Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by annmcc)
    How are you structuring your paragraphs? i.e by topic/success and failure/chronology?
    Personally I was taught to go through all of the weaker side first and then undermine each point to agree with the stronger side. Then go through the stronger side obviously And in terms of paragraphs, I was told that if it's a synoptic one for all three reigns for instance then to work through it like Edward/Mary/Elizabeth, but in other essays where possible use themes eg political/religious/economic and social sort of thing, depending on the question obviously I'm not sure if that's what you were looking for haha?
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by farah_1)
    She was in marriage negotiation with Henry, duke of Anjou in 1569 (after the deterioration in relation between her and Philip over Hawkins attempts to trade in the new world). That failed, but then in 1579 she was in talks with Francis, duke of Alencon who later became the duke of Anjou. (After she learnt of Anjou plans of supporting the Dutch rebels, she keen to marry so that she could control French involvement in the Netherlands)

    I hope that helped



    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Actually, marriage negotiations started in 1572 but without progress because of:

    1. St. Bartholomew's massacre
    2. Repairing Anglo-Spanish relations after the series of 1568 events
    3. Slight support of the Spanish by expulsion of the Sea Beggars in 1572

    It then resumed in 1578 after pressure in the Netherlands as Parma was set to reconquer all of it. Therefore, Elizabeth got engaged to Alencon in order to get him to intervene in the Netherlands and stop a Spanish victory. Alencon was greedy besieged Antwerp, attempting to take over the Provinces for himself. He was driven out by the Dutch rebels, returned to the French court and died soon after.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HannahCRJ)
    Personally I was taught to go through all of the weaker side first and then undermine each point to agree with the stronger side. Then go through the stronger side obviously And in terms of paragraphs, I was told that if it's a synoptic one for all three reigns for instance then to work through it like Edward/Mary/Elizabeth, but in other essays where possible use themes eg political/religious/economic and social sort of thing, depending on the question obviously I'm not sure if that's what you were looking for haha?
    That's great thank you is anyone else really worried about timing?
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bkw321)
    Got a question for those aiming for the A*s, or at least band 5. For the structure, should I do it chronologically, and assess them as it goes on. Or should I do I split it up into two parts? - This is mainly in regards to questions that pose a threat etc.
    The highest mark in any essay, is to analyse and give a thematic response as opposed to a chronological one.

    If the question is regarding a certain threat posed to Elizabeth, I would still do it thematically by:

    Paragraph 1: Was a threat because...
    Paragraph 2: Wasn't a threat because..
    Paragraph 3: Wasn't a threat also because...
    Paragraph 4: However, was a threat because...

    Of course, you would need to weave in historiography in your essay and I would just do so at the end of each paragraph by saying:

    This view is supported by XXX Professor who agrees that the "XXXXXXX". Therefore, ......
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by annmcc)
    That's great thank you is anyone else really worried about timing?
    Yes, the timing didn't use to be a problem in GCSE.
    But now, I'm continually find that I'm running out of time for questions, simply because there's so much depth to go into. I wish I had extra time!!!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by annmcc)
    That's great thank you is anyone else really worried about timing?
    You're welcome! and yes incredibly so! There is such limited time, do you do a quick plan before you start?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Can anyone help me on privateering? Any more instances? Are these actually correct I have no idea?

    1568 - San Juan massacre from Spanish on Hawkins' fleet
    1578-80 - Drake's adventure
    1585 - Raleigh tries to colonize Virginia, fails
    1589 - Portugal (I don't think that was privateering though)
    1599 - Essex goes to Azores instead of fully solving Irish problem
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LonelyPlanet)
    The highest mark in any essay, is to analyse and give a thematic response as opposed to a chronological one.

    If the question is regarding a certain threat posed to Elizabeth, I would still do it thematically by:

    Paragraph 1: Was a threat because...
    Paragraph 2: Wasn't a threat because..
    Paragraph 3: Wasn't a threat also because...
    Paragraph 4: However, was a threat because...

