Here are the answers to the practice exam papers from IB Prepared History. For direct access, click on the paper below.
Paper 1
Paper 2
Paper 3 option 1: History of Africa and the Middle East
Paper 3 option 2: History of the Americas
Paper 3 option 3: History of Asia and Oceania
Paper 3 option 4: History of Europe
Paper 1
Prescribed subject 3: The move to global war
1. (a) The weaknesses of the Munich Agreement, according to Source B:
It was unfair to the Czechs.
The agreement weakens Czechoslovakia.
It ignores USSR.
It imperils the rest of Czechoslovakia.
It tips the balance of power in Eastern Europe in Germany’s favour.
(b) The reasons why Britain signed the Munich Agreement, as suggested by Source C:
Britain did not trust the Soviet Union.
The Soviet Union may not have been sincere in its offers of military support.
Military cooperation between Britain and the Soviet Union was never a viable option.
Britain was more concerned about Soviet expansion into western Europe than it was about German expansion into central Europe.
Britain’s military was not able to resist German expansion in October 1938.
2. The value and limitations of Source A are as follows: Value
It is written in 1938 at the time of the Munich conference.
As an editorial it gives its opinion, and potentially that of its readers, of the Munich conference.
Because editorials can reflect the opinions of its subscribers, the tone and content suggest that the policy of appeasement was somewhat popular.
Limitations
It uses emotive language to describe support of Chamberlain’s achievement in Munich and this can be evidence of editorial bias.
It is not balanced, ignoring opposition, especially in parliament, to appeasement.
The editorial could be trying influence public opinion rather than reflect it.
3.
5–6 The response includes clear and valid points of comparison and of contrast.
3–4 The response includes some valid points of comparison and/or of contrast, although these points may lack clarity.
1–2 The response consists of description of the content of the source(s), and/or general comments about the source(s), rather than valid points of comparison or of contrast.
0 The response does not reach a standard described by the descriptors above.
Indicative content
Comparisons:
Both sources agree that Britain was interested in accommodating German demands.
Both sources note the absence of the Soviet Union from the agreement.
Both sources doubt that either Britain, France, or the Soviet Union were serious about fighting for the independence of Czechoslovakia.
Contrasts:
Source C states that the Soviet Union made offers of military cooperation whereas Source B states that the Soviet Union (Russia) formed no part of the deliberations.
Source B suggests that the agreement did not support British interests, whereas Source C states that because they could not fight at that time the agreement did support British interests.
Source C suggests that that the agreement helped maintain the balance of power in the east by denying the Soviet Union from expanding its influence to the west, Source B suggests that the agreement damages the balance of power in the east.
Source C suggests that Britain was concerned about the Soviet Union expanding influence to the west, whereas Source B sees German expansion as the main issue.
4.
The response is focused on the question.
7–9
The response is generally focused on the question.
4–6
The response lacks focus on the question.
1–3
0
The response does not reach a standard described by the descriptors above.
Clear references are made to the sources, and these references are used effectively as evidence to support the analysis.
References are made to the sources, and these references are used as evidence to support the analysis.
References to the sources are made, but at this level these references are likely to consist of descriptions of the content of the sources rather than the sources being used as evidence to support the analysis.
The response does not reach a standard described by the descriptors above.
Accurate and relevant own knowledge is demonstrated. There is effective synthesis of own knowledge and source material.
Where own knowledge is demonstrated, this lacks relevance or accuracy. There is little or no attempt to synthesize own knowledge and source material.
No own knowledge is demonstrated or, where it is demonstrated, it is inaccurate or irrelevant.
The response does not reach a standard described by the descriptors above.
Indicative content
Source A Popular opinion in Britain was supportive of appeasement. Chamberlain had been in power just over a year and needed public support, but that does not make it a sound foreign policy. The fact that he received such praise reinforced Chamberlain’s view that he was right. Not only was appeasement popular, so was a general disengagement from continental affairs. The international instability and tension was causing a “burden” in Britain. The agreement was meant to satisfy popular domestic concerns surrounding fighting another war on the continent.
Source B Despite the Munich Agreement being popular in Britain, it weakened Czechoslovakia politically and economically and thus made future war more likely. Those who argue that the rest of Czechoslovakia would be protected by the Munich Agreement were wrong. If and when Hitler wanted to advance into the rest of Czechoslovakia there would be nothing stopping him. Russian exclusion weakened the Agreement.
Source C Britain was in no position to fight for Czechoslovakia in 1938. She did not cooperate effectively with her French ally. Britain was more interested in avoiding a war and limiting Soviet influence in the west than stopping German expansion. The British had a deep distrust of the Soviet Union and so even if the Soviets had been willing to help stop German expansion, Britain was not prepared to accept this help.
Source D It depicts a weak Britain (Chamberlain) and France (Deladier) indicating the policy was weak. The Soviet Union (Stalin) is depicted as suspicious. Germany (Hitler) and Italy (Mussolini) are depicted as strong and defiant. Stopping German expansion was in the interest of the USSR as well, yet they are not sitting with the others suggesting that stopping German expansion was not a priority for Britain and France.
