How to answer History exam questions…and get all the marks you deserve! - PowerPoint Presentation

How to answer History exam questions…and get all the marks you deserve! 1. On this PowerPoint you will find example answers for every question on History Papers 1, 2 and 3. 2. For each paper there is an overview slide to show you all the question types on that paper and how many marks each is worth. These are colour coded to match the exemplar/practice questions in later slides. 3. Some slides have got annotations/colour codes to show you how to answer the question. 4. The ‘hidden’ slides include example questions for you to have a go at and an exemplar of a good answer, so you can check your own work.

Medicine Through Time and The Western Front

Question 1: Describe two features of the support trench system on the Western Front. (4 marks) The support trenches were 3-4 hundred yards behind the front line. They provided additional supplies and men in case of attack. Support trenches were safer than the front line. Support trenches were rarely targeted by enemy snipers and were less likely to have been hit by artillery. 1 st Feature. Description. 2nd Feature. Description.

Question 2 (a) How useful are Sources A and B for an enquiry into the problems involved in performing operations on the Western Front? Explain your answer, using Sources Aand B and your knowledge of the historical context. (8 marks) Judgement: Content of both sources supported by RAD own knowledge: Provenance of both sources supported by own RAD own knowledge: Judgement: Sources A and B are both very useful for an enquiry into the problems of performing surgery on the Western Front. Source B is slightly more useful due to its provenance. The content of Source A is useful in the way it suggests there were problems because of the high number of casualties and limited number of medical staff. This is shown is the source where is says “there were not enough nurses to treat the men”. Source A is about a casualty clearing station, where the wounded were taken and most surgery was done; there would be a lot of pressure on the medical staff so the source seems to reflect the situation accurately . The content of Source B is also useful because it suggests many injuries were severe since men were already dying when they were brought into the ward, bloodless is shown to be a major problem as the source says “there was blood everywhere”. Blood banks were set up for the Battle of Cambrai , 1917, showing how the army tried to anticipate the need for transfusions and improve patients’ chances of survival. This supports the idea that blood loss was a big issue. The provenance of both sources makes them useful for this enquiry. The chaplain writing Source A was a religious man rather than medical staff; we don’t know how much experience he had of such conditions and he might have been particularly sensitive to suffering and death, which could affect the reliability of his account about the extent of suffering and therefore the usefulness of the information. Robertson, writing Source B, was a surgeon and therefore can be seen as an ’expert witness’ which gives added weight to the information in Source B about the problems faced by surgeons.Therefore, Sources A and B are both very useful for an enquiry into the problems of performing surgery on the Western Front due to their content. Source B is slightly more useful due to its provenance- it is written by a surgeon who would know in detail the problems of surgery on the Western Front.

Qu 2b) How could you follow up Source B to find out more about the problems involved in performing operations on the Western Front? In your answer, you must give thequestion you would ask and the type of source you could use. (4 marks) Pick a quotation from the source that you could ask a good historical question about. Ask a valid historical question. Select a source that would contain useful information for a historian studying this question. BE SPECIFIC…where/when would the source need to come from to be useful? Explain how that source would help you answer the question. “ I could only transfuse an occasional patient .” Why were transfusions such a problem ? Army medical records about how blood was stored and made available to the hospitals. This would help me to see if the problem was about the actual transfusion process or about the quantity of blood available.

Medicine Question 2b) – Practice Question for you to try… 4 mark question. Source A:From the writings of Henry Buckle, a soldier on the Western Front. He wrote a diary while he wasin the trenches and typed it up after the war. Here he describes his situation after being injured in 1915.I am lying in the barn with a damaged leg, the result of beingtoo near a bursting shell. My leg is not bleeding but it got sortof buried in the trench and twisted up. My sergeant was alsoinjured. Our stretcher people were busy so I told them we could manage to get back by ourselves. It took us all night toget back here to the barn, with lots of sit-downs. The RAMC staff keep coming in but don’t seem able to mend me up. TheMedical Officer has been in and says I shall have to go to a Field Hospital for a week.

