AQA A2 HISTORY: The Triumph of Elizabeth, 1547-1603 Offical Thread. 2nd June 2014.

Scroll to see replies

I did Q1 and Q3.

For Q1 I Included:
Somerset
- Religious changes
- Western Prayer Book Rebellion
= instability
BUT - Economic and Social instability caused by foreign wars (had to be seen to lead like Henry VIII though)
Northumberland
- Attempted to establish stability and did with stopping foreign wars and ending debasement of the coinage
- Passed more obvious protestant changes without issues
- Lady Jane Grey succession caused short-term instability
Mary
- Catholicism welcomed back but 80 MP's voted against Statue of Repeal in 1553
- Instability came from proposed foreign marrige (Wyatt Rebellion 1554)

Q3
- Attacking John Hawkins at San Juan de Ulua is Sp fault
- Bullion affair E's faulty
- Sea Beggars E's fault

- Netherlands both their fault (E supporting William of Orange, giving money and troops but Spanish Fury sacking Antwerp)
- E going against Treaty of Nymgen from 1573 and supporting Don Antonio and sending Sir Francis Drake to circumvent the glove to spread Spanish resources thinly
- Treaty of Joinville and Nonsuch = war unavoidable at this point
- Attacking Cadiz obviously annoyed Philip but not English fault as good tactical move.

Yeah basically divided Q1 into - Somerset, Northumberland and Mary and talked about religion then foreign/social + economic and for Q2 - Trade and the Netherlands and briefly mentioned it appears she's helping Protestant rebellions in Scot and Fra (but the Q was between 1568-88, so I only made that brief)

Dunno if that sounds good or not??

Reply 421

IllmaticDragon

Original post by MREJB

beter than mine anyway

Reply 422

Endless Blue

Okay so does anyone know about the leniency on the synoptic question? I've been told by various teachers that less depth is expected as you need much more breadth so I'm hoping this will save me a bit as I only made passing references e.g to puritan and catholic challenge because I started talking about ****ing foreign policy. :facepalm2:

Reply 423

ilovee

Did q1 and q2 like everyone else. Felt I didn't quite do justice to either but perhaps that's just because I felt the writing was a bit clunky. I did comparisons and synoptic links and remerbed all my historiography (yay!) but felt in q2 I kept talking to much about the last years and had to force myself to put in the words 'success' and 'failure'.
q1 paragraphs- Politics/ government, Religious Causes and Rebellions. Talked about instability in government from Duke's different policies and ability to take over undermining everything, with religious causes not always that influential (especially Northumberland's), and weighing up how much instability rebellions actually caused.

q2 paragraphs- Religion, government, and finance/ economy. So much to say for religion! Tried to pick out specific things and made sure to talk about Puritans and Catholics, said it wasn't always a success in the first part of her reign but needed time to be established and defended. Government I said was definitely a failure when she lost control and for economy I talked about subsidies, debts and monopolies, as well as economic disorder in the last years. Concluded it wasn't as black and white as failure and success.

Hope this helps!
p.s also made me laugh (in my head) that q2 stole Haigh's quote about '30 years of illusion followed by 15 years of disillusion'!

Reply 424

annmcc

Good questions, bad answers. I definitely did not do myself and all the revision I've done justice. My Edward and Mary one was quite clunky and I forgot to write about the pope (HOW). My other one (Q2) was slightly better I think. Ahhh I'm so annoyed with myself

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 425

marm-alade

I hate to say it and I don't want to panic you but the capture of candid was 1596 and the question asked until 1588

Reply 426

Endless Blue

Original post by ilovee

p.s also made me laugh (in my head) that q2 stole Haigh's quote about '30 years of illusion followed by 15 years of disillusion'!

I put that quote in my introduction on the debate! Glad I got the right person at least, nagging thought it my mind said it was Guy but I was pretty sure it was Haigh. :lol:

Reply 427

Endless Blue

Original post by annmcc

Same here, really let myself down with the second question.