Own knowledge You may argue that appeasement was a weak policy in that it ultimately did not stop Germany from expanding into the rest of Czechoslovakia in March of 1939. You may also argue that it served British interests in that Britain was only half way through her modest rearmament plan in October 1938 and could not have fought had Hitler rejected the Munich Agreement. The agreement, therefore, could be viewed as trading the Sudetenland for more time for Britain to rearm. Chamberlain feared Soviet influence moving west more than he did German expansion to the east and the exclusion of the Soviet Union from the Munich conference reflects this fear, indicating that stopping German expansion was not Chamberlain’s priority. You could also argue that the appeasement was a weak policy in that the Munich Agreement made Stalin more inclined to a deal with Germany than with the west in 1939 after witnessing the west’s betrayal of Czechoslovakia. Popular opinion in Britain opposed rapid rearmament and the increased taxes and defence spending, rather than spending on social programmes, that this entailed, especially during the Depression, and therefore supported the Agreement and slower rearmament as this was seen as more in the domestic interest of Britain. The British Dominions of Canada and Australia opposed fighting for Czechoslovakia and could not be counted on to support Britain if it went to war over the Sudetenland, which would place more of the burden of fighting and financing a war on the British. Europe was not Britain’s only concern. The Sino-Japanese War threatened British holdings such as Hong Kong and Singapore. On the other hand, you can argue that the Munich Agreement was at least partially successful. Hitler saw it as a defeat as he had wanted all of Czechoslovakia in September 1938 and was forced into a diplomatic structure largely created by Britain. Britain was in a better position to guarantee Polish borders in the Spring of 1939 than she had been to guarantee Czech borders in October 1938 and therefore offered a stronger statement after Germany expanded into the rest of Czechoslovakia. Ultimately, the Agreement had avoided, if only for a year, a war that none of Europe, including Germany, was prepared to fight.
Paper 2
Topic 1: Society and economy (750–1400)
1. This question requires that you offer a judgment on how important you think BOTH famines and disease were to the social structure of a state. You can choose any states you wish from any period between 750 and 1400. You may argue that, in fact, famines and disease did not have a significant impact, however disease and famine must still be the focus of your answer. You must offer historical detail to support your evaluation, although of course this detail will depend on both your position and the states that you choose. Your response should be relatively balanced between the two states that you use as your examples.
Topic 2: Causes and effects of medieval wars (750–1500)
2. This question requires that you give a balanced review of the impact of two leaders on the outcome of the war. To avoid a narrative or descriptive answer you need to link the actions of the individuals to the outcome of the war and not just to events within the war. It is therefore important to discuss what the outcome of the war was. You might argue that the actions of the individuals had a significant impact on the outcome. On the other hand, you might argue that it was other factors such as the strength/weakness of their enemies, technology, or other factors that were more impactful. Your discussion should be balanced between the two individuals. Elements you might discuss could include strategy, tactics, leadership and diplomacy.
Topic 3: Dynasties and rulers (750–1500)
3. This question requires that you make an appraisal of the nobility’s contribution to governing two states. The states do not need to be from the same region. You may compare the importance of the nobility of the two states or evaluate each state separately. In other words, there is no need to make any links between the two states. As such, the two states can come from different periods between 750 and 1500. Regardless of the states you choose, some elements you could discuss are the legal status of the nobility, what positions within the government did they hold, important decisions taken by the nobility, relationship with monarchs, and criticism or opposition offered by the nobility.
Topic 4: Societies in transition (1400–1700)
4. This question requires that you offer a balanced examination of the role that changes in established trade patterns affected how states developed. The states can come from the same region. Because it is dealing with the concept of change you should establish what existing trade patterns were like and then how they changed and then the impact of these changes. You may argue that for some European countries changes such as the growth of trans-Atlantic trade were key to economic development, while simultaneously being detrimental to the development of existing American societies. This question could also be an opportunity to examine the impacts of the slave trade on European, American and African societies. You could also discuss Mediterranean and Pacific routes and their effect on participating societies.
Topic 5: Early Modern states (1450–1789)
5. This question requires that you examine both the similarities and differences in the methods used to maintain power in two states each from a different region. Your answer needs a comparative structure. Ideally this means that in each paragraph you should deal with both states you have chosen, making effective links between the two. This will help you avoid a descriptive answer. Elements that you could examine include use of religion and religious institutions, force, fear, treatment of opposition and domestic policies.
Topic 6: Causes and effects of early modern wars (1500–1750)
6. This question requires that you offer a judgment on the relative importance of religion as a cause of one war from this period. Make this judgment clear in your response. This means you can discuss other causes as well so long as your main focus is on religious causes. These other causes may include economic, political, dynastic or ideological causes. You can choose any war you wish within the time frame.
