GCSE (9–1) Ancient History J198/01: Greece and Persia General Certificate of Secondary Education Mark Scheme for November 2020

Document Content and Description Below

GCSE (9–1) Ancient History J198/01: Greece and Persia General Certificate of Secondary Education Mark Scheme for November 2020 Oxford Cambridge and RSA Examinations GCSE (9–1) Ancient Histo... ry J198/01: Greece and Persia General Certificate of Secondary Education Mark Scheme for November 2020Oxford 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 2020J198/01 Mark Scheme November 2020 Annotations Annotation Meaning Must be used on all blank pages where there is no candidate response Evidence for making a judgement on the quality of AO1 (Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the key features and characteristics of the historical periods studied) Evidence for making a judgement on the quality of AO2 (Analyse and explain historical events and historical periods to arrive at substantiated judgements) Evidence for making a judgement on the quality of AO3 (Use and analyse ancient sources within their historical context to make judgements and draw conclusions about historical events and historical periods studied.) Benefit of doubt Use to show Spelling, Punctuation and Grammar has been considered in extended response questions, where an additional 5 marks are available for SPAG Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 Point mark objective, non-levels of response questions Irrelevant; a significant amount of material that does not answer the questionJ198/01 Mark Scheme November 2020 Question Answer Mark Guidance 1 (a) AO1 486 BC 1 1 (b) AO1 Darius/Darius I 1 1 (c) AO1 • Babylon • Ecbatana • Pasargadae • Persepolis • Susa 2 1 mark for any of the places in the indicative content Question 2 Outline the main things that Cyrus did to expand the Persian Empire [6] Assessment Objectives AO1 = 6 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. Level Marks Level Descriptors Indicative Content Level 3 5-6 • Response demonstrates accurate and detailed knowledge of several features and/or characteristics that are fully relevant to the question. This is presented as a prose account that shows a clear understanding of the focus of the question. Potential details include: • He completed the conquest of the Medes, assisted by the actions of the Median army which mutinied in favour of Cyrus • He resisted the attacks of Croesus’ Lydian army and then led a daring winter counter-attack to defeat them • Crushed the Ionian and Lydian rebellions in 545 • Captured Babylon in 539, possibly by presenting himself as a liberator of the city against its ruler Nabonidus • Consolidated royal power with a new building programme based upon Pasargadae • Continued campaigning in central Asia up to his death in 530 Level 2 3-4 • Response demonstrates accurate and detailed knowledge of at least one feature and/or characteristic that is fully relevant to the question. This is presented as a prose account that shows some understanding of the focus of the question. Level 1 1-2 • Response includes basic knowledge and basic understanding that is relevant to the question 0 No response or no response worthy of creditJ198/01 Mark Scheme November 2020 Question 3 Using details from Passage A and your own knowledge, what can we learn about the character and leadership of Xerxes? [10] Assessment Objectives AO1 = 5 marks = Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the key features and characteristics of the historical periods studied AO3 = 5 marks = Use, analyse and evaluate ancient sources within their historical context 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. There is no requirement to analyse the source’s reliability to address the “what can we learn” part of the question. However, candidates that develop evaluations personal to the content of the source and relevant to the question can be rewarded under AO3. Level Marks Level Descriptors Indicative Content Level 5 9-10 • The response demonstrates a range of detailed and accurate knowledge and a developed understanding that is fully relevant to the question (AO1) • Response uses a range of fully appropriate details from the stimulus material, which are analysed to draw out relevant characteristics and features and give a detailed and sophisticated evaluation of what we can learn from the source about the specified issue. (AO3) Valid features / characteristics that answers could identify from the source include: - Xerxes’ anger is demonstrated through his reaction to the storm, especially the irrational nature of his behaviour when he hears of the destruction of the bridge. - His arrogance is demonstrated by the whipping/branding of the Hellespont, which Herodotus implies is a sacrilegious act and thus deserving of particular condemnation. - Xerxes gives the order to his troops to refer to the sea as the servant of Xerxes, and for him to be referred to as ‘your master’, thus demonstrating the nature of his autocratic leadership. - Xerxes regards himself as unstoppable and superior, and so shows his hubris in the way in which his troops rebuke the Hellespont and reject making sacrifices to it. - The vengeful and merciless side of Xerxes’ leadership is demonstrated by the execution of the builders. This is undertaken despite Xerxes blaming the Hellespont for the storm and destruction of the bridge. Other valid features / characteristics that answers could identify include: Level 4 7-8 • The response demonstrates accurate knowledge and a developed understanding that is fully relevant to the question (AO1) • Response uses a range of fully appropriate details from the stimulus material, which are analysed to draw out most of the relevant characteristics and features and evaluate what we can learn from the source about the specified issue. (AO3) Level 3 5-6 • The response demonstrates accurate knowledge and some understanding that is relevant to the question (AO1) • Response uses some appropriate details from the stimulus material, which are analysed to draw out some of the characteristics and features and evaluate what we can learn from the source about the specified issue. (AO3) Level 2 3-4 • The response demonstrates basic knowledge and some understanding that is relevant to the question (AO1)J198/01 Mark Scheme November 2020 • Response uses some appropriate details from stimulus material, which are analysed to draw out a few of the characteristics and features. (AO3) - Herodotus’ portrayal of Xerxes is generally quite scathing, painting his irrational leadership as the cause of Persian problems. A range of examples could be used here, e.g. execution of Pythius’ son, the loss/waste of troops at Thermopylae, the trick of Themistocles at Salamis. - The treatment of Leonidas’ corpse and the burning of the Acropolis temples are both condemned by Herodotus as sacrilegious acts - The humanity of Xerxes is evident in his reaction to the array of troops at Abydus. - Despite the criticisms of Xerxes, the management of the invasion demonstrates his abilities as a leader, as well as his authority. Level 1 1-2 • The response demonstrates basic knowledge that is relevant to the topic of the question (AO1) • Response uses few details from the stimulus material and a very basic attempt to draw out any of the characteristics and features. (AO3) 0 No response or no response worthy of credit Question 4 Using details from Passage A and your own knowledge, to what extent did the Persian kings rulers rely upon fear to rule the Persian Empire? Use examples from Xerxes and one other ruler. [15] Assessment Objectives AO3 = 5 marks = Use and analyse ancient sources within their historical context to make judgements and draw conclusions about historical events and historical periods studied. AO1 = 5 marks = Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the key features and characteristics of the historical periods studied AO2 = 5 marks = Analyse and explain historical events and historical periods to arrive at substantiated judgements. 