GCSE (9–1) Ancient History J198/02: Rome and its neighbours General Certificate of Secondary Education Mark Scheme for November 2020

Document Content and Description Below

GCSE (9–1) Ancient History J198/02: Rome and its neighbours General Certificate of Secondary Education Mark Scheme for November 2020 Oxford Cambridge and RSA Examinations GCSE (9–1) Ancient His... tory J198/02: Rome and its neighbours 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 2020J198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 2 Annotations 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 questionJ198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 3 Section A: The foundations of Rome: From kingship to republic, 753-440BC Question Indicative content Marks Guidance 1 (a) Valid response: • Lucius Tarquinius Priscus AO1 1 1 mark for any answer that offers a historically valid response. 1 (b) Valid response: • Numa Pompilius AO1 1 1 mark for any answer that offers a historically valid response. 1 (c) Likely valid responses are: • The behaviour of the Second Decemvirate. • Appius Crassus Claudius actions – including tyrannical behaviour. • The abduction of Virginia and the impact of her death. • Verginius speech on Mount Vecilius which inspired the army to secede. • Desire of plebeians to secure liberty and re-elect their tribunes. AO1 2 1 mark for any answer that offers a historically valid response.J198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 4 Question 2 Outline the story of how Tarquinius Superbus became king [6 marks] 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 elements include: • Servius’ reforms had made him unpopular amongst some patricians and they supported Tarquinius Superbus. • Tarquinius Superbus used flattery and gifts to win support. • Significance of Tarquinius Superbus attacks upon Servius. In particular Servius’ rumoured heritage as a son of a slave and Servius’ failure to receive a vote from the Senate or the people when he became king. • Tarquinius Superbus taking the throne by force. Mention might be made of Livy’s account where he sat on Superbus marched into the Senate with a small army, sat on the throne and demanded to be recognised as king. • The death of Servius. Tarquinius Superbus throwing Servius down the steps. Servius death may reference Tullia’s chariot killing him, or Superbus’ assassins. 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 creditJ198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 5 • Candidates may be rewarded if they refer to the significance of Superbus’ wife Tullia who encouraged Superbus to remove her father Servius from power. • Award reference to Dionysius account – which is similar but Tullius surrenders sovereignty to the people to choose their next king – and Superbus uses this to seize power.J198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 6 Question 3 Using details from Passage A and your own knowledge what can we learn from Livy about the Roman army during the reign of Romulus? [10 marks] 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: • Romulus lacked leadership/ could not control his army/ the army was disorganised: Romulus did not lead his army against the Sabines. When the citadel had been taken Romulus had allowed his general (Hostilius) to make rash decisions. Romulus was unable to rally his troops in this extract and had to ask Jupiter to regain control. Answers may be developed by reference to the intervention of the Sabine women or challenged by referring to Romulus’ numerous victories. Likewise reference may be made to the shared kingship with Tatius of the Sabines. • Romulus used religion: Romulus’ prayer and relationship with Jupiter or the importance of the 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)J198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 7 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) augural birdsas outlined in the passage. Answers may be developed with reference to Romulus’ father Mars; the altar to Heracles; the dedication of a temple to Jupiter; his supernatural death and divinity. • They were loyal to Romulus/ patriotic: The passage outlines Romulus’ desire to turn the tide of the battle and the soldiers regrouped behind him. Students may refer to their determination to defend Rome – their ‘anger’ and desire to retake the citadel. • Organisation of the Roman army: The passage discusses the assembly of the Roman army and describes the Roman’s fighting in a line. This could be reinforced by reference to Livy’s claims about legions/century’s etc. Level 2 3–4 • The response demonstrates basic knowledge and some understanding that is relevant to the question (AO1) • Response uses some appropriate details from stimulus material, which are analysed to draw out a few of the characteristics and features. (AO3) 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 creditJ198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 8 Question 4 Using details from Passage A and your own knowledge, explain whether religion or war was more significant for the development of Rome under its kings. [15 marks] 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) • Response has a full explanation and thorough, convincing analysis of the issue in the question, arriving at substantiated and developed judgements. (AO2) The focus of this question will be using information to come