Specimen Papers for the New 2017 IBDP History Syllabus

Paper 1

Section A: Military leaders
Read sources A to D carefully and answer the questions that follow. The sources and questions relate to the following aspect of the syllabus: Genghis Khan (c1200–1277): Leadership.

Source A  
Michael Rank, an historian and former journalist, writing in the popular history book History’s Greatest Generals: 10 Commanders Who Conquered Empires, Revolutionized Warfare, and Changed History Forever (2013).

Even at a young age, Genghis Khan saw that the nomadic Mongol tribes were a weak society due to
their endless internal warfare ...
Genghis Khan’s strength was in understanding the power of unity. By the age of 20, he used this wisdom to build an army that set out to destroy the divisions between tribes in what was soon to be his massive Mongol Empire. As he conquered, instead of exiling the region’s soldiers and killing the survivors, as commonly happened, he absorbed each conquered territory under his personal rule. This strategy helped him to expand the Mongol Empire quickly and efficiently, making use of all the talents, skills and abilities of the people in his newly acquired territories.
Genghis Khan had two primary directives: dominance and unity. He promoted army officers based on achievements rather than family ties. His was a system in which success and loyalty were rewarded. Due to his policies, tribal or ethnic divisions did not form in his ranks, ending the feudal alliances that had been so strong in medieval Mongolia.

Source B  
David Morgan, a professor of history, writing in an academic book, The Mongols (2007).

The question that had to be faced was: what now? The tribes of Mongolia had a supreme ruler.
Chinese policy had failed – it had failed to keep the tribes in conflict with each other. But unless something decisive was done with the newly formed military machine, it would go back to its earlier state. This, to my mind, is at least one explanation for the beginnings of the Mongols’ astonishing career of conquest. A superb army, potentially invincible in the field in thirteenth-century conditions, had been successfully created. But if it was not used against external enemies, it would not remain in existence for long. The only matter that required a decision was in which direction the armies were to advance.
Source C  
Reuven Amitai-Preiss, a professor of Muslim history at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, writing in the academic book Mongols and Mamluks: The Mamluk–Ilkhanid War, 1260–1281 (1995).

The belief that it was destiny for the Mongols to rule was not the only, or even main, reason for the ongoing Mongol expansion under Genghis Khan and his successors. Other factors which helped Genghis Khan’s rise to power were the particular political relations within the region at this time ... as well as plain luck. On a more fundamental level, territorial expansion into neighbouring areas was essential for nomadic states in the region, motivated as they were by the desire to control the manufactured and agricultural goods which could be found there.
Expansion was also a crucial part of the role of the nomadic ruler, and a ruler who did not succeed in
this was soon abandoned by his followers. The flexible nature of Turko–Mongolian tribal society made possible both the rapid construction of larger tribes and the absorption of foreign nomadic groups, giving the tribal leader the power to launch his campaigns of expansion. The warrior culture and ethos of tribesmen must also have contributed to Turko–Mongol ambition. Finally, the archery and riding skills of the tribesmen, along with their endurance, made them excellent soldiers in the conquering armies.

Source D  
Map showing the extent of Mongol conquest by 1260.

Questions for Section A
1. (a) What, according to Source C, were the factors that motivated the Mongol conquests? [3]
(b) What is the message conveyed by Source D? [2]
2. With reference to its origin, purpose and content, analyse the value and limitations of
Source B for an historian studying the Mongol Empire. [4]
3. Compare and contrast what Sources B and C reveal about the Mongol conquests under
Genghis Khan. [6]
4. Using the sources and your own knowledge, evaluate the role of Genghis Khan in the launch
and success of the Mongol conquests. [9]

Section B: Conquest and its impact
Read sources A to D carefully and answer the questions that follow. The sources and questions relate to the following aspect of the syllabus: the conquest of Mexico and Peru (1519–1551): key events and actors.

Source A
 Miguel León-Portilla, an historian and anthropologist, writing in an academic book, The Broken Spears: The Aztec Account of the Conquest of Mexico (1962).

