OCR A2 History: Russia and its Rulers 1855-1964 discussion thread 10 June
Scroll to see replies
Original post by RupertDuthie
I could really use these notes ASAP if you still have them
Same here!
Original post by dramdunda
Peasants: life was difficult for peasants throughout the period, demonstrated by the fact that all rulers of Russia tangled with the problem of Russia agriculture: Emancipation of the Serfs, introduction of Land Captains, Stolypin's land reforms, Lenin's NEP, Stalin's collectivisation (a second serfdom?) and Khrushchev's Virgin Land Programme. Some of these reforms had an overall positive effect on peasant life, perhaps 1861 and 1921 were years of relative prosperity for peasants. However overall it can be seen that the peasants ended the period in 1964 remaining in a position of extreme social and economic weakness.
Peasants: life was difficult for peasants throughout the period, demonstrated by the fact that all rulers of Russia tangled with the problem of Russia agriculture: Emancipation of the Serfs, introduction of Land Captains, Stolypin's land reforms, Lenin's NEP, Stalin's collectivisation (a second serfdom?) and Khrushchev's Virgin Land Programme. Some of these reforms had an overall positive effect on peasant life, perhaps 1861 and 1921 were years of relative prosperity for peasants. However overall it can be seen that the peasants ended the period in 1964 remaining in a position of extreme social and economic weakness.
Hey,
Not directly arguing you against your statement but could you elaborate on the relative prosperity for peasants in 1921?
For example, the use of War Communism by Lenin was simply a pragmatic policy to enable the Bolsheviks to win the Civil War, by prioritising war industry. Therefore, in 1921 both industry and agriculture were in crisis. Due to the neglect of the peasantry during this period along with droughts in 1920-21 brought about mass famine in 1921, huge unrest in the countryside etc. From my knowledge the NEP took a little while to yield beneficial effects on the peasant class, i.e. from 1922-23 things started getting better.
Also, the prosperity in 1861 is debatable. Whilst emancipation brought about increased social mobility, the economic situation for many peasants got worse due to impossibly high redemption taxes and civil unrest came about due to the severe lack of land the serfs were granted. I agree that the emancipation wasn't all bad, but that's due to the other resultant social effects of the policy as mentioned above and not really the prosperity in my opinion!
Let me know what you think, otherwise your answer was really solid! Sorry if I came across as condescending, I didn't mean to be, it seems you have exam technique down much better than me!
Hi!
Yeah I totally agree, in 1921 the peasants remained in a position of extreme economic and social weakness from War Communism which ordered peasants to turn in all of their grain other than a small amount that they could keep for their own sustenance. NEP undoubtedly improved peasant life, although as you said, this set in in 1923 and later as Kulaks prospered in free market conditions. However this was their only real period of any success under Communist rule as Stalin reverted back to a Socialist utopia and as we all know collectivisation was a long, drawn-out disaster for the peasantry, especially those who benefitted from the private enterprise brought by NEP.
With regard to 1861, yes the peasants were saddled with redemption payments, tied to their communes and still judged on the basis of traditional law yet nevertheless they were the most direct beneficiaries of the Great Reforms. This can be illustrated by the reduction in frequency of peasant revolts (in the 6 years and 2 months of Alexander II's reign pre-emancipation edict there was an astonishing 474 revolts, accounting for 32% of all peasant revolts in the entire 19th century in Russia).
I totally understand that there are two sides to the emancipation coin:
1. the abolition of human bondage began to drive russia into the modern age
2. the reform was specious and conservative in nature; its effects were in reality limited.
There isn't a right or wrong answer at all, but in this essay I have adopted view 1purely because peasant life was so miserable and desperate that I am finding it difficult to find periods of relative prosperity for peasants. It also facilitates a good synoptic essay as the positive reforms under Alex II, Stolypin and Lenin can be compared together. Am I by no means right and you are by no means wrong, in fact it might be worth mentioning that the effects of the Emancipation Edict were limited later in the essay-perhaps comparing it with some of Khrushchev's agricultural reforms which never quite realised their potential.
