Marking Scheme

www. studyguide. pk UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE INTERNATIONAL EXAMINATIONS GCE Advanced ancillary level and GCE Advanced Level MARK SCHEME for the whitethorn/June 2008 question paper 9697 HISTORY 9697/01 story 1, maximum raw t stamp outency 100 This mark scheme is published as an aid to teachers and loaferdidates, to render the requirements of the examination. It shows the basis on which Examiners were instructed to awarfared label. It does non indicate the details of the discussions that took place at an Examiners meeting in the first place marking began.All Examiners argon instructed that alternative correct answers and unexpected approaches in pratdidates scripts must(prenominal) be granted marks that fairly reflect the relevant friendship and skills recordd. take none schemes must be read in continuative with the question papers and the report on the examination. CIE go away non visualize into discussions or correspondence in connection with these mark schemes. CI E is publishing the mark schemes for the May/June 2008 question papers for around IGCSE, GCE Advanced Level and Advanced Subsidiary Level syllab characters and near Ordinary Level syllabuses. www. xtremepapers. net www. studyguide. pk rascal 2 shekels Scheme GCE A/AS train May/June 2008 Syllabus 9697 typography 01 GENERIC MARK BANDS FOR ESSAY QUESTIONS Examiners bothow for rate which Level of Response best reflects most of the answer. An answer leave not be required to demonstrate any of the descriptions in a exceptional Level to qualify for a Mark Band. In bands of 3 or 4 marks, examiners allow norm each toldy award the middle mark/one of the middle marks, moderate it up or down according to the particular qualities of the answer. In bands of 2 marks, examiners should award the lower mark if an answer just deserves the band and the spunkyer mark if the answer clearly deserves the band.Band 1 Marks 2125 Levels of Response The approach will be consistently analytical o r explanatory sooner than descriptive or narrative. commodevass will be fully relevant. The argument will be structured coherently and supported by very(prenominal) appropriate f spellual material and ideas. The writing will be stainless. At the lower end of the band, in that location whitethorn be any(prenominal) weaker sections just now the overall quality will show that the candidate is in control of the argument. The best answers must be awarded 25 marks. 2 1820 Essays will be focused clearly on the demands of the question simply there will be some un blushness.The approach will be mostly analytical or explanatory earlier than descriptive or narrative. The answer will be mostly relevant. Most of the argument will be structured coherently and supported by by and large accurate factual material. The impression will be that a good solid answer has been provided. 3 1617 Essays will reflect a clear understanding of the question and a fair attempt to provide an argument and f actual knowledge to answer it. The approach will contain analysis or explanation only if there may be some heavily descriptive or narrative passages. The answer will be largely relevant.Essays will achieve a genuine argument alone may lack balance and depth in factual knowledge. Most of the answer will be structured satisfactorily but some parts may lack full coherence. 4 1415 Essays will indicate attempts to represent relevantly although often implicitly. The approach will depend more(prenominal) on some heavily descriptive or narrative passages than on analysis or explanation, which may be limited to introductions and conclusions. Factual material, sometimes very full, will be used to impart in trackation or describe planets rather than to wield directly the requirements of the question.The structure of the argument could be organised more effectively. 5 1113 Essays will offer some appropriate elements but there will be little attempt loosely to standoff factual material to the requirements of the question. The approach will lack analysis and the quality of the description or narrative, although sufficiently accurate and relevant to the topic if not the particular question, will not be link up effectively to the argument. The structure will show weaknesses and the treatment of topics within the answer will be unbalanced. 6 8-10 Essays will not be properly focused on the requirements of the question.There may be many unassisted assertions and commentaries that lack sufficient factual support. The argument may be of limited relevance to the topic and there may be confusion intimately the implications of the question. 