1. How to answer History exam questions…and get all the marks you deserve!
1. On this PowerPoint you will find example answers for every question on History Papers 1, 2 and 3.
2. For each paper there is an overview slide to show you all the question types on that paper and how many marks each is worth. These are colour coded to match the exemplar/practice questions in later slides.
3. Some slides have got annotations/colour codes to show you how to answer the question.
4. The ‘hidden’ slides include example questions for you to have a go at and an exemplar of a good answer, so you can check your own work.

2. Medicine Through Time and The Western Front

3. 1st Feature. Description. 2nd Feature.
Question 1: Describe two features of the support trench system on the Western Front. (4 marks)
1st Feature.
Description.
2nd Feature.
The support trenches were 3-4 hundred yards behind the front line. They provided additional supplies and men in case of attack. Support trenches were safer than the front line. Support trenches were rarely targeted by enemy snipers and were less likely to have been hit by artillery.

4. Question 2 (a) How useful are Sources A and B for an enquiry into the problems involved in performing operations on the Western Front? Explain your answer, using Sources A and B and your knowledge of the historical context. (8 marks)
Judgement: Content of both sources supported by RAD own knowledge: Provenance of both sources supported by own RAD own knowledge:
Sources A and B are both very useful for an enquiry into the problems of performing surgery on the Western Front. Source B is slightly more useful due to its provenance.
The content of Source A is useful in the way it suggests there were problems because of the high number of casualties and limited number of medical staff. This is shown is the source where is says “there were not enough nurses to treat the men”. Source A is about a casualty clearing station, where the wounded were taken and most surgery was done; there would be a lot of pressure on the medical staff so the source seems to reflect the situation accurately.
The content of Source B is also useful because it suggests many injuries were severe since men were already dying when they were brought into the ward, bloodless is shown to be a major problem as the source says “there was blood everywhere”. Blood banks were set up for the Battle of Cambrai, 1917, showing how the army tried to anticipate the need for transfusions and improve patients’ chances of survival. This supports the idea that blood loss was a big issue.
The provenance of both sources makes them useful for this enquiry. The chaplain writing Source A was a religious man rather than medical staff; we don’t know how much experience he had of such conditions and he might have been particularly sensitive to suffering and death, which could affect the reliability of his account about the extent of suffering and therefore the usefulness of the information. Robertson, writing Source B, was a surgeon and therefore can be seen as an ’expert witness’ which gives added weight to the information in Source B about the problems faced by surgeons.
Therefore, Sources A and B are both very useful for an enquiry into the problems of performing surgery on the Western Front due to their content. Source B is slightly more useful due to its provenance- it is written by a surgeon who would know in detail the problems of surgery on the Western Front.

5. “I could only transfuse an occasional patient.”
Qu 2b) How could you follow up Source B to find out more about the problems involved in performing operations on the Western Front? In your answer, you must give the question you would ask and the type of source you could use. (4 marks)
Pick a quotation from the source that you could ask a good historical question about. Ask a valid historical question. Select a source that would contain useful information for a historian studying this question. BE SPECIFIC…where/when would the source need to come from to be useful? Explain how that source would help you answer the question.
“I could only transfuse an occasional patient.”
Why were transfusions such a problem?
Army medical records about how blood was stored and made available to the hospitals.
This would help me to see if the problem was about the actual transfusion process or about the quantity of blood available.

6. Identify 1 similarity. (Or 1 difference depending on the question).
Question 3) Explain one way in which people’s reactions to the plague in Britain were similar in the fourteenth and seventeenth centuries. (4 marks)
Identify 1 similarity. (Or 1 difference depending on the question).
Example from time period 1.
Example from time period 2.
One way in which reactions to the plague were similar on the fourteenth and seventeenth centuries was that in both centuries people’s reactions were based on religion. In 1348 people used flagellation as they thought the Black Death was a punishment from God. In 1665 they pained a red cross and ‘Lord have mercy’ on the door for the same reason. People also fasted and prayed during both epidemics.