Topic 7: Origins, development and impact of industrialization (1750–2005)
7. To answer this question, you must offer a detailed and balanced review of the importance of political stability to the development of industrialization in two states. The states do not need to be from the same region or period so long as the period under discussion falls within the years 1750–2005. There is no need for a comparative approach so you can use the first half of your response to discuss one state and the second half to discuss the second state. You may take a variety of stances regarding the question. You may, for instance, argue that political stability was important to industrial development in both, one or neither state. In making your argument you may refer to other factors that fostered industrial development such as population growth, access to natural resources, existing infrastructure or capital accumulation, but political stability should form the focus of your response.
Topic 8: Independence movements (1800–2000)
8. For this question, you will need to consider the degree to which wars have sparked independence movements.
Topic 9: Emergence and development of democratic states (1848–2000)
9. This question requires that you make a judgment on how important constitutions were to the development of any two democratic states. Because of the nature of the topic, the states you choose must both have developed in or after 1848. Some factors that you discuss may predate 1848, but they must be directly linked to developments within the timeframe. The states can be from any region and may or may not have developed at the same time. Elements you may examine include the development over time of the constitution, individual and/or group rights laid out in the constitution, the structure of government prescribed by the constitution, or opposition to the constitution. You may include both written and unwritten constitutions.
Topic 10: Authoritarian states (20th century)
10. For this question, you will need to give a balanced appraisal of the role that weak existing governments played in the emergence of authoritarian states. You can use a comparative approach if you wish, but this is not necessary. Because the question refers to “states” you can use one or multiple leaders within the chosen states as examples. You may argue that other factors such as economic or ideological factors were more important, but existing political systems need to be the focus of your response, explaining why this was not a factor.
Topic 11: Causes and effects of 20th-century wars
11. This question requires you to offer a judgment on how important you believe economic factors were in causing two 20th-century wars. You may use a comparative structure, but this is not necessary. Economic factors can include trade relations, competition for natural resources, or imperial rivalries. It is not enough to simply discuss or describe the economic factors preceding the outbreak of hostilities; you must determine their importance and make direct links to the outbreak of the war. You should also examine the importance of other factors to the cause of the wars.
Topic 12: The Cold War: Superpower tensions and rivalries (20th century)
12. When answering this question, you need to offer a judgment on the significance of containment policy in determining the relations between the superpowers. In this case “superpowers” refers to the United States, the USSR and China. You will need to examine whether the actions that came about because of containment policy increased, decreased or left tension between the superpowers unchanged. Regardless of your evaluation, containment policy must remain the focus of the response throughout.
Paper 3 option 1: History of Africa and the Middle East
Section 8: European imperialism and the partition of Africa
(1850–1900)
1. This question requires you to offer a judgment on how important economic factors were to decisions on the partition of Africa by European states. You may, for example, refer to the quest for both resources and markets related to the expansion of industrial capitalism in Europe and the growing competition between these states in this regard. The importance of infrastructure, such as telegraphs and railways, and the concept of “real occupation” as well the influence of individuals such as Cecil Rhodes could also form part of your answer. You could also discuss the importance of non-economic factors such as religion and the missionary movement, and/or the growing influence of social Darwinism as well the relations between European powers. It is important to remember, however, that the focus of your response should be on the relative importance of economic factors. Regardless of the factors that you discuss, it is important that you support your argument with specific examples. For example, any discussion of “real occupation” should be supported with an example of a European country settling a portion of Africa.
Section 11: 20th-century nationalist and independence movements in Africa
2. In this question, you need to assess the part that the Mau Mau movement played in the eventual independence of Kenya. Arguments that the Mau Mau were influential in the independence movement can include increasing pressure that its violent military campaign placed on the colonial government both in Kenya and in Britain. You could also discuss Kenyatta’s position in the movement. On the other hand, you could also argue that the Mau Mau had limited influence on Kenyan independence, discussing the fact that Britain was retreating from colonial holdings around the world at that time. The Mau Mau were also one of several historical nationalist uprisings from 1895, including the Nandi Resistance and the Giriama Uprising. There are also arguments that the Mau Mau Uprising can be seen as more of a civil war within the Kikuyu in that there were a number of Kikuyu that worked against the Mau Mau.
Section 13: War and change in the Middle East and North Africa 1914–1945
3. This question requires you to offer a considered and balanced review of the effect of the mandate system on both the mandating powers and the territories they administered. You may briefly discuss the mandate system itself, but the focus of your response must be the effects of the system. For effects of the mandate system on the mandating powers you may discuss regional influence, acquisition of property, weakness of the Permanent Mandate Commission. Challenges within the system can include the administration of government and law, mediating between rival populations, and preparation for independence. You could also discuss the impact of the Second World War on the mandates of the region.