7 0-7 Essays will be characterised by abridgeificant irrelevancy or arguments that do not begin to make significant points. The answers may be largely fragmental and incoherent. Marks at the bottom of this Band will be presumptuousness very rarely because even the most wayward and fragmentary answers usually make at least a few cogn izant points. UCLES 2008 www. xtremepapers. net www. studyguide. k rogue 3 Mark Scheme GCE A/AS LEVEL May/June 2008 Syllabus 9697 Paper 01 Section A The Origins of World War I, 18701914 blood-Based incertitude Analysis and Evaluation 1 Serbia was most to blame for the Sarajevo Crisis. Use acknowledgments AE to show how far the severalize confirms this statement. CONTENT compend L23 EVALUATION L45 A Strong antiAustrian, antiFranz Ferdinand statement by a instalment of a terrorist group. Y-Threats expressed to Austria and the Archduke B Official letter from a German embassador to the Kaiser with his handwritten notes. Y-The ambassador urged Austria to take a oderate positioning and avoid an extreme response. N-William II realised that the situation was very serious and fully supported Austria. He did not urge moderation. CROSSREFERENCE TO OTHER PASSAGES Y- stem C corresponds Y- root word can be that there was accepted not all widespread antias the personal Austrian sa vour in view of the writer but as the scene of Serbia. N-Contradicted by separatewise members of Source D and the down(p) Hand. especially Source E, N-Source comes from a member of a the views of official Serbian opinion small group. Although particularly which is anxious to reach a conciliatement iolent, it was not with Austria. representative of widely distributed Serbian opinion. Y-The letter is authentic and probably reflects accurately the views of the Ambassador. Y-The Kaisers handwritten notes are authentic and reflect his reaction to the blackwash of Archduke Franz Ferdinand. Y-Although the writers of B disagree about Austrias reactions, taken unitedly they represent different German opinions. Y-Agrees with Source A that the Austrians see danger in Serbia. Source C agrees that Serbian prevalent opinion is very widely anti-Austrian. N-Source D gives the cautious and anxious views of the French nd British giving medications. There is in any case a reference to the f ears of the Serbian political relation activity. UCLES 2008 www. xtremepapers. net OTHER (e. g. Contextual knowledge) Y- Serbia was the leading state in the Balkans that able a serious nationalist threat to the diverse Austrian Empire. It magnate do done more to suppress violent groups. N-The Serbian applyment was not responsible for the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand. This act was condemned universally but Austria used it as an excuse to take action against Serbia. It did not enter negotiations seriously. Y-By 1914, Austria was eeply suspicious of Serbia as the leader of hostile sassy independent states, threatening the further break-up of its Empire. Y-Serbia did not act sufficiently to suppress anti-Austrian terrorist groups. N-The Kaisers notes reflect his fatten up support for Austria, e. g. the Blank Cheque, and his tendency to adopt overhasty and immoderate attitudes. N-The conditions that Austria made on Serbia were probably too humiliating to be accep table. www. studyguide. pk Page 4 Mark Scheme GCE A/AS LEVEL May/June 2008 Syllabus 9697 Paper 01 C letter of an Austrian diplomat to the Austrian ForeignMinister Y-Anti-Austrian feeling was widespread in Serbia. All social and political groups were voluminous. There was even the (ludicrous) require that Austria had caused the assassination. Y-The diplomat was in Belgrade when he wrote the letter he had first-hand knowledge. N-He neglects the reasons for Serbian hostility to Austria. Y-Agrees with Source A, which is evidence of terrorist animosity to Austria. Agrees with the Kaiser in Source B that Austria had a justify grievance against Serbia. N-Disagrees with D, the moderate views of other(a) major(ip) states who do not condemn Serbia. Disagrees ith Source E, which is an offer by the Serbian government to settle differences. Y-Anti-Austrian feeling in Serbia had been building up for a long time. An example was the Balkans Wars. Austria felt itself on the defensive. N-Serbia was a smaller country and did not represent a major threat, even to a declining Austria. D Letter from the French Ambassador to his Foreign Minister. N-Fears of an extreme Austrian reaction are shared by the governments of France, Britain