GCE Ancient History H407/23: Emperors and Empire Advanced GCE Mark Scheme for Autumn 2021

Document Content and Description Below

Oxford Cambridge and RSA Examinations GCE Ancient History H407/23: Emperors and Empire Advanced GCE Mark Scheme for Autumn 2021Oxford Cambridge and RSA Examinations OCR (Oxford Cambridge and RSA... ) is a leading UK awarding body, providing a wide range of qualifications to meet the needs of candidates of all ages and abilities. OCR qualifications include AS/A Levels, Diplomas, GCSEs, Cambridge Nationals, Cambridge Technicals, Functional Skills, Key Skills, Entry Level qualifications, NVQs and vocational qualifications in areas such as IT, business, languages, teaching/training, administration and secretarial skills. It is also responsible for developing new specifications to meet national requirements and the needs of students and teachers. OCR is a not-for-profit organisation; any surplus made is invested back into the establishment to help towards the development of qualifications and support, which keep pace with the changing needs of today’s society. This mark scheme is published as an aid to teachers and students, to indicate the requirements of the examination. It shows the basis on which marks were awarded by examiners. It does not indicate the details of the discussions which took place at an examiners’ meeting before marking commenced. All examiners are instructed that alternative correct answers and unexpected approaches in candidates’ scripts must be given marks that fairly reflect the relevant knowledge and skills demonstrated. Mark schemes should be read in conjunction with the published question papers and the report on the examination. © OCR 2021H407/23 Mark Scheme October 2021 Annotations Annotation Meaning Blank Page Omission Noted AO1 AO2 AO3 AO4 Irrelevant Correct point Knowledge and understanding Evaluation Subject specific guidance The Assessment Objectives targeted by each question and the maximum marks available for each Assessment Objective are given at the top of each levels mark scheme for each question. The weightings of the assessment objectives remain consistent throughout the levels. For example, if the maximum marks are 5 AO1, 10 AO2 and 15 AO3, then the AO1/AO2/AO3 ratio will be 1/2/3 throughout the levels. When marking, you must therefore give greater priority to the more heavily weighted Assessment Objective when determining in which level and where within a level to place an answer.H407/23 Mark Scheme October 2021 Section A: The Julio-Claudian Emperors, 31 BC–AD 68 Question 1* How useful is the evidence for our understanding of attitudes towards the Imperial Cult during this period? [30 marks] Assessment Objectives AO3 = 15 marks = Use, analyse and evaluate ancient sources within their historical context to make judgements and reach conclusions about: • historical events and historical periods studied • how the portrayal of events by ancient writers/sources relates to the historical contexts in which they were written/produced. AO2 = 10 marks = Analyse and evaluate historical events and historical periods to arrive at substantiated judgements AO1 = 5 marks = Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the key features and characteristics of the historical periods studied. Please note that while the descriptors for AO2 and AO3 are given separately in the levels, the analysis and evaluation of sources & historical events and historical periods may be combined in responses. Additional guidance The ‘Indicative content’ is an example of historically valid content; any other historically valid content is acceptable and should be credited in line with the levels of response. Level Marks Level descriptors Indicative content Level 5 25–30 • Response uses a very good range of fully appropriate examples from the ancient sources. The sources are thoroughly analysed and evaluated, to reach logically reasoned, well-developed judgements about how the way they portray events relates to the context in which they were produced, and to draw fully substantiated and convincing conclusions about the historical issue in the question. (AO3) • The response has an excellent explanation that convincingly and very thoroughly analyses and appraises historical events and periods in order to reach substantiated, sustained, and well-developed judgements. (AO2) • The response demonstrates a very good range of accurate and detailed knowledge and a sophisticated understanding of relevant historical features and characteristics. There is a consistent focus on the question throughout the answer. (AO1) There is a well-developed and sustained line of reasoning which is coherent and logically structured. The information presented is entirely relevant and substantiated. No set answer is expected. It is possible to reach the highest marks with conclusion(s) either agreeing, disagreeing, or anywhere between providing the response has addressed the issue of ‘how useful’. Responses should be marked in-line with the level descriptors. Candidates should consider the range of information provided by literary and material evidence for the Imperial Cult. They should consider the value or usefulness of the evidence in a range of examples but also will be expected to compare the various genres of evidence in order to interpret, analyse and evaluate them. Candidates will be expected to cover the period but not every emperor or reign needs to be dealt with in detail for a full response to the question. They should consider the reasons for use or non-use of the Cult by emperors and others. They should consider the differences and similarities between reigns during the period and between the evidence both contemporary and non-contemporary. Responses are likely to include aspects of the Imperial cult, for example:H407/23 Mark Scheme October 2021 Level 4 19–24 • Response uses a good range of appropriate examples from the ancient sources. The sources are analysed and evaluated, to reach logically reasoned, developed judgements about how the way they portray events relates to the context in which they were produced, and to draw substantiated and convincing conclusions about the historical issue in the question. (AO3) • The response has a very good explanation that convincingly and thoroughly analyses and appraises historical events and periods in order to reach substantiated and developed judgements. (AO2) • The response demonstrates a good range of accurate and detailed knowledge and a well-developed understanding of relevant historical features and characteristics. There is a consistent focus on the question throughout the answer. (AO1) There is a well-developed line of reasoning which is clear and logically structured. The information presented is relevant and in the most part substantiated. • Deification of imperial family members; • Specific actions, enactments and statements by emperors in relation to the Imperial Cult and their differing attitudes towards worship; • The different ways in which the emperors and their families could be worshipped including indirect means e.g. Genius, numen • Buildings, altars, reliefs, etc related to the Cult or worship of the imperial family; • The various attitudes of citizens, non-citizens and provincials towards the Cult; • The political aspects of the Imperial cult. Supporting source details may include: • Deification of Augustus Tac. Ann. 1.10.8 temple and cult; sestertius of Tiberius AD 34/5 statue of Divus Augustus; Claudius – aureus AD 54, Suet. Claudius 45; Tac Ann. 12.69; Livia - Suet Claudius 11; Nero’s daughter, Poppaea; Seneca On consl.to Polybius Drusilla deified by Gaius; • Tac. Ann. 1.10.6 Augustus; Claudius letter to Alexandrians; Suet. Tib. 26 vetoes temples cf Gytheion; Nero vetoes temple Tac. Ann. 15.74; Gaius- divine honours Jos. JA 19.4,11; Dio 59. 