But in any case, as my teacher says, engaging in that sort of debate is more than enough to get you an A/hopefully A*.
Yeah I totally agree, in 1921 the peasants remained in a position of extreme economic and social weakness from War Communism which ordered peasants to turn in all of their grain other than a small amount that they could keep for their own sustenance. NEP undoubtedly improved peasant life, although as you said, this set in in 1923 and later as Kulaks prospered in free market conditions. However this was their only real period of any success under Communist rule as Stalin reverted back to a Socialist utopia and as we all know collectivisation was a long, drawn-out disaster for the peasantry, especially those who benefitted from the private enterprise brought by NEP.
With regard to 1861, yes the peasants were saddled with redemption payments, tied to their communes and still judged on the basis of traditional law yet nevertheless they were the most direct beneficiaries of the Great Reforms. This can be illustrated by the reduction in frequency of peasant revolts (in the 6 years and 2 months of Alexander II's reign pre-emancipation edict there was an astonishing 474 revolts, accounting for 32% of all peasant revolts in the entire 19th century in Russia).
I totally understand that there are two sides to the emancipation coin:
1. the abolition of human bondage began to drive russia into the modern age
2. the reform was specious and conservative in nature; its effects were in reality limited.
There isn't a right or wrong answer at all, but in this essay I have adopted view 1purely because peasant life was so miserable and desperate that I am finding it difficult to find periods of relative prosperity for peasants. It also facilitates a good synoptic essay as the positive reforms under Alex II, Stolypin and Lenin can be compared together. Am I by no means right and you are by no means wrong, in fact it might be worth mentioning that the effects of the Emancipation Edict were limited later in the essay-perhaps comparing it with some of Khrushchev's agricultural reforms which never quite realised their potential.
But in any case, as my teacher says, engaging in that sort of debate is more than enough to get you an A/hopefully A*.
Would anyone be able to have a quick look at one of my typical paragraphs for me? I'm constantly getting B's and I'm wondering what I have to do to get an A in this subject :/
This is for the nature of government topic.
While some leaders envisaged a step toward democracy, the role of the leader remained largely authoritarian and was deceptive in this way. The tsarist era constituted a string of superficial reform, which appeared to lessen the supreme power of the ruler in favour of a step towards a constitutional monarchy, but in fact simply bolstered it. For example, the duma supposedly existed to strengthen the voice of the masses, but Nicholas II’s Fundamental Laws 1906, most notably so Article 87, allowed the tsar to bypass the Duma entirely and refuse to pass any law at will. In a similar vein, the communists effectively yielded a similar amount of power, as the government essentially controlled all ‘democratically elected’ organisations, such as the All Russian Congress of Soviets. This pretext kept the majority content while allowing the ruler to maintain dictatorial power, and was therefore key in controlling the proletariat.
This is for the nature of government topic.
While some leaders envisaged a step toward democracy, the role of the leader remained largely authoritarian and was deceptive in this way. The tsarist era constituted a string of superficial reform, which appeared to lessen the supreme power of the ruler in favour of a step towards a constitutional monarchy, but in fact simply bolstered it. For example, the duma supposedly existed to strengthen the voice of the masses, but Nicholas II’s Fundamental Laws 1906, most notably so Article 87, allowed the tsar to bypass the Duma entirely and refuse to pass any law at will. In a similar vein, the communists effectively yielded a similar amount of power, as the government essentially controlled all ‘democratically elected’ organisations, such as the All Russian Congress of Soviets. This pretext kept the majority content while allowing the ruler to maintain dictatorial power, and was therefore key in controlling the proletariat.
Original post by GraviticWar
Anyone who wants to-see my A-grade peasant-essay, just send me a PM, along with your e-mail address. The scan file-size is-to large for this forum.