Medicine through time and Western Front 2(b) Study Source AHow could you follow up Source A to find out more about the system for dealing with injured soldiers on the Western Front?In your answer, you must give the question you would ask and the type of source you could use.Complete the table below.Detail in Source A that I would follow up:Question I would ask:What type of source I could use:How might this help answer my question:

Medicine through time and Western Front 2(b) Study Source AHow could you follow up Source A to find out more about the system for dealing with injured soldiers on the Western Front?In your answer, you must give the question you would ask and the type of source you could use.Complete the table below.Detail in Source A that I would follow up:“The RAMC staff keep coming in, but don’t seem to be able to mend me up.” Direct Quotation from the source. Question I would ask:How quickly were injured soldiers treated? Question linked to the quote. What type of source I could use: Army Medical records, from a dressing station. Specific…WHERE are the medical record from? How might this help answer my question: It might give the information on how many soldiers were in the barn, and how they were treated, and how bad their injuries were and how long they had to wait.

Question 3) Explain one way in which people’s reactions to the plague in Britain were similar in the fourteenth and seventeenth centuries. (4 marks) One way in which reactions to the plague were similar on the fourteenth and seventeenth centuries was that in both centuries people’s reactions were based on religion. In 1348 people used flagellation as they thought the Black Death was a punishment from God. In 1665 they pained a red cross and ‘Lord have mercy’ on the door for the same reason. People also fasted and prayed during both epidemics. Identify 1 similarity. (Or 1 difference depending on the question). Example from time period 1. Example from time period 2.

Question 4) Explain why there was rapid change in the treatment of illness in Britain during the twentieth century. You may use the following in your answer:· magic bullets· high-tech treatmentYou must also use information of your own. (12 marks) The first reason there was rapid change in the treatment of illness in the twentieth century was the factor of increased science and technology. For example, the role of science and the discovery of Salvarsan 606 as a magic bullet in the early twentieth century led to other new medicines which could target microbes and therefore a range of different diseases, for example penicillin (discovered by Fleming and developed by Flory and Chain during the Second World War) . These discoveries relied on the more developed scientific method and technology of the twentieth century, such as the scientific method Hata employed to check the 606 compounds for the first magic bullet. Hata used a rigorous scientific method as part of a research team to check previous work, resulting in a new treatment for illness. The second factor for change that had a big impact on rapid change in treatment of illness was the attitude of the government to funding public health. Attitudes towards government action changed, with the view developing that the government had a responsibility to take action on health issues. For example Government funding in the mass production of drugs, made treatment more widely available, as in the example of Florey and Chain pressuring the US government into mass producing penicillin during the Second World War. Without the £100,000 government investment, penicillin could not have been mass produced (up until then they were producing it in bathtubs!) and so many men would not have been saved on D Day. Penicillin is still used today and from the Second World War onward the use of antibiotics to treat illness has saved millions of lives. The government attitude towards funding public health was also shown by the establishment of the NHS in 1948, this meant that there was improved access to treatment through both the GP and hospitals, the government made sure that the NHS was well funded, providing high tech treatments such as x rays and chemotherapy to man more people as it was free at the point of use to ordinary people. Overall, reason there was rapid change in the treatment of illness in the twentieth century was a combination of a change in government attitude and increased science and technology. Reason 1 (factor for change) Example. Explain and link to question. Reason 2 (factor for change) Example. Explain and link to question. Final judgement that links answer together.

Question 5)‘There was little progress in medicine in Britain during the Renaissance period (c1500–c1700).’ How far do you agree? Explain your answer.You may use the following in your answer:•the work of William Harvey•bloodletting and purgingYou must also use information of your own.Judgement. Section supporting my judgement. Section explaining, and arguing against, alternative judgement. Judgement. I strongly agree with the statement. There was very little real progress in medicine during the Renaissance period. There were lots of new ideas but these were not put into practice on actual patients. The work of Vesalius improved knowledge of anatomy and the work of Harvey improved knowledge of physiology but had little impact on understanding of illness or how to treat it, therefore there was very little change. Vesalius’ book ‘On the Fabric of the Human Body’ published in 1543 was a revolutionary change from Galen’s ideas on anatomy (for example the structure of the jaw). Harvey also successfully proved Galen wrong in showing that blood was pumped around the body, not created fresh all the time. However , religion remained a key factor in people’s ideas about disease, prevention and treatment. Medical training was still dominated by the ideas of Galen, therefore little change was likely as doctors were still being taught the old ideas based on The Four Humours and Theory of Opposites. For example Charles II continued the ceremony of ‘touching’ to cure scrofula, and was treated himself with purging and supernatural remedies such as the Bazoar Stone. Ideas had moved forward, but doctors training, and treatment, had not. However, I understand why some people may disagree with the statement, and say there was lots of progress in the Renaissance. The authority of the Church was declining and therefore people were more willing to challenge Galen’s ideas (such as Vesalius being able to dissect real bodies rather than pigs likes Galen did). The printing press meant that ideas could spread more rapidly and medical students and doctors could see accurate drawings of the body even if they didn’t conduct dissections. This undermined Galen’s authority and made challenges to accepted ideas more possible. The Royal Society was set up to encourage scientific investigation and communication of new ideas. Thomas Sydenham stressed the importance of studying the symptoms of different diseases, leading to a new method of classification and differentiation of disease. However, as the examples in paragraph 1 show, most people, even the King of England, were still treated using the old ideas of Hippocrates and Galen. So I would argue that “there was little progress in medicine” overall. Overall, I agree with the statement. Although the church was loosing power as humanism grew and people like Harvey and Versailles were able to publish and spread new ideas about anatomy, real people, including the very rich and powerful, such as the King, were being treated using old ideas and methods. This shows there was “little progress in medicine during the Renaissance”.