28.1 precinct at Miletus; Suet. Gaius 22, Dio 59.28.2-6 temple at Rome to numen, priests, sacrifices; 59.28.5 alters temple to Dioscuri (reversed by Claudius (Dio 60.6.8); Palatine connected to Capitol (Suet. Gaius 22); Tac. Ann. 15.74 Cerialis proposed temple to Nero; • Genius of Augustus etc: inscription ILS 112 Altar at Narbonne AD 12- 13 to numen of A.; Augustan Lares -inscription ILS 3612 ?7 BC; Ovid Fasti 5.140 Lares Compitales and Genius of A.; divi filius on coins e.g. aureus 28 BC, aureus 15-12 BC triumphal branches; denarius 27 BC Egypt captured; AS AD 62 Nero as Apollo Level 3 13–18 • Response uses a range of appropriate examples from the ancient sources. The sources are analysed and evaluated, to reach logically reasoned judgements about how the way they portray events relates to the context in which they were produced, and to draw supported, plausible conclusions about the historical issue in the question. (AO3) • The response has a good explanation that convincingly analyses and appraises historical events and periods in order to reach supported judgements, though these are not consistently developed. (AO2) • The response demonstrates a reasonable range of accurate and sometimes detailed knowledge and a reasonable understanding of relevant historical features and characteristics. There is a consistent focus on the question through most of the answer. (AO1) There is a line of reasoning presented with some structure. The information presented is in the most-part relevant and supported by some evidence.H407/23 Mark Scheme October 2021 Level 2 7–12 • Response uses some appropriate examples from the ancient sources. The sources are analysed and evaluated, to reach judgements about how the way they portray events relates to the context in which they were produced, and to draw some supported conclusions about the historical issue in the question. (AO3) • The response has an explanation that analyses and appraises historical events and periods, and this is linked appropriately to judgements made, though the way in which it supports the judgements may not always be made fully explicit. (AO2) • The response demonstrates a limited range of accurate knowledge and understanding of relevant historical features and characteristics, though this may lack detail. The question is generally addressed, but the response loses focus in places. (AO1) The information has some relevance, but is communicated in an unstructured way. The information is supported by limited evidence, the relationship to the evidence may not be clear. • Strabo Geog. 4.3.2 Altar/Temple to Augustus at Lyon, 60 tribes involved; Tac. Ann. 4.37 Temple at Pergamum to A. and Rome; temple to J. Caesar; Suet. Tib. 47 temple of Augustus in Rome cf Velleius 2.130; Gytheion inscription AD 15; ILS 6080 Inscription to Genius of Tiberius in Rome AD 27; • Virgil Aeneid 8. Augustus among gods; Horace Odes 4.15 association with Ve nus; Ovid Fasti 2.119ff associated with Jupiter; denarius 16 BC vows for Augustus’ safety; Gaius: Dio 59.26.5-6 pretended he was various gods cf 28.5; Suet. Gaius 22.1 treated as a god; pretended to be Jupiter Latiaris; Dio 59.26.5 Gaius called demi-god; 26.9 mocked by a Gaul; Suet. Gaius 22 citizens become priests of Gaius; • Suet. Aug. 31 traditional Roman religion; 93 respect for ancient foreign rites; denarius 16 BC 4 priesthoods of Augustus; Suet Claudius 45 Nero neglects and cancels deification of Claudius. Although not expected, candidates may include non-prescribed material which should be credited. For example: Augustus: AD 9-14 Lyon altar; Dio 51.20 Pergamum; Suet. Aug. 52 opposed temples unless Rome included, and any temple in Rome; Horace Odes 4.5. 32-34 A. worshipped as a god cf 3.5; Tiberius: Tac. Ann. 4.15 temple in Asia to Tiberius, Livia and the senate. Tac. Ann. 4.37-38 Spain asks for temple to Tiberius and Livia- ‘I am human’. Gaius: Inscription from Didyma, temple at Miletus (Smallwood 127) cf Suet. Gaius 21; Claudius: Temple to Claudius at Colchester (Tac.Ann. 14.32); dupondius AD 41-50 Livia deified; Nero: daughter deified Tac. Ann. 16.5, Poppaea 16.20; Sebasteion at Aphrodisias. Analysis of the sources might focus on: • the genres, agendas and contexts of the evidence and how these affect the value of the information for the Imperial Cult, its importance and attitudes towards it. Level 1 1–6 • Response uses a limited selection of appropriate examples from the ancient sources. The sources are analysed and evaluated in a basic way, and this is linked to basic, generalised judgements about how the way they portray events relates to the context in which they were produced. There are some basic conclusions about the historical issue in the question, though these may only be implicitly linked with the analysis and evaluation of the sources. (AO3) • The response has some explanation which analyses and appraises historical events and periods in places, and this is linked appropriately to some of the judgements made, though the way in which it supports the judgements is not made explicit. (AO2) • The response demonstrates some limited knowledge and understanding of relevant historical features and characteristics, though lacking detail and in places inaccurate. The question is only partially addressed. (AO1) Information presented is basic and may be ambiguous or unstructured. The information is supported by limited evidence.H407/23 Mark Scheme October 2021 0 No response or no response worthy of credit • The nature of the sources: history, biography, epigraphic, numismatic etc. • The limitation of the evidence for attitudes and the actions of the emperors and others. • The differences and similarities between sources contemporary and non-contemporary, and different genres.H407/23 Mark Scheme October 2021 Question 2* ‘Claudius was a more effective and successful emperor than Tiberius.’ To what extent is this a fair assessment? [30 marks] Assessment Objectives AO3 = 15 marks = Use, analyse and evaluate ancient sources within their historical context to make judgements and reach conclusions about: • historical events and historical periods studied • how the portrayal of events by ancient writers/sources relates to the historical contexts in which they were written/produced. AO2 = 10 marks = Analyse and evaluate historical events and historical periods to arrive at substantiated judgements. AO1 = 5 marks = Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the key features and characteristics of the historical periods studied. Please note that while the descriptors for AO2 and AO3 are given separately in the levels, the analysis and evaluation of sources & historical events and historical periods may be combined in responses. Additional guidance The ‘Indicative content’ is an example of historically valid content; any other historically valid content is acceptable and should be credited in line with the levels of response. Level Marks Level descriptors Indicative content Level 5 25–30 • Response uses a very good range of fully appropriate examples from the ancient sources. The sources are thoroughly analysed and evaluated, to reach logically reasoned, well-developed judgements about how the way they portray events relates to the context in which they were produced, and to draw fully substantiated and convincing conclusions about the historical issue in the question. (AO3) • The response has an excellent explanation that convincingly and very thoroughly analyses and appraises historical events and periods in order to reach substantiated, sustained, and well-developed judgements. (AO2) • The response demonstrates a very good range of accurate and detailed knowledge and a sophisticated understanding of relevant historical features and characteristics. There is a consistent focus on the question throughout the answer. (AO1) There is a well-developed and sustained line of reasoning which is coherent and logically structured. The information presented is entirely relevant and substantiated. No set answer is expected. It is possible to reach the highest marks with conclusion(s) either agreeing, disagreeing, or anywhere between providing the response has addressed the issues of effectiveness and success in comparing the two emperors and the fairness of the assessment. Responses should be marked in-line with the level descriptors. Candidates should consider the range of information provided by literary and material evidence for the reigns of Tiberius and Claudius. They should detail the actions, policies and aims of Tiberius and Claudius; they should consider the consequences of these for the extent of success and effectiveness for each emperor; they should use detailed information to compare their reigns in terms of the question. Candidates will be expected to cover the reigns but not every act, policy or aim needs to be dealt with in detail for a full response to the question. They may consider the differences and similarities between reigns and consider the reasons and contexts for these. They should consider the value or usefulness of the evidence, both contemporary Level 4 19–24 • Response uses a good range of appropriate examples from the ancient and non-contemporary, in a range of examples but also will be sources. The sources are analysed and evaluated, to reach logicallyH407/23 Mark Scheme October 2021 reasoned, developed judgements about how the way they portray events relates to the context in which they were produced, and to draw substantiated and convincing conclusions about the historical issue in the question. (AO3) • The response has a very good explanation that convincingly and thoroughly analyses and appraises historical events and periods in order to reach substantiated and developed judgements. (AO2) • The response demonstrates a good range of accurate and detailed knowledge and a well-developed understanding of relevant historical features and characteristics. There is a consistent focus on the question throughout the answer. (AO1) There is a well-developed line of reasoning which is clear and logically structured. The information presented is relevant and in the most part substantiated. expected to compare the various genres of evidence in order to interpret, analyse and evaluate them. There should be a discussion of the fairness of the assessment and some conclusion to this issue. Responses are likely to include some of the following aspects of the reigns of Tiberius and Claudius: • their relations with the Senate and individual senators, the equestrians and the ordinary citizens of Rome and the Empire; the extent of their success in gaining good relations; • extent of success in the administration of the city and its functioning; • the provinces and security; attitudes towards expansion and resistance; • income and expenditure; • their relations with members of the imperial family and the succession; • their relations with the army, including the Praetorian Guard; • their reactions to opposition in Rome and elsewhere; • the presentation of themselves and the attitudes of the citizens. Supporting source details may include: • Acts etc: Tiberius e.g. Tac. Ann. 1.6 Postumus; mutinies Tac. Ann.1.46-7; Velleius 2.125; 2.126/129 achievements; cf Suet Tib. 32.2; Suet Tib. 48.2 generosity cf Velleius 2.130; Dio 58.8 Sejanus; retirement Tac. Ann. 4.41; greed Tac. Ann. 6.19 deaths - terror; Claudius e.g. Dio 60 3.1-7 accession cf Jos. JA 19.158ff, Suet. Cl. 11; Tac. Ann. 11.24 Gauls; Fucine lake Pliny NH 36.124; aqueduct Pliny NH 36.122-3 cf Suet Cl. 20 and Ostia (ILS 207, procurator inscrp.); Pomerium: ILS 213. • Administration: Tiberius: Velleius 2.130 buildings; Tac Ann. 4.2 Praetorian camp; Suet Tib. 47 buildings; shows; surplus in treasury- Suet Gaius 37 2,700 m HS; Claudius: Dio 60.1ff gifts, confiscations, various regulations; corn supply Seneca. Shortness of life 18.5 cf Suet Cl. 18, dupondius Ceres; upkeep of city, Arch of Tiberius (11), Theatre of Pompey (21); 25 slave laws; • Provinces: Tiberius: Sacrovir – Velleius 2.129; Tacfarinas Tac. Ann. 2,52, 3.20, 3.32, 3.73-4; Frisii Tac. Ann. 4.74; Gytheion inscr.; Suet Tib. Level 3 13–18 • Response uses a range of appropriate examples from the ancient sources. The sources are analysed and evaluated, to reach logically reasoned judgements about how the way they portray events relates to the context in which they were produced, and to draw supported, plausible conclusions about the historical issue in the question. (AO3) • The response has a good explanation that convincingly analyses and appraises historical events and periods in order to reach supported judgements, though these are not consistently developed. (AO2) • The response demonstrates a reasonable range of accurate and sometimes detailed knowledge and a reasonable understanding of relevant historical features and characteristics. There is a consistent focus on the question through most of the answer. (AO1) There is a line of reasoning presented with some structure. The information presented is in the most-part relevant and supported by some evidence. Level 2 7–12 • Response uses some appropriate examples from the ancient sources. The sources are analysed and evaluated, to reach judgements about how the way they portray events relates to the context in which they were produced, and to draw some supported conclusions about the historical issue in the question. (AO3) • The response has an explanation that analyses and appraises historical events and periods, and this is linked appropriately to judgements made, though the way in which it supports the judgements may not always be made fully explicit. (AO2)H407/23 Mark Scheme October 2021 • The response demonstrates a limited range of accurate knowledge and understanding of relevant historical features and characteristics, though this may lack detail. The question is generally addressed, but the response loses focus in places. (AO1) The information has some relevance but is communicated in an unstructured way. The information is supported by limited evidence, the relationship to the evidence may not be clear. 