Europe
This question is about the French monarchy as an institution, not only Louis WI, thus the first part of the question needs an analysis of the nature of the monarchy, as head of an outdated feudal system and as a cause of the revolution, as well as of the actions of Louis. It could be relevant to give a brief background, possibly mentioning Louis XIV, then show the absolutist nature of the monarchy (no States General was called for 175 years until 1789). Government finances relied upon a mixture of increasingly burdensome direct and indirect taxation.
Louis XVI was considered weak and incompetent, debt increased, and a series of ministers failed to solve it. But there were other causes, such as the economic situation, influence of the philosophers, ND the American War Of Independence. The monarchy was a victim, in that Louis was executed, and the revolution was at least partly responsible for the dauphin’s death. The monarchy’s former absolutist power was removed by legislation, and it was abolished in 1792 (but restored in 1814). However there were other victims, and some judgment should be given on “main”.
The question is intended to provoke thought on the nature of both the monarchy and the revolution. There are many ways of addressing the question, so reward what is written and relevant. [O to 7 marks] for inadequate knowledge and comments. 8 to 1 0 marks] for narrative of causes and results with some implicit judgment. [11 to 13 marks] for focus on Louis XVI and the monarchy as cause and victim. [14 to 1 6 marks] for structured analysis of the monarchy as cause and victim. [1 7+ marks] for balance, perception and perhaps different interpretations. . Assess the domestic policies of Napoleon between 1 799 and 1814. This question covers the domestic policies of Napoleon from First Consul to his defeat and exile in 1814, as many of his reforms were instituted before he became emperor. The main areas to assess are his legal codes, the Concordat tit the Church, administrative and economic reforms, public works and educational measures. He also restored law and order after the turmoil of the French Revolution, as well as keeping some of its gains.
However as virtual dictator of France from 1799 to 1814, he was also responsible for censorship, even a police state, and the deterioration of the economy because of his later wars (especially the campaigns in Spain and Russia) which caused many causalities and a serious financial drain. [O to 7 marks] for irrelevant and inaccurate material. [8 to 10 marks] for narrative of Napoleon with implicit assessment. [1 1 to 13 arks] for adequate knowledge and explicit assessment. [14 to 16 marks] for analytical and balanced treatment of domestic policies. 17+ marks] for an added skill such as different interpretations. -5- 3. “The Congress System was a genuine attempt by the Great Powers to produce a unified policy, but their interests were too diverse for it to succeed. ” TO what extent do you agree with this judgment? The demands of this question are such that candidates should consider two areas: was the Congress System a genuine attempt to work together to restore peace and stability after the turbulent years of the French Revolution ND the Napoleonic Wars and did it fail because countries pursued their own national interests?
In November 181 5 delegates of the four so called Great Powers; Austria, Great Britain, Prussia and Russia, agreed to hold regular meetings to discuss their common interests. Meetings were held be;en 1815 and 1825 at Xix- la-Chapel, Vienna, Trooper, Verona and SST Petersburg. The main aims were to settle disputes by diplomacy and to maintain peace. The main problems they addressed were France, revolutionary movements, unrest in Italy and Spain, the Spanish colonies and Greek revolts.
Divergence occurred over whether to intervene militarily to put down revolutionary movements and/or revolts against governments they considered legitimate, and whether this constituted interfering in the internal affairs of other countries. The treatment of France did not cause disagreements, but divisions between the powers and opposition, especially by Britain, to the use of force to support reactionary rule led to the breakdown of the Congress System.
Candidates could decide whether the Congress System was therefore a genuine attempt at unified policy, and whether its failure to be expected because of the diverse interests and nature of the Great Powers. Some may comment that it was perhaps a forerunner of the later European Union, and although there were revolutions there was no major war. [O to 7 marks] for inadequate or irrelevant material. [8 to 10 marks] for narrative of the Congress System with implicit focus. [1 1 to 13 marks] for explicit focus. [14 to 16 marks] for analysis, structure and focus. [1 7+ marks] for clear analysis of both parts of the quotation. 6 4. Analyses the main reasons why Louis Philippe became King of France in 1 830, but lost his throne in 1848. Louis Philippe (1773-1850) supported the French Revolution but later went onto exile. He returned to France in 1817 but avoided political involvement. Restoration of the Bourbons instituted a limited monarchy but Charles X tried to restore former monarchical power. His ordinances of 1830 limited political and civil rights and led to revolution. Charles abdicated and Louis Philippe, pa arty because of his revolutionary background and bourgeois lifestyle, replaced him.