Hello, I have my exam on tuesday and i really need some help...could you send me any essays you have? that would be so amazing xx
Original post by RupertDuthie
I could really use these notes ASAP if you still have them
rupert, did you ever get these notes? could really do with some, a
Original post by RupertDuthie
I could really use these notes ASAP if you still have them
Hi, I am struggling on the exam technique for this exam on tuesday. Please could you send me a few of your essays. It would be a huge help.
Thanks.
Hi,
I've got my exam on Tuesday and really desperately need some help
can someone send me some essays/essay plans?
Also, bit unsure as to how to squeeze the Provisional Government into an essay
for example, if I got one on 'effective autocrats', or 'repression v. reform'... what do i say about them?
Someone please help me! xx
I've got my exam on Tuesday and really desperately need some help
can someone send me some essays/essay plans?
Also, bit unsure as to how to squeeze the Provisional Government into an essay
for example, if I got one on 'effective autocrats', or 'repression v. reform'... what do i say about them?
Someone please help me! xx
Original post by RupertDuthie
I could really use these notes ASAP if you still have them
Could you send them to me if you still have them?! x
Original post by bellequarantaine
Hi,
I've got my exam on Tuesday and really desperately need some help
can someone send me some essays/essay plans?
Also, bit unsure as to how to squeeze the Provisional Government into an essay
for example, if I got one on 'effective autocrats', or 'repression v. reform'... what do i say about them?
Someone please help me! xx
I've got my exam on Tuesday and really desperately need some help
can someone send me some essays/essay plans?
Also, bit unsure as to how to squeeze the Provisional Government into an essay
for example, if I got one on 'effective autocrats', or 'repression v. reform'... what do i say about them?
Someone please help me! xx
what do you need help with in particular? Structure or content?!
Always try and include the Provisional Government unless it's a direct comparison between Tsars and Communists, but even then it still wouldn't hurt to mention them. So for example in 'effective autocrats' you could explain how the February revolution and PG led to possibly the only time in the period when Russian government turned away from autocracy to an extent, and showed promise of democracy.
hope this helps!
Just remembered something else to do with peasants/urban workers and the NEP. It'd be a good idea to mention the Scissors Crisis of 1923. Food prices were low because agriculture had recovered well after the Civil War, faster than industry had. Prices of consumer goods were much higher, so the peasants couldn't afford them. The peasants stopped producing food to sell, which increased the likelihood of famine in the cities. government had
Original post by RupertDuthie
I could really use these notes ASAP if you still have them
completely echoing everyone else, but if you don't mind I'd love to see those notes! x
Original post by dramdunda
Hi!
But in any case, as my teacher says, engaging in that sort of debate is more than enough to get you an A/hopefully A*.
But in any case, as my teacher says, engaging in that sort of debate is more than enough to get you an A/hopefully A*.
Yeah that's my hope too! Although I think I only need a D in this exam for an A overall, I'm really hoping I can get an A*. Thanks for your viewpoints, really interesting about the decrease in peasant revolts, definitely going to mention that in my essay if it comes up!
Good luck
Original post by helzz94
Would anyone be able to have a quick look at one of my typical paragraphs for me? I'm constantly getting B's and I'm wondering what I have to do to get an A in this subject :/
This is for the nature of government topic.
While some leaders envisaged a step toward democracy, the role of the leader remained largely authoritarian and was deceptive in this way. The tsarist era constituted a string of superficial reform, which appeared to lessen the supreme power of the ruler in favour of a step towards a constitutional monarchy, but in fact simply bolstered it. For example, the duma supposedly existed to strengthen the voice of the masses, but Nicholas II’s Fundamental Laws 1906, most notably so Article 87, allowed the tsar to bypass the Duma entirely and refuse to pass any law at will. In a similar vein, the communists effectively yielded a similar amount of power, as the government essentially controlled all ‘democratically elected’ organisations, such as the All Russian Congress of Soviets. This pretext kept the majority content while allowing the ruler to maintain dictatorial power, and was therefore key in controlling the proletariat.