26.1 rejects temples; Suet Tib. 32 taxes; 36 cults and Jews; Claudius: Suet. Cl. 17 Britain, cf aureus AD 46-7 arch; 25 changes; • Relations: Tiberius: Tac. Ann. 1.11-12 accession cf Suet Tib. 23-4; Tac. Annals 1.7.6 Germanicus, cf 1.52 distrust; 7.7 pretence of hesitancy; Velleius 129 generous;.127 Sejanus praise– contrast Tac Ann. 4.2.3, Dio 58.4.1-4, 5 Tib. offshore monarch, 8 fall of Sejanus; Tac. Ann. 1.39 mistrust among soldiers; Senate: Tac. Ann. 3.65 men fit to be slaves; Suet Tib. 29 respect; 30 appearance of liberty; 47 helped financially; 48 mean; Claudius: Suet. Cl. 10 support of ordinary citizens; 12 rumour of death causes riot; 21 largesse, games, Secular Games; 12 respect for senate; praetorians – Aureus AD 41-2, Suet.Cl 10; 25 equites; • Opposition: Tiberius: trials- Seneca On Benefits 3.26.1 national madness; Tac. Ann. 1.72 maiestas; 3.50 Clutorius Priscus (executed); Suet Tib. 41 Capri. Claudius: Dio 60.15 plots: Vinicianus, Scribonianus cf Suet. Cl.13; 60.16.1 deaths cf Suet. Cl. 29 35 senators, 300 equites; • Imperial family: Tiberius: Velleius 2.130.4 Agrippina, Tac. Ann. 4.39-40 animosity; Claudius: Tac. Ann. 12.24-5 Nero and Britannicus cf 12.41; Agrippina’s power; 12.66ff plots cf Jos. JA 20.151, Suet. Cl. 44; Messalina Suet. Cl. 36 • Tiberius: Suet Tib. 26-7 rejects worship; modest, Gytheion; Claudius: Alexandrians letter; 25 Jews/Druids; Views of the emperors expressed in the sources: Tiberius: Tac. Ann. 1. 10.7 succession;11 obscure, ambiguous; 1.46 hypocritical over mutinies; 1.47/52 deceitful, hiding true feelings; 1.72 cruelty, arrogance; 4.1 T. let violence loose (Sejanus); 3.65 Tiberius’ freedom’s enemy’; 6.19 frenzied with bloodshed; Velleius 2.99 our greatest general; 123.1 A. leaving state in safe hands. Suetonius: Tib. 41 let affairs slide; 48 mean; 61 cruel; 63 hated; state of terror; 75 joy on his death; Claudius: DIo 60.1.1 acted in proper manner; 60.6.1 exemplary actions; 60.15 no longer confident hopes in C.; 60.14 controlled by wives and freedmen cf Suet. Cl. 25/29; 60.18.2-3 Claudius unaware of others crimes; terrified by plots Suet Cl. 36; Level 1 1–6 • Response uses a limited selection of appropriate examples from the ancient sources. The sources are analysed and evaluated in a basic way, and this is linked to basic, generalised judgements about how the way they portray events relates to the context in which they were produced. There are some basic conclusions about the historical issue in the question, though these may only be implicitly linked with the analysis and evaluation of the sources. (AO3) • The response has some explanation which analyses and appraises historical events and periods in places, and this is linked appropriately to some of the judgements made, though the way in which it supports the judgements is not made explicit. (AO2) • The response demonstrates some limited knowledge and understanding of relevant historical features and characteristics, though lacking detail and in places inaccurate. The question is only partially addressed. (AO1) Information presented is basic and may be ambiguous or unstructured. The information is supported by limited evidence. 0 No response or no response worthy of creditH407/23 Mark Scheme October 2021 Although not expected, candidates may include non-prescribed material which should be credited. e.g.: Tac Ann. 2.47f earthquakes in Asia; 4.64 Caelian fire; 6.45 Aventine fire; 4.6 Tib.’s good administration; Tac. Ann. 4.57 retirement to Capri- reasons speculated; Gaius succession Tac. Ann. 4.46, 48; Suet Tib. 76 Analysis of the sources might focus on: • the genres, agendas and contexts of the evidence and how these affect the value of the information on both emperors and views of them; • The nature of the sources: history, biography, epigraphic, numismatic; • The limitation of the evidence for attitudes towards the emperors and their actions. • The differences and similarities between sources, contemporary and non-contemporary, and different genres.H407/23 Mark Scheme October 2021 Question 3 How convincing do you find Wallace-Hadrill’s interpretation that Augustus gave Rome ‘a new version of an old constitution’? [20 marks] Assessment Objectives AO4 = 15 marks = Analyse and evaluate, in context, modern historians’ interpretations of the historical events and topics studied. AO1 = 5 marks = Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the key features and characteristics of the historical periods studied. Additional guidance The ‘Indicative content’ is an example of historically valid content; any other historically valid content is acceptable and should be credited in line with the levels of response. Please note that interpretations can be evaluated in the context of the wider historical debate connected with the issue or of the historical context about which the historian was writing. There is no expectation that the interpretation will be evaluated in the context of the methods or approach used by the historian, or how the interpretation may have been affected by the time in which they were writing, though credit can be given for this approach to evaluation if done in a way which is relevant to the question. A learner’s knowledge and understanding of the historical period, including the ancient sources may be credited, but only where it is presented in a way which is relevant and intrinsically linked to the analysis/evaluation/use of the interpretation, it should not be credited in isolation. Level Marks Level descriptors Indicative content Level 5 17–20 • Response has a very through and sustained analysis of the interpretation, in context, to produce a convincing and fully substantiated evaluation in relation to the question. (AO4) • The response demonstrates a very good range of accurate and detailed knowledge and a sophisticated understanding of historical features and characteristics that are fully relevant to the question. (AO1) No set answer is expected. It is possible to reach the highest marks with a conclusion either agreeing or disagreeing with the modern historians’ interpretation, or anywhere between providing the response has addressed the issue of ‘how convincing’. Responses should be marked in-line with the level descriptors. Answers should evaluate both the interpretation locating it within the wider historical debate about the issue and using their own knowledge of the ancient sources and events and periods to reach a judgement about how convincing they find the argument. In locating the interpretation within the wider historical debate, candidates should • discuss the specific aspects of the restoration of the Republic in this passage; • consider the specific actions of Augustus after 31 BC regarding the Roman constitution; • assess whether there was change and/or continuity; • discuss the significance of Augustus’ actions for the functioning