to a judgement. The second order historical concept candidates will predominately use will be cause, but answers may also include consequence and significance. Valid factors that answers could identify from the source include: • Religion: o Significance of augural birds – competition with his brother which led to conflict andJ198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 9 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) the building of Rome on the Palatine. (this conflict could be utilised to support conflict) o Worship of Jupiter. o Importance of religion to king: Gain support/control over his army. • External Conflict: o Defence of Rome from invasion. o Romulus warlike personality and character to overcome obstacles. o Use of religion to win a war (NB this could be utilised to support religion) Other valid features / characteristics that answers could identify include: Alleged importance of conflict in the development of Rome: • Development of war theme could include: o Abduction of the Sabine Women. o Conflict with Alba Longa – Horatii and Curatii triplets; betrayal by Mettius Fufetius and eventual destruction of Alba Longa. o The significance of the siege of Ardea in the story of Lucretia and the creation of the Republic. o Tullus’ warlike nature is described as destabilising Rome and causing plague and civil unrest. 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)J198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 10 Level 1 1–3 • Response uses few examples from the stimulus material and analyses these, though there is no attempt to draw any about what the source tells us about the historical events and historical period. (AO3) • 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) o Significance of Priscus’ military record in gaining respect from Ancus and eventually becoming king. Candidates may also mention limitations – such as opposition to Priscus military reforms by Navius, an augur.(see below) o Expansion of Rome’s territory and reputation. For example, battles with the Veii and Sabines, Alleged importance of religion in the development of Rome: • Development of the religion theme could include o Importance of Numa in creating Roman culture with religion. Vestal Virgins; pontiffs and religious customs o Temple of Janus – role in demonstrating periods of peace. Livy’s assertion that Rome only knew two short periods of peace. Numa’s reign and Augustus’ reign during his life. o Ancus’ role in reintroducing religion after Tullus’ continuous warfare. o Significance of augury in making decisions. For example the opposition to Priscus desire to build more legions. o Temple of Diana and its role in confirming Rome’s leadership of the Latin League. o Livy’s story about the Delphic Oracle and Iunius Brutus which influenced the removal of the kings. (1.56) 0 No response or no response worthy of creditJ198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 11 *Question 5 Debt and poverty were the main threats to the Republic between 509 and 440.’ To what extent do you agree with this view? [20 marks] 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 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 that debt and poverty were the main threats • The Conflict of the Orders was alleged to have been triggered by poverty and debts. The story ofJ198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 12 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 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) There is a well-developed line of reasoning which is clear, relevant and logically structured. the war veteran as told by Livy. In particular the impact of high taxes upon the ordinary people of Rome. The failure of the senate and consuls to address this issue led to the first Secession in 494. • Valerius Publicola and early leaders of the Republic kept Rome peaceful by dealing with poverty during the Wars of Independence: Publicola = friend of the people. Guaranteed fair prices; built walls to protect the people and helped move plebeians livestock to safety. Larcius, the first dictator updated the census to ensure military levies were fair. • Tribunes demanded greater protection for the poor from debt and more secure land ownership. Livy describes numerous demands for land. The exile of Coriolanus after he argues the plebeians should starve. Spurius Cassius in 486 tried to create a dictatorship by offering land to the plebeians. Quintus Fabius established colonies for plebeians to gain more land in 467. The Twelve tables of 449 addressed debtors rights and land ownership. Grounds for disagreeing • Impact of warfare upon the Republic. Livy claims that the threats from Tarquinius Superbus, Lars Porsena and other neighbours such as the Volsci posed a continuous threat to the Romans. Candidates may focus upon this aspect in some detail. Expect reference to Silvia Arsia, Horatius Cocles, Scaevola and the battle of Lake Regilius. Candidates who successfully link the impact of warfare to poverty and debt should be rewarded in AO2 and AO1. Level 3 9–12 • Response demonstrates a selection of relevant, generally accurate knowledge, but which will lack detail. There is demonstration through this 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.J198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 13 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. • Demand for political