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. There is no requirement to analyse the source’s reliability. However, candidates that develop evaluations personal to the content of the source and relevant to the question can be rewarded under AO3. Level Marks Level Descriptors Indicative Content Level 5 13-15 • Response uses a range of fully appropriate examples from the stimulus material and analyses these examples to make developed, supported judgements and to draw fully convincing conclusions about what the source tells us about the historical events and historical period. (AO3) • The response demonstrates a range of detailed and accurate knowledge and a developed understanding that is fully relevant to the question. (AO1) The focus of this question will be using information to come to a judgement. The second order historical concepts candidates may use include similarities and differences between the Persian kings and assessing the nature of Persian rule throughout the empire Valid features / characteristics that answers could identify from the source include:J198/01 Mark Scheme November 2020 • Response has a full explanation and thorough, convincing analysis of the issue in the question, arriving at substantiated and developed judgements. (AO2) - The nature of Xerxes’ reaction to a problem can be taken to exemplify the way Persian rulers could wield their authority. The instinct of Xerxes is to use punishment - The statement of the troops ‘despite his never having done you the slightest harm’ may suggest that the Persian “norm” is to live harmoniously, and this act is only because of defiance of Persian authority. - ‘his anger was so terrible’ and ‘he had them beheaded’ suggests that Xerxes’ anger is never far from the surface. Other valid features / characteristics that answers could identify include: - The accession of Darius as retold on the Bisitun inscription shows the fate of those who resist. Its very public position shows that it sent a specific message to passers by. - The harsh revenge taken in the sack of Miletus demonstrates the reaction to rebellion. - Cyrus’ treatment of Babylon demonstrates the alternative to fear as a tactic. This can be demonstrated by the Apadana frieze of Darius at Persepolis, which shows the unified nature of empire and celebrates its diversity, as well as the Cyrus Cylinder. - ‘Earth and Water’ as a means to control the empire through peaceful means, but also to demonstrate the empire’s threat. - Persian respect for different religions and customs suggest that much of the rule of the empire was collaborative and did not rest of fear - System of Satraps and the building of the Royal Road show that the Persian rulers were not just reliant upon fear. Level 4 10-12 • Response uses a range of appropriate examples from the stimulus material and analyses these examples to make supported judgements and draw reasonable conclusions about what the source tells us about the historical events and historical period. (AO3) • The response demonstrates accurate knowledge and a developed understanding that is fully relevant to the question. (AO1) • Response has a full explanation and analysis of the issue in the question arriving at substantiated judgements, but these are not consistently well-developed. (AO2) Level 3 7-9 • Response uses some appropriate examples from the stimulus material and analyses these examples to make simple judgements and draw basic conclusions about what the source tells us about the historical events and historical period. (AO3) • The response demonstrates accurate knowledge and some understanding that is relevant to the question. (AO1) • This is linked to an analysis and explanation of the issue in the question but judgements may not always be made explicit. (AO2) Level 2 4-6 • Response uses some examples from the stimulus material and analyses these examples, making a very basic attempt to draw conclusions about what the source tells us about the historical events and historical period. (AO3) • The response demonstrates basic knowledge and some understanding that is relevant to the question. (AO1) • There is a basic explanation of the issue in the question. (AO2) Level 1 1-3 • Response uses few examples from the stimulus material and analyses these, though there is no attempt to draw any conclusions about what the source tells us about the historical events and historical period. (AO3)J198/01 Mark Scheme November 2020 • The response demonstrates basic knowledge that is relevant to the topic of the question. (AO1) • There is little or no attempt at a very basic explanation of the issue in the question, which may be close to assertion. (AO2) 0 No response or no response worthy of credit Question 5 . ‘The Persian rulers were more interested in ruling their empire efficiently than in making war on their neighbours.’ To what extent do you agree with this statement? [20] Assessment Objectives AO1 = 10 marks = Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the key features and characteristics of the historical periods studied. AO2 = 10 marks = Analyse and explain historical events and historical periods to arrive at substantiated judgements. 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. Analysis and discussion of the historical veracity of many of the events outlined in the sources can be rewarded as part of the judgement on AO2. For example, if the veracity of a particular event is in doubt then the quality of the evidence it provides to support a point about the significance of an event can be limited. Level Marks Level Descriptors Indicative Content Level 5 17-20 • Response demonstrates a wide range of fully relevant and accurate knowledge, with a good level of detail throughout. There is demonstration through this of a thorough understanding of all the key features and characteristics discussed. (AO1) • Response has a full explanation and thorough, convincing analysis of the issue in the question, arriving at substantiated and developed judgements. (AO2) There is a well-developed and sustained line of reasoning which is coherent, relevant and logically structured. No set answer is expected. It is possible to reach the highest marks either by agreeing or disagreeing with the statement (providing the issue of extent is addressed by refuting the counter-argument), or anywhere between providing the response matches the level descriptors. Grounds for agreeing include: - The grand scale of Darius’ building projects at Susa and Persepolis reflect his administrative interests. - The establishment of the satrap system, with specific tribute, taxation and the Royal Road shows the efficient nature of government. - The principle of ‘earth and water’ looks to avoid all out war in favour of a negotiated approach to dealing with neighbours to the empire. - The 490 BC expedition to Greece can be seen in terms of a punishment raid rather than invasion, thus showing the Persians’ lack of desire for full scale war Level 4 13-16 • Response demonstrates a good range of fully relevant and accurate knowledge, which will be detailed in places. There is demonstration through this of a good level of understanding of most of the key features and characteristics discussed. (AO1) • Response has a full explanation and analysis of the issue in the question arriving at substantiated judgements, but these are not consistently well-developed. (AO2)J198/01 Mark Scheme November 2020 There is a well-developed line of reasoning which is clear, relevant and logically structured Grounds for disagreeing include: - The empire was created through conquest, and all kings looked to add to it through expanding the boundaries of empire. - There is a clear sense that each ruler felt a sense of responsibility to live up to his predecessor; Cambyses, Darius and Xerxes all campaign for this reason. - Reference to the specific campaigns could be deployed, especially Cyrus’ capture of Babylon, Cambyses in