Some of [the nobles] were shot, others managed to get away. The Casa del Pueblo [the local HQ of the Socialist Party/UGT] formed a collective out of their lands. Meanwhile other lands were taken over by the CNT local . . . The Casa del Pueblo, having the majority of the working farmers, took over the municipal government and it was decided that every working man should be paid five pesetas for every day he worked and have a right to a daily litre of wine and a certain amount of firewood. The mayor and the secretary and treasurer and the muledrivers and the blacksmith, every man who worked was paid the same. The carpenters and masons and other skilled artisans who had been making seven pesetas a day consented, gladly they said, to taking the same pay as the rest. Later, the mastermason told me, they'd raise everybody's pay to seven pesetas or higher; after all wine was a valuable crop and with no parasites to feed there would be plenty for all. Women and boys were paid three fifty. The committees of the UGT and the CNT decided every day where their members were to work. Housing was roughly distributed according to the sizes of the families.
1. Explain the references to: (a) bourgeois-democratic states (Source B); (b) Durruti (Source D). (2)
2. What are the main differences between the arguments and language used by the authors of Sources A and B? (4)
3. To what extent are the arguments expressed in Source B reinforced by the observations in Source C? (4)
*4. What are the advantages and disadvantages of Sources D and E for a historian studying collectivization in Republican Spain? (7) 5. Using these sources and your own knowledge, discuss the view that, on the Republican side in the Spanish Civil War, 'revolution was a deeply divisive issue'. (8)
Was this article helpful?