rights: The story of the war veteran may developed to explore the role of Sicinius and the First Secession 494. Story of Volero Publilius and his conflict with Appius Claudius regarding the selection of tribunes. Gaius Terentilius and the demand for constitutional reform. The Second Secession and the demand for protection of plebeians after the abduction of Virginia. • Conflict between liberal and conservative politicians: Failure of Publius Servilius and dictator Valerius to introduce reforms in 495 in the face of Appius Claudius’ opposition. Claudius Crassus role in the corruption of the Second Decemvirate and Valerius/Horatius opposition which almost destroyed Republic. • Impact of Claudius’ family: Appius Claudius role in the First Secession. Appius Claudius’ opposition to the Volero reforms. Appius Claudius Crassus corruption of the Decemvirate and the abduction of Virginia which led to the Second Secession. NB: No reference needs to be made exploring the nature of the evidence to achieve highest levels. Candidates may make reference to the ‘legendary’ nature of this period, and the sparse archaeological record to express why it is difficult to make definitive conclusions about this issue. 0 No response or no response worthy of creditJ198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 14 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 meaningJ198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 Section B: Hannibal and the Second Punic War, 218-201BC Question Answer Mark Guidance 6 (a) Valid response • Saguntum (1) AO1 1 1 mark for any answer that offers a historically valid response. 6 (b) Valid responses include: Treaty of Lutatius AO1 1 1 mark for any answer that offers a historically valid response. 6 (c) Valid responses include: • Hannibal was forced to leave Rome to defend Carthage in Africa • Scipio Africanus had besieged Carthage • The battle started because Carthage had attacked a Roman supply ship to feed its people • Hannibal failed to make peace with Scipio Africanus before the battle • Difference in Hannibal and Scipio Africanus character. Hannibal was battle weary; Scipio confident. • Hannibal lacked confidence in his new recruits. • Numbers of respective armies – (Numbers can vary depending upon historian – Hannibal should have more men c. 36,000 infantry and 4,000 cavalry; 80 war elephants Scipio 29,000 infantry and c. 6,000 cavalry. ) NB: Award maximum of 2 marks for numbers from the same army. • Hannibal’s strategic deployment of his veterans to prevent a retreat. • Scipio’s tactics. Award a mark for each unique fact. Use of columns to neutralise elephants; use of horns to frighten elephants; use of Masinissa’s Numidian cavalry; Numidian cavalry on both sides. • Closeness of battle until the return of the Roman cavalry. • Massacre of Carthaginian forces – 20,000 dead and 20,000 captured. AO1 3 1 mark for any answer that offers a historically valid response.J198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 16 • Roman victory. Question 7 What can we learn from Passage B about Hannibal’s army at the battle of Cannae [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: • Variety of troops: slingers; light armed troops; cavalry • Variety of troops nationality: Balearic, Gallic, Spanish, Numidian and African/Carthage • The Africans had stolen and were using Roman equipment from Trasimene and Trebia so that they looked ‘almost totally Roman battle line’ • Numbers 40,000 infantry, 10,000 cavalry • Ferociousness of Gaul and Spanish tribesmen. • Location of troops: Africans on both flanks with Gauls and Spanish in-between. 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 creditJ198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 17 Question 8 Using details from Passage B, how accurate do you think the portrayal of Hannibal’s army in the passage is. [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 should relate the evaluation of Polybius to his description of the particular event in the passage for full marks. Answers should note that the passage is from Livy and consider how accurate he might be in this case: • That Livy had access to texts which have not survived. Potentially these may include Carthaginian sources. • He used Polybius who had travelled widely and had potentially experienced warfare against these nationalities whilst employed in the Roman army. • There are echoes of Polybius in this extract who also describes how the African army was equipped with weapons they had seized from previous battles (Bk 3.114) • The passage does not openly criticise Hannibal, and appears balanced in its description of the Carthaginian force at Cannae. • There are elements of embellishments to exaggerate the ‘giant physique’ of the tribesmen and the ‘almost totally Roman battle line.’ These are both good examples of Livy’s reputation as a story teller, but not necessary evidence that he is inaccurate. 