Egypt, Darius expanding into Ionia and the Black Sea, and Xerxes’ invasion of Greece. Some candidates might explore the nature of Persian rule and take the approach that it was expansionist, aggressive and acquisitive. They may recognise that this is because of the nature of the sources, which lean heavily to the Greek side and tend to portray the Persians negatively. However, candidates could demonstrate a more rounded perspective by drawing on the archaeological evidence and showing how the Persian Empire does not need to be defined solely through the prism of its neighbours. The domestic reforms of the empire (be they Cyrus’ or Darius’) offer a more nuanced perspective on the nature of Persian ambitions, especially if the Bisitun inscription and the Cyrus cylinder are considered in any detail. Bisitun speaks of the considerable domestic challenges that had to be dealt with in a large empire, whilst the Cyrus Cylinder suggests quite sophisticated strategies existed to run the empire efficiently Level 3 9-12 • Response demonstrates a wider selection of relevant, generally accurate knowledge, but which will lack detail. There is demonstration through this of some understanding of the key features and characteristics discussed. (AO1) • This is linked to an analysis and explanation of the issue in the question but judgements may not always be made explicit. (AO2) There is a line of reasoning presented which is mostly relevant and which has some structure. Level 2 5-8 • Response demonstrates a limited amount of relevant knowledge, which may be lacking in accuracy in places and will lack detail. There is demonstration of limited understanding of the key features and characteristics discussed. (AO1) • There is a basic explanation of the issue in the question. (AO2) There is a line of reasoning which has some relevance and which is presented with limited structure. Level 1 1-4 • Response demonstrates very basic knowledge and basic understanding that is relevant to the topic of the question. (AO1) • There is little or no attempt at a very basic explanation of the issue in the question, which may be close to assertion. (AO2) The information is communicated in a basic/unstructured way. 0 No response or no response worthy of creditJ198/01 Mark Scheme November 2020 Spelling, punctuation and grammar and the use of specialist terminology (SPaG) mark scheme High performance 4–5 marks • Learners spell and punctuate with consistent accuracy. • Learners use rules of grammar with effective control of meaning overall. • Learners use a wide range of specialist terms as appropriate. Intermediate performance 2–3 marks • Learners spell and punctuate with considerable accuracy. • Learners use rules of grammar with general control of meaning overall. • Learners use a good range of specialist terms as appropriate. Threshold performance 1 mark • Learners spell and punctuate with reasonable accuracy. • Learners use rules of grammar with some control of meaning and any errors do not significantly hinder meaning overall. • Learners use a limited range of specialist terms as appropriate. No marks awarded 0 marks • The learner writes nothing. • The learner’s response does not relate to the question. • The learner’s achievement in SPaG does not reach the threshold performance level, for example errors in spelling, punctuation and grammar severely hinder meaningJ198/01 Mark Scheme November 2020 Question Answer Mark Guidance 6 (a) AO1 Cleomenes (1) Isagoras (1) 2 6 (b) AO1 Valid responses include: • The Persians had demanded the reinstatement of Hippias (1) • Aristagoras persuaded the Assembly to support him (perhaps through manipulating the Assembly) (1) • The Athenians were already enemies of Persia (1) • There was a traditional connection between Athens and the Ionian cities (1) 2 1 mark for any answer that offers an historically valid response 6 (c) AO1 Hera 1 Question 7 What can we learn from Passage B about Themistocles’ skills as a leader? [5] Assessment Objectives AO3 = 5 marks = Use, analyse and evaluate ancient sources within their historical context. 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 3 4-5 • Response uses a range of fully appropriate details from the stimulus ancient source material, which are analysed to draw out relevant characteristics and features and give a detailed and sophisticated evaluation of what we can learn from the source about the specified issue in the question. Candidates are likely to pick out and explain the following details: • “only Themistocles dared to suggest” strong opinions • “they should stop…” Not afraid to hold an opinion in a debate that is contrary to the majority • “This made it easier…” Politically skilled and intelligent • “stirred up the bitter jealousy” Knew how to stir the people up and bring them along with him • “He did not need to terrify…” Manipulative and cunning in using one fear to get what he wanted in order to address a bigger issue • “who were too far away to inspire any serious fear” Clever: perceived the danger of the Persians but Level 2 2-3 • Response uses some appropriate details from the stimulus ancient source material, which are analysed to draw out some of the characteristics and features and evaluate what we can learn from the source about the specified issue in the question. Level 1 1 • Response uses few details from the stimulus ancient source material and a very basic attempt to draw out any of the characteristics and features in relation to the question 0 No response or no response worthy of creditJ198/01 Mark Scheme November 2020 knew that the threat was not immediate enough. Thus, couched his action in another form As this question assesses AO3, candidates should refer to the passage as well as answering the question. Question 8 Using details from Passage B, how accurate do you think Plutarch’s account of these events is. [5] Assessment Objectives AO3 = 5 marks = Use, analyse and evaluate ancient sources within their historical context to make judgements and draw 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 3 4-5 •. Response analyses the source by using relevant detail from the source content or historical context to give a more detailed evaluation of the source within its historical context. It draws a thorough and convincing conclusion about its accuracy or reliability based on how the context in which it was created impacts on how it portrays issues or events. Candidates might comment on the following: • Plutarch is writing well after the events he records (around 100 AD) and so accuracy may be compromised. In addition, his work is biography rather than history. • Plutarch’s writing is about drawing moral lessons for his reader rather than offering an historical analysis. He is not in a position to know exactly what was in Themistocles’ mind during the debate. • Historical accuracy is not necessarily a priority for Plutarch, but his work seems to draw upon Herodotus and is consistent with other accounts of Themistocles’ behaviour. The context of the Athenian war against Aegina is accurate. • He uses the Greek lives as a parallel to Roman lives, so his focus is not necessarily on accurate history. Level 2 2-3 • Response analyses the source by using relevant detail from the source content or historical context to give a basic evaluation of the source within its historical context. It draws a basic conclusion about its accuracy or reliability based on how the context in which it was created impacts on how it portrays issues or events. Level 1 1 • Response analyses the source in a basic way by selecting relevant detail from the source content or historical context. 