American West and Anglo-Saxon and Norman England

Q1: Describe two consequences of the introduction of barbed wire in the West, 1874 [8 marks]:

Q2: Write a narrative account analysing the key evets un the years 1851-66 that led to the beginning of Red Cloud’s War [8 marks]: For narrative accounts… THINK… CHRONOLINK!

Q3: Explain the importance of two of the following [16 marks]: cattle trails on the growth of cattle industry in 1860s railroads on ending the Plains Indians way of life wagon trails for increasing early settlement. This shows you an example of ONE of the bullet points above (8 marks). You need to do this for TWO to get 16 marks….

Question 3 (16 marks) 8 marks for each item explained. Explain two of the following:● The importance of the opening of the First Transcontinental Railroad (1869) for the settlement of the West.● The importance of the winter of 1886–87 for the cattle industry.● The importance of the Dawes Act (1887) for the way of life of the Plains Indians. The Transcontinental Railroad was a key factor in the development and settlement of the west. Previously, the journey west by foot would take several months and risks of beingattacked and ill were high. The opening of the railroad in 1869 was a great help for the fulfilment of the Manifest Destiny as settlers could migrate easier to the uninhabited areas of America. After the discovery of gold in California 1848, the movement to the west was more urgent and so the railroad enabled to effectively convince settlers to migrate and benefit from the gold. Also the railroad was important for the settlers to benefit from the free land offered after the Homestead act in 1862 . In addition, the railroad had a dramatic economic influence in the west. The railroad’s ability to connect both coasts with a quick form of transportation led to the opening of markets. The goods manufactured in the East could be delivered quickly and rise the employment ofsettlers. The trade links between the west and other countries like China meant that morefarmers, miners and ranchers would be wanting to migrate west to develop those resourcesfurther. Also the railroad made cattle ranching a profitable business attracting more settlers.However, Plain Indians were forced into reservations, losing their culture and beliefs.The Dawes Act (1887) was very important in changing the way of life for the Plains Indians. ……………………..Complete the rest of this question to get the other 8 marks availible….

Question 4a/5a) Describe two features of towns in Anglo-Saxon England [4 marks]:

Question 4b/5b) Explain why William won the Battle of Hastings [12 marks]: You could use: knights tactics. You must use your own knowledge.

Question 4b/5b) Explain why there was a disputed succession to the English throne when William I died.You may use the following in your answer:NormandyBishop OdoYou must also use information of your own.Normans Question 4b/5b– Practice Question for you to try…