Paper 3 option 2: History of the Americas
Section 8: US Civil War: causes, course and effects (1840–1877)
1. This question requires you to assess Lincoln’s impact on the course of the US Civil War. You may argue, for example, that Lincoln’s decisions on matters such as emancipation, conscription, appointing and dismissing military leaders, and his influence on military strategy had a substantial impact on how the war was fought from the Union perspective. On the other hand, you could argue that Lincoln was ineffectual in pursuing his war aims early in the war, unable to direct General McClellan, and that it was the Confederate army that dictated the course of the war at least until 1863. Other elements you could use include the composition of his cabinet, the election of 1864 and his relationship with Congress. Regardless of the evidence you choose, it is important to link it to the progress of the war itself.
Section 10: Emergence of the Americas in global affairs (1880–1929)
2. In this question, you need to assess the relative importance of the various reasons for the entry of the United States into the First World War. You may examine the reasons for nonintervention, such as German-American opinion, passivism, isolationism, and the preservation of trade, but you should include how this changed with circumstances to stay focused on the question. In terms of reasons for intervention, you may evaluate The Zimmerman Telegraph and the degree to which it influenced the decisions of the US government and affected public opinion. You could also examine the initiation and resumption of unrestricted submarine warfare and the sinking of the Lusitania. Regardless, the command term for this question requires that you make a judgment as to the relative importance of these reasons.
Section 16: The Cold War and the Americas (1945–1981)
3. Because the command term for this question is “to what extent” you will need to take a position as to whether you think Kennedy’s foreign policy was successful or not while also examining counter-arguments. To do this, you will need to establish what his foreign policy goals were, namely containment of communism especially in Latin America, Africa and Asia. Should you argue that his foreign policy was successful you could point to elements such as his support of the Limited Test Ban Treaty, his support of West Germany in response to the building of the Berlin Wall, and his successful resolution of the Cuban Missile Crisis. On the other hand, Kennedy was less successful in his negotiations with the USSR at the Vienna Summit in 1961, or developing a stable democratic government in South Vietnam. His support of the Bay of Pigs invasion was also a foreign policy setback.
Paper 3 option 3: History of Asia and Oceania
Section 11: Japan (1912–1990)
1. For this question, you will need to offer a considered and balanced review of the statement. You may agree, partially agree or disagree. Japan was satisfied in so far as she had occupied Germany’s Pacific colonies early in the First World War and was granted Shandong in the Treaty. Germany’s northern Pacific colonies were granted to Japan as League of Nations mandates and she gained a permanent seat on the League of Nations Council. Japan was also granted half of Germany’s pre-war trading concessions in China, despite Japan demanding all of these concessions. The final settlement, however, did not include any formal mention of racial equality nor did it grant Japan all of Germany’s Pacific colonies.
Section 14: The People’s Republic of China (1949–2005)
2. For this question, you will have to offer a considered appraisal of the Great Leap Forward’s impact on China. You could use a thematic approach looking at, for instance, social, economic and political impacts of the Great Leap Forward. You might, on the other hand, adopt a more chronological approach. Regardless of which approach you adopt, you must make connections between the elements of the Great Leap Forward and the impacts of these elements on China. Aspects of the plan that you could discuss include: the establishment of communes, increase in industrialization, backyard steel furnaces, and agricultural developments such as irrigation. The impacts that you could highlight include famine, increased state coercion, political changes within the Communist Party including the damage to Mao’s reputation, and the initial increase in and subsequent reduction in industrial production.
Section 15: Cold War conflicts in Asia
3. Because the command term for this question is “to what extent” you will need to take a position on whether you think it was French military failures that resulted in its retreat from Vietnam or whether other factors such as nationalism, ideology, public opinion in France or economics were the dominant reason. If you argue that it was military weakness that resulted in French withdrawal you can emphasize Viet Minh victories such as Route Coloniale 4 and Diem Bien Phu as well as the French inability to effectively neutralize the Viet Minh’s guerrilla tactics. You could argue, on the other hand, that it was the military and economic support of the People’s Republic of China that allowed the Viet Minh to win the war. You might contrast Chinese support of the Viet Minh with the United States’ support of the French which, although it constituted much of the French cost of the war, stopped short of direct intervention during the siege of Diem Bien Phu. You could also argue that that French diplomatic setbacks in 1946 and in 1953–1954 played a role in the French withdrawal.
Paper 3 option 4: History of Europe
Section 12: Imperial Russia, revolution and the establishment of the Soviet Union (1855–1924)
1. For this question, you will have to offer a considered and balanced review of the New Economic Policy. Regardless of your argument you should state the goals of the NEP, namely to rebuild industrial and agricultural output after the Civil War and the policy of War Communism. There were economic successes in that industrial output did rise, reaching 1914 levels by 1928. This was accomplished through measures such as tax reform and limited privatization of small industry. Setbacks such as the Scissors Crisis were overcome. These gains, however, were beginning to slow by 1928. There were, however, political and ideological aspects to the NEP that should be considered, including ideological opposition within the Communist Party and implications for the rise of Stalin, the ban on factions and the Lenin Enrollment.
