Section A
1. How far can the history of Europe between 1890 and 1945 be regarded as a varied experiment in modernisation?
2. In what ways was the WWI the central event of European history between 1890 and 1945? (I did this one - and I think a lot of people would have too. My first essay was roughly similar to this question... so I was kinda advantaged... just copy and paste.)
3. "Raised the greatest hopes ever conceived by humanity, and destroyed all illusions and ideals." (Yehudi Menuhin, musician 20th C.) Is this an apt description of Europe between 1890 and 1945?
Section B
1. Before 1914 Europe was a continent imbued with ethnocentric notions of progress. Discuss this statement with reference to either science or socialism.
2. How far can nationalism in Europe between 1890 and 1945 be regarded as an invention?
3. How useful is the concept of the "other" in understanding European Imperialism before 1914?
4. In what ways did Europeans attempt to cope with the experience of WW1?
5. Did the 1917 October revolution in Russia fulfil or betray the February uprising?
6. "The regimes established by what have been called armed bohemians produced nothing of any lasting moment." (Michael Burleigh). Discuss this affirmation with reference to one of the following:
a) Italian fascism
b) Nazism
c) Stalinism
7. The Spanish civil war was just one more front in the great European ideological rift of the 1930s. Discuss.
8. The Second World War was a repeat of the First. Discuss.
I did Q 6c) for the second part... cos' I happened to do Stalinism for my major essay. The problem was, I didn't quite know what "bohemian" was... and that was bad, cos as you can see, the idea of "armed bohemian" is absolutely essential to answer the question. Reminded me of the first History 2 essay test I did in TJC - the WW2 was a "watershed" event in SEA history - and I didn't know what "watershed" was! (I'm sure xy remembers this one =) So I figured (or like they say here, I reckoned) that "armed bohemian" = only depending on terror to rule the population, no legitimacy or popular support etc... I later checked dictionary.com after the exam... bohemian = A person with artistic or literary interests who disregards conventional standards of behavior.... hmm, so I didn't really catch the "disregards conventional standards" part.. but I guess it's ok, cos' I did pick up on "armed" (terror, manipulation etc), and "lack of legitimacy" is pretty close to "disregards conventional standards", I guess.... and I also wrote about "failed to produce anything of a lasting moment" - i.e. Stalinism had no impact or whatsoever, i.e. a mere aberration in European history. I guess, the exam is fairly tough becos' you know what topics are gonna be asked... but you dunno how it's gonna be asked... and if you realised, these topics are very very broad topics... And the questions are very broad as well.
Oh well, just like I always remembered what "watershed" is after that history test, I'll always remember what "bohemian" means from now on... we all learn sth new everyday haha...