The book is based on contemporary Aztec accounts of the conquest of Mexico.

On November 8, 1519, the Spanish conquistadors first entered the great city of Mexico, the metropolis the Aztecs had built on a lake island. Cortés and his men entered the city, not only as guests, but also as gods coming home.
When the Spaniards were installed in the palace, they asked Moctezuma about the city’s resources and reserves and about the warriors’ ensigns and shields. They questioned him closely and demanded gold. Moctezuma guided them to it. They surrounded him and crowded close with their weapons. When they arrived at the treasure house, the riches of gold and feathers were brought out to them: ornaments made of quetzal feathers, richly worked shields, discs of gold, the necklace of idols, bracelets and crowns.
The Spaniards immediately stripped the feathers from the gold shields and ensigns. They gathered all the gold in a great pile and set fire to everything else, regardless of its value. Then they melted down the gold. They searched through the whole treasure house, questioning and quarreling, and seizing every object they thought was beautiful.
The Aztecs were too frightened to approach. They would not risk coming forward. Yet they did not abandon the Spaniards to hunger and thirst. They brought them whatever they needed. They delivered the supplies to the Spaniards with trembling hands, then turned and hurried away.

Source B  
Hernán Cortés, a Spanish conquistador, writing in a letter to Emperor Charles V (1520). Charles V was also known as Charles I, King of Spain.

The following morning, the Aztecs came out of the city to greet me with many trumpets and drums, including many persons whom they regard as priests in their temples, dressed in traditional clothes and singing, as they do in the temples. They led us into the city and gave us very good quarters, where all those in my company were most comfortable ...
During the three days I remained in that city they fed us worse each day, and the lords and principal persons of the city came only rarely to see and speak with me ... Because of this and because of other signs I had observed, I decided to attack, and I sent for some of the chiefs of the city, saying that I wished to speak with them. I put them in a room and meanwhile warned our men to be prepared to fall on the many Indians who were outside our quarters and on those who were inside.
We fought so hard that in two hours more than three thousand men were killed. We took them by surprise, they were easy to disperse, especially because I had imprisoned their leaders.

Source C 
 Emanuel Leutze, a German painter, depicts an attack by Cortés and his troops in the painting Storming of the Teocalli by Cortez and his troops (1848).
Source D
Michael Meyer, William Sherman and Susan Deeds, professors of history, writing in the academic book The Course of Mexican History (2003).
Moctezuma and his nobles visited their guests’ quarters often to provide for all their needs.
Cortés understood with the greatest clarity that they were trapped if Moctezuma chose to make it
so. The Spaniards were surrounded by a multitude of Indians who could rise on signal. The Spanish soldiers expressed their anxiety to Cortés, who now resolved on a bold and desperate course – he would seize as hostage Moctezuma himself. This turn of events was inconceivable to the dignified lord of the Aztecs, but he finally submitted.
To limit the rising anger among his people, Moctezuma announced that he was not a prisoner; he resided with the strangers voluntarily, because it was the will of the gods. Furthermore, if Montezuma feared the revolt of nearby city-states then Cortés could provide the best means of coercing their alliance.
The Spanish captain agreed to depart whenever Moctezuma wished. The relieved ruler promised more gold and added that there was no great hurry in leaving. Cortés, of course, had no intention of departing.

Questions for Section B
5. (a) Why, according to Source D, did Moctezuma agree to remain a hostage of Cortés? [3]
(b) What is the message conveyed by Source C? [2]
6. With reference to its origin, purpose and content, analyse the value and limitations of
Source A for an historian studying the conquest of Mexico. [4]
7. Compare and contrast what Sources A and B reveal about the relationship between the
Spaniards and the Aztecs. [6]
8. “Mutual suspicion and misunderstanding between the Aztecs and the Spaniards played
a central role in the conquest of the Aztec Empire.” Using the sources and your own
knowledge, to what extent do you agree with this statement? [9]

Section C: The move to global war
Read sources A to D carefully and answer the questions that follow. The sources and questions relate to the following aspect of the syllabus: Japanese expansion in East Asia (1931–1941): Events.