0 No response or no response worthy of creditJ198/01 Mark Scheme November 2020 Question 9 Explain why Polycrates of Samos had so many political opponents [10] Assessment Objectives AO1 = 5 marks = Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the key features and characteristics of the historical periods studied AO2 = 5 marks = Analyse and explain historical events and historical periods to arrive at substantiated judgements 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 9-10 • The response demonstrates a range of detailed and accurate knowledge and a developed understanding that is fully relevant to the question. (AO1) • Response has a full explanation and thorough, convincing analysis of the issue in the question, arriving at substantiated and developed judgements. (AO2) Explanations may include: • The collapse of the alliance with Egypt because Amasis was suspicious of Polycrates’ luck, possibly Persia had forced him to step back from alliance • Polycrates’ rise to power had been through force and had gained him enemies. His large navy had subdued a number of neighbouring islands (Lesbos, Miletus, Rhenea). • Spartan and Corinthian support for the Samian rebels, linked to a range of historic offences committed by the Samians against them. • Polycrates’ support for Persia earned him new enemies in Greece. • Oroetes’ assassination of Polycrates can be linked to limiting his growing power. • Aristocrats had limited influence, as non-aristocrats had power of their own, leading to political envy. Level 4 7-8 • The response demonstrates accurate knowledge and a developed understanding that is fully relevant to the question. (AO1) • Response has a full explanation and analysis of the issue in the question arriving at substantiated judgements, but these are not consistently well-developed. (AO2) Level 3 5-6 • The response demonstrates accurate knowledge and some understanding that is relevant to the question. (AO1) • This is linked to an analysis and explanation of the issue in the question but judgements may not always be made explicit. (AO2) Level 2 3-4 • The response demonstrates basic knowledge and some understanding that is relevant to the question. (AO1) • There is a basic explanation of the issue in the question. (AO2) Level 1 1-2 • Response demonstrates basic knowledge that is relevant to the topic of the question. (AO1) • There is little or no attempt at a very basic explanation of the issue in the question, which may be close to assertion. (AO2) 0 No response or no response worthy of creditJ198/01 Mark Scheme November 2020 Question 10 ‘The Athenians welcomed Cleisthenes’ reforms because of a hatred of tyranny rather than a love of democracy.’ How far do you agree with this judgement? You must use and analyse the ancient sources you have studied as well as supporting your answer with your own knowledge. [20] Assessment Objectives AO3 = 10 marks = Use, analyse and evaluate ancient sources within their historical context to make judgements and draw 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. AO1 = 5 marks = Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the key features and characteristics of the historical periods studied AO2 = 5 marks = Analyse and explain historical events and historical periods to arrive at substantiated judgements. 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 17-20 • Response analyses examples from the ancient sources to give a more detailed evaluation of the sources within their historical context. There are thorough and detailed analyses of the reliability and accuracy of ancient sources in terms of the context in which they were created. Source analysis and evaluation is used to make developed, supported judgements and to draw fully convincing conclusions about the historical issue in the question. (AO3) • The response demonstrates a range of detailed and accurate knowledge and a developed understanding that is fully relevant to the question. (AO1) • Response has a full explanation and thorough, convincing analysis of the issue in the question, arriving at substantiated and developed judgements. (AO2) There is a well-developed and sustained line of reasoning which is coherent, relevant and logically structured. No set answer is expected. It is possible to reach the highest marks either by agreeing or disagreeing with the statement (providing the issue of extent is addressed by refuting the counter-argument), or anywhere between providing the response matches the level descriptors. Grounds for agreeing include: • The failure of the government of Hippias, which had become oppressive after the murder of Hipparchus. • Many of the more positive Peisistratid reforms were focussed on a narrow section of the aristocracy. • Cleisthenes was opposed by the Spartans, who had supported Isagoras and the Peisistratids Grounds for disagreeing include: • The changes introduced by Solon had taken root and had given the Athenians a sense of wider participation in government. Level 4 13-16 • Response analyses examples from the ancient sources to give a more detailed evaluation of the sources within their historical context. There is some analysis of the reliability andJ198/01 Mark Scheme November 2020 accuracy of ancient sources in terms of the context in which they were created and source analysis and evaluation is used to make supported judgements and draw reasonable conclusions about the historical issue in the question. (AO3) • The response demonstrates accurate knowledge and a developed understanding that is fully relevant to the question. (AO1) • Response has a full explanation and analysis of the issue in the question arriving at substantiated judgements, but these are not consistently well-developed. (AO2) There is a well-developed line of reasoning which is clear, relevant and logically structured • Tyrannicides statue demonstrated the pride that Athenians had in their democracy • Some candidates might suggest that tyranny was not actually so unpopular, and that their objection was to Hippias rather than the system of government. • The actions of Isagoras in attempting to seize power had struck at democratic institutions that Athenians wanted to defend. Likely sources to be included: Aristotle 16.7, 19.1-2, 20.1 Thucydides 6.54, 6.59 Herodotus 5. 62-65 Tyrannicides statue The source analysis is likely to address: Caution needs to be expressed about Aristotle as he writes 200 years after the events and relies of Herodotus as a source. Also of an aristocratic background Aristotle and Thucydides disagree over the quality of the government of Hippias Tyrannicides created as a celebration of democracy rather than a comment upon tyranny, and only later copies of the statue exist Herodotus’ views reflect the prevailing views of the 440s, and are probably sympathetic to democracy. He is proAlcmaeonid, and whilst writing after the events, is relatively close to them. Level 3 9-12 • Response analyses examples from the ancient sources to give a more detailed evaluation of the sources within their historical context. There is a basic analysis of the reliability and accuracy of at least one ancient source in terms of the context in which it was created and source analysis and evaluation is used to make basic judgements and draw simple conclusions about the historical issue in the question. (AO3) • The response demonstrates accurate knowledge and some understanding that is relevant to the question. (AO1) • This is linked to an analysis and explanation of the issue in the question but judgements may not always be made explicit. (AO2) There is a line of reasoning presented which is mostly relevant and which has some structure. Level 2 5-8 • Response analyses examples from the ancient sources to give a more detailed evaluation of the sources within their historical context. There is a very basic attempt to consider the reliability or accuracy of an ancient source or sources in terms of the context in which it was created, though this may border on assertion. There is no use of source analysis to reach judgements or conclusions about the historical issue in the question. (AO3) • The response demonstrates basic knowledge and some understanding that is relevant to the question. (AO1)J198/01 Mark Scheme November 2020 • There is a basic explanation of the issue in the question. (AO2) There is a line of reasoning which has some relevance and which is presented with limited structure. Level 1 1-4 • Response analyses examples from the ancient sources to give a basic evaluation of the sources within their historical context. There is no attempt to consider the reliability and accuracy of the ancient sources in terms of the context in which they were created, and no attempt to link source analysis with judgements or conclusions about the historical issue in the question. (AO3) • Response demonstrates basic knowledge that is relevant to the topic of the question. (AO1) • There is little or no attempt at a very basic explanation of the issue in the question, which may be close to assertion. (AO2) The information is communicated in a basic/unstructured way. 0 No response or no response worthy of creditJ198/01 Mark Scheme November 2020 Question Answer Mark Guidance 11 (a) • Athens (1) AO1 1 1 mark for the specific answer. 