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

Did anyone treat the Q1 as a causation question coz I said that instability was a result of different factors
religious changes
political situations
social and economic problems
and then I concluded by saying that religious changes can be seen to be the most important.

I dunno if I would get any marks coz I don't think I answered the question right.

Did anyone treat the Q1 as a causation question coz I said that instability was a result of different factors
religious changes
political situations
social and economic problems
and then I concluded by saying that religious changes can be seen to be the most important.

I dunno if I would get any marks coz I don't think I answered the question right.

I've just blanked! Was Q2 from 1558 to 1603? Friend is talking about between 1588 to 1603 and I suddenly cannot remember for the life of me what dates they were asking for.

The quote said that the first 30 years were a success and the last 15 years were a failure. So that's 45 years, from 1558 to 1603.

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??

I didn't finish on time and didn't get to talk about the sea beggars and the annexation of Portugal and drake raiding the Azores am I going to get such a bad mark. If I hadn't forgotten I think I would have been fine. I feel so horrible right now


Posted from TSR Mobile

That was part of the English Armada in 1589 and the question was from 1568-1588?

I did exactly that, first question has so much to talk about as it was broad. Third question was ok, it wasn't the best but it was good. I just didn't quite managing to write down everything I wanted to say. -.-

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.

Why did you talk about foreign policy! It's domestic affairs. Thus internal issues. But in regards to your first point, yes less depth is needed, i didn't delve too much into it, and did it chronologically and thematically. Remember, everything is not needed on the mark scheme. How many sides did you guys do anyways. I did 4 for each on this.

Yes, I know, I just read the statement and launched into it. I was already a few minutes behind from the first question so I rushed the plan massively. I only realised with about 10 mins left it was domestic, so I panicked and had to cross out all of the FP.

I honestly don't know how I did it but I'm so disappointed in myself, thrown the A* away probably.


Posted from TSR Mobile

I did Q1 and Q3.

For Q1, my argument was that it caused instability due to the contrasting religious reforms introduced by different rulers. The population had no time to settle on a religious policy before it was changed by the next ruler. I backed it up with evidence and historiography.

Did anyone else do similar?