7. Reason 1 (factor for change) Example. Explain and link to question.
Question 4) Explain why there was rapid change in the treatment of illness in Britain during the twentieth century. You may use the following in your answer: · magic bullets · high-tech treatment You must also use information of your own. (12 marks)
The first reason there was rapid change in the treatment of illness in the twentieth century was the factor of increased science and technology.
For example, the role of science and the discovery of Salvarsan 606 as a magic bullet in the early twentieth century led to other new medicines which could target microbes and therefore a range of different diseases, for example penicillin (discovered by Fleming and developed by Flory and Chain during the Second World War). These discoveries relied on the more developed scientific method and technology of the twentieth century, such as the scientific method Hata employed to check the 606 compounds for the first magic bullet. Hata used a rigorous scientific method as part of a research team to check previous work, resulting in a new treatment for illness.
The second factor for change that had a big impact on rapid change in treatment of illness was the attitude of the government to funding public health. Attitudes towards government action changed, with the view developing that the government had a responsibility to take action on health issues. For example Government funding in the mass production of drugs, made treatment more widely available, as in the example of Florey and Chain pressuring the US government into mass producing penicillin during the Second World War. Without the £100,000 government investment, penicillin could not have been mass produced (up until then they were producing it in bathtubs!) and so many men would not have been saved on D Day. Penicillin is still used today and from the Second World War onward the use of antibiotics to treat illness has saved millions of lives. The government attitude towards funding public health was also shown by the establishment of the NHS in 1948, this meant that there was improved access to treatment through both the GP and hospitals, the government made sure that the NHS was well funded, providing high tech treatments such as x rays and chemotherapy to man more people as it was free at the point of use to ordinary people.
Overall, reason there was rapid change in the treatment of illness in the twentieth century was a combination of a change in government attitude and increased science and technology.
Reason 1 (factor for change)
Example.
Explain and link to question.
Reason 2 (factor for change)
Final judgement that links answer together.

8. Question 5) ‘There was little progress in medicine in Britain during the Renaissance period (c1500–c1700).’ How far do you agree? Explain your answer. You may use the following in your answer: •the work of William Harvey •bloodletting and purging You must also use information of your own.
Judgement. Section supporting my judgement. Section explaining, and arguing against, alternative judgement.
I strongly agree with the statement. There was very little real progress in medicine during the Renaissance period. There were lots of new ideas but these were not put into practice on actual patients.
The work of Vesalius improved knowledge of anatomy and the work of Harvey improved knowledge of physiology but had little impact on understanding of illness or how to treat it, therefore there was very little change. Vesalius’ book ‘On the Fabric of the Human Body’ published in 1543 was a revolutionary change from Galen’s ideas on anatomy (for example the structure of the jaw). Harvey also successfully proved Galen wrong in showing that blood was pumped around the body, not created fresh all the time. However, religion remained a key factor in people’s ideas about disease, prevention and treatment. Medical training was still dominated by the ideas of Galen, therefore little change was likely as doctors were still being taught the old ideas based on The Four Humours and Theory of Opposites. For example Charles II continued the ceremony of ‘touching’ to cure scrofula, and was treated himself with purging and supernatural remedies such as the Bazoar Stone. Ideas had moved forward, but doctors training, and treatment, had not.
However, I understand why some people may disagree with the statement, and say there was lots of progress in the Renaissance. The authority of the Church was declining and therefore people were more willing to challenge Galen’s ideas (such as Vesalius being able to dissect real bodies rather than pigs likes Galen did). The printing press meant that ideas could spread more rapidly and medical students and doctors could see accurate drawings of the body even if they didn’t conduct dissections. This undermined Galen’s authority and made challenges to accepted ideas more possible. The Royal Society was set up to encourage scientific investigation and communication of new ideas. Thomas Sydenham stressed the importance of studying the symptoms of different diseases, leading to a new method of classification and differentiation of disease. However, as the examples in paragraph 1 show, most people, even the King of England, were still treated using the old ideas of Hippocrates and Galen. So I would argue that “there was little progress in medicine” overall.
Overall, I agree with the statement. Although the church was loosing power as humanism grew and people like Harvey and Versailles were able to publish and spread new ideas about anatomy, real people, including the very rich and powerful, such as the King, were being treated using old ideas and methods. This shows there was “little progress in medicine during the Renaissance”.