of the Republic; • consider how far Augustus created a ‘new version’ or a new constitution. Level 4 13–16 • Response has a through and sustained analysis of the interpretation, in context, to produce a convincing and well supported evaluation in relation to the question. (AO4) • The response demonstrates a good range of accurate and detailed knowledge and a well-developed understanding of historical features and characteristics that are fully relevant to the question. (AO1)H407/23 Mark Scheme October 2021 Level 3 9–12 • Response has a good analysis of the interpretation, in context, to produce a supported evaluation in relation to the question. (AO4) • The response demonstrates a reasonable range of accurate and sometimes detailed knowledge and a reasonable understanding of historical features and characteristics that are relevant to the question. (AO1) In evaluating the interpretation, answers might argue that this view is not convincing, pointing towards the following information / ancient sources: • views taken in sources: Tac. Ann. 1.2 took function of magistrates, 4.1, revolution complete, 10 assessment; Suet Aug. 28 twice did not restore Republic, ‘best possible constitution’; Dio 53.16 complete control, 17 monarchy, Augustus’ appearance of republicanism 53.12- 13; • powers and roles of Augustus: the settlements of 27 BC, 23 BC and 19 BC; the nature of his imperium: Edicts of Cyrene (Lactor 17 M20); tribunicia potestas Tac. Ann. 3.56; the provincial commands: Egypt Tac. Ann. 2.59, Denarius Aegypta Capta; Strabo 17.3.25; censor RG 8, Suet Aug. 35 (Senate), supervisor of morals RG 6, Suet Aug. 34; • control of magistrates and the senate; the ‘consilium’; new posts Suet Aug. 37 • opposition and challenges Velleius 2.88 Lepidus Velleius 2.91 Murena and Caepio • creation of dynasty Tac. Ann. 1.3; succession etc: Velleius 2.90, 2.99, 2.123.2; Aureus 2 BC -AD 11 Gaius/Lucius; In evaluating the interpretation, answers might argue that this view is convincing, drawing on the following information / ancient sources: • views taken in sources: Velleius 2.89; RG 34, 1.1,5.1, 6.1 declines unconstitutional roles, dictatorship RG 5; Aureus 28 BC and 12 BC; Tac. Ann. 1.9 ‘first citizen’; • the auctoritas, patronage – a traditional feature of Roman political life; RG 34, 15-16; • the records of independent actions, legislation etc, functioning of traditional republican aspects Tac Ann. 3.7, 9; powers granted by the senate RG 6; • attitude to tradition: Res Gestae 7 priesthoods (denarius 16 BC), 6, 8 respect for tradition; Pontifex Maximus Suet Aug. 31; buildings displaying history of Rome – the Forum, Arch; Horace Odes 4.15; • involvement of aristocratic families: City Prefect Tac. Ann. 6.10; • use of republican precedents by Augustus - constitutional continuity in use of the forms of the Republic; limited time-scales on grants of powers; Level 2 5–8 • Response has some analysis of the interpretation, in context, to produce a partially supported evaluation in relation to the question. (AO4) • The response demonstrates a limited range of accurate knowledge and understanding of relevant historical features and characteristics, though this may lack detail. (AO1) Level 1 1–4 • Response has a basic analysis of the interpretation, with parts of the answer just describing the interpretation. Response produces a very basic evaluation in relation to the question. (AO4) • The response demonstrates some limited knowledge and understanding of relevant historical features and characteristics, though lacking detail and in places inaccurate. (AO1) 0 No response or no response worthy of creditH407/23 Mark Scheme October 2021 Section B: Ruling Roman Britain, AD 43-c. 128 Question 4 How useful is this document for our understanding of life on the frontier in Britain? [12 marks] Assessment Objectives AO1 = 6 marks = Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the key features and characteristics of the historical periods studied. AO3 = 6 marks = Use, analyse and evaluate ancient sources within their historical context to make judgements and reach conclusions about how the portrayal of events by ancient writers/sources relates to the historical contexts in which they were written/produced. Additional guidance The ‘Indicative content’ is an example of historically valid content; any other historically valid content is acceptable and should be credited in line with the levels of response. Level Marks Level descriptors Indicative content Level 6 11–12 • The response demonstrates an excellent range of accurate and very detailed knowledge and a very sophisticated depth of understanding of historical features and characteristics that are fully relevant to the question. (AO1) • Response uses a very good range of fully appropriate examples from the set of ancient sources. The set of sources is thoroughly analysed and evaluated to reach substantiated, well-developed judgements about how the way the context in which the sources were produced impacts on them and their usefulness for the issue in the question. (AO3) No set answer is expected. It is possible to reach the highest marks with conclusion(s) either way as to the source’s usefulness to understanding the issue in question providing the response has addressed the issue of ‘how useful’. Responses should be marked in-line with the level descriptors. Candidates may discuss the following information in relation to contents of the source: • Vindolanda was a fort for auxiliary cohorts, not legionaries; • Self-sufficient barracks for soldiers and cavalry; • Part of stanegate • Organisation of troops: o Led by a ‘prefect’ of equestrian status o Centuries led by ‘centurions’ o Cohort of Tungrians o Other posts – i.e. optio • 265 men fit for duty o More troops are away from Vindolanda than are present o ‘guards of the governor’ o Coria / Corbridge o one centurion at London o Several soldiers on sick list • Interpretation of the source: o Is it understrength? Has there been a recent battle? Is it peaceful? Level 5 9–10 • The response demonstrates a very good range of accurate and detailed knowledge and a sophisticated understanding of historical features and characteristics that are fully relevant to the question. (AO1) • Response uses a good range of fully appropriate examples from the set of ancient sources. The set of sources is thoroughly analysed and evaluated to reach developed judgements about how the way the context in which the sources were produced impacts on them and their usefulness for the issue in the question. (AO3) Level 4 7–8 • The response demonstrates a good range of accurate and detailed knowledge and a well-developed understanding of historical features and characteristics that are fully relevant to the question. (AO1) • Response uses a good range of appropriate examples from the set of ancient sources. The set of sources is analysed and evaluated to reach developed judgements about how the way the context in which the sources were produced impacts on them and their usefulness for the issue in the question. (AO3)H407/23 Mark Scheme October 2021 Level 3 5–6 • The response demonstrates a reasonable range of accurate and sometimes detailed knowledge and a