11 (b) Valid responses include: • Supported the government (1) • Advised the assembly (1) • Prepared motions to be debated in the assembly (1) • Oversaw the implementation of the assembly’s decisions (1) • Councillors were responsible for meeting foreign ambassadors (1) and supervised elections (1) and ensured that all magistrates were scrutinised fully (1) • Prytany system – preparing agenda for council meetings (1) AO1 2 1 mark for any answer that offers a historically valid response. 11 (c) Valid responses include: • Enhanced the status of Athenian mothers (1) • Allowed to control property (1) • Could protect financial interests in law suits (1) • Entitled to protection of the law, regardless of their wealth (1) • Belonged to a prosperous city-state (1) • Both parents had to hold Athenian citizenship (1) • Payment of citizens who served as jurors so that they could take part in democratic process (1) AO1 2 1 mark for any answer that offers a historically valid response.J198/01 Mark Scheme November 2020 Question 12 What can we learn from Passage C about events at the Panathenaic Games? [5 marks] Assessment Objective AO3 = 5 marks = Use, analyse and evaluate ancient sources within their historical context. 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 3 4-5 • Response uses a range of fully appropriate details from the stimulus ancient source material, which are analysed to draw out relevant characteristics and features and give a detailed and sophisticated evaluation of what we can learn from the source about the specified issue in the question. Candidates are likely to pick out and explain the following details: • Aristophanes: • ‘the people of the kerameikos at the gate whacked him on the belly, chest, sides and bum’ – that it was normal for crowds to gather at the gates of the city to whack/slap the slower runners as they passed. • That the runners in the torch race were naked and accessible. • That many people watched the race (in this case from the same area/tribe). • Could possibly conclude that spectators from the kerameikos tribe were supporting the runner(s) representing them Plutarch: • ‘Pericles, always looking for admiration’ – that the music competitions were popular. • ‘got a proposal passed’ – that music competitions were new, and that competitions were democratically decided upon (although there had musical competitions in the past - the source hints at them being a new innovation/renewal). • There were different areas/categories of musical competition (flutes, singing, kithara). • That Pericles had an important role in the Panathenaia. • Candidates may interpret the mention of the Odeon, by inferring spectators had an area to shelter when the weather was bad. Level 2 2-3 • Response uses some appropriate details from the stimulus ancient source material, which are analysed to draw out some of the characteristics and features and evaluate what we can learn from the source about the specified issue in the question. Level 1 1 • Response uses few details from the stimulus ancient source material and a very basic attempt to draw out any of the characteristics and features in relation to the question. 0 No response or no response worthy of creditJ198/01 Mark Scheme November 2020 Question 13 Using details from Passage C, how accurate do you think ether Aristophanes or Plutarch’s accounts of events at the Panathenaia are. [5 marks] Assessment Objective AO3 = 5 marks = Use, analyse and evaluate ancient sources within their historical context to make judgements and draw conclusions about how the portrayal of events by ancient writers/sources relates to 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 3 4-5 • Response analyses the source by using relevant detail from the source content or historical context to give a more detailed evaluation of the source within its historical context. It draws a thorough and convincing conclusion about its accuracy or reliability based on how the context in which it was created impacts on how it portrays issues or events. Candidates may evaluate either Aristophanes or Plutarch. Aristophanes Candidates should relate the evaluation of Aristophanes to his description of the particular event in the passage for full marks. Answers should note that the passage is from Aristophanes and consider how accurate he might be in this case: That Aristophanes was a comic playwright – the purpose of his plays was to entertain and win competitions, ‘as he was being smacked with their hands he farted, blew out the torch, and ran off’ therefore the contextual accuracy of his account of the torch race is debatable. Although, Aristophanes has been said to recreate the life of ancient Athens more convincingly than any other author. Language might not be typical as bawdy irreverence towards both men and gods was allowed during festival comedies, ‘By God….’ Plutarch Level 2 2-3 • Response analyses the source by using relevant detail from the source content or historical context to give a basic evaluation of the source within its historical context. It draws a basic conclusion about its accuracy or reliability based on how the context in which it was created impacts on how it portrays issues or events. Level 1 1 • Response analyses the source in a basic way by selecting relevant detail from the source content and historical context. 0 No response or no response worthy of creditJ198/01 Mark Scheme November 2020 Candidates should relate the evaluation of Plutarch to his description of the particular event in the passage for full marks. Answers should note that the passage is from Plutarch and consider how accurate he might be in this case: • He was a biographer, rather than historian, and so was more interested in character than in a detailed analysis of events, e.g. the focus on Pericles and his appetite for self-promotion, and involvement in the daily activities of the Panathenaia. • Although writing over 500 years later, Plutarch uses and cites a range of sources, some of which are early, and many of which have been lost and it is the only surviving biography of Pericles – so is useful for an account of Pericles’ contribution to the Panathenaia, though difficult to ascertain complete accuracy due to limited evidence for crossreference. • Part of a larger work (Parallel lives) in which Pericles is compared to Fabius Maximus, e.g. for both their leadership skills were not fully appreciated at their height of powers – e.g. ‘always looking for admiration.J198/01 Mark Scheme November 2020 Question 14 Explain why public speaking was important in Athenian democracy [10 marks] Assessment Objectives AO1 = 5 marks = Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the key features and characteristics of the historical periods studied AO2 = 5 marks = Analyse and explain historical events and historical periods to arrive at substantiated judgements. 