9. American West and Anglo-Saxon and Norman England

10. Q1: Describe two consequences of the introduction of barbed wire in the West, 1874 [8 marks]:

11. For narrative accounts… THINK… CHRONOLINK!
Q2: Write a narrative account analysing the key evets un the years that led to the beginning of Red Cloud’s War [8 marks]:
For narrative accounts…
THINK… CHRONOLINK!

12. This shows you an example of ONE of the bullet points above (8 marks).
Q3: Explain the importance of two of the following [16 marks]:
cattle trails on the growth of cattle industry in 1860s
railroads on ending the Plains Indians way of life
wagon trails for increasing early settlement.
This shows you an example of ONE of the bullet points above (8 marks).
You need to do this for TWO to get 16 marks….

13. Question 4a/5a) Describe two features of towns in Anglo-Saxon England [4 marks]:

14. Question 4b/5b)
Explain why William won the Battle of Hastings [12 marks]:
You could use:
knights
tactics.
You must use your own knowledge.

15. Question 4 c/5c
“It was changes in landholding that did the most to secure Norman control of England”
How far do you agree? [16 marks]:
You may use:
*tenants-in-chief
* forfeiture.
You must use own knowledge.

16. Weimar and Nazi Germany

17. Details in the source that tell me this:
1. Give two things you can infer from Source A about Nazi employment policies between
Q 1. Study Source A below and then answer Question 1.
SOURCE A: From a History of the Modern World, published in 2001.
Complete the table below to explain your answer. (4 marks)
What I can infer:
I can infer the Nazis employment policies were tailored to benefit the Nazi movement and Nazi priorities.
Details in the source that tell me this:
“The Nazis employed people to make weapons and recruited men into the army”
Can infer that the employment policies may have dropped the unemployment rates but they also had other negative impacts on working people.
“The working week rose from 45 hours in 1928 to 50 hours in 1939”
When Hitler came to power, there were millions out of work. The Nazis employed people to make weapons and recruited men into the army. Jobs were created by building houses, schools and autobahns. Unemployment dropped to less than 1 million by However, the working week rose from 45 hours in 1928 to 50 hours in 1939.

18. Explain why Hitler became Chancellor in January 1933. You may use:
Hitler became Chancellor firstly because of the impact of the Great Depression. The Great Depression, caused by the Wall Street Crash in October 1929 led to a dramatic 40% decline in industrial output by This in turn caused 6.1 million German citizens being unemployed by the end of This included 50% of all Germans aged between 16 and 30 years. This was important because as unemployment grew, so too did the discontent of the German people with the Weimar Republic. Prior to the Great Depression, German citizens had largely shown their support for the Republic and there were no attempted revolutions between 1924 and 9. However, the Great Depression was a catalyst for changing attitudes as the economy spiralled downwards and ordinary German people’s lives were devastated by the recall of the American loans negotiated by Stresemann. This led to Hitler becoming chancellor because it destabilised the position of the Weimar Republic. Middle and Upper Class supporters flocked to the Nazis through fear of support for the KPD by the working class. This led to the Nazis becoming the largest party in the Reichstag with 230 seats by July This propelled Hitler into the position of Chancellor because he was now the leader of the largest party in the Reichstag which made him a prime candidate for the job. Had it not been for the Great Depression, it is unlikely that this would have happened as the Nazis did not have the wealth of support in the 1920s that they did after the Great Depression.
Furthermore, Hitler became Chancellor because of the weaknesses and failures of the Weimar Republic. For example during the period Germany had three different chancellors, all of whom lost the support of the Reichstag and were dismissed by President Hindenburg. Bruning was dismissed due to his mishandling of the financial crisis and the growing resentment from the German people. Von Papen’s dismissal was the result of his inability to unite the Reichstag and von Schleicher failed to rule without the use of the emergency decree. This instability led to the German public voting overwhelmingly in favour of the Nazi Party, taking them from 12 seats in 1928 to 230 in July This combined with the destabilising effects of the Great Depression led to the German people, especially members of the army and the rich industrialists, calling for a strong leader who was capable of reuniting the fragmented government. Hitler, thanks to his popular speeches and use of the SA appeared to be the strong and focused figurehead Germany needed. The Weimar Republic needed a strong leader and therefore Hitler was the main choice.
Finally Hitler became Chancellor because of the skilful use of propaganda by the Nazis. Goebbels produced posters, radio broadcasts, speeches and many other forms of propaganda to ensure the German people would vote in favour of Hitler and the Nazis. Had it not been for their clever exploitation of the situation caused by the Great Depression and the weaknesses of the other parties in the Weimar Republic it is unlikely that the Nazis would have gained as much support. This support caused Hitler to become the leader of the largest party in the Reichstag and therefore a prime candidate for Hindenburg to appoint as the new Chancellor because he was the people’s popular choice.
Q2:
Explain why Hitler became Chancellor in January You may use:
The Great Depression
Failure of the Weimar Republic
You must use your own knowledge
[12 marks]

