A Level History Unit 3D British Monarchy: the Crisis of State 1642-1689 Exemplar Scripts and Commentaries Version 1.0 1
Copyright 2010 AQA and its licensors. All rights reserved. The Assessment and Qualifications Alliance (AQA) is a company limited by guarantee registered in England and Wales (company number 3644723). Registered address: AQA, Devas Street, Manchester M15 6EX 2
Contents 1 HIS3D Question Paper p 5 2 Question 1 Candidate A Response p 7 3 Question 1 Candidate A Commentary p 11 4 Question 1 Candidate B Response p 13 5 Question 1 Candidate B Commentary p 16 6 Question 1 Candidate C Response p 17 7 Question 1 Candidate C Commentary p 22 8 Question 2 Candidate D Response p 23 9 Question 2 Candidate D Commentary p 28 10 Question 2 Candidate E Response p 29 11 Question 2 Candidate E Commentary p 32 12 Question 2 Candidate F Response p 33 13 Question 2 Candidate F Commentary p 37 14 Question 3 Candidate G Response p 38 15 Question 3 Candidate G Commentary p 43 16 Question 3 Candidate H Response p 44 17 Question 3 Candidate H Commentary p 48 18 Question 3 Candidate I Response p 49 19 Question 3 Candidate I Commentary p 54 3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Commentary Question 1 To what extent was religion more important than politics in the failure of settlement between Crown and Parliament in the years 1646 to 1649? (45 marks) Candidate A Candidate attempts to address the specific question and factors in the introduction, although this could be done more directly and particularly offer some focus on the issue of regicide. The first paragraph deals with politics and religion causing division within the army and within the factions in parliament as well as between army and parliament. Knowledge here is generally secure but candidate should not use the later development of the Quakers and Diggers for examples in this period and should qualify the influence of the Levellers as well as their religious agenda to show more clearly precise knowledge of the period. There follows a good paragraph illustrating Charles role in the failure of settlement. The candidate touches upon Charles tactic of causing division, there is reference to his refusal of the Newcastle Propositions (1646), and the candidate links this again to different factions in Parliament. This is then reinforced by reference to Charles and the grandees negotiating the Heads of Proposals in July 1647. The failure of these attempted settlements is also set in the context of Charles escape from Hampton Court, his Engagement and the Second Civil War. The candidate also illustrates the increasing radicalism through reference to the Windsor Prayer Meeting, again getting the chronology of these events correct. The paragraph is rounded off well with directed comment on the changed situation because of Charles as a factor compared to 1646. This paragraph is, however, too long. The candidate would benefit from separate and more detailed treatment of the Second Civil War and the Windsor Prayer Meeting. This would also allow a slightly more developed consideration of the Heads of the Proposals. The next paragraph is directly linked to the factor of religion and the candidate tries to explain this as a context for parliamentary division. Again the candidate tries to put too much into this paragraph by then going on to the Vote of No Addresses, their Repeal and Pride s Purge. While this material is linked to the theme of parliamentary division the problem again of having so much in one paragraph means that these key events are not dealt with in enough precise detail. The next paragraph is started well where all the previous themes are brought together indicating the candidate s understanding of how they linked in causing the failure of settlement. Candidate also makes directed judgement about religion being 11
the key underlying factor for all of these linked reasons as well as linking it to the continuing failure of settlement post January 1649. The candidate was awarded Level 4, 32 marks as they have showed a very good understanding of the question, specifically the key factors of the failure of settlement as well as a grasp of the chronology of the key events of the period, linked to the factors, and have structured a response around these with directed comment. It is generally written quite clearly. There is, however, much more scope for the development of the use of the key illustrative examples and comment to go further. This is particularly the case with regard to the events from December 1647. 12
13
14
15
Commentary Question 1 To what extent was religion more important than politics in the failure of settlement between Crown and Parliament in the years 1646 to 1649? (45 marks) Candidate B Candidate tries to address question and the specific factors directly in the introduction, although this would be more effective with the deployment of more precise specific evidence from the period 1646 to 1649. The first paragraph addresses Newcastle Propositions, the Heads of the Proposals and the politicisation of the New Model. Sound directed comment at the end as well as appreciation of the role of Charles. This could be more precise and development comment in relation to these themes but attempt is made in the next paragraph to add more weight by addressing the Levellers role in the politicisation of the New Model. There follows a good paragraph on Charles role which is illustrated clearly with examples of settlements that he refused. The paragraph on divide in parliament, caused by attempts at settlement, builds on this with other directed specific examples, Ireton s Remonstrance and Pride s Purge. The candidate tries to address the concept of providence in the context of this division and the politicisation of the army. All of these themes are brought together in the conclusion which is generally clear and focused on the specific question. This essay is awarded Level 4, 32 marks as it shows a very good understanding of the question, is good on the themes and has a range of good evidence. However, it also fails to really develop some of these examples. 16
