose or conditions.

Following the visit, the deportations to Auschwitz and other camps and ghettos across Eastern Europe resumed. The prisoners who had met the Red Cross were deported in attempts to remove any evidence of the lie. The so-called Theresienstadt Family Camp at Auschwitz was also liquidated.

Liberation of Theresienstadt

As the Allied forces closed in, the Nazis began to empty ghettos and camps in Eastern Europe and send prisoners on death marches to camps and ghettos closer to the Germany. Approximately 15,000 such prisoners arrived in Theresienstadt in the last weeks of April 1945. This increase almost doubled the camps population at that time to approximately 30,000 people.

Following two further visits in April 1945, the International Red Cross took over the running of Theresienstadt on 2 May 1945. One week later, on 9 May 1945, Soviet forces liberated the ghetto.

Continue to next topic

What happened in March

On 5 March 1933, elections were held for the German Reichstag. The Nazis used violence to increase their vote share.

On 22 March 1933, the first Nazi concentration camp was established in the town of Dachau.

On 24 March 1933, the Enabling Act was passed, allowing Hitler to make laws without the approval of the Reichstag.

On 17 March 1935, 700 pastors of the Confessing Church, which opposed the Nazis, were arrested.

On 15 March 1938, following the German annexation of Austria three days earlier, Hitler gave a speech in front of the palace in Vienna.

The Path to Nazi Genocide

Organized around a Museum-produced 38-minute Documentary, The Path to Nazi Genocide , these discussion questions provide students with an introduction to the history of the Holocaust.

Languages: English, Spanish

Discussion Questions

Documentary: The Path to Nazi Genocide

Related Lesson: 

Connecting the Timeline Activity to The Path to Nazi Genocide

This lesson is also available in Spanish.

This Section

Explore lesson plans and training materials organized by theme to use in your classroom.

• Online Tools for Learning and Teaching
• Videos for Classroom Use

• Advisory Board
• Announcements
• Participant Observations
• Site Updates
• Field Notes
• Comprehensive
• Generative Texts
• Archival Developments
• Clio’s Fancy
• Submissions
• Back Issues
• Working Group

Socio-Cultural Anthropology under Hitler: An Introduction to Four Case Studies from Vienna

Note to readers: This introduction seeks to draw attention to the three-volume collection examining Socio-Cultural Anthropology in Vienna during the Nazi period (1938-1945) , recently published in German and edited by Andre Gingrich and Peter Rohrbacher . The editors’ essay below is followed by brief essays in English based on a selection of chapters by Katja Geisenhainer, Lisa Gottschall , Gabriele Anderl, Ildikó Cazan-Simányi , Reinhold Mittersakschmöller, and Peter Rohrbacher. We thank the editors and authors for making their work available in this way, as a joint effort by our “Clio’s Fancy” and “Field Notes” sections, and invite readers to follow up with the complete work.– HAR editors.

Elaborating and interpreting anthropology’s history under Nazism is not only a continuing ethical, moral, and political obligation for the field today. It also represents a set of complex challenges in many of its empirical, methodological, and conceptual dimensions, open to debate and reflection by interested laypersons and experts in the relevant languages, regions, and periods but also from all other fields of anthropology and history as well. Through the present introduction to four case examples from Vienna, the authors seek to contribute to these debates by pointing out the relevance of well-researched archival evidence within sound methodological contexts. This is the indispensable prerequisite for advancing further debates and related research.

To a considerable extent, when Hitler’s party came to power in early 1933, socio-cultural anthropology ( Völkerkunde ) was institutionally separate from biological anthropology ( Humanbiologie or Physische Anthropologie ) at most museums and university institutes in Germany. This was also true for Austria after the “ Anschluss ” (“union,” or annexation) of March 1938. As a consequence of the Anschluss , Vienna became the second largest academic site in the “Third Reich.” Its institutional landscape for Völkerkunde included (as of the late 1920s) a university institute, a museum, a missionary educational center (since 1906), subdivisions in Vienna’s Academy of Sciences (after 1914), and the Anthropological Society of Vienna (as of 1870). In terms of size and institutional diversity, case studies from Vienna can therefore be taken as good indicators for how socio-cultural anthropology was carried out under Hitler and in exile: who profited from its practices, who stood by, and who suffered and resisted. All of these questions need to be raised and explored, but many of them cannot yet be fully answered.

