1. Feedback from timed essay question
During the reign of James I, financial problems were at the heart of disputes between Crown and Parliament
Scope =
Event =
Cause given =
Qualifying importance of the cause =

2. During the reign of James I, financial problems were at the heart of disputes between Crown and Parliament
Evidence that there were disputes between Crown and parliament in James I’s reign
Impositions 1606 – 1614 (complaints raised in parl. in 1610 & 1614 J & parl began to argue over rights & privileges parl felt their right to raise taxation was being eroded
1604 Parliament wrote a Form of Apology and Satisfaction to be clear on their rights (although not presented to James so not open conflict)
1610 parl dissolved by James for failing to agree the extra 100,000 requested to go with the Great Contract
Failure of Addled Parliament to achieve anything – withheld subsidies until impositions were abolished - James said ‘ I am obliged to put up with what I cannot get rid of’ showing his displeasure – then dissolved them – but factional infighting to blame and poor management
James managed without parl until
1621 Parliament Protestation of the Commons presented to James – tore page out of journal and dismissed commons over the issue that Commons felt their freedom of speech was being hampered and James upset they were treading on his prerog by discussing the Spanish match and froeign policy – but due to a misunderstanding as MPs felt james had asked for their views
1624 parliament did encroach on Royal Prerog by discussing the type of war to be launched with their finances – included the ‘appropriation clause in their grant of subsidies.
(this question does not need you to discuss this, but if asked the extent of breakdown you can also argue that there were also well managed and effective parliamentary sessions e.g after Gunpowder plot and st session which granted James 2 subsidies parl needed for finance – James said to MPs they may ‘freely advise’ him and they granted him 3 subsidies (although insufficient) James accepted the Monopolies Act in 1624
Causes of those disputes
Finance = do first as it is the factor in the question
Constitution (rights and privileges of parl vs. prerogative of the king)
Religion
Foreign policy
factions/favourites at court

3. LO: To revise religion during the reigns of James I and Charles I and how to answer AS Britain Section A 01 questions

4. Religious issues during the reigns of James I and Charles I up to 1629
Content revision –
Main themes:
Catholic threat
Puritan threat
Rise of Arminianism
Colour code notes into these categories:
Main events
How James/Charles deals with them
Level of success

5. 01 Question Format
You will be given two extracts from secondary sources
These will be from academic historians
You will have one question to answer based on these extracts
It will take the following format:
01. With reference to these extracts and your knowledge of the historical context, which of these two extracts provides the more convincing interpretation of____

6. What is this testing you on?
AO3 Analyse and evaluate, in relation to the historical context, different ways in which aspects of the past have been interpreted.

7. How will it be marked? Generic Mark Scheme
L5: Answers will display a good understanding of the interpretations given in the extracts. They will evaluate the extracts thoroughly in order to provide a well-substantiated judgement on which offers the more convincing interpretation. The response demonstrates a very good understanding of context
L4: Answers will display a good understanding of the interpretations given in the extracts. There will be sufficient comment to provide a supported conclusion as to which offers the more convincing interpretation. However, not all comments will be well-substantiated, and judgements may be limited. The response demonstrates a good understanding of context
L3: The answer will show a reasonable understanding of the interpretations given in the extracts. Comments as to which offers the more convincing interpretation will be partial and/or thinly supported. The response demonstrates an understanding of context
L2: The answer will show some partial understanding of the interpretations given in the extracts. There will be some undeveloped comment in relation to the question. The response demonstrates some understanding of context. 6-10
L1: The answer will show a little understanding of the interpretations given in the extracts. There will be only unsupported, vague or generalist comment in relation to the question. The response demonstrates limited understanding of context. 1-5
Nothing worthy of credit. 0

8. How to plan your answer Extract A
What is the extract arguing? (its interpretation on the wider question not specific things it says)
What evidence can you find in the extract to support its argument? (the specific things)
What own knowledge do you have that supports the claims in the extract?
What own knowledge do you have that contradicts the claims in the extract?
Using your judgement do you consider the evidence in the extract and your own knowledge provide convincing support for this interpretation?
Extract B
Repeat steps 1-5
Then
Come to a conclusion about which extract offers the more convincing interpretation about the question.

9. How to Answer – an idea…
Take each extract in turn and follow this structure:
Extract A – evidence which suggests it is convincing
Extract A – evidence which suggests it is not
Extract B – evidence which suggests it is convincing
Extract B – evidence which suggests it is not
Conclusion – which is more convincing and why

10. Use of Language and Style of Writing
You should be formal at all times in your historical writing
You should aim to use nuanced language ‘to some extent’, ‘fairly’, ‘for the most part’, ‘mostly’, ‘largely’ etc. so that you don’t contradict yourself.
Use connectives and comparative language to ensure you discuss both in connection to each other. ‘whilst’, ‘whereas’, ‘on the other hand’, ‘although’, ‘meanwhile’.

11. Pitfalls
Having already decided which one you think is more convincing and only using this to criticise the other
Providing no criticism of one or either extract
Not understanding the gist or tone of the Extract (its interpretation)
Only using quotes from the extract not your own knowledge
Not answering the question! (how convincing when referring to the point of the question…)

12. Question to plan together
01. With reference to these extracts and your understanding of the historical context, which of these two extracts provides the more convincing interpretation of James I and religion ?

13. Question to answer in timed conditions
01. With reference to these extracts and your knowledge of the historical context, which of these two extracts provides the more convincing interpretation of Charles I and religion in the 1620s?