This is for the nature of government topic.
While some leaders envisaged a step toward democracy, the role of the leader remained largely authoritarian and was deceptive in this way. The tsarist era constituted a string of superficial reform, which appeared to lessen the supreme power of the ruler in favour of a step towards a constitutional monarchy, but in fact simply bolstered it. For example, the duma supposedly existed to strengthen the voice of the masses, but Nicholas II’s Fundamental Laws 1906, most notably so Article 87, allowed the tsar to bypass the Duma entirely and refuse to pass any law at will. In a similar vein, the communists effectively yielded a similar amount of power, as the government essentially controlled all ‘democratically elected’ organisations, such as the All Russian Congress of Soviets. This pretext kept the majority content while allowing the ruler to maintain dictatorial power, and was therefore key in controlling the proletariat.
Well, although it's difficult to tell what kind of mark you'd be getting without seeing a whole essay, it seems like you're on the right lines!
What I would say is that I wouldn't get too worried about the marks your teachers are giving you at this stage - Firstly, the marks you receive in the exam are worryingly subjective to what examiner marks your paper and their general impression of your essay, some can be unnecessarily lenient whilst others much harsher. This wasn't meant to put you off, more suggesting your teacher may simply be quite a harsh marker on average. Also, secondly, it's a common tactic of teachers to under-mark you, especially close to exam time, in order to motivate you to really push yourself for the exam, I know my teachers do!
If you're doing exactly what your teachers are telling you to do in terms of exam technique and you're still getting B's I suspect either the above is true, or that you're lacking knowledge - maybe this is in specific examples etc. Can you not ask them why they didn't give you an A, really grill them for specific areas you can improve!
Hope that helped a little, the main point is not to worry too much and focus on preparing solid synoptic essay plans for the different topic areas/questions, and make sure you get your knowledge as tight as possible!
Original post by barneybewick
what do you need help with in particular? Structure or content?!
Always try and include the Provisional Government unless it's a direct comparison between Tsars and Communists, but even then it still wouldn't hurt to mention them. So for example in 'effective autocrats' you could explain how the February revolution and PG led to possibly the only time in the period when Russian government turned away from autocracy to an extent, and showed promise of democracy.
hope this helps!
Always try and include the Provisional Government unless it's a direct comparison between Tsars and Communists, but even then it still wouldn't hurt to mention them. So for example in 'effective autocrats' you could explain how the February revolution and PG led to possibly the only time in the period when Russian government turned away from autocracy to an extent, and showed promise of democracy.
hope this helps!
Thank you!
Also, how would you structure a turning point essay? my instinct is to go through it thematically... so :
ideology
central gov structure
role of the church
repression
censorship and propaganda
and then within that debate to what extent different periods were turning points
and end up arguing that october 1917 was the biggest turning point
But my friend seems to think we should structure it like this:
all the changes 1917
all the changes 1905
all the changes 1924 and so on...?
which is better?
x
Original post by bellequarantaine
Thank you!
Also, how would you structure a turning point essay? my instinct is to go through it thematically... so :
ideology
central gov structure
role of the church
repression
censorship and propaganda
and then within that debate to what extent different periods were turning points
and end up arguing that october 1917 was the biggest turning point
But my friend seems to think we should structure it like this:
all the changes 1917
all the changes 1905
all the changes 1924 and so on...?
which is better?
x
Also, how would you structure a turning point essay? my instinct is to go through it thematically... so :
ideology
central gov structure
role of the church
repression
censorship and propaganda
and then within that debate to what extent different periods were turning points
and end up arguing that october 1917 was the biggest turning point
But my friend seems to think we should structure it like this:
all the changes 1917
all the changes 1905
all the changes 1924 and so on...?
which is better?
x
I definitely think yours is better!