Section
13: Europe and the First World War (1871–1918)
2. This question requires that you give a balanced consideration of the role the alliance system played in the outbreak and expansion of the First World War. You may argue that previous Balkan conflicts had not resulted in a general European war and that it was a failure to solve the diplomatic crisis of July 1914 that brought all the European powers and their empires into a war in 1914. Another argument could be that once Russia mobilized, alliances such as the Triple Entente and the Triple Alliance, with ancillary agreements such as the Blank Cheque and the British guarantee of Belgian neutrality, ensured that the war could not be restricted to the Balkans. You could argue that other factors such as war plans, imperialism, and the Anglo-German naval race contributed to the escalation of the conflict.
Section 14: European states in the inter-war years
3. For this question, you will have to make an appraisal of how successful Hitler’s economic policies were during the period 1933–1939. You may argue that economic policies designed to increase employment such as public works, youth work battalions (Voluntary Youth Service) and conscription were successful in reducing unemployment. You might also argue that some of these gains were the result of encouraging women to leave the labour force and the removal of Jews from the labour statistics, though statistically these had little impact. Other policies such as autarky and the Four Year Plan designed to prepare Germany for war were less successful. Large businesses tended to benefit from Nazi policies while workers and small business owners did not. You might also argue that what gains were achieved could not be sustained in the long term with deficit financing.
Exploring the Variety of Random Documents with Different Content
Of pain there was none, nor was I disturbed by any mental anxiety. I recollect only an ethereal lightness of limb, and a sense of soulemancipation and peace—a sense of soul-emancipation such as one might feel were he to awaken on a sunny morning to find that all sorrow and sin were gone from the world for ever; a peace ample and restful as the hallowed hush and awe of summer twilight, without the twilight's tender pain.
Then I seemed to be sinking slowly and steadily through still depths of sun-steeped, light-filled waters that sang in my ears with a sound like a sweet-sad sobbing and soaring of music, and through which there swam up to me, in watered vistas of light, scenes of sunny seas and shining shores where smiling isles stretched league beyond league afar. And so life ebbed and ebbed away, until at last there came a time—the moment of death, I believe—when the outward and deathward setting tide seemed to reach its climax, and when I felt myself swept shoreward and lifeward again on the inwardsetting tide of that larger life into which I had died.
CHAPTER V.
ISOFANEXPLANATORYNATUREONLY .
WHEN the first rough draft of this diary was lying on my study table, there called to see me, at a time when I chanced to be out, a certain novelist who is an old and intimate friend of mine. He was shown into the study to await my coming, and, on my return, I found him amusing himself with these papers. Of the reality of my death-experiences (which he persistently refused to regard as other than dreams) I had never been able to convince him, and I was not surprised therefore when, after the conversation turned upon the work each of us had in hand, he referred to my booklet in his usual sceptical tone.
"My dear fellow," he said, laying one hand upon the offending manuscript, "I haven't the slightest intention of disputing the truth of your statements, or of denying that your diary has a certain unwholesome interest of its own, but seriously, I don't think fiction is altogether in your line."
"Nor satire in yours," I replied; "but what have you to say against the thing now?"
"This," he answered, more evidently in earnest, "that you haven't scored as you might have done, but have let slip what opportunities you had for turning out something original. 'Letters from Hell' (which, by the bye, you must expect to be charged with imitating, though that needn't trouble you much) was confessedly a work of pure imagination, and I shouldn't be surprised if the fact helped somewhat to lessen the interest of the volume. Now your book has just enough shadow of probability or possibility to sustain the delusion, and all that will tell in its favour. The public likes—just as Dick Swiveller's Marchioness did—to 'make believe' in the reality of
that which is meant to interest it; and books or plays can't be too life-like or realistic nowadays. You have 'made believe' until you have brought yourself to believe in the reality of something which I can't think ever happened; but that isn't my business. What I complain of is this:—that although you have a story to tell with sufficient shadow of probability or possibility, as I have said, to make it interesting, and to keep up the delusion, you have failed most lamentably to turn your opportunities to account. Take your death scene, for instance. Any practical writer of ordinary ability could imagine the sensations of dying, and could draw a far more powerful picture of them than you have done, who profess to have actually experienced those sensations personally. Then what you have to say about Heaven and Hell, and all the rest of it, is curious, and some may think it not uninteresting, but you haven't given us any idea of what the places are like, after all. Why didn't you draw on your imagination, man? Why didn't you go in for the grim, and grey, and ghastly? Why didn't you revel in the weird (never mind Mr. Lang's abuse of the word), or conjure up blissful dreams of the blest and of Paradise? I know a dozen men who could have made twice as much capital, and far more saleable copy, out of that idea of yours about a man dying, or nearly so, and then coming back to relate what he has seen, as it appears from the standpoint of frail mortality; and I tell you frankly that I don't think you have scored as you ought to have done."
"But what has all this," says the reader, "to do with your diary? We are willing to hear what you have to tell about your experiences, but we didn't bargain for an article setting forth the opinion of your friends on the subject, and we can't help thinking that the introduction of this chapter is somewhat uncalled for."