Question 4b/5b) Explain why there was a disputed succession to the English throne when William I died.You may use the following in your answer:NormandyBishop OdoYou must also use information of your own.There were a number of reasons why there was a disputed succession to the English throne when William I died. One cause of this dispute was the relationship between William I and his eldest son Robert. Robert was born around 1051 and was the eldest son. He had been in a number of arguments with his father which had led to William leading troops against his son. In one battle Robert had knocked William off his horse and then forced his father to retreat in humiliation. Eventually the two were reconciled and Robert was recognised as William’s heir for Normandy. However, Robert was not content with just being made heir to Normandy and when William died he claimed the throne of England as well, thus contributing to the succession crisis.Another reason was that many of the barons had lands in both England and Normandy. Splitting the lands went against Norman custom and practice but William Rufus had been William I’s favourite son. The barons wanted the two territories to be united as one. Some feared William Rufus would dispossess them, and so supported Robert in his claim for the English throne. They were also worried about dealing with demands from two leaders, especially if Robert and William fought each other. This meant that many nobles such as Roger Bigod in Norfolk and the sheriff of Leicester, Hugh de Grandmesnil , supported Robert and led rebellions against William Rufus’ accession. The fear of the barons was therefore another reason for the disputed succession. A final reason for the disputed succession was the role of Odo , William’s half-brother. Odod had been William’s co-regent in England during his absences but had got into trouble for illegal land acquisition and in 1082 he fell out of favour with William. Odo may well have been very ambitious for power and this caused not only his troubles with William but also his support for Robert. He became leader of the rebels and sought to maintain his power in England. The barons and Odo saw Robert as the weaker of the two and hoped for personal increase in power and status, and thus sought to remove William Rufus. Thus Odo’s wish to gain power by supporting the weaker claimant linked in with Robert’s own ambition to unite England and Normandy and the fears of the barons to create the disputed succession. Normans Question 4b/5b– Practice Question for you to try…

Question 4 c/5c “It was changes in landholding that did the most to secure Norman control of England” How far do you agree? [16 marks]: You may use: *tenants-in-chief * forfeiture. You must use own knowledge.

Weimar and Nazi Germany

  When Hitler came to power, there were millions out of work. The Nazis employed people to make weapons and recruited men into the army. Jobs were created by building houses, schools and autobahns. Unemployment dropped to less than 1 million by 1938. However, the working week rose from 45 hours in 1928 to 50 hours in 1939. What I can infer: I can infer the Nazis employment policies were tailored to benefit the Nazi movement and Nazi priorities. Details in the source that tell me this: “The Nazis employed people to make weapons and recruited men into the army” What I can infer: Can infer that the employment policies may have dropped the unemployment rates but they also had other negative impacts on working people. Details in the source that tell me this: “The working week rose from 45 hours in 1928 to 50 hours in 1939” Q 1. Study Source A below and then answer Question 1. SOURCE A: From a History of the Modern World, published in 2001. 1. Give two things you can infer from Source A about Nazi employment policies between 1933-1939. Complete the table below to explain your answer. (4 marks)

Hitler became Chancellor firstly because of the impact of the Great Depression. The Great Depression, caused by the Wall Street Crash in October 1929 led to a dramatic 40% decline in industrial output by 1932. This in turn caused 6.1 million German citizens being unemployed by the end of 1932. This included 50% of all Germans aged between 16 and 30 years. This was important because as unemployment grew, so too did the discontent of the German people with the Weimar Republic. Prior to the Great Depression, German citizens had largely shown their support for the Republic and there were no attempted revolutions between 1924 and 9. However, the Great Depression was a catalyst for changing attitudes as the economy spiralled downwards and ordinary German people’s lives were devastated by the recall of the American loans negotiated by Stresemann. This led to Hitler becoming chancellor because it destabilised the position of the Weimar Republic. Middle and Upper Class supporters flocked to the Nazis through fear of support for the KPD by the working class. This led to the Nazis becoming the largest party in the Reichstag with 230 seats by July 1932. This propelled Hitler into the position of Chancellor because he was now the leader of the largest party in the Reichstag which made him a prime candidate for the job. Had it not been for the Great Depression, it is unlikely that this would have happened as the Nazis did not have the wealth of support in the 1920s that they did after the Great Depression. Furthermore, Hitler became Chancellor because of the weaknesses and failures of the Weimar Republic. For example during the period 1929-32 Germany had three different chancellors, all of whom lost the support of the Reichstag and were dismissed by President Hindenburg. Bruning was dismissed due to his mishandling of the financial crisis and the growing resentment from the German people. Von Papen’s dismissal was the result of his inability to unite the Reichstag and von Schleicher failed to rule without the use of the emergency decree. This instability led to the German public voting overwhelmingly in favour of the Nazi Party, taking them from 12 seats in 1928 to 230 in July 1932. This combined with the destabilising effects of the Great Depression led to the German people, especially members of the army and the rich industrialists, calling for a strong leader who was capable of reuniting the fragmented government. Hitler, thanks to his popular speeches and use of the SA appeared to be the strong and focused figurehead Germany needed. The Weimar Republic needed a strong leader and therefore Hitler was the main choice. Finally Hitler became Chancellor because of the skilful use of propaganda by the Nazis. Goebbels produced posters, radio broadcasts, speeches and many other forms of propaganda to ensure the German people would vote in favour of Hitler and the Nazis. Had it not been for their clever exploitation of the situation caused by the Great Depression and the weaknesses of the other parties in the Weimar Republic it is unlikely that the Nazis would have gained as much support. This support caused Hitler to become the leader of the largest party in the Reichstag and therefore a prime candidate for Hindenburg to appoint as the new Chancellor because he was the people’s popular choice. Q2: Explain why Hitler became Chancellor in January 1933. You may use: The Great Depression Failure of the Weimar Republic You must use your own knowledge [12 marks]