Like elsewhere in the “Third Reich,” individual researchers and students were persecuted for “racial” and/or political reasons within Vienna’s institutions of socio-cultural anthropology. Entire institutions and research directions were dissolved or marginalized if they followed research orientations in conflict with Nazi priorities. What remained as quasi-legitimate socio-cultural anthropology under the Nazis was pushed, with considerable support by those involved, into research programs conspicuously connected to Nazi ideological priorities for German supremacist racism, for winning the war when it broke out, and for collaborating in practical activities serving the regime’s political agenda. What remained of socio-cultural anthropology under Nazi dictatorship contained as its core elements some prominent trends in (German) historical diffusionism in Vienna as elsewhere, the emerging networks of (German) functionalism (in Vienna until mid-1939), and local variants of a proto-structuralism outside Vienna. All of these directions were informed by varying versions of biological racism. Obvious intersections and parallels between the directions promoted as quasi-legitimate under the Nazis, and dominant paradigms in western socio-cultural anthropology after 1945 require further analysis and reflection, as one of us has pointed out (Gingrich 2010).

Socio-cultural anthropology under Hitler took on a radical agenda in its practical and empirical dimensions: addressing the (print and radio) media was one important element, while reaching out to the public through spectacular colonial and imperial museum exhibits and lectures was another. Pursuing “embedded” research in combat zones for army or espionage units was actively promoted, for example during Rommel’s North Africa campaign. Providing professional reviews to Himmler on how to promote SS justifications of annihilation and murder in East Europe was part of socio-cultural anthropologists’ “applied” routine. Last but not least, the publication of entertaining and bestselling books on exotic societies and their bizarre habits contributed—after passing censorship—to a prevailing sense of a smiling public normality so important to the regime under Joseph Goebbels. Behind the scenes, meanwhile, the SS engaged PhD candidates and young post-docs from socio-cultural anthropology and neighboring fields in the humanities to carry out enquiries among Jewish families who were about to be murdered and to do secret fieldwork in prison camps, both among gypsy families before they were deported to death camps and among POWs from Africa or Asia before they perished in forced labor or were recruited as “volunteers” to the SS or the Wehrmacht.

In Vienna, the new Nazi regime after 1938 quickly disbanded the Catholic missionary unit of St. Gabriel, and dismissed all senior representatives with explicit sympathies for an independent Austrian state. At the Museum of Ethnology, the old director with pro-German sympathies was able to hold on to his position because members of a previously clandestine Nazi cell now gained an official voice. At the University-based anthropology institute, the Nazi party member Hermann Baumann became the new director until 1945, with an aim to re-orientate the institute according to the Reich’s colonial interests in Africa. While the regime prepared for war and mass persecutions, Himmler installed and promoted a new research unit with socio-cultural anthropology on its central agenda in his notorious, elite research organization, the SS- Ahnenerbe (“ancestral heritage”). By contrast, the record of resistance among socio-cultural anthropologists is less disappointing than often assumed. In Vienna, this ranged from conservative anti-Nazi patriots to clandestine communists, many of them supporting the formation of the underground organization, O5 (where “5” stands for “e,” and “Oe” represents “Ö,” the first letter of the German word for Austria). In exile, several socio-cultural anthropologists supported local resistance groups in occupied Austria or they supported their British and US hosts’ war efforts.

