Appeasement historians (1 Viewer)

[silvermoon]

hey, i was just wondering what historians people are looking at for the appeasement option - our classes at school are VERY VERY far behind for a multitude of reasons - we've only just finished AJP Taylor, our trial is in a bit over a wk and apart from looking at some backgroun on the Nuremberg trials that's pretty much all we've done. was wondering if any1 could help by pointing me in the right direction (re: other historian's 2 research). would be greatly appreciated

 

[Persephone87]

A J P taylor
Cato
Churchill
Kennedy
ummm we have more but I cant remember just right now

 

[Vuki]

You can do the trials and HSC with just Churchill, Gilbert, and Taylor.

All 3 have an easily described and analysed personal identity and political and social context, and they represent differing views (they're best for areas of debate 1, 2 and 4).

I don't see the point in studying more than the above 3, really. I understand that if you just did these three you would finish appeasement in a month, but really the most they can ask you is 3 historians on 1 debate, or more commonly 2 on 2 debates. And the question can't lend itself towards any debates or anything.

 

[angelduck]

Yeah, its true, the question is basically gonna be:

"discuss two areas of historical debate"

OR

"with reference to the above stimulus, discuss two areas of historical debate"
- where stimulus is like a quote or something referring to how/why interpretations of history can change.

They cant really do much with the possible 19 case studies.

CATO - what the?? Where can i find this view, i cant anywhere!!

::feels really incompetant::

 

[silvermoon]

it hasnt always been that angelduck - ie. the 'discuss 2 areas of debate' with or without stimulus. its also been pick 2 historians, opposing schools etc. and talk bout differences in as manby different areas as possible (or something along those lines, cant remember exactly)
neway, thanks 4 the help guys: i owe u all a big talkin milkshake...or nething else really...

 

[!!belle!!]

i was wondering can anyone help me with these debate things how many are we really meant to study? and how i dont get it

 

[bahodl]

hey, i was just wondering what historians people are looking at for the appeasement option - our classes at school are VERY VERY far behind for a multitude of reasons - we've only just finished AJP Taylor, our trial is in a bit over a wk and apart from looking at some backgroun on the Nuremberg trials that's pretty much all we've done. was wondering if any1 could help by pointing me in the right direction (re: other historian's 2 research). would be greatly appreciated

some more other than taylor churchill and cato are d c watt "War Games" - he gives a more modern viewpoint
and martin gilbert, paul kennedy and r a c parker are handy

 

[!!belle!!]

they r so hard to find info on the net

 

[silvermoon]

thanx so much guys! u are all my heros!

 

[Katie123]

we did churchill cato taylor and parker

 

[Vuki]

umm, don't forget even if you're only memorising/learning 3 historians views for the exam (as I am), you still need to know about CATO. They sparked the debate, their publication was printed right after the Battle of Dunkirk and it's pretty significant. Even if you just chuck it in the introduction, it's pretty important to mention.

 

[matt_a]

If you are doing Churchill and you don't do Clive Ponting and David Day you are shooting yourself in the foot.