3a) Study Sources B and C. How useful are Sources B and C for an enquiry into reasons for the growth in support forthe Nazi Party in the years 1929-32?Explain your answer, using Sources B and C and your own knowledge of the historicalcontext.Sources B and C are very useful for an enquiry into reasons for the growth in support for the Nazi Party. Source B suggests that support increased due to the unemployment crisis caused by the effects of the Great Depression. You can see in the photograph a long line people queuing for unemployment benefits. To some extent this is correct as unemployment rose to 6 million by 1932 and this was made worse by the actions of the Weimar government in cutting unemployment benefit which suggested that the government could not reduce the problem. On the other hand Hitler was promising ‘work + bread’ which encouraged increased support. However , Source B is a photograph from Hanover and therefore cannot reveal whether queues for unemployment benefits occurred across Germany and it cannot reveal reasons for increased support prior to 1932. Additionally, the fact that it was printed in a newspaper suggests the nature of it could be subjective as we do not know the intended impact of source B. For example the detail in the background saying ‘Vote Hilter’ could suggest that this was used as a piece of propaganda. Source C suggests that Hitler’s speeches and the content of these were a primary reason for growth in support for the Nazi Party. For example Speer, who went on to support Hitler, says that Hitler gave “new hope” and he was carried away on a “wave of enthusiasm”. To some extent this is correct as people were enthused by the ‘energy in an atmosphere of hopelessness’ Hitler’s speeches were dynamic and targeted at his audience saying things people wanted to hear such as promises to reduce unemployment, destroy the Treaty of Versailles and remove the communist threat, for example in Source C Speer says Hitler explained the “dangers of Communism” and how this could be stopped-which would have been a popular view at the time. On the other hand Source C does not reveal alternative reasons such as the failure of the Weimar government to address the problems of the Great Depression. However the fact that source C was written in 1970 by Albert Speer highlights some problems. Firstly Speer is looking back on a speech made in 1931 and may be trying to justify his support for Hitler, given the fact that he played a key role in Hitler’s dictatorship, especially as he highlights his mother’s support.Overall, both sources used together would be highly useful for an enquiry into reasons for the growth of support for the Nazis. Source B:A photograph published in 1932 in a German newspaper. It shows people from Hanover queuingfor their unemployment benefits. The writing on the wall of the building says ‘Vote Hitler’.

Both interpretations explain how Hitler got into power but they both give a different main factor to explain this. Interpretation 1 emphasises Hitler's personality and speeches. It says that he was “charismatic”, a “powerful speaker” and had a message to “build a new Germany”. This is the main reason it gives for how he secured power. Interpretation 2 gives a different view and states that chance and luck were more important in Hitler gaining power. Interpretation 2 says that events outside Hitler's control like “the Wall Street Crash” and other “chance events” like the “depression” played a bigger role in allowing Hitler to take power. Interpretation 1: From Weimar and Nazi Germany by J Hite and C Hinton , published in 2000 . Hitler himself was central to the success of the Nazis in the years 1929–32. He provided charismatic leadership with his powerful message to build a new Germany. He was a powerful speaker with his timing, expression and the content of his speeches impressing listeners. He was able to identify with their emotions and gavepeople hope. Along with Goebbels, he realised the importance of propaganda. He used propaganda to target the specific grievances of many Germans.Interpretation 2: From Hitler 1889–1936 by I Kershaw, published in 1998.There was nothing inevitable about Hitler becoming Chancellor ofGermany in January 1933. Five years earlier the Nazis had been asmall party in German politics with little support. Events such as theWall Street Crash, which led to depression in Germany, broughtincreased support for the Nazis in the years 1929–32. Chanceevents, such as the depression and unemployment, played a muchlarger role than any actions of the Nazi leader himself in bringingHitler to power.Q3b) 3(b). Study Interpretations 1 and 2. They give different views about how Hitler got into power. What is the main difference between these views? Explain your answer, using details from both interpretations. (4 marks) USE QUOTATIONS!