These and many other details are presented and discussed by twenty-eight authors in our three recently published co-edited volumes: Völkerkunde zur NS-Zeit aus Wien (1938-1945): Institutionen, Biographien und Praktiken in Netzwerken (Gingrich and Rohrbacher 2021). Though this work is appearing in German, its topics will be of considerable interest to many readers internationally. We are therefore publishing four brief vignettes here, adapted from chapters in the three volumes, to introduce English readers to some of the work’s major themes and the wide variety of its examples. In keeping with the focus of “Clio’s Fancy” and the importance of neglected archives for this research, each piece also highlights the dispersed documents and collections which have allowed these stories to be told.

In her text, “ Marginalized in Central European Anthropology and Persecuted as a Jew: The Case of Marianne Schmidl ,” author Katja Geisenhainer (U Frankfurt/U Vienna) presents the example of a pioneer of mathematical anthropology and a cultural-historical expert in studying sub-Saharan basket weaving. She shows how this almost forgotten but brilliant scholar was persecuted and murdered by the Nazis. Schmidl was never able to complete her main research project on African basket weaving. Surviving family members’ memories and correspondence are the primary sources in this study.

“ Assisting in the Holocaust: Pro-Nazi Anthropologists from Vienna in Occupied Poland (1940–1944) ” by Lisa Gottschall (U Vienna) scrutinizes the activities of a largely unknown and forgotten doctoral graduate from Vienna’s Völkerkunde institute who prepared early measurements among the Jewish resident population around Kraków, before they were sent into that city’s ghetto. Parallel to that, he and two female colleagues were crucial to the Nazi “documentation” of Jewish residents on Tarnów’s main square, right before several hundred of them were deported into the death camps. The text presents a vivid example of the Nazis’ recruitment of ambitious junior anthropologists into their deadly schemes, and how some of their plans relied to an extent on new institutions, such as the IDO (Institute for German Studies in the East) in this case, which was set up after the dissolution of the Jagiellonian University.

Gabriele Anderl, Ildikó Cazan-Simányi, and Reinhold Mittersakschmöller are a team of freelance and museum staff authors in Vienna; their essay, “ Rivalries with Fatal Consequences ,” addresses an enduring competition during the Nazi period between two Indonesia specialists at Vienna’s Ethnology Museum. Indonesia had strategic importance for the Nazis, both as a recent colony of their Japanese allies and in view of Dutch source materials for research. One of the two contenders was Frederic M. Schnitger, an internationally widely read Dutch author with a partially Chinese Java background; his rival, a less qualified, local female party mentee, made accusations which led to Schnitger being sent to die in a concentration camp. The key sources here are museum archives and Gestapo files.

The contribution by Peter Rohrbacher (Austrian Academy of Sciences), “ A Priest in the Resistance: Father Wilhelm Schmidt and His Alliances in World War II ,” shows how Wilhelm Schmidt—a Catholic priest and missionary who founded the Vienna School of Ethnology—worked from exile in Switzerland, with covert support by the Vatican and British SOE, to sponsor Austrian defectors from the Wehrmacht who re-organized as anti-Nazi guerilla groups. This study draws upon the discovery of Schmidt’s day-to-day notebook from 1943-45.

These four diverse vignettes seek to attract readers’ interest to the relevant chapters in the three volumes, and to encourage further relevant research on the theme at large. The authors are grateful to the editors at HAR for their support and assistance in making this set of contributions possible.

Other essays from this collection:

Katja Geisenhainer, “Marginalized in Central European Anthropology and Persecuted as a Jew: The Case of Marianne Schmidl.”

Lisa Gottschall, “Assisting in the Holocaust: Pro-Nazi Anthropologists from Vienna in Occupied Poland (1940–1944).”

Gabriele Anderl, Ildikó Cazan-Simányi and Reinhold Mittersakschmöller, “Rivalries with Fatal Consequences.”

Peter Rohrbacher, “A Priest in the Resistance: Father Wilhelm Schmidt and His Alliances in World War II .”