Source A  
The first three articles of the Three Power/Tripartite Pact agreed between Germany, Italy and Japan in Berlin on 27 September 1940.

The governments of Germany, Italy and Japan have agreed as follows:
Article one: Japan recognizes and respects the leadership of Germany and Italy in establishment of a new order in Europe.
Article two: Germany and Italy recognize and respect the leadership of Japan in the establishment of a new order in greater East Asia.
Article three: Germany, Italy and Japan agree to cooperate in their efforts. They further agree to assist one another with all political, economic and military means when one of the three contracting powers is attacked by a power at present not involved in the European war or in the Chinese–Japanese conflict.

Source B  
Akira Iriye, a professor of History, writing in an academic book, The Origins of the Second World War in Asia and the Pacific (1987).

By September 1940, Britain could be assured of continued American support, and the United States had already implemented some of its embargoes against Japan. Under the circumstances, there would have been no way in which an Axis pact would cause the Anglo-American powers to soften their stand.
On the contrary, the pact could be expected to give them added resolve to stand firm. This is exactly what happened.
Japanese and German negotiators were fully aware of the developing ties between America and Britain, and for this very reason they hoped their alliance would serve to check and reduce the effectiveness
of American intervention. By then, as Matsuoka [the Japanese Foreign Minister] explained at the
time, it was becoming obvious that the United States was steadily involving itself not only in European but in Asian-Pacific affairs as well. It was tying itself not just to the British in the Atlantic but to the Commonwealth in Asia and the Pacific. The United States, in fact, would establish itself as a global power, with its influence in the Atlantic, Canada, the Western hemisphere, the Pacific Ocean and Asia.
It followed, then, that it would be an American-led coalition that Japan had to confront and be prepared to fight. It would no longer be China in isolation, but China assisted by the Soviet Union, Britain, and especially the United States.

Source C  
Ian Kershaw, a professor of Modern History, writing in an academic book,Fateful Choices: Ten Decisions that Changed the World, 1940–1941 (2007).

The American response quickly revealed the folly of Matsuoka’s claim – that the Tripartite [Three Power] Pact would serve as a deterrent. Instead, it merely confirmed American views that Japan was a belligerent [warlike], bullying, imperialist force in the Far East, an Asian equivalent of Nazi Germany, and had to be stopped. Such views seemed confirmed by the entry of Japanese troops into French Indochina on 23 September 1940. The essential purpose of the Tripartite Pact, from the Japanese perspective, was to deter the United States from intervening to prevent the southern advance seen as necessary to ensure Japan’s control of raw materials and, therefore, her future economic and political security.
The gamble in the pact was self-evident. What if the United States did not regard the pact as a deterrent, but as a provocation? What if the effect was to reinforce the determination to prevent Japanese expansion by threatening the lifeline of oil supplies? But from a Japanese perspective at
the time, the gamble had to be taken. To take it held great dangers, but also the potential of enormous rewards. Not to take it meant long-term domination by the Anglo-American powers. It meant, too, that the China War had been in vain. The need for boldness, not caution, carried the day in such a mentality.

Source D  
Harold “Mick” Armstrong, a cartoonist, depicts Japan announcing a “new order” in greater East Asia in a cartoon published in the Australian newspaper The Argus (1940).

Questions for Section C
9. (a) What, according to Source B, were the effects for Britain of the signing of the Three
Power/Tripartite Pact? [3] (b) What is the message conveyed by Source D? [2]
10. With reference to its origin, purpose and content, analyse the value and limitations of
Source A for an historian studying the Three Power/Tripartite Pact (September 1940). [4]
11. Compare and contrast what Sources B and C reveal about the significance of the Three Power/Tripartite Pact. [6]
12. Using the sources and your own knowledge, evaluate the consequences of the Three Power/Tripartite Pact for Japan, China and the US up to the end of 1941. [9]

Section D: Rights and protest
Read sources A to D carefully and answer the questions that follow. The sources and questions relate to the following aspect of the syllabus: the civil rights movement in the United States (1954–1965): Protests and action.

