Triumph of Elizabeth A2 AQA June 12th Exam
Scroll to see replies
Original post by xrachelliex
So, if Parliament did come up as an essay question, would the best idea be to take these conflicts as one per paragraph? As chronological order would be too simplistic...
Yes, I'd cover each of them in turn - also mention the Puritans in Parliament: they weren't a significant issue, but Neale thought that they were. I'd probably finish up with a point about the Commons not really being politicised (absenteeism was rife, only about half voted on bills on average), so they couldn't really present coherent opposition to the monarchy. The Monopolies Crisis is the only proper example of such (the succession debates mostly being stage-managed by the Council), and that was about money which did tend to get MPs going.
Original post by Safe
Do you think you could do what you did for parliamant during Elizabeth's reign for Edward and Mary's please?
Thanks mate.
Thanks mate.
Do you mean a summary of Parliament under Edward and Mary? I don't know much about that, to be honest, but nothing exciting happened. AFAIK, it's not on the syllabus.
Original post by MalleusMaleficarum
Do you mean a summary of Parliament under Edward and Mary? I don't know much about that, to be honest, but nothing exciting happened. AFAIK, it's not on the syllabus.
It can come in very handy on a Parliament question for synoptic links as Parliament were very keen for Liz to marry yet opposed the Spanish marriage to Mary. Also everyone goes on about the group of 40 MP's who made up the Puritan Choir, yet about 80 MP's opposed reversal of Edwardian legislation.
Original post by MalleusMaleficarum
Do you mean a summary of Parliament under Edward and Mary? I don't know much about that, to be honest, but nothing exciting happened. AFAIK, it's not on the syllabus.
Literally it's in the details. You don't think that little paragraph about Mary and parliament is useful but then you find it can provide precise evidence for a counter argument and synoptic link... I ****ing hate those btw. ****ting it for this exam :'(:'(:'(
I was just trying to do
‘In the years 1547 to 1558 English government was at its most effective during the rule
of Mary I.’
How valid is this assessment?
In all fairness its quite late, but I also tend to go completely in the wrong direction
How much of this plan is relevant?
PLAN:
Intro: Henry VIII left England in turmoil, Ed took on some of his governors, Mary kept Edwards governors
Religious policy: Protestant reform in 1540’s more unpopular than Catholic in 50’s (rebellions more motivated by religion
Better religious acts in Mary’s – Book of Common Prayer (BUT NORTHUMBERLAND THOUGHT OF THIS ORIGINALLY), 42 artilces of religion compiled
But no burning in 40’s, many suffered in Marys reign
Economic policy: Mary introduced success’s like book of rates, poor law, was going to bring in the recoinage + council
Loss of Calais can be seen as a financial advantage
Technically Northumberland started the financial reform
Somerset was awful, debased coinage, taxed everyone lots
Foreign policy: Somerset war with France and Scotland – waste of resources vs. securing boundaries
Northumberland best – ended wars!
Mary – marraige to phillip, weak? didn’t listen to council
Conclusion:
I hate government and council!!!
‘In the years 1547 to 1558 English government was at its most effective during the rule
of Mary I.’
How valid is this assessment?
In all fairness its quite late, but I also tend to go completely in the wrong direction
How much of this plan is relevant?
PLAN:
Intro: Henry VIII left England in turmoil, Ed took on some of his governors, Mary kept Edwards governors
Religious policy: Protestant reform in 1540’s more unpopular than Catholic in 50’s (rebellions more motivated by religion
Better religious acts in Mary’s – Book of Common Prayer (BUT NORTHUMBERLAND THOUGHT OF THIS ORIGINALLY), 42 artilces of religion compiled
But no burning in 40’s, many suffered in Marys reign
Economic policy: Mary introduced success’s like book of rates, poor law, was going to bring in the recoinage + council
Loss of Calais can be seen as a financial advantage
Technically Northumberland started the financial reform
Somerset was awful, debased coinage, taxed everyone lots
Foreign policy: Somerset war with France and Scotland – waste of resources vs. securing boundaries
Northumberland best – ended wars!