Louis’ initial popularity waned through a timid foreign policy, failure to initiate social reforms or increase the electorate, and unpopular ministers such as Gusto. The increasingly wealthy middle class sought a rater share in government and set up reform banquets, while the poor suffered economic distress and supported republicanism. Revolts broke out in Paris, and Louis fled to England. [O to 7 marks for lack of relevant knowledge. [8 to 10 marks] for narrative of Louis Philippe. [1 1 to 13 marks] for focus on why Louis became king, then lost the throne. 14 to 16 marks] for analysis in a focused and structured essay. [17+ marks] for a balanced and perceptive treatment of both parts. 5. Compare and Contrast the roles Of Cavort and Garibaldi in Italian unification between 1852 and 1861. The dates of the question refer to the period between Savor’s appointment as prime minister of Piedmont-Sardinia, and his death. Garibaldi was concerned with Italian unification before and after these dates. Comments on his earlier and later actions are not required, although they may be referred to in introductory or concluding material.
For comparison: ; both were partly responsible for achieving Italian unification, ; both wished to drive Austria and Austrian influence out of Italy, ; both finally supported Victor Emmanuel II as king of Italy. For contrast: ; Cavort was a statesman, Garibaldi a soldier, Cavort arguably sought Piedmont expansion, not total Italian unification, ; Garibaldi always sought Italian unification, ; Cavort was responsible for north and central Italy joining Piedmont, ; Garibaldi won Sicily and the south for unification, ; Cavort advocated foreign help, Garibaldi opposed it.
The above points should be known. Accept and reward other relevant details. [O to 7 marks] for general comments or if only one person is addressed. [8 to 10 marks] for sequential narrative accounts of both with limited linkage. [1 1 to 13 marks] for an attempted comparative structure or excellent linkage. 14 to 16 marks] for accurate knowledge in a comparative framework. [1 7+ marks] for a perceptive, analytical and balanced comparison. -8- 6. What were the main areas of industrial growth in Victorian Britain, and how did they affect the social and economic conditions of the people?
Britain led the nineteenth century industrial revolution, and was known as “the workshop of the world”. The main areas of industrial growth in Victorian Britain were coal, iron, textiles – especially cotton and woolen goods, transport – especially railways and shipbuilding. Although imports exceeded sports, financially the deficit was more than made up by banking, insurance etc. Arbitration was also a feature of industrial growth, and towns developed rapidly in the industrial areas.
Social and economic effects for the population were both positive and negative. Industrial growth increased prosperity, improved lifestyle, helped literacy, education, culture and travel for the aristocracy (old and new) and the middle class, but workers suffered employment- and slum-related illnesses and, until legislation prohibited it, the exploitation of women and children. Disease was rife in the unsanitary crowded housing. The above are some Of the points that could be made.
Accept other relevant details and also accept answers that take areas to mean geographical areas and base their answers mainly on industrial northern and midland Britain and industrial regions of Scotland and Wales. [O to 7 marks] for vague general answers. [8 to 1 0 marks] for narratives of industrial development. [1 1 to 13 marks] for answers that try to address all parts of the question. [14 to 16 marks] for focused, structured arguments based on specific evidence. [1 7+ marks] for balance and perhaps different interpretations. -9- 7.
For what reasons, and with what results up to 1871, did Prussia replace Austria as the leading Germanic power in the German Confederation? Candidates prefer questions focused on Prussian strength, although knowledge of Austrian weakness is necessary for top bands. Reasons could include: Prussian gains at the Vienna Settlement; Prussian economic growth, including the Silvering; Austrian weakness as a politically backward multi-national empire which did not share in economic advancement; the political, diplomatic, financial and military work Of Bismarck – including wars against Denmark, Austria and France.