Reply 428

marm-alade

For question 3 I'm pretty worried about my response, I went for:

-how Philip contributed (seizure of English ships and goods/frustrating talks with Morocco)
- then how liz contributed (supporting don Antonio/Hawkins infiltrating Spanish monopoly/ antagonism for supporting Dutch rebels
- how her inconsistent policy toward the Dutch rebels led to drawn out conflict- it was her inaction with directly supporting them after port brielle that led to war (inaction of English not action)
- and finally that it's what triggered the English actions that indirectly led to war (rebels sacking Antwerp/rebels devided on religious grounds) and liz didn't really want to help them (shown by trying to make peace with Parma) it was the actions of the rebels that forced her to join the treaty of nonesuch/ french relations and the actions of Hiii in attacking Antwerp and joining treaty of joinsville

I feel like it's very messy/not what they were looking for? What do you think?

Reply 429

MREJB

Yes but the 1587 attack on Cadiz by Francis Drake was ordered by Elizabeth and delayed the Armada by up to a year :smile:

Reply 430

marm-alade

I thought that was Azores?

Reply 431

MREJB

Original post by marm-alade

I thought that was Azores?

I googled it and on Wikipedia it says: "Battle of Cádiz (1587): in the Anglo-Spanish War, Francis Drake torched the harbour's merchant ships but was repelled outside the city."

Reply 432

Endless Blue

Original post by marm-alade

I thought that was Azores?

Original post by MREJB

Yes but the 1587 attack on Cadiz by Francis Drake was ordered by Elizabeth and delayed the Armada by up to a year :smile:

There were several attacks prior to the Armada, so you're both actually correct.

Reply 433

annmcc

I'm so mad at myself but at least this shows that we're not alone in feeling like we messed up a bit! Onwards and upwards, on the bright side we we never have to think about Elizabeth again :wink:

How do you guys think the grade boundaries will be? I think it was slightly harder than last year

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 434

Endless Blue

Original post by annmcc

I'm so mad at myself but at least this shows that we're not alone in feeling like we messed up a bit! Onwards and upwards, on the bright side we we never have to think about Elizabeth again :wink:

How do you guys think the grade boundaries will be? I think it was slightly harder than last year

Posted from TSR Mobile

They're always around the same I think, give-or-take a few marks.

Edit: Actually it seems 12/13 have both been similar; 60 for an A and 70 for an A*. On the other hand, 10/11 were much lower. I personally don't know now, question 1 was easy but the other two were more difficult imo.

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 435

ilovee

I feel like they were reasonable questions but for some reason they were just a bit weird and confusing! i think q2 caught a lot of people out with foreign policy, and q3 I didn't do because I was worried about how to write about England's influence. I don't know about grade boundaries, they've been going up every year, I mean in 2010 you only needed like 32 in each essay for an A, now it's 38! Hopefully they won't go up any more or will be lower. But just remember guys, as my history teacher who is also a history examiner for this course says, examiners mark positively, looking at what you've written and not what you've left out :smile:

Reply 436

annmcc

Ones I've looked at have varied between 97-107 UMS, but you're right, I just want to make myself feel better about it haha

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 437

tengentoppa

I think it was OK.

Q1. Somerset inept, not religion. Northumberland and succession, not religion. Mary reign stable, what little instablity there was, not religion. To conclude, not religion.
q2. Did well in first 30 years with religion-puritans, presbytarians, omission of black rubric, northern rebellion.
Also did well with religion in last years, but messed up with parliament and society. Overall, yes quote is true.

I'm not particularly confident of getting an A in this exam, but I only need 60% in this one to get an A overall so I'm fairly happy. Good luck to everyone! :smile:

Reply 438

Alindsey

How much do you think they'll mark me down because I didn't write a conclusion for the sources:'(? I used historians opinions and my own knowledge:-/ but obviously I didn't come to a judgement.

Reply 439

brendonbackflip

lol u suckers thinking it would be on france

i'm refusing to look at any of this but I thought it was OK.
I personally think people will have tripped up nation-wide in Q2 (I thought it was quiet good for myself, but I think there was a lot of potential to misread the question...) so maybe we can hope for lower grade boundaries? As well as the fact this is the first year for many places to do all A-Levels in the summer, so again there may be leniency...this is what I'm hoping for anyway!