Mary – marraige to phillip, weak? didn’t listen to council
Conclusion:
I hate government and council!!!
Okay I relooked over my notes and wrote out a new plan
is this along the right lines
Somerset - Bypassed his pricy council - provoked a counter coup
- Faction
- Guy - Autocracy as much as policies provoked counter coup
- Government not under immediate threat from rebels
- council inherited from Henry VIII
Northumberland -Lord President, not Protector - less faction
- council got functions back (like in finances)
- Cecil and Mildmay emerged within the council
- Imperfections were gotten rid of (like Northumberland)
- Still faction existed
- "Edward was a puppet" - Hoak
Mary - Rubbish government, too large to be effective and there was faction - Pollard
- Didn't always discuss everything - marriage to Phillip
- Good councillors like Paget and Gardiner appointed
- Council started acting against Mary (stopping young people from attending burnings + not agreeing on all policy like stopping Elizabeth from being in sucession)
-Tittler - Inner council was set up - useful for the war with France
- Strong local government was established - led to success of poor relief
- Government was effective -Loades
The positives are italicised
Thanks!
is this along the right lines
Somerset - Bypassed his pricy council - provoked a counter coup
- Faction
- Guy - Autocracy as much as policies provoked counter coup
- Government not under immediate threat from rebels
- council inherited from Henry VIII
Northumberland -Lord President, not Protector - less faction
- council got functions back (like in finances)
- Cecil and Mildmay emerged within the council
- Imperfections were gotten rid of (like Northumberland)
- Still faction existed
- "Edward was a puppet" - Hoak
Mary - Rubbish government, too large to be effective and there was faction - Pollard
- Didn't always discuss everything - marriage to Phillip
- Good councillors like Paget and Gardiner appointed
- Council started acting against Mary (stopping young people from attending burnings + not agreeing on all policy like stopping Elizabeth from being in sucession)
-Tittler - Inner council was set up - useful for the war with France
- Strong local government was established - led to success of poor relief
- Government was effective -Loades
The positives are italicised
Thanks!
Original post by hisalice
Okay I relooked over my notes and wrote out a new plan
is this along the right lines
Somerset - Bypassed his pricy council - provoked a counter coup
- Faction
- Guy - Autocracy as much as policies provoked counter coup
- Government not under immediate threat from rebels
- council inherited from Henry VIII
Northumberland -Lord President, not Protector - less faction
- council got functions back (like in finances)
- Cecil and Mildmay emerged within the council
- Imperfections were gotten rid of (like Northumberland)
- Still faction existed
- "Edward was a puppet" - Hoak
Mary - Rubbish government, too large to be effective and there was faction - Pollard
- Didn't always discuss everything - marriage to Phillip
- Good councillors like Paget and Gardiner appointed
- Council started acting against Mary (stopping young people from attending burnings + not agreeing on all policy like stopping Elizabeth from being in sucession)
-Tittler - Inner council was set up - useful for the war with France
- Strong local government was established - led to success of poor relief
- Government was effective -Loades
The positives are italicised
Thanks!
is this along the right lines
Somerset - Bypassed his pricy council - provoked a counter coup
- Faction
- Guy - Autocracy as much as policies provoked counter coup
- Government not under immediate threat from rebels
- council inherited from Henry VIII
Northumberland -Lord President, not Protector - less faction
- council got functions back (like in finances)
- Cecil and Mildmay emerged within the council
- Imperfections were gotten rid of (like Northumberland)
- Still faction existed
- "Edward was a puppet" - Hoak
Mary - Rubbish government, too large to be effective and there was faction - Pollard
- Didn't always discuss everything - marriage to Phillip
- Good councillors like Paget and Gardiner appointed
- Council started acting against Mary (stopping young people from attending burnings + not agreeing on all policy like stopping Elizabeth from being in sucession)
-Tittler - Inner council was set up - useful for the war with France
- Strong local government was established - led to success of poor relief
- Government was effective -Loades
The positives are italicised
Thanks!