A turning point question will always focus on government, so it is important to make sure this is what you concentrate on rather than Russia through the period in general.
Focus on these four themes: ideology, structure, organisation, and tools of government (repression censorship etc). Feel free to bring in the role of the Church but i don't think it is quite as vital.
Then, as you said, within these themes analyse the extent to which different potential turning points within the period changed the nature of government. It is probably a good idea to have about five in your head ready to use. This is for you to choose, but along with the October revolution I'm going to go for:
- defeat in the Crimean War
- assassination of Alexander II
- 1905 revolution
- february revolution
- failure to release the testament (this one is a bit 'out there', but my teacher has assured me the examiners like a little originality!)
In some ways it is good to have a one or two which maybe aren't as major turning points as others as it makes it easier to discredit them and form a valid conclusion.
Hope this helps. It it does feel free to ask anything else as it makes good revision for me too! xx
Thanks so much... i sent you a private message
(not as dodgy as it sounds), belle
(not as dodgy as it sounds), belle
Original post by barneybewick
I definitely think yours is better!
A turning point question will always focus on government, so it is important to make sure this is what you concentrate on rather than Russia through the period in general.
Focus on these four themes: ideology, structure, organisation, and tools of government (repression censorship etc). Feel free to bring in the role of the Church but i don't think it is quite as vital.
Then, as you said, within these themes analyse the extent to which different potential turning points within the period changed the nature of government. It is probably a good idea to have about five in your head ready to use. This is for you to choose, but along with the October revolution I'm going to go for:
- defeat in the Crimean War
- assassination of Alexander II
- 1905 revolution
- february revolution
- failure to release the testament (this one is a bit 'out there', but my teacher has assured me the examiners like a little originality!)
In some ways it is good to have a one or two which maybe aren't as major turning points as others as it makes it easier to discredit them and form a valid conclusion.
Hope this helps. It it does feel free to ask anything else as it makes good revision for me too! xx
A turning point question will always focus on government, so it is important to make sure this is what you concentrate on rather than Russia through the period in general.
Focus on these four themes: ideology, structure, organisation, and tools of government (repression censorship etc). Feel free to bring in the role of the Church but i don't think it is quite as vital.
Then, as you said, within these themes analyse the extent to which different potential turning points within the period changed the nature of government. It is probably a good idea to have about five in your head ready to use. This is for you to choose, but along with the October revolution I'm going to go for:
- defeat in the Crimean War
- assassination of Alexander II
- 1905 revolution
- february revolution
- failure to release the testament (this one is a bit 'out there', but my teacher has assured me the examiners like a little originality!)
In some ways it is good to have a one or two which maybe aren't as major turning points as others as it makes it easier to discredit them and form a valid conclusion.
Hope this helps. It it does feel free to ask anything else as it makes good revision for me too! xx
Thanks so much... i sent you a private message
(not as dodgy as it sounds), belle
Original post by barneybewick
I definitely think yours is better!
A turning point question will always focus on government, so it is important to make sure this is what you concentrate on rather than Russia through the period in general.
Focus on these four themes: ideology, structure, organisation, and tools of government (repression censorship etc). Feel free to bring in the role of the Church but i don't think it is quite as vital.
Then, as you said, within these themes analyse the extent to which different potential turning points within the period changed the nature of government. It is probably a good idea to have about five in your head ready to use. This is for you to choose, but along with the October revolution I'm going to go for:
- defeat in the Crimean War
- assassination of Alexander II
- 1905 revolution
- february revolution
- failure to release the testament (this one is a bit 'out there', but my teacher has assured me the examiners like a little originality!)
In some ways it is good to have a one or two which maybe aren't as major turning points as others as it makes it easier to discredit them and form a valid conclusion.
Hope this helps. It it does feel free to ask anything else as it makes good revision for me too! xx
A turning point question will always focus on government, so it is important to make sure this is what you concentrate on rather than Russia through the period in general.
