Option A: Nineteenth century topic Was Spain responsible for the sinking of the Maine? Study the Background Information and the sources carefully, and then answer all parts of Question 1. Background Information On 15 February 1898 an explosion sank an American battleship, the USS Maine, while it was anchored in Havana harbour in Cuba. The Americans described the visit of the Maine to Havana as 'a friendly call'. It was there to protect American interests during the uprising by Cuban nationalists who wanted independence from Spanish rule. 260 sailors were killed. There was uproar in the USA where popular newspapers such as The New York Times, and politicians including Theodore Roosevelt, blamed the Spanish and demanded that President McKinley take America to war. Relations between the two countries quickly deteriorated, and on 24 April Spain declared war on the USA. There have been several major investigations into the sinking, and two main theories have emerged. Firstly, that a Spanish mine (a bomb in the water) in Havana harbour caused the explosion; secondly, that a fire in the coal bunker of the Maine detonated a nearby magazine where the ship's ammunition was stored. Did the Spanish deliberately sink the Maine? SOURCE A It was just before 10 pm on 15 February 1898, when the double thuds of massive explosions thundered throughout the city of Havana, and voices all along the shoreline screamed as a yellow fireball, dotted with countless debris, flew into the sky. Below it, the battleship USS Maine, quickly slid into the black water with 260 American sailors dead. The implied accusation, made by the report of the US navy inquiry on 21 March 1898, was that a Spanish mine was responsible. But Spain was reluctant to go to war against the United States as it was already struggling in its war against the Cuban rebellion. There was no evidence for any of the conspiracy theories and the Spanish inquiry found that a coal fire igniting the ship's magazine was the true cause. Coal fires that ignited the magazine sometimes happened to coal-powered ships like the Maine. Survivors did not report any coal fires and none set off the Maine's fire alarms, but such fires often smouldered deep within the coal and could have gone undetected. We know there were more than 20 such fires reported on US warships during the decade of the Maine's destruction. This explanation was accepted by most people at the time and today. From a podcast, 2020. SOURCE B Shortly after 9.30pm on 15 February 1898 an explosion, quickly followed by another, rocked Havana and the USS Maine. The blasts quickly sank the ship, killing 266 sailors. The US court of inquiry in 1898 concluded that the ship had been blown up by a mine but did not state who was responsible. The Spanish inquiry concluded that a fire in the coal bunker had ignited the ship's magazine. This conclusion was met with disbelief and outrage by the American newspapers and public. In 1910 the ship was raised and inspected and an inquiry found that there had been an external explosion which had ignited the magazines. However, in 1976 US Admiral Rickover carried out his own investigation and concluded the cause had not been a mine. He revived the idea of fire in a coal bunker causing the first explosion. The final word is that we do not know what set fire to the Maine's magazines and sank it. Insufficient evidence survived to make a definite determination. Both an accident and an act of sabotage are consistent with all that we know of the sinking of the USS Maine. From a recent account about the sinking of the Maine. SOURCE C Not an Accident, Captain Sigsbee Says A secret telegram received by Secretary Long from Captain Sigsbee announced that Captain Sigsbee, after a hasty examination, has concluded that the disaster to the Maine was not caused by accident. He expressed his belief that the explosion was made possible by the enemy. He requested that his suspicions be considered confidential until he could conduct a more extended investigation. He also said that not more than one hour before the explosion the magazines and boilers had been carefully inspected, thus, in his judgement, an accident was not possible. From The New York Times newspaper, 17 February 1898. Long was the member of the US government in charge of the navy. Sigsbee was captain of the Maine. SOURCE D After full and careful consideration of all the evidence the court finds as follows: 1 The state of discipline on board the Maine was excellent, and all orders and regulations in regard to the care and safety of the ship were strictly carried out. All ammunition was stored in accordance with instructions, and proper care was taken when ammunition was handled. 2 There were two explosions of a distinctly different character, with a short interval between them. The first explosion was like the sound of a gun, while the second explosion was more open, prolonged and of greater volume and was, in the opinion of the court, caused by the partial explosion of two or more of the forward magazines of the Maine. 3 The evidence obtained from divers establishes that the damage to the ship could have been produced only by the explosion of a mine situated under the bottom of the ship. 4 The court finds that the loss of the Maine was not in any respect the fault of any of the officers or members of the crew. 5 In the opinion of the Board of Inquiry, the Maine was destroyed by the explosion of an under-water mine, which caused the explosion of two or more of its magazines. 6 The Board of Inquiry has been unable to obtain evidence fixing the responsibility for the destruction of the Maine upon any person or persons. The conclusions of the US Department of the Navy's Board of Inquiry Report on the sinking of the Maine, 21 March 1898. SOURCE E [Figure 5.0] A cartoon published in an American newspaper, 16 February 1898. SOURCE F Spanish Officer in Cuba Makes a Startling Prediction A Spanish resident of New York, a man of responsible position, received a few days ago a letter from a lieutenant in the Spanish army in Cuba. This letter was written in Havana, is dated 28 January 1898, and one section of it reads as follows: 'The visit of the battleship Maine has created a very bad feeling among us. Though the people conceal their anger, the storm is near the surface. It is certain that before long something will happen that will astonish the whole world.' From The New York Times, 17 February 1898.