You need to understand what is meant by that question. What they mean by 'Government' is not necasseraly related to council, parliament and so on. It's more in terms of 'governing' and who 'ruled' the most effectively. If you put all that down in the exam as a response to that question, you will not receive many marks!
Original post by Char Wari
You need to understand what is meant by that question. What they mean by 'Government' is not necasseraly related to council, parliament and so on. It's more in terms of 'governing' and who 'ruled' the most effectively. If you put all that down in the exam as a response to that question, you will not receive many marks!
I would say you can do it both ways, yes personally i would do it the same way as you, but it would be perfectly okay to do it that way.
Does anyone have any idea what type of things would be included in a 1558-1571 question on the extent to which Elizabeth had established her royal authority? Especially historiography, I don't know what I would say other than there is an ongoing debate but I don't even know if that's accurate...
This exam is ruining my life. I felt okay until I came on this thread and everyone seems to know loads of stuff and I don't, and now I'm really worried that the last years are going to come up
This exam is ruining my life. I felt okay until I came on this thread and everyone seems to know loads of stuff and I don't, and now I'm really worried that the last years are going to come up
Original post by Preeti!
how much has everybody learnt in regard to local government? I'm finding it a bit repetitive and wondering if a question would even come up on it...
Depending on the time period, I'd say that there were issues with the people elected to local gov., which can be seen by the Earl of Derby in Lancashire, whose loyalty to Elizabeth was questionable, showed sympathy towards Catholics, but was elected to his position because of his influence in Lancashire which led to tension when the Northern Rebellion broke out. Even though Derby was ultimately not an issue, the tension felt at the time demonstrates how much central government relied on local government.
I would also say that overall there were not many issues with loyalty as many of the people appointed to positions like Lords-Lieutenant and JPs appeared to be hardworking, with only a few issues in select areas, and many were so honoured to receive the titles - which were very prestigious - that they would rather not show disloyalty and lose them.
I think I'd include that JPs showed considerable effectiveness, especially when dealing with plague and dearth in the later years, as they were shown to take stocks of grain and divide them between the localities according to the Books of Orders which helped deal with the problem of failing harvests. As well as this, they were appointed in every shire once problems with Spain became paramount in 1585, which can only demonstrate that they were effective in some way or they surely would not have been used to this extent.
Personally, I would have said that local government is too narrow to get a whole essay out of on its own, but I have seen - and answered, badly (it was almost at the beginning of the course) - a question where it is mentioned alongside central government. Please someone correct me if I'm wrong but I think if they wanted specifics on local government, they'd combine it with central government rather than just local on its own.
Original post by OurDecemberSun
Does anyone have any idea what type of things would be included in a 1558-1571 question on the extent to which Elizabeth had established her royal authority? Especially historiography, I don't know what I would say other than there is an ongoing debate but I don't even know if that's accurate...
This exam is ruining my life. I felt okay until I came on this thread and everyone seems to know loads of stuff and I don't, and now I'm really worried that the last years are going to come up
This exam is ruining my life. I felt okay until I came on this thread and everyone seems to know loads of stuff and I don't, and now I'm really worried that the last years are going to come up
Look at ways that her royal authority had been challenged such as Northern Rebellion, Parliament wanting her to marry and name a successor, councilors influencing her in foreign affairs such as Treaty of Berwick in 1560 with Scotland and Treaty of Hampton Court in 1562 with Prince de Conde in France. What I would then do is say these issues arguably show a lack of royal authority, but then would look at the remainder of her reign and say that these issues weren't present, for example there were no rebellions after the Northern Rebellion, she was not persuaded to help Protestants in the Netherlands and succession wasn't debated at length again.