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 creditJ198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 18 • Candidates who explore the question of accuracy in relation to the scarcity of evidence could utilise archaeological debate about the actual location of the battlefield and the lack of validated finds from the battle. As a result candidates making these assumptions can be rewarded highly without much support if linked to the context of the source. • Any claim That Livy cannot be trusted because he was Roman or writing 200 years after events cannot access Level 2 unless supported by valid analysis of the source.J198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 19 Question 9 Explain whether Hannibal's preparations for the Battle of Cannae were different from his preparations for the Battle of Zama? [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: Significant change: • Became battle-weary: Failure to siege Rome and death of his brothers affected him. According to Livy and Polybius he regretted his previous actions and sought peace. Livy describes his return to Africa as having a profound effect upon him. • Had to change: Hannibal was fighting in Africa, new troops, new opponent who used surprise and innovation. • Lacked belief: At Cannae he had assembled a large army of different nationalities and defeated a far superior Roman force. At Zama he did not trust new recruits and failed to inspire them – he relied upon his veterans. • Tasted defeat: Loss of Tarentum and Capua had limited his ability to hurt Rome after 209. He had abandoned Italy and had, therefore, lost any advantage he had. 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)J198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 20 • Lost alliances and support: By 203 BC he had lost support of Masinissa. Gauls and Spanish troops had made peace with Rome. • Preparations favoured Scipio at Zama: At Cannae Hannibal outwitted the Romans. They lined up facing the sun and wind. At Cannae the Roman army had lined up in a traditional formation which Hannibal exploited. Scipio Africanus was represented as a greater strategist than Hannibal at Zama. Hannibal lined up in a traditional formation at Zama which Scipio exploited. Hannibal’s aims had changed: Cannae – Hannibal hoped to destroy Roman army and force surrender. At Zama – Hannibal discussed surrender with Africanus according to Livy. Other changes: • Location: Cannae was in Italy; Zama in Africa • Hannibal’s role: Hannibal was attacking Italy at Cannae – but was defending Carthage’s independence at Zama. • Carthage was weaker: At Cannae Spanish troops and resources had been strengthened by Gaul and Italian support. At Zama Carthage was under siege and allies had abandoned them. • Troops: Hannibal still had veterans but relied upon new recruits. Also his army was larger. Candidates may express a view that it had changed very little: • Hannibal was still determined to win: • Hannibal still deployed the same types of troops • Hannibal still relied upon his veterans 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 creditJ198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 21 Question 10 To what extent was Fabius Maximus a more successful military leader than Hannibal? [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) 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. AO1 and AO2 Fabius Maximus was more successful • Prevented Hannibal from achieving victory after disasters at Trasimene and Cannae. • Frustrated Hannibal by denying him another Cannae.J198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 22 There is a well-developed and sustained line of reasoning which is coherent, relevant and logically structured. • Deployed Rome’s financial and economic strengths effectively. Opening up new fronts in Spain and the Mediterranean to move Carthaginian deployment from Italy. • Reward highly candidates that assess the nature of this claim. Fabius Maximus success is exaggerated • Although sources (Plutarch and Livy) suggest that the Fabian strategy weakened Hannibal. There is considerable evidence that its use in 217/6 backfired. Ager Falernus was a failure and led to the appointment of Municius. • It destroyed Roman countryside and helped Hannibal gain support from Syracuse. • According to Polybius, who may be prejudiced, Fabius Maximus had no plan to defeat Hannibal and accepted a stalemate. There are those who believe that this potentially gave Hannibal an opportunity to achieve victory after the collapse of Carthage’s Spanish colonies and the redeployment of African troops. • Scipio Africanus and Marcellus were more successful in controlling Hannibal. Hannibal was more successful: • Strategies at Ticinus, Trebia, Trasimene and Cannae. • Crossing of the Alps caught Rome unprepared. • Hannibal’s success in gaining allies. • Hannibal’s continued success in Italy until the invasion of Africa in 204. AO3 Likely source material to be included: 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 well-developed. (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) 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 reliabilityJ198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 23 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) There is a line of reasoning which has some relevance and which is presented with limited structure. Polybius 3.80-3.86 Trasimene; 3.87-89 Fabian strategy. Livy 21.54 Trebia; 22.7-8 Impact of Trasimene and appointment of the dictator; 22.25-6 Criticism of Fabius Maximus by senate and Varro; 22.44.48 Cannae Plutarch Life of Fabius Maximus 5 Dedication for Quintus Fabius Maximus Possible analytical approaches for AO3: • Comparison of interpretations: Livy and Plutarch’s depiction of Fabius as a decisive character in the Second Punic War; Polybius’ respectful but at times critical assessment