The Student Room Group

AQA A Level History 1C The Tudors: England 1485-1603 7042/1C - 06 Jun 2018

Scroll to see replies

Original post by AxSirlotl
Pretty much how my exam went. In a mock a few weeks before the exam I did 2 essays which scored over 80%, then I get into the exam and I can barely write an essay on HVII rebellions! I don't know whether it's the pressure of being in an exam and having 2 years of work all culminating in those 2 and a half hours, or whether I should have revised structure more. I'm really disappointed because my teacher believes I could get an A (what i need for uni) but I didn't feel like I wrote A grade answers for the essays :frown:


another annoying thing is that i feel as if people who revised and crammed at the last minute could still get a grade as good as people like us who worked hard because of the topics that were on that exam (even though they were badly worded they) were quite generic.

feels really unfair but i guess we can just hope for luck
Guys, how did everyone feel about balancing the essays...? I'm so so worried now because I'm recalling my points on my essays and I really don't think I balanced it enough. For the foreign policy essay on the 'was peaceful' side i only put the Field of the Cloth of Gold and the Treaty of London, and even counteracted them as peaceful in the last sentences of those paragraphs, and I think my rebellions essay was even less balanced... how badly do you think this is going to affect the overall grade? I literally feel sick right now I don't think I can get higher than a band 3.

I did also put a small plan at the top of each essay and made sure that was balanced (3 points on the side I agree with, 2 on the opposing side as I couldn't think of a third), but I really don't think I executed it very well and I wrote it super unbalanced...
Reply 142
Original post by anna_00
Guys, how did everyone feel about balancing the essays...? I'm so so worried now because I'm recalling my points on my essays and I really don't think I balanced it enough. For the foreign policy essay on the 'was peaceful' side i only put the Field of the Cloth of Gold and the Treaty of London, and even counteracted them as peaceful in the last sentences of those paragraphs, and I think my rebellions essay was even less balanced... how badly do you think this is going to affect the overall grade? I literally feel sick right now I don't think I can get higher than a band 3.

I did also put a small plan at the top of each essay and made sure that was balanced (3 points on the side I agree with, 2 on the opposing side as I couldn't think of a third), but I really don't think I executed it very well and I wrote it super unbalanced...


You don't have to force a balanced argument - as long as you have considered multiple sides then that's fine. Having an argument to drive your essay is surely better than just sort of wishy-washy-ing about the statement.

For peaceful, I just put about The Treaty of London and then the general alliances he made with France or HRE. I'm pretty sure that is all you could argue it with.

The statement in itself did really invite you to disagree, I doubt anyone could possibly think it was a peaceful foreign policy.

Don't worry X
Guys, just remember to do better on your other exam to help your overall mark :smile:
Overall, I`m very happy with that foreign policy question. I introduced it by weaving in the classic `did Wolsey steer Henry (traditionalist) or did Henry control Wolsey? (revisionist).

P1 - At first glance, may appear peace driven - Treaty of London; Field of the Cloth of Gold; League of Cognac. (Wolsey counterbalancing the foreign superpowers - eng can`t really do much as a bone torn between two dogs. (esp now CV has netherlands and spain circa 1519)

HVIII broke these treaties; declared war on France; the King`s Great Matter - clearly Wolseys survival depended on maintaining HVIII`s chivalric ambitions. (essentially jealous of FI and CV - two warlike kings much like himself - but both gaining glory over eachother leaving HVIII isolated once again - battle of milan.

Counter this with how HVIII may have wanted peace. The peace treaties, particularly ToL was international well-received and placed England at the heart of Eurpoean affairs. This did perhaps allign with HVIII's ambitions at the time - he was also cultivaing a renaissance man image - examples - assertio septem sacramentorum around this time of peace 1521.

Reinstate argument - this would be too abrupt to assume HVIII's main aim - he broke the peace (once again) shwoing he wasn't commited over warlike policy, and one only has to look at his early foreign policy - two twin victories; battle of flodden (eal of surrey wrecks the scots...) and battle of the spurs in 1513, in which henry viii played a leading role in the c charge, served bolster the english and h's reputation. These cost a lot, used all of hvii's savings so henry couldn't continue - hence the sudden switch to peace. (I`ve seen some people say that Flodden doesn`t count but of course it does)


I concluded that peace was merely a secondary objective; one never sincere (Wolsey`s influence + H`s ambitions and breaking in 1522 and divorce) and only utilised when deemed too expensive to wage a medieval centric one (afterall, look at H`s first decisions). I only had 30 minutes to do the rebellion question and wrote 3 paragraphs, if I did really well in this one, can I still balance out to an A? ;s
Reply 145
Hey!
Not sure if anyone is going to reply to this, but is it correct to mention the distance at which the wars were going on compared to the city that rebelled as a local issue?
For example, the Yorkshire rebellion rebelled against taxation for Henry VII’s desire to protect Brittany, which is geographically far away from Yorkshire. So the cause of the rebellion was kind of a local issue as taxpayers could not see where their money was going which led to unrest...
Reply 146
Original post by nj23
Hey!
Not sure if anyone is going to reply to this, but is it correct to mention the distance at which the wars were going on compared to the city that rebelled as a local issue?
For example, the Yorkshire rebellion rebelled against taxation for Henry VII’s desire to protect Brittany, which is geographically far away from Yorkshire. So the cause of the rebellion was kind of a local issue as taxpayers could not see where their money was going which led to unrest...


Yeah I guess that is a local issue. I don't know how much emphasis people put on "local issues" though. I mainly just mentioned the motives of the rebels being socio-economic grievances as a result of taxation, and then talked briefly about how the Yorkshire rebellion was motivated in part by resentment of local officials (murder of Duke of Northumberland) but never really talked in depth about the "local issues" other than taxation. Not sure how harsh they'll be about it, I hope they're lenient, however.
Reply 147
Original post by Wikia
Yeah I guess that is a local issue. I don't know how much emphasis people put on "local issues" though. I mainly just mentioned the motives of the rebels being socio-economic grievances as a result of taxation, and then talked briefly about how the Yorkshire rebellion was motivated in part by resentment of local officials (murder of Duke of Northumberland) but never really talked in depth about the "local issues" other than taxation. Not sure how harsh they'll be about it, I hope they're lenient, however.


Wasn’t taxation a national issue though? It’s the fact that the taxpayers were funding far away expeditions is what had them triggered, making it a local issue.
Reply 148
Original post by nj23
Wasn’t taxation a national issue though? It’s the fact that the taxpayers were funding far away expeditions is what had them triggered, making it a local issue.


Not necessary though because it only affected certain areas. When Henry imposed tax he didn't impose it nation-wide, it was only really in certain areas (e.g. to fund Scottish wars he imposed tax on the north whereas to fund French wars he imposed tax on the south). I didn't just outright classify taxation as a local issue though, I said resentment of taxation was as a result of the already ever-present socio-economic grievances (e.g. enclosures or bad harvests).
(edited 5 years ago)
Reply 149
Original post by Wikia
Not necessary though because it only affected certain areas. When Henry impose tax he didn't impose it nation-wide, it was only really in certain areas. I didn't just outright classify taxation as a local issue though, I said resentment of taxation was as a result of the already ever-present socio-economic grievances (e.g. enclosures or bad harvests).


That makes sense. I hope the grade boundaries for this paper are low.
your mum

Quick Reply

Latest