    Of course, you would need to weave in historiography in your essay and I would just do so at the end of each paragraph by saying:

    This view is supported by XXX Professor who agrees that the "XXXXXXX". Therefore, ......
    Thanks. Do have 1 question. Would I be alright with about 5 historians per essay? I can't remember all of them XD. And apparently on the mark scheme it does say that historiography helps but one can reach the top bands without it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HannahCRJ)
    You're welcome! and yes incredibly so! There is such limited time, do you do a quick plan before you start?
    I know, a mark a minute is so unfair! This is probably weird but I usually write my introduction and then do a plan :L I ran out of time at AS so I'm even more aware of how tight the time is
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bkw321)
    Thanks. Do have 1 question. Would I be alright with about 5 historians per essay? I can't remember all of them XD. And apparently on the mark scheme it does say that historiography helps but one can reach the top bands without it.
    Yeah they say that but just put histriography in anyway! Seriously make someone up :P They aren't going to check the reliability of the source when they have 600 papers to mark. My teacher actually told me that some markers aren't even tudor specialists and A grades have been given to pieces which aren't even factually correct but still have been marked correctly!... May the history gods please give me one of these markers hahah
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by annmcc)
    I know, a mark a minute is so unfair! This is probably weird but I usually write my introduction and then do a plan :L I ran out of time at AS so I'm even more aware of how tight the time is
    It is ridiculous isn't it! haha no I understand why you would! I'm just so worried about running out of time! Me too! Just the thought of sitting there and opening the paper, reading the questions and trying to frantically plan ah! Makes me feel sick haha
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HannahCRJ)
    It is ridiculous isn't it! haha no I understand why you would! I'm just so worried about running out of time! Me too! Just the thought of sitting there and opening the paper, reading the questions and trying to frantically plan ah! Makes me feel sick haha
    Ahh same just the thought of seeing 3 questions I can't do makes me want to cry! Praying for nothing on foreign policy haha I hate it all
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by brendonbackflip)
    Can anyone help me on privateering? Any more instances? Are these actually correct I have no idea?

    1568 - San Juan massacre from Spanish on Hawkins' fleet
    1578-80 - Drake's adventure
    1585 - Raleigh tries to colonize Virginia, fails
    1589 - Portugal (I don't think that was privateering though)
    1599 - Essex goes to Azores instead of fully solving Irish problem
    1587: Drake's attack on Cardiz resulted in a significant financial loss for Phillip II and most likely, set back the Spanish Armada by a year to 1588

    1589: English Armada - this was partially a privateering expedition. However, it's primary aim was to assist the illegitimate Antonio to raise a rebellion against Phillip. This failed disastrously. The other aim was to seize Azores (a main Spanish trading port)

    1599: This was when Essex was appointed Lord Lieutenant of Ireland and sent to confront Tyrone at Ulster. Instead, paranoid that Cecil will gain power whilst he's away from court, he made peace with Tyrone and burst into the Queen's bedchamber, resulting in a loss of titles and house arrest. This led to the 1601 Essex Rebellion.

    Note: He did not attack Azores in 1599

    Privateering:
    1590: Hawkins had an unprofitable expedition to the Carribean as Phillip II increased security (Military vessels now accompany bullion ships)

    1592: Drake attacked Lisbon by fails to profit from it

    1594: Largest capture of Spanish treasure to date. Gained £140,000 in loot, but note that most of the treasure was split between the investors. Crown only gain a margin of it.

    1596: Raleigh and Howard captures Cardiz. However, against Essex's advice, they decided to move on to loot treasure ships. Essex wanted them to remain and hold onto the port for future strategic attacks on the Spanish. This saw a conflict between privateering motives vs. the Crown's motives.

    1598: Cumberland privately funded the capture of Puerto Rico from the Spanish. But the majority of his forces died from dysterny and he was unable to hold onto it. Puerto Rico was also insignificant regarding the Spanish trade network.