Well, perhaps it is so, but it is because the conversation given above touches upon some points concerning which I am anxious that the reader should come to a right understanding before he enters upon my after-death experience, that I have inserted it here, and if a very few minutes' indulgence be granted me, I will say what I have to say as briefly as possible. I could, I am sure, by drawing a little on my imagination, have written a far more striking description of the
sensations of death, than that which I have given in the preceding chapter, for of such description, in the sense of "working-up a situation" there is absolutely none. All that I have tried to do is to relate my story with a resolute avoidance of anything akin to the sensational. If aught of the sensational there be in the narrative, it is because the thing is sensational in itself, and not because I have attempted to make it so. As George Eliot says, it is far easier to draw a griffin, with wings and claws filled in according to our own fancy, than to correctly limn the outlines of a lion; and to keep to the truth has been the hardest part of my task.
When the mental picture or impression left on my mind is but an imperfect one, I have not attempted, as I might easily and perhaps pardonably have done, to fill in the missing outline from my imagination, but have given the picture or impression for what it is worth, and have left it so. My memory is, generally speaking, excellent, and during the first few hours of consciousness after the return of vitality, the recollection of that which I had seen was as fresh as are the events of yesterday. Within a week, however, I found that the greater part of it had gone from me, and that all my efforts to recall the mental pictures were unavailing. I have sometimes wondered if it can be possible that when my presence was missed from the realms into which I had so untimely wandered, some angelic messenger was despatched with instructions to wipe out from the tablets of my memory the records of my experiences. Whether it be so, or not, I cannot say, but this I do know, that had I commenced my diary within a week of my return to life, the booklet would have been one such as it is not often given to man to write. The subject, however, seemed then, and for a long time after, too solemn to be turned to account for "copy," and each of the several years which have elapsed since I died, has taken with it some part of the recollections that remained to me; and now that I have all too tardily set about my task, I have but blurred and broken reminiscences to offer in place of a life-like picture.
These reminiscences, vague, disconnected, and fragmentary as they are, I have given for what they are worth. If any reader think that I
have overrated the value of my experiences, and that I have failed to verify the promise with which I started, I can only assure him that the failure is due, not to the insufficiency of what is strange and striking in my experiences, but to my inability to recall what I have seen, and to my incompetency to do fitting justice to my singular subject.
The expense of spirit in a waste of shame Is lust in action; and till action, lust Is perjured, murderous, bloody, full of blame, Savage, extreme, rude, cruel, not to trust, Enjoyed no sooner but despisèd straight, Past reason hunted, and no sooner had Past reason hated, as a swallowed bait, On purpose laid to make the taker mad; Mad in pursuit, and in possession so; Had, having, and in quest to have, extreme; A bliss in proof, and, proved, a very woe; Before, a joy proposed; behind, a dream. All this the world well knows; yet none knows well To shun the heaven that leads men to this hell.
Shakespeare's129thSonnet.
TIME, which is the name we give to our petty portion of Eternity, has no existence in that Eternity which has been defined as the "lifetime of the Almighty"; and so it was that though I remained in the spirit realm but two days, it seemed to me as if weeks, months, years, had elapsed between my death and the hour when I first became conscious of that death.
I have told you that as I lay a-dying, I felt my life slowly but steadily ebbing away, until at last there came a time—the moment of death, I believe it to have been—when the outward and deathward-setting tide seemed to reach its climax, and when I felt myself swept shoreward and lifeward again. I know there are some who will say
that the turning-point which I have called the moment of death was nothing more or less than the moment which marked the decline of the disease, and the return of vitality, but this theory, plausible and even probable as it seems, leaves the strangest part of my experience unexplained, and I cannot entertain it; neither, I think, will the reader, when he has heard me out.
Whether my death was succeeded by a season of slumber, in which certain divinely ordered dreams were caused to be dreamed by me, or whether God caused the hands on the dial of Time to be put back for a space in order that I might see the past as He sees it, I neither knew nor know; but I distinctly remember that the first thing of which I was conscious after my dissolution was that the events of my past life were rising before me. Yes, it was my past life, which I saw in that awful moment, my past life standing out in its own naked and intolerable horror, an abomination in the sight of God, and of my own conscience.
The hands on the dial of Time went back half a score, a score, and finally a score and a half of years, and once more I was a young man of twenty-one. The chambers in which I was then living were situated in one of the well-known Inns off Holborn, and the housekeeper of the wing where I was quartered was a widow, who, with her daughter Dorothy, a girl of seventeen, resided on the premises.