Source A
William J Simmons, a spokesman for a White Citizens’ Council [an organization that openly worked to preserve segregation] in an interview for a US television documentary about the civil rights movement, Eyes on the Prize (1987).

When the civil rights workers invaded the state [Mississippi] in the summer of 1964 to change us, presumably into their own image, they were met with a feeling of some curiosity, but mostly resentment. They spread across the state, made a great show of breaking up our customs, of challenging social practices that had been respected by people here over the years. That was the time of the hippies just coming in and they had on hippie uniforms and conducted themselves in hippie ways. They were not exactly the types of models that most people I knew wanted to copy and so the arrogance they showed in wanting to reform the whole state in the way they thought it should be created resentment.

Source B
Charles Patterson, an author and historian, writing in a student study guide The Civil Rights Movement (1995).

Freedom Summer was designed to register blacks for a real election – the 1964 presidential election. The ambitious goals of the project were to register as many blacks as possible across the state; organize a “Freedom Democratic Party” to challenge the official whites-only Mississippi Democratic Party; set up “freedom schools” for black children and establish community centers for blacks who needed medical or legal help. Student volunteers were recruited at elite colleges in the Northeast, large universities in the Midwest and black colleges in the South ... The day after the first wave of about 200 students arrived
in Mississippi – three young civil rights workers disappeared ... The disappearance of the civil rights workers failed to deter the work of the Freedom Summer volunteers, nor did the arrests, shootings and burnings of churches that served as “freedom schools”...
The most dramatic result of the Freedom Summer was the creation of the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party (MFDP). Organized by the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) to challenge the legitimacy and supremacy of Mississippi’s all-white regular Democratic Party. Freedom Summer volunteers convinced 80 000 blacks to join the MFDP... Although the MFDP was never officially recognized by the state Democratic Party, its dramatic challenge marked the beginning of the end of exclusive white political control of the state ... Freedom Summer was also important for the civil rights movement itself because it moved the struggle to a new level, beyond the bus boycotts, freedom rides and sit-ins. Mississippi blacks demonstrated to the nation that they wanted to vote, elect representatives, and have a voice in government. They wanted the political power they were entitled to as American citizens, black people were fighting for more than a seat at the lunch counter, they were now fighting for seats in the legislature.

Source C
Frank Miller, a cartoonist, depicts a Mississippi sheriff [law enforcement officer] arresting a civil rights activist in a cartoon published in the US newspaper The Des Moines Register (July 1964). The caption on the t-shirt reads “civil rights volunteer”.
 Sheriff: “Caught him trespassing on private property!” 

Source D
Dwight Garner, a journalist and book critic, writing in the article Mississippi Invaded by Idealism”, published in The New York Times (2010).

More than 700 college students, in the summer of 1964, under the supervision of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, risked their lives to travel to Mississippi to register black voters and open schools ... Many Americans remember the names Andrew Goodman, James Cheney and Michael Schwerner, the three young volunteers who vanished that summer, their bodies later found buried under a dam. What many forget is that these three men disappeared on the very first day of the Mississippi Summer Project (Freedom Summer). Their abduction terrified the other volunteers.
Much more was to come. Some 35 black churches were burned in Mississippi that summer, and five dozen homes and safe houses were bombed. Volunteers were beaten, harassed by the police, arrested on fraudulent charges. Shotguns were fired into the houses where they slept. Pickup trucks filled with armed men followed volunteers around ... The summer of 1964 in Mississippi was in some ways a failure for the volunteers. They didn’t register as many voters as they had hoped. Their plans to replace Mississippi’s all-white delegation at the 1964 Democratic National Convention in Atlantic City came to nothing. But their actions brought the nation’s full attention to Mississippi’s second-class citizens.