17
18
19
20
21
Commentary Question 1 To what extent was religion more important than politics in the failure of settlement between Crown and Parliament in the years 1646 to 1649? (45 marks) Candidate C This essay has a very good introduction that shows a very good grasp of the key themes and groups in the failure of settlement indicating immediately an understanding of the question and period. There is a good paragraph on Charles approach which shows a sound understanding of his motivation and links clearly to Newcastle Propositions and the army s Heads of Proposals. While the next paragraph deals with New Model but is not clear in its deployment of evidence in terms of the chronology of the period. This candidate shows a clear understanding of the Second Civil War as a turning point in the politics of settlement but could have been more developed through a closer use of precise evidence and comment. While the candidate attempts to bring this together in a conclusion and has shown enough for Level 4 there is definitely a need for greater detail and precision in this essay. 22
23
24
25
26
27
Commentary Question 2 To what extent can the Restoration Settlement in the years 1660 to 1685 be regarded as a failure? (45 marks) Candidate D Candidate writes a good introduction addressing the specific question directly shaping an argument and including key themes of the period and specific evidence. There is a good illustrated paragraph on foreign policy commenting on the failure against the Dutch and relations with the French/Louis XIV. There is precise support, specifically with Treaty of Dover to illustrate this. The paragraph ends linking the French information to religion, finance and parliament. This ably sets up the next paragraph which deals with the issue of religion which again has a chain of evidence which runs through the period as well as underpinning the examples with reference to the longer term causes of anti-catholicism. A paragraph dealing with the tension between Charles and MPs due to the nature of his court as well as Charles II causing tension with his councillors is effective and is followed by a very solid consideration of Charles successes in dealing with immediate issues resolved at the Restoration. The candidate has a good paragraph on the Exclusion Crisis and why this was the main success of Charles II. Again there is some good detail, for example reference to the Triennial Act, from the candidate in support of the point being made. All of this is brought together in clear conclusion and the candidate gets a good Level 4 mark by showing a very good understanding of the specific question through dealing with the themes of the period and illustrating this through use of the key details of the period. Comment needs extension and further precision when using key events as examples. 28
29
30
31
Commentary Question 2 To what extent can the Restoration Settlement in the years 1660 to 1685 be regarded as a failure? (45 marks) Candidate E This essay starts with a good introduction which makes judgement and addresses the range of factors for this specific question. There follows a sound paragraph on religion with evidence. The candidate then deals with other themes, notably foreign policy, finance, ministers and Exclusion as they proceed through the essay. Some of this would be more effective in a clearer structure and there is a need for greater depth of illustration and comment. The candidate does bring the essay together in a sound conclusion. They have been awarded Level 4 as they have, however, shown a very good understanding of the specific question, have addressed the themes of the period, linked to some key details and shown an understanding of how the themes linked. 32
33
34
35
36
Commentary Question 2 To what extent can the Restoration Settlement in the years 1660 to 1685 be regarded as a failure? (45 marks) Candidate F Response F shares the same key features as responses D and E on Question 2. There is a good rounded introduction that has detail and addresses both sides of the question well. It deals with the immediate issues of the restoration with precise detail in the first two paragraphs and then illustrates the problems of religion effectively. This is developed further in the next paragraph although the theme and evidence of this could be clearer. The candidate does become more precise towards the end when dealing with Exclusion, a key issue for this specific question. The treatment of Charles use of his ministers is valid but would be strengthened by more directed comment. Like the other two essays this candidate has a good range of evidence, addresses themes and generally has comment and on this basis has done enough to secure a good Level 4 mark but again more precision more clarity with the themes of the paragraph would strengthen this essay. 37
38
39
40
41
42