of Fabius especially in relation to Ager Falernus. • Archaeological record: Whilst the sparse archaeological record may be considered as a factor, the Dedication for Quintus Fabius Maximus is a significant source. In particular its claim that ‘He was regarded as the most cautious commander of his own age and the most expert in military affairs’ can be utilised to support Livy, Plutarch and Polybius’ interpretations. • Comparison of the different techniques of the three historians. Livy’s use of written texts; Polybius use of travel and eyewitness; Plutarch’s biography. • NB: Be careful of candidates that accuse Livy of fiction or writing for entertainment, this is too simplistic and is indicative of Level 2-3 AO3 analysis. More sophisticated analysis is needed at Levels 4 and above. • Comparison of the purpose of the three historians. Livy’s Preface or his desire to write the complete history of Rome. Livy echoes large parts of Polybius’ account, but challenges his predecessor when he has found more compelling evidence. 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 creditJ198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 24 Candidates could explore the impact of Polybius’ desire to encourage the Greeks to accede to the Roman Empire. His emphasis upon Roman wealth and manpower as the decisive factor against the great Hannibal is a clear warning to his countrymen. Plutarch’s biographical approach is focused upon Fabius’ character and is exaggerated to construct a comparison with Pericles (The Athenian statesman who turned Athens into a great power). In particular both men’s ability to rise above the mob and inspire greatness. As a consequence, the focus upon Fabius’ ability to rebuild Rome after Trasimene and Cannae.J198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 25 12. Subject Specific Marking Instructions Section C: Cleopatra: Rome and Egypt, 69–31 BC Question Answer Mark Guidance 11 (a) Valid responses include: • Isis (1) AO1 1 1 mark for the answer. 11 (b) Valid responses include: • Pompey • Pompey the Great AO1 1 1 mark for any of these specific responses 11 (c) Valid responses include: • Took place 2 September 31 (1) • Antony formed his navy opposite Octavian’s (1) • Antony’s forces were spread in 3 sections (1) • Antony’s ships were protecting Cleopatra’s fleet of 60 ships in reserve (1) • Antony urged his ships to not advance (1) • Initially the battle was a stalemate (1), Antony wanted to draw Octavian to him (1), but Octavian/Agrippa wanted Antony to advance (1) • Antony’s left wing edged forward at midday (1) • Octavian’s right wing rowed backwards (1) • Octavian then surrounded Antony’s larger ships (1) • Agrippa attempted to envelop the right flank of Antony (1) • This forced Publicola away from the centre (1), this left a gap (1) • Cleopatra and her fleet fled on seeing this gap (1) • Antony followed Cleopatra in flight (1) • Some of Octavian’s men gave chase (1) • The majority of Antony’s fleet were left fighting (1) • Faced with a high sea and wind they surrendered (1) • No more than 5000 were dead (1) • 300 ships were captured (1) • Octavian burnt the remainder of Antony’s fleet (1) AO1 3 1 mark for any answer that offers a historically valid response.J198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 26 Question 12 What can we learn from Passage C about the end of Cleopatra’s life? [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: • That there are two alternative ways that Cleopatra killed herself (an asp bite or poison) • Asp bite: • An asp was hidden and carried in under some fig leaves • she had wanted the asp to bite her without her realizing (perhaps suggesting that she was fearful) • she allowed the asp to bite her by baring her arm to it (though this is a brave action) • there was a different variation though, that the asp had been locked in a water jar • instead of allowing it to bite her, she had been playing with it and annoying it with a golden stick, and it had jumped up and bitten her (again perhaps suggesting that she was intelligent and brave if she deliberately goaded the snake into biting her – but could also interpret that her death was accidental) • Poison: • it was also said that she kept poison hidden in her hairpin, which she kept in her hair (perhaps suggesting that she had planned her death) 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 creditJ198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 27 • there was no sign of poison on her body (perhaps questioning the authenticity of this account) • others say there were two hardly noticeable puncture marks on her arm – believed by Octavian (therefore perhaps more creditable) • That Octavian, ‘admired her noble spirit’ – suggests that Cleopatra’s death was a noble and brave death worthy of a Queen/respected adversaryJ198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 28 Question 13 Using details from Passage C, how accurate do you think the portrayal of the end of Cleopatra’s life by Plutarch is. [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 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: • Candidates can suggest that it will be too difficult to assess the accuracy of Cleopatra’s death, as Plutarch tells us at the end of the extract that, ‘These, therefore, are the various stories of what happened.’ • The start of the account claims that, ‘we are told…’ but Plutarch gives no indication of who exactly has told him these accounts of Cleopatra’s death and so difficult to assess accuracy. Later, he again says that ‘others tells us’ – but with no detail on the authors or origin of these accounts • In terms of accuracy, even Plutarch himself is unsure as he states that, ‘no one really knows the truth.’ • Plutarch was not concerned with history so much as the influence of character, good or bad. • Plutarch himself acknowledged that some of his sources were unreliable in his work. • The account comes from a parallel life of Antony so the focus is not only on him (rather than Cleopatra), but is also selected for comparison to a famous Greek (in this case Demetrius). 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 creditJ198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 29 Question 14 Explain why Caesar chose to become involved in Cleopatra's life [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: • Physical attraction: • Caesar was a promiscuous man who had multiple marriages and affairs throughout his life (often with foreign queens). • Numerous sources tell us he was captivated by Cleopatra’s charm and beauty. • Perhaps unlikely that physical attraction alone drove him to support Cleopatra, but it is likely it played a significant part. • Political sense: • By supporting Cleopatra, Caesar could force Ptolemy and his regency advisors to work harder to earn his trust and support. • Caesar needed the wealth and resources of Egypt to ensure his own success in Rome. • Cleopatra undoubtedly needed Caesar’s support more than he needed hers. • Yet, he will have recognised that Cleopatra was likely to be a better friend to Rome and Caesar than Ptolemy XIII. • A dislike for Ptolemy and his advisors: 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)J198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 30 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) • Since Caesar’s angry reaction to his ‘gift’ of the head of Pompey – Caesar had a poor relationship with Ptolemy and his advisors (particularly Pothinus). • Pothinus resented Caesar’s involvement and did all he could to make Caesar’s time in Alexandria difficult. • Punishing Pompey’s murderer’s would also be a popular decision in Rome. 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 creditJ198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 31 Question 15 To what extent was Cleopatra a failure as a political leader? 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) 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 Cleopatra’s failure’s as a political leader might include:J198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 32 • 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. • She was unable to gain power through her son by Julius Caesar, as Caesarion was overlooked as heir in favour of Octavian in Caesar’s will; • She was unpopular with Romans as she was viewed as an Eastern, corrupt, manipulative and destructive monster (see Horace, Odes) and so was never able to gain power in Rome itself; • She appeared to be powerless without the support of a famous Roman leader; • Some failures are beyond her control eg Caesar’s assassination loses her link with Rome at this point, Mark Antony’s actions are beyond her control but she is linked to his failures. Examples of Cleopatra’s successes as a political leader might include: • She risked everything by asking for support from Caesar – if he refused she may be killed – and she gained a link with the major power of Rome through their relationship; • By allying with Caesar against Ptolemy she overcame the rivals to the throne, and became Queen of Egypt; • Making the trip to Rome was useful politically to gain popularity and support as a ‘friend of the Roman people’; • Her control of the food production in Egypt meant she encouraged trade and business outside Egypt. • Expansion of Egyptian power and territory under Cleopatra; 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 well-developed. (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)J198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 33 There is a line of reasoning presented which is mostly relevant and which has some structure. . Likely source material to be included: Coin of Cleopatra, with distinctive hairstyle and hooked nose Plutarch, The Life of Caesar 48-49 Cassius Dio, Roman History XLII 44 Plutarch, Life of Mark Antony 25, 36, 53, 56 Coin of Cleopatra and Caesarion minted in Cyprus Relief portraits of Cleopatra and Caesarion from Dendera Silver denarius of Antony and Cleopatra minted in 32 BC Analysis of the sources should focus on the limitations of the sources in terms of information and approach to Cleopatra, including the Roman focus of the sources, and their attitudes towards women; the effects of the Augustan regime on some of the key contemporary sources (e.g. Virgil) and Plutarch’s interest in character and biography. Additionally, It is very difficult to judge Cleopatra as a political leader as she is linked so much with Roman leaders who themselves are written about in length; Cleopatra is not the main subject of much of the writing – eg Plutarch’s book is nominally about ‘The Life of Mark Antony’, and Suetonius is writing ‘The Life of the Deified Julius Caesar’. Her political actions and decisions are not necessarily covered in enough detail for us to make fair judgements about her success; 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) 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 creditJ198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 34 Section D Britannia Question Answer Mark Guidance 16 (a) Valid responses include: Military action Client states Manipulation of elites Building roads Use of auxiliaries Establishing colonia AO1 1 mark for any answer that offers a historically valid response. 