Gingrich, Andre. 2010. “Alliances and Avoidance: British Interactions with German-speaking Anthropologists, 1933–1953.” In Culture Wars: Context, Models, and Anthropologists’ Accounts , edited by Deborah James, Evelyn Plaice, and Christina Toren, 19-31. Oxford and New York: Berghahn.

Gingrich, Andre, and Peter Rohrbacher, eds. 2021. Völkerkunde zur NS-Zeit aus Wien (1938-1945): Institutionen, Biographien und Praktiken in Netzwerken . Veröffentlichungen zur Sozialanthropologie 27, 3 volumes. Vienna: Verlag der ÖAW. https://verlag.oeaw.ac.at/produkt/voelkerkunde-zur-ns-zeit-aus-wien-1938-1945/99200565

Share this:

Leave a comment cancel reply.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

Since 1973, the History of Anthropology Review (formerly the History of Anthropology Newsletter ) has been a venue for publication and conversation on the many histories of the discipline of anthropology. We became an open access web publication in 2016. Please subscribe to our emails below to receive updates as we publish new essays, reviews, and bibliographies.

Weekly email of new posts.

Social Media

Recent comments, publication information.

The History of Anthropology Review became an online publication with volume 40 in 2016, and changed its title from History of Anthropology Newsletter to History of Anthropology Review on October 18, 2019. Content is updated continually, and subscribers receive weekly emails with links to new content.

HAR is based at the Department of History and Sociology of Science, 303 Claudia Cohen Hall, 249 S. 36th Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104-6304. Fax: 215-573-2231.

ISSN 2572-2220

Volume 46 (2022) Volume 45 (2021) Volume 44 (2020) Volume 43 (2019) Volume 42 (2018) Volume 41 (2017) Volume 40 (2016) Prior Volumes

© 2024 History of Anthropology Review

Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑

Final dates! Join the tutor2u subject teams in London for a day of exam technique and revision at the cinema. Learn more →

Reference Library

Collections

• See what's new
• All Resources
• Student Resources
• Assessment Resources
• Teaching Resources
• CPD Courses
• Livestreams

Study notes, videos, interactive activities and more!

History news, insights and enrichment

Currated collections of free resources

Browse resources by topic

• All History Resources

Resource Selections

Currated lists of resources

A Level Study Notes: Weimar & Nazi Germany 1918-1945

Last updated 12 Apr 2018

• Share on Facebook
• Share on Twitter
• Share by Email

This collection features our free study notes for A Level History units encompassing Weimar and Nazi Germany 1918-1945.

Reich President

Study Notes

Reparations

Allied powers, central powers, coalition government, strengths and weaknesses of the weimar constitution, the weimar constitution, spartacist revolt 1919, our subjects.

• › Criminology
• › Economics
• › Geography
• › Health & Social Care
• › Psychology
• › Sociology
• › Teaching & learning resources
• › Student revision workshops
• › Online student courses
• › CPD for teachers
• › Livestreams
• › Teaching jobs

Boston House, 214 High Street, Boston Spa, West Yorkshire, LS23 6AD Tel: 01937 848885

• › Contact us
• › Terms of use
• › Privacy & cookies

© 2002-2024 Tutor2u Limited. Company Reg no: 04489574. VAT reg no 816865400.

Nazi Germany (Notes)

DOWNLOAD THE RESOURCE

Resource Description

Notes on Nazi Germany

Report a problem

Popular HSC Resources

• Speech on George Orwell ‘1984’ – Human Experiences
• How To Survive the HSC
• One Night the Moon – Analysis (Video)
• 2020 – Physics – PHS (Trial Paper)
• Business Studies Influences on HR (Quiz)
• Sci Ext – Portfolio Pack
• 2020 – Science Ext – Exam Choice (Trial Paper)
• Domino’s Marketing Case Study

Become a Hero

Easily become a resource hero by simply helping out HSC students. Just by donating your resources to our library!

What are you waiting for, lets Ace the HSC together!

Join our Email List

No account needed.

Get the latest HSC updates.

All you need is an email address.