3(c). Suggest one reason why Interpretations 1 and 2 give different views about how Hitler got into power. You may use Sources B and C to help explain your answer. (4 marks)The two interpretations may give different views on how Hitler got into power because the two historians used different sources. Interpretation 1 emphasises Hitler’s personality and speeches saying that he was a “powerful speaker”. This historian may have used sources like Source C where Speer explains how Hitler’s speech carried his away “on a wave of enthusiasm” for Nazi ideas. Interpretation 2 emphasises chance events outside Hitler’s control like “The Wall Street Crash” and “unemployment” as the main reason Hitler got into power. This historian (Kershaw) may have used sources like Source B which shows the huge amount of people who were unemployed in Germany in 1932. The que in Source B are waiting for benefits in front of a poster that reads “Vote Hitler” showing that Hitler used unemployment to gain popularity.

Question 3 (d) How far do you agree with Interpretation 2 about reasons for the growth in support for the Nazi Party in the years 1929–32? Explain your answer, using both interpretations, and your knowledge of the historical context. Interpretation 2 gives the view that the reasons for growth in Hitler’s support were due to events which negatively affected the people of Germany which therefore led to desperation and a wish for change. I would agree with this interpretation as Interpretation 2 supports the claim by providing examples of events such as the Wall Street Crash, the depression and unemployment. The author suggests that without the Wall Street Crash, and the depression and unemployment that followed, the Nazi Party would have remained a minor party. During the period 1924–28 Germany had experienced a period of relative prosperity and the Nazi Party was ‘a small party in German politics with little support’.. It was not until after 1929, when the economy experienced a general downturn, that Nazi support began to rise as people blamed the Weimar Government for the depression and began to support parties such as the Nazis who were opposed to the Republic; the Nazi share of the vote increased from less than 10% to over 30% from 1929–32. In addition, the depression brought increased support for the communists and some Germans, especially businessmen and industrialist, supported the Nazis to prevent a possible communist government. Interpretation 1 adds some support to this argument by noting that Hitler used propaganda ‘to target the specific grievances of many Germans.’ However, as shown in Interpretation 1, the role of Hitler was also important. He provided ‘charismatic leadership with his powerful message to build a new Germany’. Interpretation 1 states that it was Hitler who played the key role in increasing support for the Nazi Party in the years 1929–32 and claims it was Hitler who brought increased support by providing examples of his abilities as a speaker that enabled him to identify with the audience and give them hope. During the elections of 1932 Hitler toured all over Germany and spoke to huge meetings of people in halls and sports stadia. Furthermore Hitler’s decision to put Goebbels in charge of Nazi propaganda ensured that the Nazi message was heard everywhere, particularly on the radio. The Nazis appeared to offer stability during a time of uncertainly and worry. The organisation and discipline of the Nazi party attracted many Germans, and the Hitler Youth provided opportunities for young people. Overall, as Interpretation 1 suggests the role of Hitler was important in reaching out to people and persuading them to support the Nazi Party. However, Interpretation 2 is more convincing in claiming that the growth of the Nazi Party was ultimately dependent on the events of the period 1929-32. To a large extent Interpretation 2 shows that without the circumstances of the depression and unemployment Hitler’s message and oratory would not have had an audience. Interpretation 1 is right that Hitler’ gave people hope’ but without the sense of hopelessness identified in Interpretation 2 the Nazi Party would not have achieved such a level of support.

FINAL POINTS and TOP TIPS! Focus on the question ALL the way through- use the language from the question to help with this. The question will always tell you exactly what you need to include to get marks…read them carefully and pay attention! Make sure you include plenty of Relevant, Accurate and Detailed (RAD) knowledge to back up your points. Go beyond the bullet points. In source questions use CONTENT (quotations and inferences) CONTEXT (your own knowledge of the period) and PROVENANCE/NOPA (Nature, Origin, Purpose, Audience) to EVALUATE how useful the sources would be to a historian trying to find out about the particular enquiry in the questions. For the two interpretations questions use the tricks we have discussed….