- (a)Study Sources A and B. How far do these two sources agree? Explain your answer using details of the sources.[7]
- (b)Study Sources C and D. How far does Source C prove that the findings of the inquiry of the Navy Board (Source D) were correct? Explain your answer using details of the sources and your knowledge.[8]
- (c)Study Source E. Why was this cartoon published on 16 February 1898? Explain your answer using details of the source and your knowledge.[8]
- (d)Study Source F. Has this source any use for a historian studying the sinking of the Maine? Explain your answer using details of the source and your knowledge.[8]
- (e)Study all the sources. How far do these sources provide convincing evidence that the Maine was sunk by the Spanish? Use the sources to explain your answer.[9]
This question uses a diagram from the original paper, which isn't shown here. Open the full paper from the past papers archive to see it.
Mark scheme
Marking points from the official mark scheme (Oct/Nov 2024). The mark or mark type is shown in brackets.
- [7] Level 5 (7 marks) Answers that compare the big messages of the two sources. A - a coal fire igniting the magazine was responsible, B – impossible to say who/what caused the explosion.
- [5-6] Level 4 (5-6 marks) Answers that compare agreement(s) AND disagreement(s).
- [3-4] Level 3 (3-4 marks) Answers that compare agreement(s) OR disagreement(s). Agreements include: US enquiry said it was a mine; there were two explosions; it was on 15 February; the explosions were heard throughout Havana; the Maine sank quickly; the Spanish enquiry said it was caused by a coal fire/ignition of the ship's magazine. Disagreements include: A says explosion was just before 10, B says shortly after 9.30 (this could be an agreement, but can't have both); 260 sailors died in A, 266 in B; in A the US enquiry implied Spain was responsible, in B it did not say who was responsible; A is sure it was not the Spanish, B is not sure; coal fire theory accepted at the time in A, greeted with outrage in B. Note: only credit one if there is comparison both of time and date
- [2] Level 2 (2 marks) Answers based on information that is in one source but not in the other OR Answers that compare the provenance of the sources.
- [1] Level 1 (1 mark) Answers that attempt to compare the sources but make no valid comparison.
- [0] Level 0 (0 marks) No creditable response.
- [8] Level 7 (8 marks) Answers that explain both sources imply the Spanish were guilty and evaluates at least one of the sources.
- [7] Level 6 (7 marks) Answers that explain key agreement and evaluate at least one of the sources. Evaluation in L6/L7 can be in terms of purpose/cross reference, or using internal evidence within C or D, e.g. hasty examination in C.
- [5-6] Level 5 (5-6 marks) Answers based on key agreement between the sources.
- [4] Level 4 (4 marks) Answers based on comparison of less significant details.
- [3] Level 3 (3 marks) Answers that explain things in D that C cannot prove/disprove OR Evaluates D by itself, no use of C.
- [2] Level 2 (2 marks) Answers that compare the sources but fail to explain if D is correct OR Explains/identifies what was right/wrong in D but no valid explanation.
- [1] Level 1 (1 mark) Answers that make assertions based on provenance.
- [8] Level 6 (8 marks) Answers that explain the purpose of the cartoon in the context of events at the time.
- [7] Level 5 (7 marks) Answers that explain the purpose of the cartoon.
- [5-6] Level 4 (5-6 marks) Answers that explain the big message of the cartoon as a reason for publication e.g. to blame the Spanish.
- [3-4] Level 3 (3-4 marks) Answers that explain the context of the cartoon as the reason for publication OR Answers that explain valid sub-message as a reason for publication OR Purpose but no valid audience.
- [2] Level 2 (2 marks) Answers that explain purpose, message or the context but not used as a reason for publication.
- [1] Level 1 (1 mark) Answers that provide a surface description of the cartoon.
- [8] Level 7 (8 marks) Use as evidence about why the New York Times printed this letter.
- [7] Level 6 (7 marks) Not useful because the New York Times was trying to implicate the Spanish in the sinking (purpose) OR Useful as evidence of how the US press represented the events.
- [6] Level 5 (6 marks) Uses cross reference to evaluate the attempt to implicate the Spanish.
- [5] Level 4 (5 marks) Useful because it implicates the Spanish in the sinking. Uses internal evidence in F to argue reliable and useful.
- [3-4] Level 3 (3-4 marks) Useful because it implicates the Spanish in the sinking.
- [2] Level 2 (2 marks) Assertions about usefulness based on provenance only OR Assertions about content not being useful.
- [1] Level 1 (1 mark) Uses incidental details in Source C as evidence it is useful OR Answers in Levels 2-5 that fail to state if useful or not.
- [9] Level 4 (6-9 marks) Uses the sources to support AND reject the statement.
- [3-5] Level 3 (3-5 marks) Uses the sources to support OR reject the statement.
- Supporting: B, C, D, E, F
- Not supporting: A, B, D
- [2] Level 2 (2 marks) Uses the sources but fails to use them to test the statement.
- [1] Level 1 (1 mark) Writes about the topic but no use of sources.
Write your answer and get it marked
On Oracle Prep you can write or photograph your own answer and have it marked by AI against this mark scheme, with feedback on what you missed.
Sign up free →