19. 3a) Study Sources B and C. How useful are Sources B and C for an enquiry into reasons for the growth in support for the Nazi Party in the years ? Explain your answer, using Sources B and C and your own knowledge of the historical context.
Source B:
A photograph published in 1932 in a German newspaper. It shows people from Hanover queuing
for their unemployment benefits. The writing on the wall of the building says ‘Vote Hitler’.
Sources B and C are very useful for an enquiry into reasons for the growth in support for the Nazi Party. Source B suggests that support increased due to the unemployment crisis caused by the effects of the Great Depression. You can see in the photograph a long line people queuing for unemployment benefits. To some extent this is correct as unemployment rose to 6 million by 1932 and this was made worse by the actions of the Weimar government in cutting unemployment benefit which suggested that the government could not reduce the problem. On the other hand Hitler was promising ‘work + bread’ which encouraged increased support. However, Source B is a photograph from Hanover and therefore cannot reveal whether queues for unemployment benefits occurred across Germany and it cannot reveal reasons for increased support prior to Additionally, the fact that it was printed in a newspaper suggests the nature of it could be subjective as we do not know the intended impact of source B. For example the detail in the background saying ‘Vote Hilter’ could suggest that this was used as a piece of propaganda. Source C suggests that Hitler’s speeches and the content of these were a primary reason for growth in support for the Nazi Party. For example Speer, who went on to support Hitler, says that Hitler gave “new hope” and he was carried away on a “wave of enthusiasm”. To some extent this is correct as people were enthused by the ‘energy in an atmosphere of hopelessness’ Hitler’s speeches were dynamic and targeted at his audience saying things people wanted to hear such as promises to reduce unemployment, destroy the Treaty of Versailles and remove the communist threat, for example in Source C Speer says Hitler explained the “dangers of Communism” and how this could be stopped-which would have been a popular view at the time. On the other hand Source C does not reveal alternative reasons such as the failure of the Weimar government to address the problems of the Great Depression. However the fact that source C was written in 1970 by Albert Speer highlights some problems. Firstly Speer is looking back on a speech made in 1931 and may be trying to justify his support for Hitler, given the fact that he played a key role in Hitler’s dictatorship, especially as he highlights his mother’s support. Overall, both sources used together would be highly useful for an enquiry into reasons for the growth of support for the Nazis.

20. USE QUOTATIONS!
Q3b) 3(b). Study Interpretations 1 and 2. They give different views about how Hitler got into power.
What is the main difference between these views?
Explain your answer, using details from both interpretations. (4 marks)
Both sources explain how Hitler got into power but they both give a different factor to explain this. Interpretation 1 emphasises Hitler's personality and speeches. It says that he was “charismatic”, a “powerful speaker” and had a message to “build a new Germany”. This is the main reason it gives for how he secured power. Interpretation 2 gives a different view and states that chance and luck were more important in Hitler gaining power. Interpretation 2 says that events outside Hitler's control like “the Wall Street Crash” and other “chance events” like the “depression” played a bigger role in allowing Hitler to take power.
Interpretation 1: From Weimar and Nazi Germany by J Hite and C Hinton,
published in 2000.
Hitler himself was central to the success of the Nazis in the years
1929–32. He provided charismatic leadership with his powerful
message to build a new Germany. He was a powerful speaker with
his timing, expression and the content of his speeches impressing
listeners. He was able to identify with their emotions and gave
people hope. Along with Goebbels, he realised the importance of
propaganda. He used propaganda to target the specific grievances
of many Germans.
Interpretation 2: From Hitler 1889–1936 by I Kershaw, published in 1998.
There was nothing inevitable about Hitler becoming Chancellor of
Germany in January Five years earlier the Nazis had been a
small party in German politics with little support. Events such as the
Wall Street Crash, which led to depression in Germany, brought
increased support for the Nazis in the years 1929–32. Chance
events, such as the depression and unemployment, played a much
larger role than any actions of the Nazi leader himself in bringing
Hitler to power.