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 9-10 • The response demonstrates a range of detailed and accurate knowledge and a developed understanding that is fully relevant to the question. (AO1) • Response has a full explanation and thorough, convincing analysis of the issue in the question, arriving at substantiated and developed judgements. (AO2) Explanations might include: • Ostracisms – skilled public speaking could be employed to win over the assembly, e.g. Pericles convinced the assembly to ostracise Thucydides of Alopece in 443/2 – which effectively removed opposition to Pericles. • Law Courts – Rhetoric was a vital skill. Antiphon observed that in a law court ‘victory goes to the best speaker’. A persuasive speech in the assembly or law courts could also win great political influence. • Sophists – Philosophers such as Plato believed that ordinary people could be manipulated by skilled but immoral speakers, e.g. based on his experiences with the execution of Socrates. In particular sophists taught their pupils how to make their case as well as possible, and to manipulate the truth. • That all levels of citizens would participate in decisions on how Athens was governed therefore speech-making was an essential part of the democratic process. Level 4 7-8 • The response demonstrates accurate knowledge and a developed understanding that is fully relevant to the question. (AO1) • Response has a full explanation and analysis of the issue in the question arriving at substantiated judgements, but these are not consistently well-developed. (AO2) Level 3 5-6 • The response demonstrates accurate knowledge and some understanding that is relevant to the question. (AO1) • This is linked to an analysis and explanation of the issue in the question but judgements may not always be made explicit. (AO2) Level 2 3-4 • The response demonstrates basic knowledge and some understanding that is relevant to the question. (AO1) • There is a basic explanation of the issue in the question. (AO2)J198/01 Mark Scheme November 2020 Level 1 1-2 • Response demonstrates basic knowledge that is relevant to the topic of the question. (AO1) • There is little or no attempt at a very basic explanation of the issue in the question, which may be close to assertion. (AO2) 0 No response or no response worthy of creditJ198/01 Mark Scheme November 2020 Question 15 To what extent do you think the actions of Pericles, as leader of Athens, were successful? You must use and analyse the ancient sources you have studied as well as supporting your answer with your own knowledge. [20 marks] Assessment Objectives AO3 = 10 marks = Use, analyse and evaluate ancient sources within their historical context to make judgements and drawn 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. AO1 = 5 marks = Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the key features and characteristics of the historical periods studied AO2 = 5 marks = Analyse and explain historical events and historical periods to arrive at substantiated judgements. 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 17-20 • Response analyses examples from the ancient sources to give a more detailed evaluation of the sources within their historical context. There are thorough and detailed analyses of the reliability and accuracy of ancient sources in terms of the context in which they were created. Source analysis and evaluation is used to make developed, supported judgements and to draw fully convincing conclusions about the historical issue in the question. (AO3) • The response demonstrates a range of detailed and accurate knowledge and a developed understanding that is fully relevant to the question. (AO1) • Response has a full explanation and thorough, convincing analysis of the issue in the question, arriving at substantiated and developed judgements. (AO2) There is a well-developed and sustained line of reasoning which is coherent, relevant and logically structured. No set answer is expected. It is possible to reach the highest marks either by agreeing or disagreeing with the statement (providing the issue of extent is addressed by refuting the counter-argument), or anywhere between providing the response matches the level descriptors. Examples of Pericles’ successful actions might include: • Increased the political representation of poorer citizens by introducing payment for citizens who served as jurors – allowed poorer citizens to play a greater role in the democracy. • Legislation that an Athenian citizen had to have an Athenian mother and father – prevented the citizen population growing too much, giving greater importance to citizenship. • Managed to be elected general 15 years in a row between 443 and 429. Plutarch (18) explains how Level 4 13-16 • Response analyses examples from the ancient sources to give a more detailed evaluation of the sources within their historical context. There is some analysis of the reliability and accuracy ofJ198/01 Mark Scheme November 2020 ancient sources in terms of the context in which they were created and source analysis and evaluation is used to make supported judgements and draw reasonable conclusions about the historical issue in the question. (AO3) • The response demonstrates accurate knowledge and a developed understanding that is fully relevant to the question. (AO1) • Response has a full explanation and analysis of the issue in the question arriving at substantiated judgements, but these are not consistently well-developed. (AO2) There is a well-developed line of reasoning which is clear, relevant and logically structured. Pericles’ foresight in foreign affairs gained him respect among the people. Trust from delivering on his promises led to re-election. • Could never be bribed (Thucydides called him incorruptible), because he used his father’s inheritance wisely • Used ostracism to remove political rivals – Cimon and Thucydides of Alopece. • Instructed the building (in 440) of a third ‘middle wall’ which gave greater protection to the route between Athens and Piraeus. • Restored during the plague of Athens and successful in granting his son citizenship. • Examples of success of the scale and quality of the building programme. Examples of Pericles’ unsuccessful actions might include: • Plutarch records that Pericles’ critics accused him of alienating Athens’ allies by spending money from the treasury on his building programme instead of on military defence. • Criticisms in Plutarch (28) of Pericles’ savage treatment of the conquered Samians. • Blamed (Plutarch, 31) for the Megarian decree not being overturned. Responsibility for the Peloponnesian War – and according to Thucydides (1.126) and Aristophanes the Spartans may have believed that Pericles was the man who most stood in the way of peace. • Policy of non-engagement with Spartan land forces – though successful to an extent – led to Pericles being the object of much derision and criticism. The overcrowding in the city arguably responsible for the consequential plague of Athens – which led to Level 3 9-12 • Response analyses examples from the ancient sources to give a more detailed evaluation of the sources within their historical context. There is a basic analysis of the reliability and accuracy of at least one ancient source in terms of the context in which it was created and source analysis and evaluation is used to make basic judgements and draw simple conclusions about the historical issue in the question. (AO3) • The response demonstrates accurate knowledge and some understanding that is relevant to the question. (AO1) • This is linked to an analysis and explanation of the issue in the question but judgements may not always be made explicit. (AO2) There is a line of reasoning presented which is mostly relevant and which has some structure. . Level 2 5-8 • Response analyses examples from the ancient sources to give a more detailed evaluation of the sources within their historical context. There is a very basic attempt to consider the reliability or accuracy of an ancient source or sources in terms of the context in which it was created, though this may border on assertion. There is a no use of source analysis to reach judgements or conclusions