Focus on these four themes: ideology, structure, organisation, and tools of government (repression censorship etc). Feel free to bring in the role of the Church but i don't think it is quite as vital.
Then, as you said, within these themes analyse the extent to which different potential turning points within the period changed the nature of government. It is probably a good idea to have about five in your head ready to use. This is for you to choose, but along with the October revolution I'm going to go for:
- defeat in the Crimean War
- assassination of Alexander II
- 1905 revolution
- february revolution
- failure to release the testament (this one is a bit 'out there', but my teacher has assured me the examiners like a little originality!)
In some ways it is good to have a one or two which maybe aren't as major turning points as others as it makes it easier to discredit them and form a valid conclusion.
Hope this helps. It it does feel free to ask anything else as it makes good revision for me too! xx
I have another question about the turning point question. Can I refer to the opposition in this question as they seemed to have significant impact on the development of Russian government, yet writing about the opposition does not directly refer to changes in government.
Let me give you an example:
In my paragraph about A2's accession to power I emphasize the significance of this event as decentralisation of power led to the promotion of liberalism, and therefore it gave rise to the increasing number of people pressing for liberal refroms in the future. Moreover, as a result of lenient treatment of the opposition, such as the Narodniks, they could flourish, and therefore the members and ideas of the future opposition emerged from this particular group. In the conclusion of a paragraph I point out that not only did A2's accession bring about significant, though short-lived, liberal reforms, but also played more important role on the long-term development of the Russia government as the leaders of future opposition movements were influenced by the groups from A2's period. For example, Social revolutionaries grew out of the groups, such as People's Will or Land and Liberty.
I wrote quite a lot as I wanted to make sure that you understand what I meant. Obviously, it is going to be much more concise in the exam.
Secondly, do you think that my list of turning points is good:
-Assassination of A2
-October Revolution
-A2's accession
-Stalin's accession
-Death of Stalin/Khrushchev's emergence
-February Revolution
Original post by Kwak
I have another question about the turning point question. Can I refer to the opposition in this question as they seemed to have significant impact on the development of Russian government, yet writing about the opposition does not directly refer to changes in government.
Let me give you an example:
In my paragraph about A2's accession to power I emphasize the significance of this event as decentralisation of power led to the promotion of liberalism, and therefore it gave rise to the increasing number of people pressing for liberal refroms in the future. Moreover, as a result of lenient treatment of the opposition, such as the Narodniks, they could flourish, and therefore the members and ideas of the future opposition emerged from this particular group. In the conclusion of a paragraph I point out that not only did A2's accession bring about significant, though short-lived, liberal reforms, but also played more important role on the long-term development of the Russia government as the leaders of future opposition movements were influenced by the groups from A2's period. For example, Social revolutionaries grew out of the groups, such as People's Will or Land and Liberty.
I wrote quite a lot as I wanted to make sure that you understand what I meant. Obviously, it is going to be much more concise in the exam.
Secondly, do you think that my list of turning points is good:
-Assassination of A2
-October Revolution
-A2's accession
-Stalin's accession
-Death of Stalin/Khrushchev's emergence
-February Revolution
Let me give you an example:
In my paragraph about A2's accession to power I emphasize the significance of this event as decentralisation of power led to the promotion of liberalism, and therefore it gave rise to the increasing number of people pressing for liberal refroms in the future. Moreover, as a result of lenient treatment of the opposition, such as the Narodniks, they could flourish, and therefore the members and ideas of the future opposition emerged from this particular group. In the conclusion of a paragraph I point out that not only did A2's accession bring about significant, though short-lived, liberal reforms, but also played more important role on the long-term development of the Russia government as the leaders of future opposition movements were influenced by the groups from A2's period. For example, Social revolutionaries grew out of the groups, such as People's Will or Land and Liberty.
I wrote quite a lot as I wanted to make sure that you understand what I meant. Obviously, it is going to be much more concise in the exam.
