NCEA Level 3 History (90657) 2012 — page 1 of 8

Assessment Schedule – 2012

History: Examine a significant decision made by people in history, in an essay (90657)

Evidence Statement

Achievement

/

Achievement with Merit

/

Achievement with Excellence

Through the candidate’s response to the first part of the essay question, they have accurately described factors that contributed to the decision.
(See content guidelines for examples of relevant historical information that could be included in the candidate’s answer). / Through the candidate’s response to the first part of the essay question, they have accurately explained factors that contributed to the decision.
(See content guidelines for examples of relevant historical information that could be included in the candidate’s answer). / Through the candidate’s response to the first part of the essay question, they have accurately and perceptively explained factors that contributed to the decision.
(See content guidelines for examples of relevant historical information that could be included in the candidate’s answer).
Through the candidate’s response to the second part of the essay question, they have accurately described the consequences of the decision.
(See content guidelines for examples of relevant historical information that could be included in the candidate’s answer). / Through the candidate’s response to the second part of the essay question, they have evaluated the consequences of the decision.
(See content guidelines for examples of relevant historical information that could be included in the candidate’s answer). / Through the breadth, depth and/or range of ideas in the candidate’s response to the second part of the question, they have comprehensively evaluated the consequences of the decision.
(See content guidelines for examples of relevant historical information that could be included in the candidate’s answer).
The candidate has structured and organised their information using an appropriate essay format:
  • introductory paragraph
  • relevant, structured and logically sequenced paragraphs
  • conclusion.
/ The candidate has structured and organised their information using an appropriate essay format:
  • introductory paragraph
  • relevant, structured and logically sequenced paragraphs
  • conclusion.
The candidate has provided an argument.
IE, the candidate has stated a view and supported it with relevant and accurate evidence (probably most obvious in the evaluative part of their essay). / The candidate has structured and organised their information using an appropriate and effective essay format:
  • introductory paragraph
  • relevant, structured and logically sequenced paragraphs
  • conclusion.
The candidate has provided a convincing argument.
IE, the candidate has a clearly articulated view and has supported it with sound reasoning and relevant, accurate, and significant evidence (probably most obvious in the evaluative part of their essay).

NCEA Level 3 History (90657) 2012 — page 1 of 8

Topic One: England 1558–1667

Essay question (a)

Explain the factors that men from different social classes considered when deciding to marry in early modern England.

Evaluate the consequences of marriage for women.

The candidate’s response to the first part of the essay question could include:

  • The stability of society was enshrined in the ideas about marriage and the sanctity of family. A man maintaining a sexual relationship with a woman outside of marriage was unacceptable to respectable elements of society. Types of acceptable marriage were: marriage in church, handfasting and betrothalde futuro
  • Young men were subject to the head of the house, and had obligations to their families that lasted beyond when they physically left home or were no longer economically dependent. In particular, this would involve heeding advice given on who and when they should marry
  • The legal position of women was similar to that of children. They were meant to be either in the care or protection of their father, brother or husband. The doctrine of coverture stated that 'Man and wife were one person, and that person was the husband’.As a feme covert, a married woman became at one in law with her husband – he now became responsible for her. A boy was therefore only able to legally consent to marriage at 14, compared with 12 for a girl
  • Marriage was the key medium of social advancement and could well have a considerable effect on personal wealth and property because the woman traditionally brought a jointure or dowry into the marriage.Sons of nobility often married daughters of the wealthy so that a double advantage could occur — impoverished noble families might in time be relieved of debt and the rich family might receive social elevation
  • Love and sexual attraction alone were not popularly regarded as sufficient reason for marriage. The age, wealth, social connections and religion of the marriage partner were considered to be more important factors in the decision. Love was expected to grow after marriage
  • Heads of families frequently interfered to prevent unsuitable matches. The most used penalty for disobedience in this important area was disinheritance. Incompatibility in families could bring public humiliation and lawsuits. Examples include Bess of Hardwick and Anne Clifford
  • Marriagewas a life-changing decisionthat would initiate a family unit providing for the couple’s economic, sexual and companionship needs but also permit the begetting of heirs to inherit the family property. Therefore marriage was generally delayed,especially for the governed class, until a couple had whatever was required to establish and maintain an independent nuclear family
  • The higher the social level, the greater the parental involvement in choosing marriage partners,though the willing consent of the future husband and wife was generally sought. Popular writing upheld the value of young people in the governed class gaining the consent of their parents to a marriage:

-Peerage and Gentry:

-married earliest

-shorter courtships

-least freedom of choice

-greater emphasis on economic matters; less on personal preference

-Yeomen and Husbandmen:

-married latest

-reasonable freedom in choice

-marrying without parental/family consent could result in a withdrawal of dowry or inheritance

-Artisans, Labourers, the Poor:

-married earlier than yeomen and husbandmen

-greatest freedom of choice

-greater opportunities for courtship

-least obligation to seek parental advice or consent

-parish officials tried to prevent marriages of homeless couples.