Not trying to scare you by the way but I am almost 100% sure there will be a question of the final years of Elizabeth, I mean it's one of 4 sections of the course, 25%, and has never been asked! Don't worry however it's relativly easy to revise, I would just recomend splitting it into 3 sections: Failures found in both her last years and her whole reign, failures found only in her last years and successes only found in her last years. The key to a question about her final years is comparing it with the rest of her reign, in particular the "Golden Years" of 1571-1588. You need to decide whether her final years really did become a problem, they were just existing problems or there were no problems at all!
Original post by OurDecemberSun
Personally, I would have said that local government is too narrow to get a whole essay out of on its own, but I have seen - and answered, badly (it was almost at the beginning of the course) - a question where it is mentioned alongside central government. Please someone correct me if I'm wrong but I think if they wanted specifics on local government, they'd combine it with central government rather than just local on its own.
Personally, I would have said that local government is too narrow to get a whole essay out of on its own, but I have seen - and answered, badly (it was almost at the beginning of the course) - a question where it is mentioned alongside central government. Please someone correct me if I'm wrong but I think if they wanted specifics on local government, they'd combine it with central government rather than just local on its own.
Yes, I would imagine their question on local government would call in central government, local government is too small and horrible a topic (lets just say that if it appears, I shall ignore it)
Original post by OurDecemberSun
Depending on the time period, I'd say that there were issues with the people elected to local gov., which can be seen by the Earl of Derby in Lancashire, whose loyalty to Elizabeth was questionable, showed sympathy towards Catholics, but was elected to his position because of his influence in Lancashire which led to tension when the Northern Rebellion broke out. Even though Derby was ultimately not an issue, the tension felt at the time demonstrates how much central government relied on local government.
I would also say that overall there were not many issues with loyalty as many of the people appointed to positions like Lords-Lieutenant and JPs appeared to be hardworking, with only a few issues in select areas, and many were so honoured to receive the titles - which were very prestigious - that they would rather not show disloyalty and lose them.
I think I'd include that JPs showed considerable effectiveness, especially when dealing with plague and dearth in the later years, as they were shown to take stocks of grain and divide them between the localities according to the Books of Orders which helped deal with the problem of failing harvests. As well as this, they were appointed in every shire once problems with Spain became paramount in 1585, which can only demonstrate that they were effective in some way or they surely would not have been used to this extent.
Personally, I would have said that local government is too narrow to get a whole essay out of on its own, but I have seen - and answered, badly (it was almost at the beginning of the course) - a question where it is mentioned alongside central government. Please someone correct me if I'm wrong but I think if they wanted specifics on local government, they'd combine it with central government rather than just local on its own.
I would also say that overall there were not many issues with loyalty as many of the people appointed to positions like Lords-Lieutenant and JPs appeared to be hardworking, with only a few issues in select areas, and many were so honoured to receive the titles - which were very prestigious - that they would rather not show disloyalty and lose them.
I think I'd include that JPs showed considerable effectiveness, especially when dealing with plague and dearth in the later years, as they were shown to take stocks of grain and divide them between the localities according to the Books of Orders which helped deal with the problem of failing harvests. As well as this, they were appointed in every shire once problems with Spain became paramount in 1585, which can only demonstrate that they were effective in some way or they surely would not have been used to this extent.
Personally, I would have said that local government is too narrow to get a whole essay out of on its own, but I have seen - and answered, badly (it was almost at the beginning of the course) - a question where it is mentioned alongside central government. Please someone correct me if I'm wrong but I think if they wanted specifics on local government, they'd combine it with central government rather than just local on its own.
Oh okay that makes sense, thanks
Original post by Char Wari
You need to understand what is meant by that question. What they mean by 'Government' is not necasseraly related to council, parliament and so on. It's more in terms of 'governing' and who 'ruled' the most effectively. If you put all that down in the exam as a response to that question, you will not receive many marks!
