The 8 Mark "How Convincing is the Interpretation About" Question: Medieval England (Q1) (AQA GCSE History)
Revision Note
Summary of Question One
Question One requires you to evaluate how convincing an interpretation is about the given issue in the question
Amount of marks | 8 |
|---|---|
The time that you should spend on the question | No more than 10 minutes |
An example of the type of question you may encounter can be seen below:
In previous years, this question has focused on the following topics in Medieval history:
Year | Question Topic |
|---|---|
2022 | |
2021 | |
2020 | |
2019 | |
2018 | |
Sample 1 | |
Sample 2 |
How to Analyse an Interpretation
When analysing an interpretation you should:
Read the interpretation carefully
If you have time, read the interpretation more than once
Focus on just the content of the interpretation
If you use the provenance, you will receive no marks for the comments made
Whilst reading the interpretation, underline or highlight relevant pieces of text
Annotate the interpretation by attaching your knowledge to the content of the interpretation
When analysing an interpretation, many students forget to focus on the issue outlined
For example, if a question is asking you about the Hundred Rolls and the interpretation includes "The Model Parliament", you disregard the information about "The Model Parliament"
How is an Interpretation Convincing?
Interpretations are used in history to explain the past by looking at history from different points of view
Interpretations are convincing because they:
Have accurate knowledge
An understanding of the historical period
Show a typical experience or point of view from the historical period
The easiest way to decide if an interpretation is convincing is by using your own knowledge
For the example question, you could use the use of stocks and pillories as a reason why the interpretation is convincing
Judging Interpretations
The “How Convincing” question requires you to make a judgement
The common mistakes that students make when making a judgement are:
Not giving a clear judgement. Students do this by:
Failing to decide why the interpretation is convincing
Using language in their answer which is not decisive e.g. “kind of” or “maybe”
Contradicting your judgements
Students sometimes haven’t planned their answers properly. They start to write their answer with one judgement and then change their opinion halfway through
Doing this means that there is not a sustained judgement and you can not access Level 4 (6-8 marks)
Good judgements will:
Explain why the interpretation is convincing
Have a substantiated judgement
Be supported with specific knowledge
Be relevant to the interpretations and the question
Although you need to explain how convincing the interpretation is, this does not mean that the interpretation will not be convincing
Your judgement does not need to include limitations and you can receive full marks without one
Student's responses are stronger when they are decisive and clear about how convincing the interpretation is
However, if you include a limitation you will be credited, you must make sure the limitation is:
Supported by knowledge
Focused on the question
Relevant to your answer
“How Convincing is the Interpretation” Structure
For the example question above, you will be given an interpretation in an insert
An insert is an additional booklet to your answer paper. It provides key sources or interpretations needed to answer specific questions in the exam
Your answer should consist of:
Specific relevant knowledge
Content from the interpretation
The wider context of the time
Your answer could be written in PEE paragraphs
P- Make a point about the question
Identify why the interpretation is convincing
E- Use information from the interpretation and knowledge to support the point you have made
Your knowledge should be specific
Focus on the content from the interpretation
E- Explain why you find the interpretation convincing
Focus on the given issue in the question
For top marks, you need to show your understanding of the wider context of the time
To achieve full marks, you need to repeat this twice
Worked Example of a “How Convincing is the Interpretation” Question
Worked Example
How convincing is Interpretation A about medieval justice?
[8 marks]
Interpretation A: Adapted from a lecture given by the historian Helen Mary Carrle in 2006 at the International Medieval Congress, at Leeds University “The common view of the medieval justice system as cruel and based around torture and execution is often unfair and inaccurate. In fact, medieval townspeople saw it as their Christian duty to show mercy to offenders who were sent to prison. Prisoners were obliged to pay fees to their gaolers for their upkeep, so they depended upon given alms as a means of obtaining food, drink and other necessities. Consequently, prisons were much more public than nowadays - passersby could often see prisoners through the bars and gave them charity. Solitary confinement was usually a sanction only to be used against the very worst offenders because it removed the possibility of receiving alms from the charitable.” |
Answer:
Interpretation A is very convincing because it shows that there were different levels of punishment for different crimes. The interpretation says that thinking that medieval justice was based on "torture" and "execution" is "often unfair and inaccurate." This is very convincing because not all crimes were punishable by death. For example, for minor crimes such as drunkenness, medieval people used public humiliation by placing the criminal in stocks or pillories. Therefore, the interpretation is convincing because not all criminals in medieval England faced horrendous treatment. There were opportunities for criminals to repent for their crimes and to be accepted back into society.
Interpretation A is somewhat convincing because it shows that people’s belief in Christianity impacted how they saw justice. The interpretation states that it was their" Christian duty to show mercy to offenders". This is convincing because some punishments for crimes were based on the idea of repenting. For example, many people were subjected to flagellation for the crime of stealing. Flagellation was the concept of being whipped. This suffering made the criminal suffer for their sin and an opportunity to ask God for forgiveness. Very serious crimes that broke God’s Ten Commandments like murder had to be punished by death. The criminal could then face God’s judgement in the afterlife. Therefore, this interpretation is convincing as it shows that the punishment for minor to serious crimes was based on people’s Christian faith.
Overall, the interpretation is very convincing because the interpretation states that the medieval concept of justice was diverse and based on religion. People could be allowed the opportunity to repent but they could also be condemned to death if their crime was unforgivable.
You've read 0 of your 10 free revision notes
Unlock more, it's free!
Did this page help you?