  • For the husband, fatherhood would confirm his headship of an independent family unit, and highlight that he had the potential to perpetuate the family name and pass on an inheritance. This status entitled a governing class man to the vote in many boroughs
  • Celibacy in this period was still a viable alternative. However, the family was still the natural place where unmarried men resided, contributing financially and functionally to the unit.

The candidate’s response to the second part of the essay question could include:

  • Marriage was a significant public occasion and spectacle and the frequent cause of much subsequent financial distress for families. The planning and execution of a “suitable match” was considered the high point of a woman’s life among the peerage and gentry
  • Marriage was often defined as the start of a woman’s life, or at least the watershed to which all other prior events had led. A married younger sister would take precedence in the family over an older spinster. In church, married women sat separately and even sometimes dressed or wore their hair differently
  • The governing class tended to marry girls while young because they had inherited wealth and planned to secure the next generation of family heirs. Whereas the governed class had to wait until they had amassed or received the means to begin a new family unit (economic conditions and natural disasters could affect this). Periods when late marriage was common tended to reduce the numbers of children born and raise the proportion of unmarried adults
  • Childbirth was a risky consequence of marriage, but the wife’s place was thereby elevated in the family – especially as a mother of a son. Women in the governed class often left service to nurture their children. The governing class generally could afford wet-nurses and servants to care for the children so that the wife could return to reproducing further heirs
  • Breakdown in marriage led to some annulments for the governing class, but more often irregular separations. In England innocent parties (usually the woman) were not allowed by law to remarry
  • The wife had few rights over her body in relation to her husband. Wifebeating was legal, although society generally disapproved of it. Prosecution for marital rape was legally impossible
  • The wife’s earnings belonged to her husband and she couldneither sue nor be sued in a civil action. Any dowry or personal property she inheritedbecame her husband’s unless there were special provisions in the will. A married woman had the right tobe maintained by her husband during his lifetime. If she outlived him she wasentitled to a jointure – one-third of his estate if she had children, one half if she did not
  • Contemporary examples of the practice of courtship and marriage would generally be expected from candidates gaining Achievement with Excellence (eg Sir Lucius Carey, Mary Boyle, Peg Oxinden, Ralph Josselin, Henry Newcombe, Roger Lowe, or Alice Smith).

Essay question (b)

Explain the factors behind Elizabeth I’s decision to establish a religious settlement that was different from her predecessor in 1559.

Evaluate the consequences of the decision for Roman Catholics in England from 1559 to 1606.

The candidate’s response to the first part of the essay question could include:

  • Elizabeth’s ascension to the throne meant an opportunity to change the Catholicreligious settlementof her predecessor (Mary I) and establish a new Protestant national church that would signal England’s independence. She needed to signal her intentions early to avoid the instability that uncertainty would bring given the context of the religious turmoil of the previous three reigns
  • Elizabeth’s personal preference, influenced by her upbringing and education, was for continuity with her father’s church settlement and royal control of the new English church through Protestant bishops of her own choosing
  • Catholicism during the reign of Mary I had been linked to the burning of English Protestant martyrs and submission to Rome. Mary’s marriage to Philip II had caused English foreign policy to be subservient to the interests of Roman Catholic Spain.Elizabeth was reluctant for England to continue under such foreign domination
  • The Catholic Church had in the recent past declared Elizabeth to be illegitimate (Henry VIII’s divorce of Katherine of Aragon had not been sanctioned by the Pope). The international situation remained uncertain. Mary Queen of Scots was a rival Catholic claimant to the thrones of Scotland and England and had marriage connections with France (England’s traditional enemy). A uniform state church would be vital to national security
  • Elizabeth wanted to reward the support shown to her by Protestants in the SE of England and welcomed the return of some of the more moderate Marian exiles. But she did not want the radical Protestant reforms of Edward VI that had aroused resentment and disturbed harmony in the localities
  • She recognised that a state church free of ties to the papacy was an important source of income for the Crown through vacant sees, tithes and first fruits and tenths. She was also aware the governing class had an economic interest in supporting any settlement that did not require the land distributed during the dissolution of the monasteries to be returned
  • Given the precedent set by the religious changes in her father’s reign, it was going to be necessary to somehow secure the acceptance of both houses of Parliament for the new church settlement, despite the incumbent Roman Catholic bishops in the House of Lords. Reinforcing that Parliament had that role during periods of religious change was inescapable and no doubt Elizabeth understood it would mean that some might assume it was a place where further church reform could be initiated
  • Elizabeth, therefore, decided on a broad-based Anglican Church enacted by Parliament that would gain her uniformity and conformity, perhaps eventually assimilating those English Catholics who were prepared to accept her both as monarch and head of the church. It was both a reflection of her personal views and Erastian policy (intending to subordinate the needs of the church to the authority of the state).