reasonable understanding of historical features and characteristics that are relevant to the question. (AO1) • Response uses a reasonable range of appropriate examples from the set of ancient sources. The set of sources is analysed and evaluated to make some basic judgements about how the way the context in which the sources were produced impacts on them and their usefulness for the issue in the question. (AO3) o Are the numbers normal for a fort such as this? Low number of centurions o How would Vindolanda change once Hadrian’s Wall was built? The usefulness of this passage in comparison/contrast to other sources which make reference to Vindolanda e.g.: • Development of Stanegate - originally built of wood, but more permanent structures stone; • Use of buildings: e.g. Principia administrative and religious focus, granary and hospital; • Other Vindolanda tablets: commander’s wife felt it safe enough to travel and have parties • Tombtstone of Titus Pontius Sabinus, suggests local armed resistence in the north leading to the creation of Hadrian’s Wall • Doesn’t show town around the fort • What did the soldiers do? – Police force? Keep the peace? – Did their job change overtime? • Accept any other relevant source which groups may have studied in relation to the Stanegate and Vindolanda from local visits/visits to other forts across the country Level 2 3–4 • The response demonstrates a limited range of accurate knowledge and understanding of relevant historical features and characteristics, though this may lack detail. (AO1) • Response uses a few appropriate examples from the set of ancient sources. The set of sources is analysed and evaluated in a basic way to make some basic judgements about how the way the context in which the sources were produced impacts on them and their usefulness for the issue in the question. (AO3) Level 1 1–2 • The response demonstrates some limited knowledge and understanding of relevant historical features and characteristics, though lacking detail and in places inaccurate. (AO1) • Response uses a few appropriate examples from the set of ancient sources. The set of sources is analysed and evaluated in a basic way but judgements about how the context in which the sources were produced impacts on them and their usefulness for the issue in the question are either not present or are not linked to analysis and are merely assertions. (AO3) 0 No response or no response worthy of creditQuestion 5* ‘The Romans had more difficulty in conquering Wales than anywhere else in Britain.’ How far do you agree with this assessment of the Roman conquest of Britain? [36 marks] Assessment Objectives AO3 = 18 marks = Use, analyse and evaluate ancient sources within their historical context to make judgements and reach conclusions about: • historical events and historical periods studied • how the portrayal of events by ancient writers/sources relates to the historical contexts in which they were written/produced. AO2 = 12 marks = Analyse and evaluate historical events and historical periods to arrive at substantiated judgements AO1 = 6 marks = Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the key features and characteristics of the historical periods studied. Please note that while the descriptors for AO2 and AO3 are given separately in the levels, the analysis and evaluation of sources & historical events and historical periods may be combined in responses. Additional guidance The ‘Indicative content’ is an example of historically valid content; any other historically valid content is acceptable and should be credited in line with the levels of response. Level Marks Level descriptors Indicative content Level 6 31–36 • Response uses an excellent range of fully appropriate examples from the ancient sources. The sources are very thoroughly analysed and evaluated, to reach very logically reasoned and well-developed judgements about how the way they portray events relates to the context in which they were produced, and to draw fully substantiated, very convincing conclusions about the historical issue in the question. (AO3) • The response has an excellent explanation that convincingly and very thoroughly analyses and appraises historical events and periods in order to reach substantiated, sustained, and well-developed judgements. (AO2) • The response demonstrates an excellent range of accurate and very detailed knowledge and a very sophisticated depth of understanding of relevant historical features and characteristics. There is a consistent focus on the question throughout the answer. (AO1) There is a well-developed and sustained line of reasoning which is coherent and logically structured. The information presented is entirely relevant and substantiated. No set answer is expected. It is possible to reach the highest marks with conclusion(s) either agreeing, disagreeing, or anywhere between providing the response has addressed the issue of ‘how far’. Responses should be marked in-line with the level descriptors. Candidates should look at the military issues the Roman army had in dealing with the different areas of Britain [south, southwest, Brigantia, Iceni, Wales, Scotland] and weigh up whether Wales was more problematic to conquer than anywhere else. Candidates might consider the role client kings had in creating a smoother transition of Roman control. Candidates might also discuss the importance given by the sources to Caratacus, Boudica, and Cartimandua [as well as Calgacus later on]. Answers are likely to include information on some of the following: • The policies of individual governors, and the instruction given by Rome • The role of individual Britain leaders to cause issues for Romanisation • Links between south of England in pre-conquest period Level 5 25–30 • Response uses a very good range of fully appropriate examples from the ancient sources. The sources are thoroughly analysed and evaluated, to reach logically reasoned, well-developed judgements about how the way they portray events relates to the context in which they were produced, and to draw fully substantiated and convincing conclusions about the historical issue in the question. (AO3)H407/23 Mark Scheme October 2021 • The response has a very good explanation that convincingly and thoroughly analyses and appraises historical events and periods in order to reach substantiated, sustained and developed and judgements. (AO2) • The response demonstrates a very good range of accurate and detailed knowledge and a sophisticated understanding of relevant historical features and characteristics. There is a consistent focus on the question throughout the answer. (AO1) There is a well-developed line of reasoning which is clear and logically structured. The information is relevant and in the most part substantiated. • Initial invasion and conquest period • Importance of Caratacus as leader and focus of insurrection • Terrain and guerrilla tactics of welsh tribes • Client kings [Catimandua / Prasutagus ] as buffer areas to allow conquest of SW and S Wales • Comparison between conquest of Wales and S. Scotland • Issues with Tacitus in Annals and eulogy on Agricola Supporting source details may include: • Wales (Tacitus’ Annals) • Claudius’ invasion – Aulus Plautius (Dio, Suet., Vesp.) Boudiccan Revol[Colchester & Anglesey) t – Suet. Paulinus (Dio, Tacitus), Agricola (Tacitus) • British collaboration: Verica (Dio & coinage) Cartimandua (Tacitus, Annals; Tacitus, Histories) Analysis of the sources might focus on: • Tacitus’ focus on good and bad governors Scapula, Gallus etc  expansion and Romanisation • Focus on individual leaders, rather than socio-economic problems • Policy from the top [i.e. Claudius vs Nero] • Wales full of natural resources c.f. Tacitus’ portrayal of Caratacus as ‘worthy native’ • Context of Boudica’s Revolt in Annals comparing Boudica with Nero • Tacitus’ portrayal of Agricola as being more worthy than Caesar, Vespasian etc Level 4 19–24 • Response uses a good range of appropriate examples from the ancient sources. The sources are analysed and evaluated, to reach logically reasoned, developed judgements about how the way they portray events relates to the context in which they were produced, and to draw substantiated and convincing conclusions about the historical issue in the question. (AO3) • The response has a good explanation that convincingly and fully analyses and appraises historical events and periods in order to reach substantiated and developed judgements. (AO2) • The response demonstrates a good range of accurate and detailed knowledge and a well-developed understanding of relevant historical features and characteristics. There is a consistent focus on the question throughout the answer. (AO1) There is a line of reasoning with some structure. The information presented is in the most-part relevant and supported by some evidence. Level 3 13–18 • Response uses a range of appropriate examples from the ancient sources. The sources are analysed and evaluated, to reach logically reasoned judgements about how the way they portray events relates to the context in which they were produced, and to draw supported, plausible conclusions about the historical issue in the question. (AO3) • The response has an explanation that convincingly analyses and appraises historical events and periods in order to reach supported judgements, though these are not consistently developed. (AO2) • The response demonstrates a reasonable range of accurate and sometimes detailed knowledge and a reasonable understanding of relevant historical features and characteristics. There is a consistent focus on the question through most of the answer. (AO1) The information has some relevance and is presented with limited structure. The information is supported by limited evidence.H407/23 Mark Scheme October 2021 Level 2 7–12 • Response uses some appropriate examples from the ancient sources. The sources are analysed and evaluated, to reach judgements about how the way they portray events relates to the context in which they were produced, and to draw some supported conclusions about the historical issue in the question. (AO3) • The response has an explanation that analyses and appraises historical events and periods, and this is linked appropriately to judgements made, though the way in which it supports the judgements may not always be made fully explicit. (AO2) • The response demonstrates a limited range of accurate knowledge and understanding of relevant historical features and characteristics, though this may lack detail. The question is generally addressed, but the response loses focus in places. (AO1) The information has some relevance but is communicated in an unstructured way. The information is supported by limited evidence and the relationship to the evidence may not be clear. Level 1 1–6 • Response uses a limited selection of appropriate examples from the ancient sources. The sources are analysed and evaluated in a basic way, and this is linked to some basic, generalised judgements about how the way they portray events relates to the context in which they were produced. There are some basic conclusions about the historical issue in the question, though these may only be implicitly linked with the analysis and evaluation of the sources. (AO3) • The response has some explanation which analyses and appraises historical events and periods in places, and this is linked appropriately to some of the judgements made, though the way in which it supports the judgements is not made explicit. (AO2) • The response demonstrates some limited knowledge and understanding of relevant historical features and characteristics, though lacking detail and in places inaccurate. The question is only partially addressed. (AO1) Information presented is basic and may be ambiguous or unstructured. The information is supported by limited evidence. 0 No response or no response worthy of creditH407/23 Mark Scheme October 2021 Question 6* ‘Claudius’ invasion of Britain had no benefits for the Romans whatsoever.’ To what extent do the sources agree with this view? [36 marks] Assessment Objectives AO3 = 18 marks = Use, analyse and evaluate ancient sources within their historical context to make judgements and reach conclusions about: • historical events and historical periods studied • how the portrayal of events by ancient writers/sources relates to the historical contexts in which they were written/produced. AO2 = 12 marks = Analyse and evaluate historical events and historical periods to arrive at substantiated judgements AO1 = 6 marks = Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the key features and characteristics of the historical periods studied. Please note that while the descriptors for AO2 and AO3 are given separately in the levels, the analysis and evaluation of sources & historical events and historical periods may be combined in responses. Additional guidance The ‘Indicative content’ is an example of historically valid content; any other historically valid content is acceptable and should be credited in line with the levels of response. Level Marks Level descriptors Indicative content Level 6 31–36 • Response uses an excellent range of fully appropriate examples from the ancient sources. The sources are very thoroughly analysed and evaluated, to reach very logically reasoned and well-developed judgements about how the way they portray events relates to the context in which they were produced, and to draw fully substantiated, very convincing conclusions about the historical issue in the question. (AO3) • The response has an excellent explanation that convincingly and very thoroughly analyses and appraises historical events and periods in order to reach substantiated, sustained, and well-developed judgements. (AO2) • The response demonstrates an excellent range of accurate and very detailed knowledge and a very sophisticated depth of understanding of relevant historical features and characteristics. There is a consistent focus on the question throughout the answer. (AO1) There is a well-developed and sustained line of reasoning which is coherent and logically structured. The information presented is entirely relevant and substantiated. No set answer is expected. It is possible to reach the highest marks with conclusion(s) either agreeing, disagreeing, or anywhere between providing the response has addressed the issue of