Question Type: Comparing interpretations
1. Study Sources A and B. How far do these two sources agree? Explain your answer using details of the sources. 
NOTE: This could easily be turned around as: How far do the sources disagree? - they are basically the same question.
The Treaty of Versailles was indeed a victor’s peace, designed to punish and constrain the Germans and to vindicate the Allied sacrifices. This was what President Wilson meant when he claimed that, though this was a harsh treaty, it was a just one. But it was also meant to create a post-war world that the defeated as well as the victor nations could accept. The establishment of the League of Nations, whatever the reservations of the victor powers, held out the promise of a more just international regime. The principle of self-determination, never clearly defined, was not universally applied. Wilson hoped that some of the difficulties could be settled within the framework of the League of Nations. Clemenceau managed to achieve much from his fellow peacemakers to compensate for France’s wartime sacrifices and its uniquely exposed position. The drastic cuts in Germany’s military power and its territorial and financial losses gave France a considerable measure of protection. Much in the Versailles Treaty was left undecided and would depend on the manner of its enforcement. Clemenceau was right when he claimed that it was ‘not even a beginning, but the beginning of a beginning’.
From a history book published in 2005.
Clemenceau was under attack from powerful forces in France, who accused him of having been outwitted by the cunning English. Lloyd George knew that he was heading into a storm of criticism for his failure to obtain the huge reparation payments from the Germans which he had promised the British public. But he had also come to fear that the treaty was too harsh. Wilson had come to Paris hoping to remake the world according to liberal and democratic principles, but he had found the task so dominated by claims, hatreds, fears and greeds that he was forced to settle for a compromise that satisfied no one. Hopefully, his League of Nations would eventually resolve some of the difficulties – but this was only a hope.
From a history book published in 1968.
Now do the same for Source B
Essence of the Source?
DO NOT describe each source - in your opening sentence ANSWER the question by comparing the 'BIG PICTURE'
e.g. The sources do not agree with each other. In fact, they disagree quite significantly. Source A is more optimistic about the Treaty and what they achieved whereas (a good word to use when making comparisons) Source B suggests if failed pretty miserably and no one got what they wanted from it.
THEN you need to develop your answer using references from the two sources.