about the historical issue in the question. (AO3) • The response demonstrates basic knowledge and some understanding that is relevant to the question. (AO1) • There is a basic explanation of the issue in the question. (AO2)J198/01 Mark Scheme November 2020 There is a line of reasoning which has some relevance and which is presented with limited structure. Pericles being deprived of his command and issued with a large fine. Likely sources to be included: Aristotle The Athenian Constitution 26.3, 27, 42, 43 Plutarch Life of Pericles 7.1-4, 9, 12-14, 16.1-3, 18, 28, 29, 31-35, 37 Thucydides History of the Peloponnesian War 1.126, 1.139.1, 2.13.2-5, 2.59.1, 2.60.2-4, 2.61.2, 2.63.1, 2.65 Aristophanes Acharnians 515-539 Aristophanes Peace 605-9 Analysis of the sources should focus on the limitations of the sources, such as: • Plutarch was a biographer, rather than historian, and so was more interested in character than in a detailed analysis of events. Part of a larger work (Parallel lives) in which Pericles is compared to Fabius Maximus • Although writing over 500 years later, Plutarch consults and cites a range of sources, some of which are early, and many of which have been lost and it is the only surviving biography of Pericles. • Thucydides, as a historian, set a great store on evidence-based research. He had himself fought in the early years of the war and had his own perspectives and biases – e.g. thought to have favoured the richer classes and thought Pericles was acting in Athens’ best interests. • Aristotle was a careful researcher and used records from 5th Century Athens when he could. Though the Athenian Constitution describes Athenian democracy in the 320s – and many of the historical events he relates have been reinterpreted by later Athenians. • Aristophanes as a comic playwright gives the ‘man on the street’ impression of Pericles’ leadership Level 1 1-4 • Response analyses examples from the ancient sources to give a basic evaluation of the sources within their historical context. There is no attempt to consider the reliability and accuracy of the ancient sources in terms of the context in which they were created, and no attempt to link source analysis with judgements or conclusions about the historical issue in the question. (AO3) • Response demonstrates basic knowledge that is relevant to the topic of the question. (AO1) • There is little or no attempt at a very basic explanation of the issue in the question, which may be close to assertion. (AO2) The information is communicated in a basic/unstructured way. 0 No response or no response worthy of creditJ198/01 Mark Scheme November 2020 Question Answer Mark Guidance 16 (a) AO1 Bucephalus (1) 1 16 (b) AO1 Phalanx (1) 1 16 (c) AO1 Any two of: Parmenio (1), Ptolemy (1), Cassander (1), Antigonus (1), Seleucus (1). Accept Nearchus (1), Hephaestion (1) [Max 2] 2 One mark for any answer that offers a valid historical response. 16 (d) AO1 Susa [1] 1 Question 17 Using details from Passage C and your own knowledge, what can we learn about Alexander’s methods of siege warfare? [5] Assessment Objectives AO3 = 5 marks = Use, analyse and evaluate ancient sources within their historical context 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 3 4-5 • Response uses a range of fully appropriate details from the stimulus ancient source material, which are analysed to draw out relevant characteristics and features and give a detailed and sophisticated evaluation of what we can learn from the source about the specified issue in the question. Answers might include reference to some of these points from the source: • “slingers” refers to use of soldiers armed with missile weapons including the Agrianians • “mound…already completed” demonstrates speed and huge scale of engineering work • “machines hurling missiles” refers to torsion catapults • “extend the mound” indicates large scale of works • “work…continued without a break” shows Alexander’s determination • “forced their way up” demonstrates bravery of Macedonians (perhaps aware of potential rewards) • “Alexander … pressed on” illustrates Alexander’s personal presence • “join his mound with the hill” more evidence of scale of the works • “extraordinary daring” shoes quality of the Macedonian infantry • “prepared to surrender” shows success of such aggressive siege tactics. Answers might include reference to other sieges including Tyre. Level 2 2-3 • Response uses some appropriate details from the stimulus ancient source material, which are analysed to draw out some of the characteristics and features and evaluate what we can learn from the source about the specified issue in the question. Level 1 1 • Response uses few details from the stimulus ancient source material and a very basic attempt to draw out any of the characteristics and features in relation to the question. 0 No response or no response worthy of creditJ198/01 Mark Scheme November 2020 Question 18 Using details from Passage C, explain how accurate you think Arrian’s account of Alexander’s campaign is. [5] Assessment Objectives AO3 = 5 marks = Use, analyse and evaluate ancient sources within their historical context to make judgements and draw 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 3 4-5 • Response analyses the source by using relevant detail from the source content or historical context to give a more detailed evaluation of the source within its historical context. It draws a thorough and convincing conclusion about its accuracy or reliability based on how the context in which it was created impacts on how it portrays issues or events. Answers might include reference to some of these points: • Arrian was a soldier and interested in military detail which suggests accuracy; • References to ‘slingers’, ‘machines’ and other details suggest accuracy; • However he idolised Alexander so might have exaggerated Macedonian achievements and /or Alexander’s personal role in the battle; • Arrian not present at the siege … but had access to official records of the event (including that of Ptolemy). • Arrian had no way of knowing that the “Indians were frightened”. Level 2 2-3 • Response analyses the source by using relevant detail from the source content or historical context to give a basic evaluation of the source within its historical context. It draws a basic conclusion about its accuracy or reliability based on how the context in which it was created impacts on how it portrays issues or events. Level 1 1 • Response analyses the source in a basic way by selecting relevant detail from the source content or historical context 0 No response or no response worthy of creditJ198/01 Mark Scheme November 2020 Question 19 Explain how important Alexander’s sieges were to his success. [10] Assessment Objectives AO1 = 5 marks = Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the key features and characteristics of the historical periods studied AO2 = 5 marks = Analyse and explain historical events and historical periods to arrive at substantiated judgements. 