Questions for Section D
13. (a) Why, according to Source A, was there resentment towards the civil rights workers? [3]
(b) What is the message conveyed by Source C? [2]
14. With reference to its origin, purpose and content, analyse the value and limitations of Source B for an historian studying the civil rights movement in the United States. [4]
15. Compare and contrast what Sources B and D reveal about the consequences of the Freedom Summer. [6]
16. Using the sources and your own knowledge, evaluate the success of the Freedom Summer in furthering the cause of black civil rights in the United States.[9]

Section E: Conflict and intervention
Read sources A to D carefully and answer the questions that follow. The sources and questions relate to the following aspect of the syllabus: Rwanda (1990–1998): Course and interventions.

Source A
Lieutenant General Roméo Dallaire, the Force Commander for the United Nations Assistance Mission for Rwanda (UNAMIR), writing in a fax sent to the United
Nations headquarters in New York (11 January 1994).

1. Force Commander was put in contact with informant [Jean-Pierre Abubakar Turatsinze] by an important government politician. Informant is a top-level trainer of the Interhamwe-armed militia ...
6. Principal aim of Interhamwe was to protect Kigali from the RPF [Rwandan Patriotic Front].
Since UNAMIR arrived he has been ordered to register all Tutsi in Kigali. He suspects it is for their extermination. Example he gave was that in 20 minutes his personnel could kill 1000 Tutsis.
7. Informant states he disagrees with anti-Tutsi extermination. He supports opposition to RPF but cannot support killing of innocent persons.
8. Informant is prepared to provide location of many weapons ... He was ready to go to the storage location tonight, if we guarantee that he and his family be placed under our protection.
9. It is our intention to take action within the next 36 hours ...
11. Force commander does have certain reservations on why the informant is now suddenly deciding to release such information. Possibility of a trap not excluded ...
13. Where there’s a will, there’s a way. Let’s go.

Source B
Lieutenant General Roméo Dallaire, the former Force Commander for the United Nations Assistance Mission for Rwanda (UNAMIR), writing in his memoirs of
the conflict in Rwanda, Shake Hands with the Devil: The Failure of Humanity in Rwanda (2003).

The message from Kofi Annan caught me by surprise. Annan spelled out in excruciating detail the limits New York was placing upon me: as force commander of a chapter-six peacekeeping operation I was not allowed to conduct deterrent operations in support of UNAMIR. Also, in the interests of transparency,
I was to pass on to President Habyarimana the information that Jean-Pierre Abubakar Turatsinze had given to us ... For the rest of the week, I made phone call after phone call to New York, arguing over the necessity of raiding the arms stores. During these exchanges, I got the feeling that New York saw me as unpredictable and uncontrollable. The deaths and injuries suffered by the American Rangers in Somalia must have had a huge impact on the DPKO [Department of Peacekeeping Operations] and many member nations ...
Just before going to see Habyarimana on January 12, I briefed the ambassadors of Belgium and the United States, and the chargé d’affaires of France. All of them acknowledged the information we provided and stated they would inform their respective governments. None of them appeared to be surprised, which led me to conclude that our informant was merely confirming what they already knew.

Source C
Michael Dobbs a journalist and research fellow, writing in the article “The Rwanda ‘Genocide Fax’: What We Know Now”, for the #Rwanda20yrs project of the US
Holocaust Memorial Museum and the National Security Archive (2014).

Over time, the “genocide fax” became a symbol of the failure of the international community to prevent mass-killing in Rwanda. Thanks to new documents, it is now possible to piece together a fuller account of the man who inspired the fax, and how and why UN officials responded, or failed to respond, to his warnings.
Half-Hutu and half-Tutsi, Jean-Pierre Abubakar Turatsinze [the informant] operated on both sides of the political and ethnic divisions in pre-genocidal Rwanda ... By 1990, he worked as an intermediary to the Interahamwe. He had been given the assignment of distributing weapons to Interahamwe members, but was suspected of selling many of these for personal profit ...
Turatsinze met with UNAMIR [United Nations Assistance Mission for Rwanda] officers through January and February 1994, but he declined to show them the lists of Tutsis identified for “extermination” that he claimed to have compiled on MRND [National Republican Movement for Democracy and Development, the ruling party in Rwanda] instructions ... Turatsinze misled UN peacekeepers on key points and exaggerated his own importance. One of the structural weaknesses of UNAMIR was the lack of a professional intelligence evaluation unit, to fully evaluate Turatsinze’s credibility.