16 (b) Valid responses include: Fosse Way AO1 1 mark for the answer 16 (c) Valid responses include: Agricola AO1 1 mark for the answerJ198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 35 Question 17 What can we learn from Passage D about why Calgacus’ people fought the Romans? [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: • Candidates might identify Calgacus as an inspiring leader able to unite and motivate his people to take action. • Candidates might identify the loss of wealth, land and produce as a major cause of resentment. • Candidates might note how the Britons had been forced work, under duress, on Roman infrastructure projects. Some candidates may realise that the Britons were being forced to contribute to their own subservience. The Britons were fighting for honour as well as safety. • Some candidates may infer that Calgacus’ people feared an even greater fate if they didn’t fight: destruction. Tacitus mentions that there few industries the Romans could have set them to work in. Their fighting spirit also made them a danger to Rome while their seclusion provoked suspicion among Romans. 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 creditJ198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 36 Question 18 Using details from Passage D, how accurate do you think the portrayal of Calgacus’ speech is in this passage? [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 should relate the evaluation of Tacitus to his description of the particular event in the passage for full marks. • Answers should note that the passage is from Tacitus and consider how accurate he might be in this case: • Some candidates may compare the claims Tacitus puts into the mouth of Calgacus with other evidence. For example, they may note that elsewhere in the sources o the Romans are accused of exploiting the Britons from an economic perspective. o Some candidates may use the Vindolanda tablets to ponder where all the grain was coming from. o Other candidates may note that a great many roads were built and that the Britons no doubt contributed to that process. 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 creditJ198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 37 o Candidates may make reference to the lack of any other mention of Calgacus – especially after the battle or one of Agricola’s Caladonian hostages. • Some candidates may question the figure and description of 30,000 armed men renowned in war given that the passage was created by Tacitus. • Students are likely to question how Tacitus knew what Calgacus said being so far removed in place and time. Within in this analysis, there is likely to be reference to the fact that this is a created speech offering a Roman view of why the Britons were fighting. Some reference will probably be made to Tacitus’ relationship with Agricola and the impact of this on the accuracy of the passage. • Other students will focus on the general themes Tacitus liked to develop as a writer and link these to the claims he has Calgacus make.J198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 38 Question 19 Explain how far the lives of the Britons changed during the period AD43 to 84? [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: Trade and Economy: • Trade with Britain was already well established – but the development of Roman towns/colonies and garrisons in Britain created new opportunities. • Vindolanda tablets demonstrate that the Roman military potentially traded with local businessmen. • Another approach may see a concentration on a loss of wealth among the British ruling elite and how Romans such as Catus Decianus imposed debts on them. • Elsewhere, Tacitus describes Verulamium as a wealthy town prior to Boudicca’s attack which could speak of the impact of traders in the south. Some students may discuss Fishbourne Palace with reference to what it could show about the economic impact of the Romans. • Some students will analyse the extent of the economic impact on different groups of Britons at different times to reach substantiated and developed overall conclusions. 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 3-4J198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 39 • 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) Political • After revolts many tribes were forced to become client states. Iceni etc • Roman governors carried out the wishes of the Empire – such as extending Roman influence and protecting the tribes which had surrendered to Roman influence. Students may note that Verica asks Claudius for military support which prompts the invasion. • Some candidates may mention the situation of the Trinobantes and Iceni before they revolted • Changing status of British ruling elite. Impact of war: • The situation after Boudicca’s revolt. The territory of the rebels was laid waste until there was famine. • Destruction of Briton independence • Death and destruction of tribal life after war Infrastructure: • More coinage – wealth into Britain • Building of baths • Potentially some roads – but candidates will mention Fosse Way etc are likely to be ditches which were developed over time (most were finished around 180AD) 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 creditJ198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 40 Question 20 ‘Other governors of Britain were more successful than Ostorius Scapula in the period AD 43 to 84.’ How far do you agree with this statement? 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) 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.J198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 41 • 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. Examples of agreement might include: • Candidates are likely to analyse and evaluate the records and successes of one or more of Aulus Plautius, Suetonius Paulinus, Cerealis or Agricola. • Aulus Plautius’ conquest of southern Britain. • Suetonius Paulinus’ defeat of Boudicca’s revolt and restoration of control. • Cerealis’ victories in the north. • Agricola’s military successes in the west and north, and his socialisation and anti-corruption programme elsewhere. • Candidates may conclude that many of Ostorius Scapula’s successes proved only temporary solutions. His link with Cartimandua may have created as many problems as it solved, given that it may have divided her tribe. • Candidates may note that he was unable to pacify the Silures and that raiding and fighting continued. The strain contributed to his death. • Ostorius Scapula failed to pacify the Druids. This was left to Suetonius Paulinus and Agricola. • Some of his other measures may have been counter-productive: it may have been 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 well-developed. (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)J198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 42 • 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. . unnecessary to disarm the Iceni and insult their honour. Some candidates may analyse and evaluate the lack of evidence regarding the exact circumstances in which these events occurred. Other candidates may even analyse the decision to establish the colonia with a view to arguing it had negative consequences a decade later. Examples of disagreement might include: • Candidates are likely to explain the failures or limitations of other governors. • Plautius’ difficulties at the Channel and at the Thames. • Suetonius Paulinus’ inability to maintain peace and his destruction of valuable land after the revolt. • Agricola’s failure to take the whole of Scotland and his conquests being quickly given up. • Candidates may focus on the idea that Ostorius Scapula consolidated the invasion, disarming many of the Britons. This entailed an armed encounter with the Iceni. Garrisons were set up to consolidate Roman power southeast of the Fosse Way. • Candidates may also explain how Ostorius Scapula successfully dealt with the threat posed by Caratacus. Some will explain that he had been a principal organiser of resistance against the Roman conquest and thus his capture was a 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) 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 creditJ198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 43 major success that enabled Roman power to be consolidated. • Candidates may explain how Ostorius Scapula worked successfully with British client rulers to achieve his aims. Particular mention may be given to Cartimandua and her role in the capture of Caratacus. Some candidates may suggest that Ostorius Scapula played a role in presenting land to King Cogidubnus. Ostorius Scapula’s role in this decision cannot be proved either way; however, it is clear that the decision proved very beneficial as the King proved very loyal, his lands remaining free from rebellion even during Boudicca’s revolt. • Candidates may suggest Ostorius Scapula’s campaigns against the Silures and Ordovices strengthened the province’s western flank during the important period of consolidation. • Ostorius Scapula also made good use of auxiliaries as testified by the tombstones. • Some candidates may mention that Camulodunum was established as a colonia so freeing up men to secure the frontier. Likely source material to be included: Tacitus’ Annals 12.31–40 (the section on Ostorius Scapula), 14.29-39 Cassius Dio 60.19-21, 60.30.2, 62.2, 62.7-9, 62.12 Suetonius, Claudius 24.3 Tacitus Agricola 14-21, 23, 36-37 Tombstones of Sextus Valerius Genialis and Rufus SitaJ198/02 Mark Scheme November 2020 44 • Students should analyse why and how a particular policy of Ostorius Scapula was/was not successful. • Comparison should be made with other governors. Stronger candidates may establish themes to do this. • The evidence used should be evaluated, including with regard to the context in which it was produced, to reach convincing conclusions as to comparative success. • Stronger candidates may discuss the concept of success when analysing the question.OCR (Oxford Cambridge and RSA Examinations) The Triangle Building Shaftesbury Road Cambridge CB2 8EA OCR Customer Contact Centre Education and Learning Telephone: 01223 553998 Facsimile: 01223 552627 Email: general.qualifications@ocr.org.uk [Show More]

Last updated: 2 years ago

Preview 1 out of 46 pages