extent. Responses should be marked in-line with the level descriptors. Candidates should look at the political and personal benefits to Claudius which likely effected his decision to invade Britain although candidates will likely look at the economic benefits there should be framed in a political context. There is a very narrow time frame for this question, so candidates should cover both areas with good reference to the sources. Answers are likely to include information on: • personal glory for a weak emperor c.f. Aug/Tib/Gaius relationship with Britain • the invasion of AD 43 and continuing conquest • control of the army, prevention of mutinies • assistance for loyal allies (Adminius, Verica) • punishment of rebellious Britons • gain of a profitable province for Rome’s advantage – economic: minerals, agriculture, trade etc; colonisation and romanisation Level 5 25–30 • Response uses a very good range of fully appropriate examples from the ancient sources. The sources are thoroughly analysed and evaluated, to reach logically reasoned, well-developed judgements about how the way they portray events relates to the context in which they were produced, and to draw fully substantiated and convincing conclusions about the historical issue in the question. (AO3)H407/23 Mark Scheme October 2021 • The response has a very good explanation that convincingly and thoroughly analyses and appraises historical events and periods in order to reach substantiated, sustained and developed and judgements. (AO2) • The response demonstrates a very good range of accurate and detailed knowledge and a sophisticated understanding of relevant historical features and characteristics. There is a consistent focus on the question throughout the answer. (AO1) There is a well-developed line of reasoning which is clear and logically structured. The information is relevant and in the most part substantiated. Supporting source details may include: • Dio 60.19-22 the invasion and benefits • Evidence of Claudius’ need for imperium and image: Arch of Claudius, Aureus of Claudius etc, Suet.Claudius 17.1-3, 21.6 • Coinage showing British links with Rome: Verica • Archaeology showing Romanisation in the SW • Strabo, Geography 4.5.2 • Some relevance on economic worth in Tacitus, Agricola 12, Mendip pig, Mela 3.51 • Tacitus, Annals 12.23, mention Claudius re: pomerium • Issues outweighing benefits: Suet. Nero 18, 39.1; Tac. Annals 12.31 (Iceni), 12.32 (Brigantes) 12.32-33ff (Silures, Ordovices, Caratacus), 12.39 (Silures), 14.31 FF (Boudiccaa) and Histories 3.45 (Brigantes); Tac. Agricola (Scotland - Calgacus) Although not expected, candidates may include nonprescribed material which should be credited. e.g.: • Suet; Cassius Dio: Attitudes to Britain by Aug, Tib, Gaius, Suet. Gaius 44.2 Analysis of the sources might focus on: • Roman archaeological and numismatic created by the emperor himself • Reasons why previous emperors did not invade • Strabo’s views on worthlessness of Britain, following Augustus’ official line • How successful Claudius actually was Level 4 19–24 • Response uses a good range of appropriate examples from the ancient sources. The sources are analysed and evaluated, to reach logically reasoned, developed judgements about how the way they portray events relates to the context in which they were produced, and to draw substantiated and convincing conclusions about the historical issue in the question. (AO3) • The response has a good explanation that convincingly and fully analyses and appraises historical events and periods in order to reach substantiated and developed judgements. (AO2) • The response demonstrates a good range of accurate and detailed knowledge and a well-developed understanding of relevant historical features and characteristics. There is a consistent focus on the question throughout the answer. (AO1) There is a line of reasoning with some structure. The information presented is in the most-part relevant and supported by some evidence. Level 3 13–18 • Response uses a range of appropriate examples from the ancient sources. The sources are analysed and evaluated, to reach logically reasoned judgements about how the way they portray events relates to the context in which they were produced, and to draw supported, plausible conclusions about the historical issue in the question. (AO3) • The response has an explanation that convincingly analyses and appraises historical events and periods in order to reach supported judgements, though these are not consistently developed. (AO2) • The response demonstrates a reasonable range of accurate and sometimes detailed knowledge and a reasonable understanding of relevant historical features and characteristics. There is a consistent focus on the question through most of the answer. (AO1)H407/23 Mark Scheme October 2021 The information has some relevance and is presented with limited structure. The information is supported by limited evidence. Level 2 7–12 • Response uses some appropriate examples from the ancient sources. The sources are analysed and evaluated, to reach judgements about how the way they portray events relates to the context in which they were produced, and to draw some supported conclusions about the historical issue in the question. (AO3) • The response has an explanation that analyses and appraises historical events and periods, and this is linked appropriately to judgements made, though the way in which it supports the judgements may not always be made fully explicit. (AO2) • The response demonstrates a limited range of accurate knowledge and understanding of relevant historical features and characteristics, though this may lack detail. The question is generally addressed, but the response loses focus in places. (AO1) The information has some relevance but is communicated in an unstructured way. The information is supported by limited evidence and the relationship to the evidence may not be clear. Level 1 1–6 • Response uses a limited selection of appropriate examples from the ancient sources. The sources are analysed and evaluated in a basic way, and this is linked to some basic, generalised judgements about how the way they portray events relates to the context in which they were produced. There are some basic conclusions about the historical issue in the question, though these may only be implicitly linked with the analysis and evaluation of the sources. (AO3) • The response has some explanation which analyses and appraises historical events and periods in places, and this is linked appropriately to some of the judgements made, though the way in which it supports the judgements is not made explicit. (AO2) • The response demonstrates some limited knowledge and understanding of relevant historical features and characteristics, though lacking detail and in places inaccurate. The question is only partially addressed. (AO1) Information presented is basic and may be ambiguous or unstructured. The information is supported by limited evidence. 0 No response or no response worthy of creditOCR (Oxford Cambridge and RSA Examinations) The Triangle Building Shaftesbury Road Cambridge CB2 8EA [Show More]

Last updated: 1 year ago

Preview 1 out of 22 pages