Interpretations of the Reichstag Fire

i) Van der Lubbe was a madman, and he circumscribe give nonice to the Reichstag all by himself, but the national socialists genuinely believed the apprize was the scribble of a Communist uprise.ii) The Reichstag Fire was started by the Nazis to give them an exc do to persuade requisite powers and lock up or get the better of the Communists. Van der Lubbe was used by the Nazis.Which reading material is shell support by the designate in these sources and your knowledge of the period? apologise your answer.Its difficult to incline the balance to for each one of two(prenominal) interpretations because some(prenominal) of them nominate deduction to backup them. character A for instance, supports the for the first age interpretation, it suggests that Lubbe acted a l whizz and Diels to backup his linguistic communication tells that it would be tardily operoseened the run off because the old furniture, dry wood, and heavy curtains would make the fire spread rapidly , while Lubbe could be starting fires elsewhither in the make running through the long corridors. In the other(a) hand outset I contradict directly the other source, because it secernates that a man who was handicapped both physically and mentally, without knowledge of the place and with the brief time given couldnt possibly set the fire on its testify.As we can take to both of the sources use nearly supported theories, however, Source I seems to be vanquish well supported because despite the flammable materials which were there, he was handicapped, didnt know the place and he didnt even cast time, excessively, Source I its from an history retain what suggest me that the possibleness would been well studied by historians to bewilder that closedown.In support of statement i) Source B targets Lubbes confession which tells I set fire to the Reichstag all by myself, here we could say that Lubbe set the fire on his own, and ascribable to his madness he could set the fire on his own for then boast about his great frolic. However there are also many reasons were he could be guile to take in favour this source, he could be protecting communists, or perhaps under pressure by the own Nazis, or simply despite he was helped he would preferred to tell e veryvirtuoso he set the fire on himself to show off.In the other hand, we pass water other sources suggesting that the Nazis were implicated in the fire, Source E for example shows General Franz express that on Hitlers birthday three years before, pierce said The only one who really knows about the Reichstag building is I, for I set fire to it, General Franz could entertain reasons to tell the truth because know he didnt have any kind of Nazi pressure on him and also he might had postal code to loose. Anyway, he also could be lying show the reliability here is very questionable, he could be give tongue to that for saving himself, to revenge on him. However, it was at Hitlers birthday, so pierce could been easily rummy and say that in a joke (despite there was the possibility that the intoxicant could make say what he shouldnt say). pierce in Source F describes of piteous the statement before, he could be recounting the truth and said that in whizz of a joke while he was drunk, which explains why he didnt remember nothing he said, so maybe the cardinal are telling the truth Halder could take too seriously what for Goring was a joke while he was drunk to make some fun on Hitlers birthday. However it Halder was telling the truth and Goring said that seriously its obvious that Goring would have defend himself as shown in Source F. Most likely Halder could misinterpret Gorings joke so the value of his state could scarcely support the game statement.D and G are two of the less(prenominal) reliable Source shown here, they are both pieces of propaganda by blaming the enemy for the fire. The two of them were make in convenience of the party and both of them lack of evi dence to backup them so we cannot consider them seriously.It appears that Source H the best well supported source contradicting the second statement though its took from an history book so the evidence on it is more or less likely to be true. It suggest that the Nazis didnt pass judgment the fire at all because the measures taken after(prenominal) it couldnt be plan, most significantly the fact that the Nazi party had to use out-of-date lists to arrest the communists and that the Nazis had hoped to destroy the Communists after the election (however, this last statement is very subjective). Obviously, the Nazis would have made ample preparations if they aforethought(ip) the fire and this source shows they didnt, this possibly one of the bests pieces of evidence (if we assume the book is telling the truth) against the theory that the Nazis were behind the fire.In conclusion we can say that none of both interpretations is more supported by the sources than other because they almos t balance equally with sources in favour or against. We have to say that some sources suggest that that Lubbe didnt acted alone which in the same way that suggests that could been helped by communists they could be also helped by the Nazis. The most most-valuable thing is the weight and reliability that each source have, and all of them have reasons to not be true.For my interpretation of the sources and my knowledge it would be more likely that the Nazis took part in the fire. The first statement isnt very well supported because despite the evidence in their favour (such the fact that the fire could be spread very rapidly due to the materials inside) Van der Lubbe couldnt make such a high damage and devastation as shown in source J, its very hard to believe that all that damage could be done a person who hardly had any time (before being caught), who didnt have any knowledge of the place, and who had a gruelling sight problem and so mentally ones. The curious thing that makes you think is that the fire was made just one hebdomad before the elections, very possibly the Nazis could have planned the fire as an still to use the emergency powers, by blaming the Communists of an uprising and so crushing the opposition in favour for their elections. Because we got to remember that Hitlers greatest concern at that time was the Communism.