Results could include: formation of the dual monarchy of Austria-Hungary; unification of Germany; emergence of Germany as a major European power; humiliation of France; end of the Second French Empire and formation of Third French Republic. Do not expect or demand all of the above, and note the end date. [D to 7 marks] for inadequate or inaccurate material. [8 to 10 marks] for narrative of Bismarck policies or his three wars. [1 1 to 13 marks] for focus on reasons and results. [14 to 16 marks] for analysis of reasons and results based on specific evidence. 1 7+ marks] for perceptive explanation and perhaps different 10- 8. Analyses the strengths and weaknesses of Russia in the second half of the nineteenth century. This question covers the end of the reign of Nicholas I (1825-1855), Alexander II (1855-1881 Alexander Ill (1881-1894), and the first few years of Nicholas II (1894-1917). It is hoped that in order to avoid an answer based only on Alexander II and his reforms, candidates will structure their answer thematically, focusing on strengths and weaknesses.
They will probably emphasize weaknesses, and may well start with them. For strengths: the size of Russia and her population; traditional status as a Great Power; the reforms of Alexander II, which were aimed at modernization and catching up with other European powers in areas such as the emancipation of serfs, education, the economy, the army, justice, and to a lesser extent politics; the industrial policies of White in the sass.
For weaknesses: the size of Russia and the difficulties of governing such a large and inaccessible country; autocracy; repressive policies of Nicholas I; backwardness (especially serfdom); defeat in the Crimean War; unpopularity and failure of some of Alexander Sis’s reforms; very small middle class; uneducated and untrained population so foreign expertise needed; repressive policies of Alexander Ill; opposition and terrorism; nature and policies of Nicholas II.
Do not expect or demand all the above (especially comments on Nicholas and Nicholas II) but the question demands more than Alexander Sis’s reforms. [O to 7 marks] for vague generalizations. [8 to 10 marks] for narratives mainly of Alexander Sis’s reign. [11 to 13 marks] for genuine attempts to focus on strengths and weaknesses. [14 to 16 marks] for structured analysis of strengths and weaknesses. [17+ marks] for receptive analysis and specific evidence Of strengths and weaknesses. -11- 9. “Bismarck pursued a successful foreign policy between 1871 and 1890, but was often defeated on domestic issues. To what extent do you agree with this statement? This is a straightforward question on whether and why his foreign policy was successful, but his domestic policy was successfully challenged and perhaps flawed. Policies in both parts should be named and assessed, but not described at length. Candidates should know and be able to assess the following elements of foreign policy: keeping France isolated; reverting war between Austria and Russia over the Balkans; the various Alliances/Treaties; the Congress of Berlin.
Domestic issues include: maintaining his own and the Honorable monarchy’s authority by limiting the power of the Reichstag and that of political parties; the Cultural; disagreements with liberals and socialists. Most candidates will probably agree with the statement, but they must explain why. Some may legitimately challenge it, but specific evidence must be presented for a successful argument. [O to 7 marks] for vague, inadequate or inaccurate answers. 8 to 10 marks] for narrative of Bismarck with implicit assessment. [11 to 13 marks] for explicit assessment of acceptable factual knowledge. 14 to 1 6 marks] for structured, focused, analytical and balanced essays. [1 7+ marks] for perceptive insight into the effects of Bismarck policies on Germany and Europe. 10. Assess the impact of developments in either transport or agriculture on one European country in the second half of the nineteenth century. Candidates should select one country, possibly their own, or one for which they have researched as a case study, and, using specific evidence, show how either transport or agricultural developments impacted both beneficially and harmfully on the lives of the people and the overall state of the chosen country.