As it was Dorothy's part to wait upon the occupants of the chambers, she had occasion to come to my room several times in the day, and I could not help noticing her loveliness, which, indeed, reminded me not a little of my favourite Greuze picture. When I first knew her she seemed maidenly and modest, but was vain beyond a question, and her manner to the opposite sex was shy and selfconscious, with occasional dashes of an artless and even childish coquetry which was most bewitching. By this girl I was irresistibly and fatally fascinated. I was young, susceptible, and singularly impressionable to female beauty, whilst the loneliness and the monotony of the life I was leading were in themselves elements of
considerable danger; and to make matters worse, it was only too evident that Dorothy was not indifferent to my admiration. As I knew that it was but the fascination of form and feature which attracted me, and that nothing but mischief was likely to come of such a passion, I strove my hardest to steel myself against her; but Fate seemed adverse, for one summer evening while I was sitting in my study, waiting for a friend, there burst over London the most fearful thunderstorm which I have ever witnessed. The lightning was so vivid and the thunder so terrific, that even I, who am by no means nervous about such things, felt strangely moved and unsettled; and I was not a little glad, therefore, to hear what I took to be my friend's knock. When I went to the door, however, I found that it was not he, but Dorothy, and that she was white with fear, and trembling from head to foot. "Oh, sir," she sobbed, "mother's out, and there's no one else in but you, and I'm so frightened that I can't stay by myself. If you'll only let me be here till she comes back, I'll be very quiet and not disturb you in any way."
Knowing my weakness and her great beauty, I had up to that moment studiously refrained from allowing so much as a wandering glance to rest on her; but I could not avoid looking at her now, and I remember that her eyes, bright and pitiful and beseeching, "her bosom's gentle neighbourhood," and the very consciousness of her presence as she stood before me, set my heart beating so wildly, that it was all I could do to refrain from taking her in my arms then and there, and telling her (forgive the profanation of a holy word) that I "loved" her.
The virtuous determination to be on our guard against some besetting sin or constitutional failing comes to us generally, not during the moment of temptation, when we are most in need of such a moral reminder, but after the event, and when the determination is too late; but on this occasion I heard the inward monitor speak out a timely warning, and that with no uncertain tongue. By a great effort I nerved myself to my accustomed control, and though I knew Dorothy would think me churlish and cruel, I told her coldly that she had better go downstairs and wait the return of
her mother. The words had scarcely time to pass my lips (I doubt, indeed, if she could have heard them), before they were lost in a terrific thunder-peal, following almost instantaneously upon a blinding flash of lightning. It had been better for both of us, as I have often since thought, if that flash had struck us dead as we stood there; for, with one cry of passion and fear, and calling me by my name—my Christian name—in a tone that none could misinterpret, Dorothy flung her arms around me, and the next moment I found myself pressing her to my heart with a fierce and almost savage exultation, and telling her, amid a score of burning kisses, that I loved her.
Almost immediately afterwards we heard the opening of doors, which indicated her mother's home-coming, but not before Dorothy had time to tell me in return that she too loved me, and had always done so. And then she slipped from my arms, and tripped away with tumbled hair and flaming cheeks to join her mother, turning as she reached the door to look back with a shy smile and to say innocently and unsuspectingly enough as I knew well—that the room directly over mine was her own, and that she often lay awake at night listening to my restless pacing to and fro, and wondering what could keep me up so late.
Of the hellish thought which rose in my heart as I listened—the thought that she would not refuse me admittance to her room should I seek her there that night—she could have had no suspicion, for it was a thought of which, at any other time, I should have deemed myself incapable. I remember that I did not fling the hateful suggestion from me, as I should have done an hour earlier, although, passion-maddened as I was, I recoiled from it, and vowed that I would never entertain it. But I brooded over the horrible idea, and sketched out how easily it might be acted upon, were I the foul thing to do it, which I still declared to myself I was not. Had I arisen in trembling horror, and thrust the vile conception from me, she and I might even then have been saved, but I let it enter and take up its abode in my heart, and from thenceforward I strove to drive it forth in vain.
Oh! in God's name, in the name of Love and Truth and Purity, when any such evil or impure thought so much as casts the shadow of its approaching presence on your soul, then, in all the strength of your manhood, arise and thrust it out, ere it be too late! Argue not, delay not, listen not, but hurl the loathsome whisper from you as though it were some poisonous reptile, and bid it be gone for ever!
From the moment that I gave audience to that messenger of Satan, hell and its furies laid hold on me. Sometimes I seemed to be gaining ground, sometimes I seemed to be recovering my balance of mind. "I will do the right!" I cried, "I will not be guilty of this accursed thing!" but even as I strove to fix my feeble purpose to the sticking point, some moral screw seemed to give way within me, and I felt that purpose ebbing away like life-blood from a fatal wound.
At last the struggle seemed to cease, and there was borne in upon me a sense of peace, deep, and sweet, and restful. I know now that it was but exhaustion consequent upon the strain I had endured, that it was nothing more than the inevitable reaction from the high soul-tension to which I had been subjected. To me, however, it seemed as the very peace of God and as a sign from heaven, and lulled into a false security, I let my thoughts wander back to dwell again upon the temptation. Need I tell the remainder of my story? Need I say that my passion had but simulated defeat, as passion often does, in order that it might turn in an unguarded moment, and rend me with redoubled fury? The next moment I saw my last gasping effort to will the right sink amid the tempestuous sea of sinful wishes, as a drowning man sinks after he has risen for the third time; and deliberately thrusting away, in the very doggedness of despair, the invisible hand which yet strove to stay me, I arose and sought the room that I had prayed I might never enter.
