This pathway teaches the skills you need for a depth study set in Germany: telling a documented event from a later interpretation, using evidence about change, comparing sources and writing a careful explanation. It does not replace your class notes or textbook, which hold the detailed content your school has chosen.
Your depth study is one selectable option within IGCSE History 0470. Check the current syllabus for your exam year on the Cambridge syllabus page, linked under sources, and confirm with your teacher which depth study you sit.
What should you know before starting?
You should already have a rough timeline of the period you study, and be comfortable with the basic idea of a source. If not, revisit chronology and historical context and evidence and source interpretation first.
One orienting example
Read these three statements.
- “The Reichstag passed the Enabling Act on 23 March 1933.”
- “A newspaper written at the time called the vote a moment of national unity.” (invented for practice)
- “A modern historian argues that the Act removed the main legal barrier to one-party government.” (invented for practice)
The first is an established fact: a documented event with a date. The second is a source’s viewpoint: a writer’s judgement made at the time, shaped by their purpose. The third is a historical interpretation: a later reasoned argument that you weigh, not a record.
Every lesson in this pathway returns to that three-way split.
In what order should you study the lessons?
- Distinguish a documented event from a later interpretation: learn the three labels before anything else.
- Use evidence about a defined social or institutional change: set boundaries on a change, then test claims against evidence.
- Compare two historical sources with explicit provenance: weigh who made each source and why.
- Write a bounded explanation without speculative claims about a public figure: put the skills into a safe, supported paragraph.
Then attempt the integrated practice set.
Common traps in this depth study
- Presenting a historian’s argument as if it were a fact.
- Saying a leader “must have felt” or “secretly wanted” something with no evidence.
- Treating one source as proof of what everybody experienced.
- Writing a moral verdict when the question asks for an explanation.
- Using events outside the dates in the question.
How to use the practice set
Do the lessons in order, then try the practice questions with your notes closed. Label every error as event, evidence, comparison or explanation, and go back to the matching lesson. If you want someone to check your reasoning as well as your answers, our online one-to-one History tuition works from your actual option and depth study.