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 9-10 • The response demonstrates a range of detailed and accurate knowledge and a developed understanding that is fully relevant to the question. (AO1) • Response has a full explanation and thorough, convincing analysis of the issue in the question, arriving at substantiated and developed judgements. (AO2) Arguments for sieges being more important might include: • Siege of Tyre led to control of east Mediterranean • Fall of Tyre allowed Alexander to invade Egypt. • Rock of Aornos and Rock of Sogdiana demonstrated Alexander’s determination and led to kingdoms surrendering and allowed access further East. • Battles of Granicus and Issus arguably not decisive • Battle of Hydaspes led to short-term gain only Arguments for battles being more important might include: • Granicus gained Alexander time and support • Issus led to weakening of Persian hold over Mediterranean coast so allowed Alexander’s fleet to support the army • Gaugamela led to collapse of entire Persian empire • Hydaspes resulted in massive gains for Alexander by alliance with Porus. Level 4 7-8 • The response demonstrates accurate knowledge and a developed understanding that is fully relevant to the question. (AO1) • Response has a full explanation and analysis of the issue in the question arriving at substantiated judgements, but these are not consistently welldeveloped. (AO2) Level 3 5-6 • The response demonstrates accurate knowledge and some understanding that is relevant to the question. (AO1) • This is linked to an analysis and explanation of the issue in the question but judgements may not always be made explicit. (AO2) Level 2 3-4 • The response demonstrates basic knowledge and some understanding that is relevant to the question. (AO1) • There is a basic explanation of the issue in the question. (AO2) Level 1 1-2 • Response demonstrates basic knowledge that is relevant to the topic of the question. (AO1)J198/01 Mark Scheme November 2020 • There is little or no attempt at a very basic explanation of the issue in the question, which may be close to assertion. (AO2) 0 No response or no response worthy of credit *Question 20 “There are so many different stories in the sources about Alexander’s death that it is impossible to say what happened.” How far do you agree with this view? You must use and analyse the ancient sources you have studied as well as supporting your answer with your own knowledge. [20] Assessment Objectives AO3 = 10 marks = Use, analyse and evaluate ancient sources within their historical context to make judgements and draw 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. AO1 = 5 marks = Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the key features and characteristics of the historical periods studied AO2 = 5 marks = Analyse and explain historical events and historical periods to arrive at substantiated judgements. 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 17-20 • Response analyses examples from the ancient sources to give a more detailed evaluation of the sources within their historical context. There are thorough and detailed analyses of the reliability and accuracy of ancient sources in terms of the context in which they were created. Source analysis and evaluation is used to make developed, supported judgements and to draw fully convincing conclusions about the historical issue in the question. (AO3) • The response demonstrates a range of detailed and accurate knowledge and a developed understanding that is fully relevant to the question. (AO1) • Response has a full explanation and thorough, convincing analysis of the issue in the question, No set answer is expected. It is possible to reach the highest marks either by agreeing or disagreeing with the statement (providing the issue of extent is addressed by refuting the counterargument), or anywhere between providing the response matches the level descriptors. Arguments that agree might include: • Reference to the various signs and portents cited by both Arrian and Plutarch suggest unreliable stories rather than historical ‘fact’ • Variance of sources • Plutarch’s usage of portents and signs as a literary tool in his Parallel Lives • Alexander had many enemies who might have poisoned him and disguised the evidenceJ198/01 Mark Scheme November 2020 arriving at substantiated and developed judgements. (AO2) There is a well-developed and sustained line of reasoning which is coherent, relevant and logically structured. Arguments that disagree might include: • Overlap of some content of sources • Arrian refers to some of the same portents as Plutarch, giving them credibility, including the anecdote of the stranger who sits on Alexander’s throne • Both Arrian and Plutarch agree on the events leading to Alexander’s death (drinking binge, fever, more wine, death) and various attempts to counter the symptoms (including resting, bathing and sacrificing) • Plutarch and Arrian both used contemporary sources including Aristobulus and Ptolemy • Arrian specifically refers to the ‘court journals’ that he used • Plutarch discounts theories of murder as all dating from the ensuing bitter struggle between the ‘successors’. Likely sources to be included: Plutarch, The Life of Alexander 73–77 Arrian, The Campaigns of Alexander 7.24–26 Analysis of the sources should focus on the limitations of the sources, such as: Plutarch does not name many sources and his focus on the unusual omens at the start of his account do make some other elements of his account difficult to find credible Does give dates, which suggests he is looking closely at the court journals Arrian has a very perfunctory account, and it is not embellished with details not directly pertinent to the events around Alexander’s death and its aftermath. His questioning of sources adds a greater level of accuracy as it implies that he has looked to find the most likely events. Level 4 13-16 • Response analyses examples from the ancient sources to give a more detailed evaluation of the sources within their historical context. There is some analysis of the reliability and accuracy of ancient sources in terms of the context in which they were created and source analysis and evaluation is used to make supported judgements and draw reasonable conclusions about the historical issue in the question. (AO3) • The response demonstrates accurate knowledge and a developed understanding that is fully relevant to the question. (AO1) • Response has a full explanation and analysis of the issue in the question arriving at substantiated judgements, but these are not consistently welldeveloped. (AO2) There is a well-developed line of reasoning which is clear, relevant and logically structured. Level 3 9-12 • Response analyses examples from the ancient sources to give a more detailed evaluation of the sources within their historical context. There is a basic analysis of the reliability and accuracy of at least one ancient source in terms of the context in which it was created and source analysis and evaluation is used to make basic judgements and draw simple conclusions about the historical issue in the question. (AO3) • The response demonstrates accurate knowledge and some understanding that is relevant to the question. (AO1) • This is linked to an analysis and explanation of the issue in the question but judgements may not always be made explicit. (AO2)J198/01 Mark Scheme November 2020 There is a line of reasoning presented which is mostly relevant and which has some structure. Level 2 5-8 • Response analyses examples from the ancient sources to give a more detailed evaluation of the sources within their historical context. There is a very basic attempt to consider the reliability or accuracy of an ancient source or sources in terms of the context in which it was created, though this may border on assertion. There is no use of source analysis to reach judgements or conclusions about the historical issue in the question. (AO3) • The response demonstrates basic knowledge and some understanding that is relevant to the question. (AO1) • There is a basic explanation of the issue in the question. (AO2) There is a line of reasoning which has some relevance and which is presented with limited structure. Level 1 1-4 • Response analyses examples from the ancient sources to give a basic evaluation of the sources within their historical context. There is no attempt to consider the reliability and accuracy of the ancient sources in terms of the context in which they were created, and no attempt to link source analysis with judgements or conclusions about the historical issue in the question. (AO3) • Response demonstrates basic knowledge that is relevant to the topic of the question. (AO1) • There is little or no attempt at a very basic explanation of the issue in the question, which may be close to assertion. (AO2) The information is communicated in a basic/unstructured way. 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 32 pages