You may wonder, perhaps, how it is that I am able to recall so vividly the circumstances of an event which happened many years ago. You
would cease so to wonder, had you seen, as I have seen, the ghost of your dead self rise up to cry for vengeance against you, and to condemn you before the judgment seat of God, and of your own conscience. For this was my first glimpse of Hell; this was my Day of Judgment. The recording angel of my own indestructible and now God-awakened memory showed me my past life as God saw it, and as it appeared when robbed of the loathsome disguises with which I had so long contrived to hide my own moral nakedness. "Sin looks much more terrible to those who look at it, than to those who do it," says the author of the "Story of an African Farm." "A convict, or a man who drinks, seems something so far off and horrible when we see him, but to himself he seems quite near to us, and like us. We wonder what kind of a creature he is, but he is just we ourselves." It was so indeed that I had thought and wondered. I had read often of "adulterers" and "murderers" in the newspapers, and had thought of them as I thought of lepers or of cannibals, in no way imagining that my youthful escapade could render such words applicable to me. I had accustomed myself to calling my crime "gallantry" in my own thoughts, and I should have regarded one who used harsher language as wanting in delicacy and in breeding; and now I found myself branded as "Murderer" and "Seducer" to all Eternity!
"Murderer!" you say. Yes, murderer, for seduction is moral murder; and the man who has thus sinned against a woman is fit only to stand side by side with him who has taken a life. Ay, and his is not seldom the more awful punishment, for God will as surely require the spiritual life at the hands of the seducer, as He will the bodily life at the hand of the murderer.
The one thing of all others which added to the unutterable horror of that moment, was the memory of the false and lying excuses with which I had striven to palliate my sin to myself. I remember that such excuses took form and shape, and haunted and tortured me like devils—as indeed they were—of my own begetting. "The relation of the sexes," I had often said when striving to silence an uneasy conscience, "Bah! it is but a yoke of man's imposing. I take the woman I love to live with me, and she and I are shunned as lepers.
Yonder is a man who follows the same precedent and from the same motive; and because a priest has murmured a few words of sanction over the contract, he and his partner are fêted and flattered. How can the indulgence of a natural passion which in one set of circumstances is fair and honourable, in another be sinful and foul? Fair is fair, and foul is foul, and no muttering of a man can transform the one into the other."
This is the way in which I had repeatedly striven to silence my conscience, and it is but one instance of the way in which many others on this earth are now striving to silence theirs. "For God's sake," I would say to them, "beware!" Such hardening of the heart against the Holy Spirit, such God-murdering (for it isthe wish to kill God, and to silence His voice for ever) is the one unpardonable sin which is a thousand-fold more awful in its consequences than is the crime which it seeks to conceal. It was the foulest stain on the soul of him who hung by the dying Saviour, and it is, I believe at this moment, the one and only thing which still keeps Hell Hell, and Satan Satan.
Must I write further of the torture-throes of that awful moment, when I first saw my sin in its true light? God only knows how even now I shudder and shrink at the mere thought of it; but I have told you of my crime, and it is right that I should speak also of my punishment. I remember that when the realization of what I was, and what I had done, was first borne in upon me, I fell to the ground and writhed and shrieked in agony. The tortures of a material hell,—of a thousand material hells,—I would have endured with joyfulness could such torture have drowned for one moment the thought-anguish that tore me. Nay, mere physical suffering— physical suffering meted out to me as punishment, and in which, though it were powerless to expiate, I could at least participate by enduring—I would have welcomed with delirious gladness, but of such relief or diversion of thought there was none. From the mere mention of annihilation—the personal annihilation of soul and body, of thought and sensation—I had ever shrunk with abject loathing and dread; but to annihilation, had it been then within my reach, I
would have fought my way through a thousand devils. But in hell there is no escape through annihilation; suicide, the last refuge of tyrannous and cowardly despair, is of none avail,
"And death once dead there's no more dying then."
What had to be endured I found mustbe endured, and that unto the uttermost, for in all horrid hell there was no nook or cranny into which I could creep to hide myself from the hideous spectres of the past. I remember that I rose up in my despair, and stretching vain hands to the impotent heavens, shrieked out as only one can shriek who is torn by hell-torture and despair. I fell to the ground and writhed and foamed in convulsive and bloody agony. I dug my cruel nails deep into my burning eyeballs, and tearing those eyeballs from their tender sockets, flung them bleeding from me; but not thus could I blind myself to the sights of hell, nor could mere physical pain wipe out from my brain the picture of the ruin I had wrought.
And then—but no, I am sick, I am ill, I am fainting; I cannot, I cannot write more.
