NAN HUA HIGH SCHOOL

2016 CONTINUAL ASSESSMENT 2

Subject

History

Paper

2174/01

Level

Secondary Three Express

Date

26 April 2016

Duration

45 minutes

INSTRUCTIONS TO CANDIDATES
Write your index number and name on all the work you hand in.
Do not use staples, paper clips, highlighters, glue or correction fluid.
You must answer all questions.
At end of the examination paper, fasten all your answers securely together.
The total mark for this paper is 25.

This paper consists of 7 printed pages.

Page 1 of 7

Nan Hua High School

2016 Common Test 1

History 2174/01

Section A: Source-Based Case Study

Question 1 is compulsory for all candidates
Study the background information and the sources carefully, and then answer all the
questions.
You may use any of the sources to help you answer the questions, in addition to those
sources you are told to use. In answering the questions you should use your knowledge
of the topic to help you interpret and evaluate the sources.
1

(a)

Study Source A
What is the message in Source A? Explain your answer.

[5]

(b)

Study Sources B and C

To what extent are the sources different in their opinion about the Treaty of
Versailles?
[6]

(c)

Study Source D
Can you believe what the author says about David Lloyd George? Explain
your answer.
[7]

(d)

Study Source E
Why did Lloyd George make this speech in parliament? Explain your
answer.
[7]

Page 2 of 7

Nan Hua High School

2016 Common Test 1

History 2174/01

How far can the Treaty of Versailles be considered a fair settlement?

BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Read this carefully. It may help you to answer some of the questions.
World War I was formally ended by the Treaty of Versailles, concluded in Paris in mid1919. This treaty imposed restrictions on Germany to reduce, if not eliminate her future
capacity to make war against her neighbours. It also attempted to resolve outstanding
disputes by resolving the ownership of European territories and colonial possessions,
finalising national borders and setting up an international organisation to deal with future
disagreements. While many historians have considered the Treaty of Versailles a harsh
treaty, many also believed that it was fair treaty considering that the Germans
demanded more reparations and territories from the Russians under the terms of the
Treaty of Brest-Litovsk signed just before the end of World War One in 1917.
Source A:

A British cartoon published during the 1920s about Germanys reaction to

the terms of the Versailles Treaty.

Page 3 of 7

Nan Hua High School

2016 Common Test 1

History 2174/01

Mr Lloyd George was the Prime

Minister of Great Britain and Mr.
Briand was the Prime Minister of
France who took over from
Clemenceau after the war.

Page 4 of 7

Nan Hua High School

2016 Common Test 1

Source B:

History 2174/01

A comment made by an American historian in 1999

As many historians point out, though the Treaty of Versailles was comprehensively
harsh on Germany, it was not predestined to fail as a solution for peace. In fact,
from 1924 until 1931 there was a period of relative stability in European
relations
Public opinion in France, Britain and the U.S. convincingly supported harsh
consequences for the belligerent Germans, and that public opinion constituted a
substantial constraint on the Big Three.
Given these constraints and the general exhaustion of Europe after such a long
war, the Treaty of Versailles was certainly not the best one could hope for, but it
seems to have been the best compromise possible

Page 5 of 7

Nan Hua High School

2016 Common Test 1

Source C:

History 2174/01

A comment made by a British historian in 2004.

The Peace of Versailles was an unsatisfactory compromise with little chance

of ensuring an enduring peace. Each of the 'Big Three' had different aims which
had to be modified in order to reach an overall agreement and the Germans were
not even allowed to take part in the negotiations. Germany was humiliated, the
French didn't feel completely secure, the British had wanted the re-establishment of
trade more than anything else and the Americans had had to give up on their ideals
of self-determination where Germany was concerned. All this was a recipe for
disaster in my opinion.

Source D:

A diary entry by Raymond Poincare, a French delegate at the Paris Peace

Conference in 1919 recounting his conversation with Clemenceau about
Lloyd George.

Lloyd George has deceived me. He made me the finest promises, and now he
breaks them. Fortunately, I think that at the moment we can count on American
support. What is the worst of all is that the day before yesterday, Lloyd George said
to me. "Well, now that we are going to disarm Germany, you no longer need the
Rhineland". I said to Clemenceau: "Does disarmament then seem to him to give the
same guarantees? Does he think that, in the future, we can be sure of preventing
Germany from rebuilding her army?" "We are in complete agreement," said
Clemenceau, "it is a point I will not yield."

Source E:

An extract of a speech by David Lloyd George, Prime Minister of Great

Britain to the English parliament in 1919.

The terms are in many respects terrible terms to impose upon a country. Terrible
were the deeds which it requites... Germany not merely provoked, but planned the
most devastating war the earth has ever seen... She deliberately embarked upon it,
not to defend herself against assailants, but to aggrandise herself at the expense of
her neighbours. I cannot think of a worse crime.
[The aim of the Treaty is] to compel Germany, in so far as it is in her power, to
restore, to repair and to redress. Yes, and to take every possible precaution of
every kind that is in our power against the recurrence of another such crime - to
make such an example as will discourage ambitious peoples from ever attempting to
repeat the infamy.

Page 6 of 7

Nan Hua High School

2016 Common Test 1

History 2174/01

requites: to avenge or take revenge for

aggrandise: to glorify or to expand territorially
redress: to compensate or to restore back to the original
infamy: notorious act

End of Paper

Page 7 of 7