    However, such provocative actions led to the Spanish Armadas of 1596 and 1597. The primary aim was to assist the Irish Rebellion, but also as revenge for the series of attacks.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bkw321)
    Thanks. Do have 1 question. Would I be alright with about 5 historians per essay? I can't remember all of them XD. And apparently on the mark scheme it does say that historiography helps but one can reach the top bands without it.
    5 is more than enough.
    We do 2/3 questions and 2 historiography in my opinion, is enough.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by annmcc)
    Ahh same just the thought of seeing 3 questions I can't do makes me want to cry! Praying for nothing on foreign policy haha I hate it all
    I know same haha! And me too! but then again I'm not sure what I really want haha! Ones I've already planned in class would be nice hahaha!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    okay, this might side like a silly question, but all this talk of France is stressing me out, what exactly were Elizabeth foreign policy aims toward France, I can't find anything about her aims other than making sure they didn't gain control of the Netherlands???
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fiyeroed)
    okay, this might side like a silly question, but all this talk of France is stressing me out, what exactly were Elizabeth foreign policy aims toward France, I can't find anything about her aims other than making sure they didn't gain control of the Netherlands???
    Also in addition to this, how successful was she in her aims? I have never really considered France until today which is stressful!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I hope Spain doesn't come up as the core basis of a question now. It's been up for 2 years. I just hope they don't wanna trick us and put it in for a 3rd time XD Don't you dare do that AQA.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hfn123)
    Also in addition to this, how successful was she in her aims? I have never really considered France until today which is stressful!
    me either, I mean I know roughly what she did in France, St Bartholomew massacre, betrothal to Anjou and having to keep them out of the Netherlands etc but nothing about her aims or success
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fiyeroed)
    okay, this might side like a silly question, but all this talk of France is stressing me out, what exactly were Elizabeth foreign policy aims toward France, I can't find anything about her aims other than making sure they didn't gain control of the Netherlands???
    Background Knowledge:

    - Traditional enemies with France due to a wide variety of reasons
    - Elizabeth's reign saw a steadily improving Anglo-French relation as Anglo-Spanish relations deteriorated and she needed an ally

    1559: Treaty of Cateau-Cambresis ended the war with France, instigated by Mary under the influence of Phillip II (Pft, and she said that Phillip had no say in English politics. Love blinds her!) This saw the loss of Calais for 8 years.

    Not long afterwards, the death of Henry II led to Francis II accession. He was pro-Catholic and supported Mary Queen of Scots. This led to an attempted French intervention in Scotland regarding the Lords of the Congregation rebellion against Mary.

    So Elizabeth sent help as stated in the Treaty of Berwick 1560, Elizabeth was forced to intervene by Cecil. The English blockage of the Firth of Fourth allowed the Lords to force Mary to flee, resulting in a Protestant victory. This led to the Treaty of Edinbugh 1560, which is the French agreeing to withdraw from Edinburgh and allow the Lords of the Congregation to rule lawfully.

    1560: Death of Mary of Guise, mother to Mary Queen of Scots and pro-Catholic faction in France, led to a weakening of French commitment to the Scottish cause. This is because they had to deal with the Hugenot uprising in France and does not have enough resources.

    Anglo-French relations at this point was ok, but then Leicester urged a English intervention in France in support of the Prince of Conde, Hugenots, against the Catholic crown. Elizabeth pledged support and the Hugenots subsequently lost. She then signed the Treaty of Troyes 1564, this saw him losing Calias permanently.

    Relations were improving with the start of a marriage negotiation in 1572, this saw the Treaty of Blois established in the same year. This was an Anglo-French alliance against Spain. In return, France abandon their support for Mary permanently. The strength of the treaty can be seen by Henry III's willingness to renew it in 1574 when he ascended to the throne.

    Marriage negotiations at their peak in 1578 as Elizabeth was engaged to Francis, Duke of Anjou (Alencon). He was the heir presumptive to the French throne, however, his untimely death shortly after this defeat in the Netherlands saw this marriage frizzled out. It is doubtful whether Elizabeth was really going to marry him anyway, or simply seeing him as a chess piece.

    After this, Anglo-French relations remained cordial and close. But they were never formally allies to attack the Spanish - each had their separate wars with Spain (Note, England and Spain never were officially at war. But it really was)
 
 
 
Poll
Do you think parents should charge rent?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.