Source D
Patrick Chappatte, a cartoonist, depicts the General Assembly of the United Nations in the cartoon “Anniversary of the Rwandan Genocide”, published in the Swiss newspaper Le Temps (7 April 2014).

Questions for Section E
17. (a) Why, according to Source B, did the UN not allow Lieutenant General Romeo Dallaire to act upon information provided by the secret informant? [3] 
(b) What is the message conveyed by Source D? [2]
18. With reference to its origin, purpose and content, analyse the value and limitations of Source B for an historian studying the international community’s response to the Rwandan genocide. [4]
19. Compare and contrast what Sources A and C reveal about the “genocide fax”. [6]
20. “The international community failed to effectively intervene in Rwanda because it lacked knowledge on the crisis.” Using the sources and your own knowledge, to what extent do you agree with this statement? [9]

Paper 2

Topic 1: Society and economy (750–1400)
1. Evaluate the importance of famines and disease as causes of social and economic change.
2. With reference to one religion, examine the reasons for disputes between rulers and religious leaders.

Topic 2: Causes and effects of medieval wars (750–1500)
3. “Dynastic disputes lay at the heart of most medieval conflicts.” To what extent do you agree with this statement?
4. Compare and contrast the military tactics used in two medieval conflicts, each chosen from a different region.

Topic 3: Dynasties and rulers (750–1500)
5. With reference to one medieval ruler, evaluate the importance of non-military methods as a means to expand and consolidate their rule.
6. Examine the extent to which the rule of two medieval leaders can be regarded as successful.

Topic 4: Societies in transition (1400–1700)
7. Examine the social impact of two scientific or technological developments from the period 1400 to 1700.
8. Evaluate the importance of merchants and travellers in bringing about economic change in the period 1400 to 1700.

Topic 5: Early Modern states (1450–1789)
9. Examine the relationship between religion and the state in any one Early Modern state.
10. Compare and contrast the reasons for resistance or rebellion in two colonial states, each chosen from a different region.

Topic 6: Causes and effects of Early Modern wars (1500–1750)
11. Compare and contrast the short-term causes of two Early Modern wars, each chosen from a different region.
12. Evaluate the role and importance of mercenaries in one Early Modern war.

Topic 7: Origins, development and impact of industrialization (1750–2005)
13. “The availability of natural resources was the most important cause of industrialization.” With reference to two countries, each chosen from a different region, to what extent do you agree with this statement?
14. Examine the impact of industrialization on standards of living and working conditions in one country.

Topic 8: Independence movements (1800–2000)
15. Evaluate the importance of war as a cause or catalyst for two independence movements, each chosen from a different region.
16. “The greatest challenges facing newly independent states were economic.” With reference to one newly independent state, to what extent do you agree with this statement?

Topic 9: Evolution and development of democratic states (1848–2000)
17. Compare and contrast the conditions that encouraged the demand for democratic reform in two states, each chosen from a different region.
18. “Government policies in democratic states rarely affect the distribution of wealth.” To what extent do you agree with this statement?

Topic 10: Authoritarian states (20th century)
19. “Successful foreign policy was essential for the maintenance of power by authoritarian leaders.”
With reference to one authoritarian leader, to what extent do you agree with this statement?
20. Compare and contrast the impact on women of the policies of two authoritarian states, each chosen from a different region.
Turn over

Topic 11: Causes and effects of 20th-century wars
21. Examine the role of ideology in causing two 20th-century civil wars, each chosen from a different region.
22. Compare and contrast the role of technology in determining the outcome of two 20th-century wars.

Topic 12: The Cold War: Superpower tensions and rivalries (20th century)
23. Examine the impact of the US policy of containment on superpower relations between 1947 and 1964.
24. Evaluate the impact on the course of the Cold War of two crises, each chosen from a different region.