21. 3(c). Suggest one reason why Interpretations 1 and 2 give different views about how Hitler got into power. You may use Sources B and C to help explain your answer. (4 marks)
The two interpretations may give different views on how Hitler got into power because the two historians used different sources. Interpretation 1 emphasises Hitler’s personality and speeches saying that he was a “powerful speaker”. This historian may have used sources like Source C where Speer explains how Hitler’s speech carried his away “on a wave of enthusiasm” for Nazi ideas. Interpretation 2 emphasises chance events outside Hitler’s control like “The Wall Street Crash” and “unemployment” as the main reason Hitler got into power. This historian (Kershaw) may have used sources like Source B which shows the huge amount of people who were unemployed in Germany in The que in Source B are waiting for benefits in front of a poster that reads “Vote Hitler” showing that Hitler used unemployment to gain popularity.

22. Question 3 (d)
How far do you agree with Interpretation 2 about reasons for the growth in support for the Nazi Party in the years 1929–32? Explain your answer, using both interpretations, and your knowledge of the historical context.
Interpretation 2 gives the view that the reasons for growth in Hitler’s support were due to events which negatively affected the people of Germany which therefore led to desperation and a wish for change.
I would agree with this interpretation as Interpretation 2 supports the claim by providing examples of events such as the Wall Street Crash, the depression and unemployment. The author suggests that without the Wall Street Crash, and the depression and unemployment that followed, the Nazi Party would have remained a minor party. During the period 1924–28 Germany had experienced a period of relative prosperity and the Nazi Party was ‘a small party in German politics with little support’.. It was not until after 1929, when the economy experienced a general downturn, that Nazi support began to rise as people blamed the Weimar Government for the depression and began to support parties such as the Nazis who were opposed to the Republic; the Nazi share of the vote increased from less than 10% to over 30% from 1929–32. In addition, the depression brought increased support for the communists and some Germans, especially businessmen and industrialist, supported the Nazis to prevent a possible communist government. Interpretation 1 adds some support to this argument by noting that Hitler used propaganda ‘to target the specific grievances of many Germans.’
However, as shown in Interpretation 1, the role of Hitler was also important. He provided ‘charismatic leadership with his powerful message to build a new Germany’. Interpretation 1 states that it was Hitler who played the key role in increasing support for the Nazi Party in the years 1929–32 and claims it was Hitler who brought increased support by providing examples of his abilities as a speaker that enabled him to identify with the audience and give them hope. During the elections of 1932 Hitler toured all over Germany and spoke to huge meetings of people in halls and sports stadia. Furthermore Hitler’s decision to put Goebbels in charge of Nazi propaganda ensured that the Nazi message was heard everywhere, particularly on the radio. The Nazis appeared to offer stability during a time of uncertainly and worry. The organisation and discipline of the Nazi party attracted many Germans, and the Hitler Youth provided opportunities for young people.
Overall, as Interpretation 1 suggests the role of Hitler was important in reaching out to people and persuading them to support the Nazi Party. However, Interpretation 2 is more convincing in claiming that the growth of the Nazi Party was ultimately dependent on the events of the period To a large extent Interpretation 2 shows that without the circumstances of the depression and unemployment Hitler’s message and oratory would not have had an audience. Interpretation 1 is right that Hitler’ gave people hope’ but without the sense of hopelessness identified in Interpretation 2 the Nazi Party would not have achieved such a level of support.