Secondly, do you think that my list of turning points is good:
-Assassination of A2
-October Revolution
-A2's accession
-Stalin's accession
-Death of Stalin/Khrushchev's emergence
-February Revolution
I think you can definitely refer to opposition, but maybe focus on how the methods of government employed by different leaders allowed opposition to flourish (or otherwise)... and hence how government developed as a result of this. So for your example say that Alexander II's image as the "tsar liberator" and a number of his reforms allowed opposition to thrive, which ultimately changed the mindset of Russian people's thoughts on their political/social/economic rights etc- so is valid to the question as a turning point. Hope that makes sense (probably doesn't)
In terms of your list i think that is good, you have examples from the whole period which is recommended.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- OCR A-Level HISTORY PAPER 3 (Y301-Y321) - 23rd MAY [Exam Chat]
- Ocr alevel history paper 3
- OCR A Level History Britain 1930-1997 PDF?
- Exam predictions OCR History Russia
- OCR A-Level History Unit 3 (Y301-Y321) - 24th May 2023 [Exam Chat]
- AQA A Level History Paper 1 (7042/1A-1L) - 23rd May 2024 [Exam Chat]
- AQA history coursework on Russia 1855-1964
- How can I get started on my NEA for History A-Level?
- A-level Exam Discussions 2024
- a level study buddy!!
- OCR A-level History British period study and enquiry: All exams 10th Jun 2022
- Evaluate the interpretations
- Good History A-Level resources
- Can someone pls give me feedback on my crime and punishment 16 mark q?
- A-level History Study Group 2022-2023
- GCSE Exam Discussions 2024
- OCR A Level History Non-British period study: All Exams - 22 Jun 2022 [Exam Chat]
- year 13 gyg journal : trying not to become an academic victim 🤡📖
- mauufey v a-levels gyg 2024 🌺🍵
- A-level History Study Group 2023-2024
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Edexcel A Level History Paper 2 (9HI0 2A-2H) - 7th June 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 1 day ago
AQA A Level History Paper 1 (7042/1A-1L) - 23rd May 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 1 day ago
AQA A Level History Paper 2 (7042/2A-2T) - 7th June 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 3 days ago
Edexcel GCSE HISTORY PAPER 1 (1HI0 10-13) - 15th MAY [Exam Chat]Last reply 3 days ago
Edexcel A Level History Paper 1 (9HI0 1A-1H) - 23rd May 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 1 week ago
OCR A-Level HISTORY PAPER 3 (Y301-Y321) - 23rd MAY [Exam Chat]Last reply 2 weeks ago
History Edexcel A level Britain Transformed and USA Conformity and ChallengeLast reply 3 months ago
AQA A-level History USA: Making of a Superpower (7042/1K) - 24 May 2023 [Exam Chat]Last reply 3 months ago
AQA A Level History - Making of Modern Britain(2S) Exam Chat - 9th June 2023Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Edexcel A Level History Paper 2 (9HI0 2A-2H) - 7th June 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 1 day ago
AQA A Level History Paper 1 (7042/1A-1L) - 23rd May 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 1 day ago
AQA A Level History Paper 2 (7042/2A-2T) - 7th June 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 3 days ago
Edexcel GCSE HISTORY PAPER 1 (1HI0 10-13) - 15th MAY [Exam Chat]Last reply 3 days ago
Edexcel A Level History Paper 1 (9HI0 1A-1H) - 23rd May 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 1 week ago
OCR A-Level HISTORY PAPER 3 (Y301-Y321) - 23rd MAY [Exam Chat]Last reply 2 weeks ago
History Edexcel A level Britain Transformed and USA Conformity and ChallengeLast reply 3 months ago
AQA A-level History USA: Making of a Superpower (7042/1K) - 24 May 2023 [Exam Chat]Last reply 3 months ago
AQA A Level History - Making of Modern Britain(2S) Exam Chat - 9th June 2023