14. Feedback from Charles I 01 question
James I – broad Anglican Church most Puritans allowed in, some who did not accept the Oath of Allegiance not and fined, Catholics not and fined
Be really careful between Catholicism and Arminianism
Puritan, Presbyterian, Protestant, Arminian, Catholic get your understanding clear

15. Feedback from Charles I 01 question
Identification of arguments (not just quotes, e.g. Cust argues ‘there was no Arminian revolution in the 1620s’ you could write Cust in extract A argues that Arminianism was not too much of a threat to the established religious order of the 1620s this is shown by his point ‘there was no Arminian revolution in the 1620s’.)
Show how you know the historian has made this point from what they say – support with a quote
Contextual evidence to support – specific!! These are interpretations of facts – don’t use terms ‘true/false’ but convincing, limited, supported, countered, accurate…
Contextual evidence to counter
Try not to use the same evidence over and over again
Overall judgement –most convincing? Not because of number of points! We are not Year 7!
Scope! s – Laudian reforms 1630s! (however, you can use in support of Extract A, as it says no Arminian revolution in the 1620s so you could argue it really got going after Laud’s appointment as Archbishop of Canterbury in 1633, therefore not in the 20s but yes in the 30s which extract A alludes to when it says ‘yet’.

16. 2016 paper – 01 question Identify the arguments
Remember summary then quote
Evidence to support
Any evidence to counter
Therefore how convincing?
Mark scheme

17. Examiners’ Report General Comments on 01
In the new ‘interpretations question’ there was a tendency for some students to drift in to general summary of the extracts rather than isolate and explain the overall argument of each extract and then provide a breakdown of how the historian constructed and supported that argument as part of an analysis with deployment of context to assess how convincing the interpretations were. It may be helpful for students to attempt to explain in one sentence what each extract is actually arguing before then analysing that interpretation. For the strongest responses there was a real selection of contextual knowledge.

18. Examiners’ Report Question 01
A key issue for some students was grasping the key focus of Smith in Extract A on the structural issues with the financial system which inflation then exacerbated. Those who able to comment on this key aspect of early modern finances with good contextual support clearly showed a good understanding of the extract. Many were helped in an appreciation of this by a focus on the Great Contract of 1610 as the one attempt before 1688 to seriously attempt to reform the Crown’s structural financial weaknesses. Many were able to support reference to feudal or prerogative income with selected examples. There was some good comment on the reference to inflation with typical support derived from Cecil’s updating of the Book of Rates to partially take account of its impact. More students were able to appreciate the focus in Extract B on the impact of James’s extravagance. They were also able to deploy a range of contextual knowledge as part of assessing this, many focusing on favourites or the ‘double supper’ as illustration. Stronger responses assessed the extract in the context of the political reasons for James’s extravagance, especially in the early years of his reign with his need to appease the political nation. Others set his extravagance in the context of the flourishing cultural life of his court. The strongest responses were able to link the structural problems outlined in Extract A with the impact of inflation and the focus in Extract B on James’s extravagance. Some did this through developing the focus on the failure of the Great Contract from MPs reticence in granting James a more regular income from reform given his inability to curb his extravagance.

19. Specimen Paper
2 x students answers
Examiners marking

20. 2016 paper – 02/03 Essay questions
Either 02 ‘The early Stuarts dealt effectively with religious problems between 1603 and 1629.’ Explain why you agree or disagree with this view. [25 marks] or 03 ‘Charles I showed in the years 1628 to 1648 that he could not be trusted.’ Explain why you agree or disagree with this view. [25 marks]

21. 2016 Examiners’ Report
General comments for the essay questions the strongest responses could illustrate their responses with well selected precise evidence. While on a breadth paper there is no expectation of a range of depth of evidence there is an expectation across 45 minutes in an essay that students will be able to use a range of precisely selected examples to illustrate their argument across the themes and periods of the questions.

22. 2016 Examiners’ Report
Essay Questions Question 02 Stronger responses covered both monarchs and made a direct assessment not just between James I and Charles I but also across different periods for James. Some used 1618 as more of turning point than 1625 due to the impact of the Thirty Years’ War. Stronger responses also were able to assess both monarchs in the context of the concept of the Jacobethan balance as a means to view the differing approaches of the first Stuart monarchs. In general those who dealt with confidence with concepts such as Arminianism or anti-Catholicism alongside well selected precise evidence were also illustrative of strong responses. Selection over 40 minutes across the period 1603 to 1629 was also more indicative of stronger responses with many students showing a sound appreciation of the major religious events/issues such as, the Millenary Petition, Hampton Court Conference, Bancroft’s Canons, the King James Bible, the development of Arminianism, Montagu and the York House Conference. Others showed a good appreciation of the importance of individuals like Andrewes or Laud. Question 03 A general issue with some responses to this question was a lack of coverage across the range of the period. Some students did not address the period after the outbreak of civil war in A key example used well in the majority of stronger responses was the Engagement of This was used in the context of Ireton’s direct negotiation with Charles over his and the New Model’s Heads of the Proposals. Charles’s refusal of Ireton’s Proposals and subsequent agreement with the Scots was a turning point in trust that made the regicide possible as shown by the Windsor Prayer Meeting of April A key starting point for many was the 1628 Petition of Right and how Charles’s actions raised the question of his duplicity. Students’ selection of evidence across the period was most credited when shaped to set up comment on the issue of trust.