The question covers 1850-1900, but earlier material could be relevant for background. Transport will probably emphasize railways, but should also include water and road transport. Use for industry, daily needs and leisure could be considered. Agriculture covers land owners, land usage, workers, methods, implements, animals and crops and those who consumed the products. [O to 7 marks] for vague generalizations. [8 to 10 marks] for narrative accounts With implicit assessment. CLC 1 to 13 marks] for adequate factual knowledge and explicit assessment. 14 to 16 marks] for assessment based on clear specific evidence. [17+ marks] for excellent depth and detail. -12 11. MUM/3/Halts/HP/ENG/TCO/E/Met Analyses the impact of either nationalism or socialism on nineteenth century Europe. This is a very open-ended question, apart from the choice to be made of analyzing nationalism or socialism. Candidates can choose Europe as a whole, or select specific countries to analyses. Candidates could select themes for nationalism such as: its impact on unification – e. G. N Germany and Italy; TTS impact on the break up of empires, e. G. The Status-Hungarian and Ottoman empires. Themes for socialism could include: its political and socio- economic effects; Marxism; trade unionism and strikes; its importance in securing social legislation. Approach this question with an open mind, and credit thoughtful answers. [O to 7 marks] for unsubstantiated generalizations. [8 to 10 marks] for narrative accounts of nationalism or socialism. [11 to 13 marks] for genuine attempts to analyses nationalism or socialism. 14 to 16 marks] for structured, focused and thoughtful analysis based on evidence. 1 7+ marks] for a perceptive essay with perhaps different view points. 12. Why, in spite of crises, was the Third French Republic still in power in 1905? The Third French Republic was established in 1871 after the defeat of Napoleon Ill in the Franco-Prussian War. Although originally intended as a stop gap arrangement, with a majority of royalists in the Assembly, it lasted until 1940 (but this question only covers the republic until 1905).
The crises were the Ballooner Affair of 1 886, the Panama Scandal of 1 892, and the Dresses Case 1 894 continuing into the twentieth century. Reasons why the republic survived could include: absence of a suitable candidate for the monarchy; republican support; 1875 constitution; work of Theirs; recovery after the war, and swift payment of the indemnity; reforms of 1881-1884; us port for the reduction of influence of the Church; Wallace-Rousseau reforms. Do not expect all the above, but it should be realized that as a moderate, secular, reformist form of government, the Third Republic proved popular. O to 7 marks] for lack of knowledge and comments. [8 to 10 marks] for narratives of France 1871-1905, or of the crises. [11 to 13 arks] for judgment on the crises, and why the republic survived. [14 to 16 marks] for analytical treatment of the republic’s survival. [1 7+ marks] for balance, depth of analysis and perhaps different interpretations. -13- 13. Compare and contrast political developments in either the nineteenth or twentieth century, in two of the following: Denmark, Finland, Norway, Sweden.
Details to compare and contrast will depend on which century and which two countries are chosen. Denmark supported Napoleon, lost Norway to Sweden in 1 814, was an independent monarchy, was involved in the Schlesinger- Holstein war, generally progressed economically and politically, remained neutral in the First World War but was invaded by Germany in the Second, was a founder member of NATO, and joined the Common Market in 1972. Finland, captured by Russia in the Napoleonic Wars, was generally allowed autonomy, but national feeling increased.
Nicholas II initiated a policy to Russian Finland in 1899. Finland declared independence in 1917, established a republic in 191 9, fought the Winter War 1939-?1 940, then supported Germany but was defeated by the Soviet forces in 1944. Postwar Finland has greatly increased in prosperity. Sweden lost Finland to Russia in the Napoleonic Wars, but gained Norway from Denmark in 1814. The French Marshal Bernardino became King of Sweden in 1818, reigned as Charles XIV until 1844 and initiated a period of peace and liberation’s.
The union with Norway was dissolved in 1905 and Sweden maintained neutrality in the two world wars. Social democracy and social welfare were promoted. Norway, as noted above, was subject to Denmark then Sweden. It was noted for literature and music after 1850. 1905-1957, King Hookah reigned as a constitutional monarch. Norway was neutral in the First World War but was occupied by Germany in the Second World War. Economic prosperity, largely dependent on oil, has increased since 1945. [O to 7 marks] for brief general comments or if only one country is addressed. 8 to 10 marks] for sequential narrative accounts with brief linkage. [1 1 to 13 marks] for strong linkage or a comparative framework. [14 to 16 marks] for relevant knowledge in a clear comparative framework. [17+ marks] for good depth and detail or an extra dimension. -14- 14. Why were the Central Powers defeated in the First World War? Candidates should note that the question asks for the Central Powers, not just Germany. Before 1914 “Central Powers” referred to members of the Triple Alliance of 1882: Germany, Austria-Hungary and Italy.
