Both historical periods need to be referenced in this question.
Both sides of the statement (agree and disagree) should be explained for top marks.
In order to obtain a secure mark in Level 5, candidates do need to make sure that they have constructed four explained points across two time periods and that these both agree and disagree with the statement. This is challenging – and the marks for Question 4 represent almost half the marks available on the entire paper – and candidates are strongly advised to set aside around half the time of the examination to answer it.
‘Taxation was the main cause of political problems between c.1000 and 1800.’ How far do you agree? Explain your answer.
‘Military power was the main source of legitimacy for rulers between c.1000 and 1800’. How far do you agree? Explain your answer.
‘Religion was the main cause of political problems between 1500 and 2014.’ How far do you agree? Explain your answer.
‘Rulers ruled with compromise between c.1485 and 2014. How far do you agree? Explain your answer.
‘Those in power ruled with compromise between c.1500 and 2014’. How far do you agree? Explain your answer.
For Level 5 students need to both explain a how the Nobility limited the power of the Monachy and explain two other factors that limited the power of the Monarchy.
Some students offered explained disagreement with the statement - i.e. that some monarchs were able to successfully overcome challenges from the nobility. This is also valid.
To successfully explain, you need to specify how the issue you've chosen actually limited the power of the monarchy.
For instance, you might use the Magna Carta. But to explain this you need to give an example of how it limited John’s (and future monarchs’) power. Otherwise this is not full explanation.
Don't misunderstand the key term in the question! Some students misunderstood the term ‘nobility’, and this limited the extent to which they could access the higher marks.
Rather than listing loads of different factors/monarchs/ examples, focus on fewer issues & develop them more fully to make sure that they respond specifically to the question set.
Examiners were impressed by the number of candidates who were able to construct a clinching argument, often around how Parliament increasingly became more of a threat to the power of the monarchy than the nobility
Typical unexplained example
The nobility forced the Monarch to sign the Magna Carta and this limited his power. This came about because the Barons rebelled against King John's rule and they took more power in the political nation.
Typical example of full explanation
The nobility proved to be a significant limit on the power of the monarch between 1000 and 1715. An example of this would be the signing of Magna Carta in 1215. This came about because of a rebellion by the barons, who were angry at King John’s abuse of his power as king. They forced John to sign Magna Carta and he had to agree to limit his own power as king by not abusing the justice system and accepting that a council of nobles had to ensure that he respected the new laws. This made the monarch answerable to the nobility on certain points of law including taxation and established the basis of the monarch having to abide by the law, enforced by the nobility.
Examiner Report : The above answer received Level 5 - 21/24