Source E tells us about Kristallnacht the facts in source E has some accurate details as it was the 15th anniversary of the Munich putsch we also know that during Kristallnacht shop windows were broken and the contents of the shop was stolen also that Jewish synagogues were set on fire. The city of Kurfurstendamm that is written about in source E does exist. The language of the article may have been exaggerated to get people to buy the newspaper to do this they made the story shocking and interesting by the use of exaggerated and violet language.
Or it could have been written this way just to get the message across of what the event. The words that were used were words such as ; bawling raucous gangs, drunken and aflame. This puts across violent imagery and makes the story interesting. This source is reliable as it matches my own knowledge as on crystal night many people destroyed Jewish shops and synagogues. It also happened. The source is reliable as it matches my own knowledge on the events of kristallnacht; it is also reliable as the date of the article shows it was written the day after kristallnacht.
Source F backs up source E and adds to its reliability because it was also was written about Kristallnacht but from a different point of view. Source F is an American article from the New York Times and was published on the same date. The story also has violent language like “perish Jewry! ” and “kill the Jews! “. Comparing both sources, they have different details of what went on as in source F is says that the Jews were untouched but in source E it says “Jews were chased through the streets”. The possible reason why source F is different is because it is from an American newspaper and therefore from an American point of view.
Source F shows that there were wrecking squads and lots of destruction this backs up source E’s points. On the other hand source E is not fully reliable as it is emphasising the fact that lots of German people took part in the riots, when actually most people stayed out of the way. It mentions that the crowds were apathetic. Source E also says that the riots started when, storm troopers and the Hitler youth, who were celebrating Hitler’s 15th anniversary of the Munich putsch, started to get out of control and started to destroy buildings.
From my knowledge I know that the riots were started because a Nazi official was shot dead by a Jewish refugee. This made Hitler furious so he ordered Himmler to start a week of destruction against the Jews. Source E also doesn’t include true facts such as that 1000’s of Jews were killed and 1000’s arrested. Also the riots were organised by the Nazis. The source may not be reliable as it may be bias, the reason for this is that it was published by a British newspaper therefore the language might have been exaggerated to sell copies of the paper.
We also don’t know where the writer of the article got his information from therefore the facts may not be true. Source F doesn’t fully back up source E as they have different viewpoints for example source E says that the crowds were apathetic whereas source F says “why not hang the owner in the window” this suggests that the information in both sources contradict each other therefore not making source E reliable. Source E is only reliable about Berlin as that is the main place that it focuses on during kristallnacht but throughout the country there was destruction against the Jews.
Source F in the other hand talks about destruction all over the country however source F was published by an American newspaper therefore expressing the views and opinions of the people there and not the actual facts. I have found that source E is reliable to a certain extent as it has some facts that agree with source F but it is only reliable for one part of Germany. Source E is also only reliable for a British newspaper as the language may have been exaggerated to sell stories.
Therefore Source E is not useful to a historian for facts of Kristallnacht but it is useful for the opinions of a socialist Britain on a Nazi Germany. Also Britain didn’t like Hitler’s foreign policy aims this could be why the source was bias. This source is not trust worthy for historians to use about the details of the events as some facts were grossly over exaggerated. The language was exaggerated just to sell the story, it also doesn’t match source F and the amount of violence that went on during the night of Kristallnacht.