Angevin Kings HIS3A Family Divisions caused loss of Empire ?

Well I would link it to the fact that Philip II was able to take advantage of these family divisions and used them to his advantage. He was always siding with one against the other and then switching; sided with Richard against Henry II, John against Richard, Arthur against John etc. The last two gained him territory, he gained the Vexin and Gisors because he sided with John against Richard and he gained the rest when he used Arthur against John. Then I would turn that around to say that, without Philip, the family divisions probably would have been harmless.

Yes, that would make a very nuanced argument as you could ultimately arrive at the conclusion that the family divisions inadvertently led to an increase in Capetian strength ,which then in turn led to the loss of Normandy. After doing a paragraph/section in depth about the key factor, you could go on to do another one about Philip's skill in isolation of family divisions.
What do you guys think is likely to come up on the exam tomorrow ?

I think for the Henry II question (always do one on him, he does have the longest reign after all) a Thomas Becket question is long overdue, it has only ever appeared in the first two papers. If not that then on the Great Rebellion, as royal authority has come up in the last three papers.

For the Richard/John question I think it will be on Richard as John has been in the last two papers and so Richard is due to make an appearance. If for some bizarre reason Richard doesn't come up, then John and Magna Carta should really make an appearance (many of us were surprised it didn't come up last year with it being the anniversary).

For synoptic I think it will either be a church question or an Angevin empire one. An Eleanor of Aquitaine question was last year and has come up twice now and so has an anti-semitism one, so far they have only had those four synoptic topics and I don't see why they would change it at the end of the specification.