The candidate’s response to the second part of the essay question could include:

  • Elizabeth began her settlement through Parliament with the Acts of Supremacy (requiring clergy and royal officials to accept the Queen’s new title of Supreme Governor of the Church under oath) and Uniformity (requiring use of a Book of Common Prayer in all churches). An Act of Exchange later in 1559 allowed Elizabeth in various ways to tap into the wealth of the Church for her own purposes. The settlement was completed in the Royal Injunctions 1559, the Thirty Nine Articles of 1563 and the Bishops visitations that followed. Clergy had to swear an oath of supremacy acknowledging Elizabeth as head of the Church. While only one of the twenty-six Marian bishops took the oath, almost all of the lower orders did. Consequently, less than 4% of the clergy of her predecessor were deprived of their office
  • The Settlement was clearly a compromise – Protestant in doctrine but retaining elements of a traditionally Catholic appearance, eg episcopacy, clerical dress and some rituals. Initially the government was content with outward conformity and did not strictly enforce recusancy fines (12 pence/ month). The Settlement did not immediately affect rural areas, and while some people in the localities did not like it imposed on them, the vast majority of people eventually accepted it
  • Elizabeth as Supreme Governor was firmly in control of the Church and was prepared to use her bishops to ensure conformity within it by visitations intended to remove papist images, relics, altars and vestments. But, she was also to accept no changes after the Thirty Nine Articles. Each parish church was to obtain the Bible in English, and there were very clear restrictions on preaching without a licence. She demanded Archbishop Parker publish the Advertisements in 1566, stating expectations of the clergy in terms of practice and dress
  • Catholics challenged both the monarch’s position as head of the Church and the changes in their churches. Many, especially in the north, stayed faithful to the Pope and the old religion, while others became Church Papists attending the national Church but worshipping in the Catholic manner in secret. They collaborated and evaded
  • However, resistance of Catholics within England to the Settlement was not apparent until the arrival of Mary Stuart in 1568. Her confinement in house arrest until her death in 1587 made her the focus of a number of plots (such as the Northern Rebellion in 1569), to free her and place her on Elizabeth’s throne
  • The Papal Bull of 1570 announcing Elizabeth’s deposition and requiring Catholics to disobey her sparked the response of the Treason and Fugitives Acts. This made it high treason to publish the Bull and caused loss of property for English Catholics who remained abroad. When priests from the continent were smuggled into England to revive the faith, recusancy laws were further tightened, making it treason to reconcile others to the Catholic faith, and priests were hunted out and executed. Recusancy fines were also raised to twenty pounds a month
  • The massacre of St Bartholomew 1572 and the assassination of William of Orange with papal blessing in 1584, enflamed fears of Mary Stuart’s involvement in plots against Elizabeth and inspired the Bond of Association and the Privy Council’s work to ensure her eventual execution for complicity in the Babington plot
  • The war against Spain from 1585 to 1603 and Irish rebellion caused Catholics to be treated as potential traitors who would support a foreign Papist inspired invasion and led to the Five Mile Act prohibiting all recusants from moving more than five miles beyond their homes ending any real Catholic resistance to the Church Settlement. The Archpriest controversy of the 1590s indicated most English Catholics were desperate to show they could be regarded as loyal
  • The hopes of Catholics for tolerance on the accession of James I (via his Catholic mother and wife) were soon dispelled after the Gunpowder Plot in 1605, when the Popish Recusants Act provided a new oath of allegiance, which denied the power of the Pope to depose monarchs. Recusants were prohibited from remaining within ten miles of the city of London, or from moving more than five miles from their home without a licence. They were disabled from holding commissions in the army or navy, from practising the professions of law and medicine or voting in local or Parliamentary elections and debarred from maintaining or defending any personal action or suit in the civil courts. Their houses were liable to be searched at any time and their arms and ammunition seized. Finally, they were liable to a fine of 10 pounds a month for each guest or servant who failed to attend the Anglican Church. It led the majority of Catholic families to simply withdraw from society as a whole
  • However, the Oath did not make James a persecutor of Catholics; he insisted no blood be spilled and that subversive Jesuits and seminary priests should simply be asked to leave the country.He regarded persecution, he wrote to Cecil, “as one of the infallible notes of a false church". In practice, James proved lenient towards Catholic laymen who took the Oath of Allegiance, and he tolerated Catholicism and crypto-Catholicism even at court (eg the Howards)
  • It was the outbreak of the Thirty Years religious war in Europe in 1618 that was tore-stimulate anti-Catholicism in England.

Essay question (c)

Explain the factors behind Elizabeth I’s decision not to name a successor throughout her reign.