Download
1 / 16
160 likes | 258 Views
‘Two Source’ Question. What you are being asked…. Essentially, you are being asked – to what extent do these two sources tell you about the perspectives of *buzz* in question?
E N D
What you are being asked… • Essentially, you are being asked – to what extent do these two sources tell you about the perspectives of *buzz* in question? • The SQA requires you to deal with each source as well as use your own recalled knowledge to show that the sources don’t offer ALL perspectives on *buzz* in question.
Distribution of Marks • Interpretation of sources = 6 marks (3 for each source) • Wider Contextual Development (recall) + views of historians’ = 10 marks
Tip to remember! • Deal with each source in turn • Use your recall (and knowledge of historians) throughout your response – you can use source comments to pick up on other valid points. • Only put your recall at the end of your response if you are seriously running out of time. • The knowledge you gain from revising for essays will also benefit your source responses.
Basic Structure • Intro sentence • Source A origin and purpose • Source A source content & your own recall • Source B origin and purpose • Source B source content & your own recall • Concluding sentence
1 – Origin & Purpose Authorship - • Historian: which school of thought? Perspective on *buzz*? Any obvious limitations? • Contemporary Personality: What was their involvement/relationship to *buzz*? Date – • Contemporary/Primary: Why is the date important? What was going on at that time that is crucial to *buzz*? • Secondary: Generally by an historian and so – is this date during the Soviet union or post Soviet union? (e.g. Post-Glasnost) How would the date influence the view of the author?
1 – Origin & Purpose Purpose – • What does the source aim to do/say? • How does this relate to the *buzz*? Don’t rely solely on the source ‘blurb’; read the content! N.B. In a two source response origin & purpose should not be lengthy as you can only gain a max of 2 marks for this. Your time is best spend dealing with source content and recall.
2 – Source Content • Select content which is directly related the *buzz* • You can quote/paraphrase or a mix of both. • It is important that you don’t just lift content from the source but you actually do something with it i.e. explain what is meant and add related recall where possible.
3 – Recall • Aim to sprinkle in-depth recall which is *buzz* related throughout your answer i.e. don’t have a special section for this. • An easy way to do this is to: • Develop upon the source content you use. Do you know other facts or details about what is mentioned in the source? • Offer differing views to those offered by the source. If the source discusses long term factors causing the Feb Revolution, then why not say ‘However, X does not discuss the short term factors such as xxxxx[insert explanation].
How much do Sources A and B reveal about differing interpretations of the immediate causes of the abdication of the Tsar in February 1917? (16)
SOURCE A from the Act of Abdication of Tsar Nicholas II, 2 March 1917 (old style) The domestic disturbances among the people threaten to have a calamitous effect on the further conduct of a hard fought war. The fate of Russia, the honour of Our heroic army, the good of the people and the whole future of Our beloved Fatherland demand that at all costs the war be pursued to a victorious conclusion. The cruel enemy is straining every sinew, and the hour is close when Our valiant army together with Our glorious allies will finally be able to smash the enemy. At such a decisive time in the life of Russia We have deemed it Our duty to facilitate for Our people the close unity and cohesion of all popular forces necessary for the rapid achievement of victory, and in agreement with the State Duma we have considered it right to abdicate and lay down power.
SOURCE B from A History of Twentieth Century Russia by Robert Service (1997) Matters came to a head with the resumption of industrial conflicts in February 1917. Wages for workers in the Petrograd armaments plants probably rose slightly faster than inflation. It was reckoned that such workers by 1917 were being paid in real terms between fifteen and twenty per cent less than before the war. Yet Nicholas was unsurprisingly complacent about the labour movement. The Emperor would indeed have faced difficulties even if he had summoned regiments from the Eastern front; for the High Command stayed very reluctant to get involved in politics. It is true that the monarchy’s troubles were as yet located in a single city. Yet this limitation was only temporary; for Petrograd was the capital; as soon as news spread to the provinces there was bound to be further popular commotion. Antipathy to the regime was fiercer than in 1905–1906.