Commentary Question 3 To what extent were James II s political policies more important than his religious policies in causing the revolution of 1688 to 1689? (45 marks) Candidate G The candidate produces a clear introduction that provides the context of change over the period while making directed comment on James and his religious policies as a cause of the Revolution. The candidate also links the concepts of Catholicism and absolutism and sets this in context of James aims, which is also linked to different historians views of James aims. The candidate also shows an appreciation of the importance of the alienation of the church and gentry. Within this the candidate also supports their establishment of the context of the essay with precise support, referring to the defeat of the Whigs in the Exclusion Crisis and the improved financial position of the crown at James accession. The candidate then follows through with evidence to illustrate religious policies causing problems Godden v Hales, Commission for Ecclesiastical Causes, relationship with gentry, JPs etc are all dealt with as examples of James alienating key support. The candidate also deals with James relationship with Dissenters and then has more detail on Declarations of Indulgence and the Bishops. There is an excellent direct attempt at balance in the argument by structuring the essay around other factors as well, like the underlying anti-catholicism of the population and thereby addressing a key concept of the whole period and the role of William of Orange. In dealing with these factors the candidate supports their argument with key details, including the trigger for William s intervention, the birth of James son and the European context of the Netherlands struggle with Louis XIV. All of this is effectively brought together in the conclusion and while there could have been more precision with the evidence, links between themes and comments the candidate has done enough to secure Level 5 as they have shown a relatively full understanding of the question. They have also, through the essay, illustrated a good conceptual grasp. This can be seen, for example, in an understanding of the importance of the gentry, the nation as represented in parliament, the link between Catholicism and absolutism and the importance of trust. Well structured with a range of evidence the candidate makes explicit comment as they proceed through the essay. 43
44
45
46
47
Commentary Question 3 To what extent were James II s political policies more important than his religious policies in causing the revolution of 1688 to 1689? (45 marks) Candidate H Despite spelling throne as thrown the candidate produces a good introduction establishing the context and shaping an argument to the key factors that caused the Glorious Revolution. They establish the religious context for James policies and more importantly the importance of the support of the church and landowners who the candidate argues James alienated by his religious and political policies. This is supported with reference to policies and the candidate also shows an appreciation of the process/escalation of alienation of this key group. The candidate makes directed comment on this material in relation to the specific wording of the question. The candidate then addresses, in a similar structure, James alienation of landowners, specifically by using examples that link their role in parliament and in control of the localities. Such an approach in previous paragraphs indicates very good understanding of some key concepts and if developed by more lining comment would really be a feature of a Level 5 essay. The candidate deals with William clearly as another factor and has the crucial trigger of the birth of James son and the fear of absolutism as a consequence. Touches upon the immortal seven and weaknesses of James reaction but this needs more detail and while the candidate brings an argument together in their conclusion generally there needs to be a development of the evidence and comment. 48
49
50
51
52
53
Commentary Question 3 To what extent were James II s political policies more important than his religious policies in causing the revolution of 1688 to 1689? (45 marks) Candidate I There is a good direct start with focus on specific question and shaped to an argument. The candidate then sets the context by explaining the strength of James position in 1685 and then developing this in relation to different interpretations of James intentions. The candidate has a good range of evidence with regard to James policies that alienated the elite at the heart of the essay. Yet this essay does need a development of comment and evidence and needs to be much clearer on the role of William in relation to the development of opposition in England to move higher within Level 4. General summary of all responses These essays secured Level 4 (26-37). They range from the weakest, at 28 marks, to 34 marks. One secured a Level 5 mark of 42. The Level 4 essays all showed very good understanding of the demands of the question, predominantly by focusing on the key themes/factors for the specific question which is supported by a range of precise evidence. The essays are well-organised and, in general, relatively clearly written. They have clear judgement through the essays. Yet all of these elements could have been more developed to move beyond 34 marks to the top of the level at 37 or in to Level 5 (38-45 marks). The one essay that did secure Level 5, 42 obviously had all of the features of the other essays but showed a fuller understanding of the question, was more precise with its evidence and shaped the comment more consistently through the whole essay as part of an overall argument that was very clear, helped by a very good structure and fluency of expression. 54