Paper 3 – History of Europe
Monarchies in England and France (1066–1223)
1. Examine the reasons for William I’s success in establishing his authority as King of England.
2. To what extent were the Capetian kings of France successful in extending the royal demesne in the period from 1137 to 1223?

Muslims and Jews in medieval Europe (1095–1492)
3. Examine the reasons for the collapse of Islamic rule in Spain.
4. “The most significant impact of Jewish persecution was the loss of skill and ability from economic and cultural life.” To what extent do you agree with this statement?

Late medieval political crises (1300–1487)
5. Examine the reasons for English success in the Hundred Years War in the period from 1415 to 1427.
6. Compare and contrast the political challenges facing Henry VI and Edward IV of England.

The Renaissance (c1400–1600)
7. To what extent was the social and political structure in Florence responsible for the origins of the Renaissance?
8. Discuss the role and significance of Lorenzo de Medici in the patronage of art in Renaissance Italy.

The Age of Exploration and its impact (1400–1550)
9. Evaluate the significance of Henry the Navigator in the 15th-century exploration of Africa.
10. Examine the importance of religion as a motive for European exploration.

The Reformation (1517–1572)
11. To what extent were the attitudes of the German princes responsible for the spread of Lutheranism in Germany between 1517 and 1547?
12. Examine the importance of the Council of Trent for the Catholic Church.

Absolutism and Enlightenment (1650–1800)
13. Compare and contrast the political impact of Enlightenment ideas in two European states you have studied.
14. Examine the impact of monarchical patronage on the arts in any one country from the region.

The French Revolution and Napoleon I (1774–1815)
15. To what extent do you agree with the claim that Louis XVI caused the French Revolution?
16. Evaluate the success of Napoleon I’s domestic policies in the period from 1799 to 1815.

France (1815–1914)
17. Examine the causes and significance of the Revolution of 1830.
18. Evaluate the extent of political instability in the French Third Republic between 1871 and 1890.

Society, politics and economy in Britain and Ireland (1815–1914)
19. “Unrealistic and overambitious demands were the main reason for the failure of Chartism.” To what extent do you agree with this statement?
20. Evaluate the success of Disraeli’s foreign policy.

Italy (1815–1871) and Germany (1815–1890)
21. Examine the consequences of Austrian dominance in Italy between 1815 and 1849.
22. “Bismarck was the sole architect of German unification, 1862 to 1871.” To what extent do you agree with this statement?

Imperial Russia, revolution and the establishment of the Soviet Union (1855–1924)
23. Compare and contrast the domestic policies of Alexander II and Alexander III.
24. Examine the reasons for Bolshevik victory in the Russian Civil War.

Europe and the First World War (1871–1918)
25. Evaluate the claim that German foreign policy was the main cause of the First World War.
26. Discuss the effects of the First World War on the civilian population in any one European country.

European states in the inter-war years (1918–1939)
27. Evaluate the reasons for the survival of the Weimar Republic in the period from 1918 to 1923.
28. Examine the reasons for the Nationalist victory in the Spanish Civil War.

Versailles to Berlin: Diplomacy in Europe (1919–1945)
29. “The Treaty of Versailles was a fair and reasonable peace.” To what extent do you agree with this statement?
30. Evaluate the successes and failures of the League of Nations in Europe.

The Soviet Union and post-Soviet Russia (1924–2000)
31. Discuss the reasons for Stalin’s success in the struggle for power during the period 1924 to 1929.
32. Evaluate the success of Brezhnev’s domestic policies.

Post-war western and northern Europe (1945–2000)
33. Examine the reasons for, and the extent of, European integration between 1945 and 2000.
34. Discuss the challenges to the establishment of democracy in Spain up to 1982.

Post-war central and eastern Europe (1945–2000)
35. Examine the extent of economic and social change in any one country in Central or Eastern Europe from 1989 to 2000.
36. “Popular support for local Communist parties was the main reason for Soviet dominance in Eastern Europe during the period 1945 to 1955.” To what extent do you agree with this statement?