Studied by 0 people
Popular majority view
Approval of Chamberlain’s actions
Kept spectre of war at bay for as long as he could
british people were scared of another war like WWI
Interpretation didn’t last long - people felt guilty about Czecheslovakia
there were powerful critics e.g. Churchill
Popular Majority view time
1937-8 (before the war)
Popular Political view
Appeasement was foolish, cowardly, immoral
book ‘guilty men’ published by CATO - main argument was that Britain giving in to dictators just strengthened them
Many people felt ashamed of what happened
Popular Political view time
1939-48 (during the war and just after)
Orthodox view
Appeasement was a terrible misjudgement even if it was based on good motives
Churchill argued this in his book ‘the gathering storm’ - published after WWII
he claimed that Chamberlain should have made a grand alliance with France, USA and USSR
This view became very accepted as Churchill lead Britain through the war
Orthodox view time
1948-60s (after the war)
Academic revisionist view
Chamberlain was in an impossible position - he did the best he could at the time
Historian A.J.P Taylor argued, in 1961, that Hitler did not have a clear plan in the 1930s
Chamberlain could not be blamed for not knowing
Donald Watt (historian), 1965, argued that Hitler was just one of Chamberlain’s problems and he had little resources
New British sources available
This view did not have a big impact on politicians nor the public
Academic revisionist view time
1960s-90s (a time of radical thinking)
Academic counter-revisionist view
Chamberlains own personality and assumptions meant he handled the situation badly
Robert Parker = first historian to introduce view
Chamberlain overrate his own abilities
Chamebrlain completely failed to understand Hitler
Chamberlain ignored advice of officials
Chamberlain betrayed Czecheslovakia
Many historains didn’t agree, didn’t have a big impact on wider public either
New Soviet sources
Donald Watt, 1991 change his view to this one
Academic counter-revisionist view time
1990s-2000s
US orthodox view
the Cold war was caused by aggressive expansion by Soviet leaders who wanted to spread communism everywhere
Thomas Bailey, historian, argued that the USSR wanted world revolution - their actions in Eastern Europe were what caused it
The ‘red scare’: there were fears of communist agents operating in the US
Many orthodox historians were previously part of the government
This view was widely accepted among most americans
US orthodox view time
1940s-60s - during
US revisionist view
the Cold war was caused by the aggressive actions of the USA + its determination to dominate trade in Europe and Asia
Orthodox historians overstated soviet threat
Cuban revolution - USA behaved like an empire-building power
Vietnam war - US supported a corrupt regime - killing innocent civilians '
A strong youth culture supported the view - Politicans were less accepting
US revisionist view time
1960s-70s - still during
Post-revisionist view
The cold war was caused by the way either side reacted to eachothers actions
largely based on misunderstanding and mistrust
John Lweis Gaddis = leading post-revisionist historian
mixed ideas of both 1st and 2nd interpretation
substantial blame on Stalin’s beliefs and actions howerver the US always overreacted
This interpretation Influenced lots of historians - provided a more rounded view
Post-revisionist view time
1970s-89 (towards the end of the war)
The new Cold War historians
We still can’t be sure - access to soviet archive still left historains divided
the ‘Reagan factor’ - in the last years of the COld war Reagan referred to USSR as ‘Evil EMpire’ - many poeple agreed howerver some thought he had still been too aggressive
John Gaddis revised his ideas more towards orthodox - created a bug ipression among historians
The new Cold War historians
1989+ (after the war)