Yeah I thought I was going wrong - I might just avoid any question linked to government haha! So for Mary and Edwards reign what sort of points would I put?
Original post by hisalice
Yeah I thought I was going wrong - I might just avoid any question linked to government haha! So for Mary and Edwards reign what sort of points would I put?
You would still talk about council parliament etc but more in relation to how well they allowed Eliz to govern the country. And you'd also look at the effectiveness of each as a monarch. So under Edward there's the difficulties of minority rule etc and Mary being the first female monarch etc
Original post by hisalice
Yeah I thought I was going wrong - I might just avoid any question linked to government haha! So for Mary and Edwards reign what sort of points would I put?
Well you'd have to make the point that Edward was a minor, and that it was difficult for his lord protectors to govern as there was a wide range of threat on the international scale - Then talk about Somerset - Spain + France (Battle of Pinkie 1547)...
Then also give a mention that governing wasn't effective in Somerset's reign because of the rebellions caused by social and religious issues - Kett's and Western Rebellion....
Northumberland in fact was successful because he had sensible foreign policy in comparison to Somerset, and was able to avoid tensions with France and Scotland. He built a new financial administration system which benefited the triumphic reign of Elizabeth's...
On the other hand Northumberland didn't govern well because of his involvement in the succession, and he was not governing for the country, but for himself as he was power hungry.
Mary was the most effective, built a naval base... book of rates... process of coinage...
Was not effective as the 1554 Wyatt's rebellion and relations with Spain caused tensions... burning of heretics and loss of Calais...
So you have a wide range of options to choose from in order to make a firm argument for that question. Just do some revision on each of these three people, and what they did. Reference to Edward VI, usually mention him as a minor and how that caused issues, but it was not him who governed the country during his reign, it was instead Somerset and Northumberland.
Remember to compare who was more effective and why, make synoptic links
(edited 11 years ago)
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- A-level Exam Discussions 2024
- A Level Exam Discussions 2023
- AQA A Level German Paper 2 7662/2 - 12th June 2024 [Exam Chat]
- GCSE Exam Discussions 2024
- GCSE 2024 timetable
- GCSE Exam Discussions 2023
- AQA GCSE History Paper 2 (8145/2) - 7th June 2023 [Exam Chat]
- Do I have to retake the year or can I just resit the exam?
- GCSE English language
- AQA A-level Law Paper 3 (7162/3) - 12th June 2023 [Exam Chat]
- AQA A-level Religious Studies 1 (7062/1) 12 Jun & 2 (7062/2A-2E) 19 Jun [Exam Chat]
- AQA GCSE English Literature Paper 1 8702/1P - 25 May 2022 [Exam Chat]
- Over 500 questions on AQA Bio Unit 4 + Current Spec and old Spec papers + MS!
- I'm in Year 11 and confused about the gaps between GCSE exams
- How can I get a 9 in GCSE history?
- A-level History Study Group 2022-2023
- Edexcel A-Level French Paper 1 (9FR0 01) - 12th June 2023 [Exam Chat]
- Edexcel A-level Statistics Paper 2 (9ST0 02) - 12th June 2023 [Exam Chat]
- predictions for a level history tudors exam
- GCSE AQA Physics Paper 1 and 2 Revision and Study Chat
Latest
Trending
Last reply 13 hours ago
Edexcel A Level History Paper 1 (9HI0 1A-1H) - 23rd May 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 A Level History Paper 2 (9HI0 2A-2H) - 7th June 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 5 days ago
Edexcel GCSE HISTORY PAPER 1 (1HI0 10-13) - 15th MAY [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 13 hours ago
Edexcel A Level History Paper 1 (9HI0 1A-1H) - 23rd May 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 A Level History Paper 2 (9HI0 2A-2H) - 7th June 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 5 days ago
Edexcel GCSE HISTORY PAPER 1 (1HI0 10-13) - 15th MAY [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