and Serbia. Austria is seen as the major danger to peace. Y-The letter probably represents accurately the discussions in which he Ambassador was involved. N-Source does not hold the reasons wherefore Austria was taking a strong line against Serbia. Y-Source B part agrees inasmuch as the German Ambassador dissuaded the Austrians from taking extreme measures. Source E agrees as the offer of the Serbian government to resolve differences with Austria. N-Source C strongly disagrees. Source A can also be seen to disagree because it shows the unremitting hostility of an antiAustrian terrorist group. Y-France and Britain wished to take the Sarajevo crisis. The Serbian government was uncoerced to make concessions. N-The British overnment did not make i ts exact attitude sufficiently clear. E Message from a Serbian Ambassador to his Prime Minister. N-The Serbian government condemns the assassination of Franz Ferdinand and wishes to arm good relations with Austria. Y-The message is reliable because it is very probably authentic. N-The Serbian government had not antecedently done all come-at-able to suppress violent anti-Austrian groups. Y-Source D agrees directly and indirectly. Source B part agrees (the words of the German Ambassador). N-Source A can be taken to disagree as can the Kaisers notes in Source B.Source C strongly disagrees opinion in Serbia is extremely anti-Austrian. Y-The Serbian government responded positively to Austrian demands after the Sarajevo assassination. N-The Serbian government had tolerated the presence of some extreme antiAustrian groups. UCLES 2008 www. xtremepapers. net www. studyguide. pk Page 5 Mark Scheme GCE A/AS LEVEL May/June 2008 Syllabus 9697 Paper 01 Marking Notes Note all papers are to be marked using the generic marking bands for source-based and essay questions. ) 1 Source-Based Question L1 WRITES ABOUT THE HYPOTHESIS, NO USE OF SOURCES 15These answers write about Sarajevo or even generally about 1914 but will ignore the question, i. e. they will not use the sources as information/evidence to test the effrontery speculation. For example, they will not discuss Serbia was most to blame for the Sarajevo Crisis but will describe events very generally. embroil in this level answers which use information taken from the sources but only in providing a analysis of views expressed by the writers, rather than for testing the hypotheses. Alternatively, the sources super advocate be ignored in a general essay answer. L2 USES INFORMATION TAKEN FROM THE SOURCES TO quarrel OR upkeep THE HYPOTHESIS 68 These answers use the sources as information rather than as evidence, i. e. sources are used at brass value only with no evaluation/interpretation in context. For example, A ustria exaggerated the crisis caused by the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand. The German Ambassador in Source B does not think that the Austrian government should take precipitate measures against Serbia, preferring a more considered approach. Source D states that the British Foreign Minister shared this view and believed that the Austrian government should be honest in its demands on Serbia.Source E gives the view of the Serbian government, in which it promised not to allow extremism against Austria in its territories. Those prove of being involved in the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand would be punished. The Serbian government wished for good relations with Austria. Or alternatively, Austria did not exaggerate the crisis caused by the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand. Source A portrays the extreme opinions of a member of a terrorist group even after the assassination. They represented a potent threat to Austria.In Source B, the Kaiser supported Austr ia and did not agree that Austria should be advised to be cautious. In Source C, the Austrian diplomat describes widespread extreme anti-Austrian feeling in Serbia after the assassination. L3 USES INFORMATION TAKEN FROM SOURCES TO CHALLENGE AND SUPPORT THE HYPOTHESIS. 913 These answers know that testing the hypothesis involves both attempting to confirm and to disconfirm it. However, sources are used only at face value. For example, There is evidence for and against the claim that Serbia was most to blame for the Sarajevo Crisis.Source A supports the claim because it is evidence of the views of a member of a terrorist group that was on the whole anti-Austrian and completely critical of the visit to Sarajevo of Archduke Franz Ferdinand. He was not only expressing his own opinion. This is supported in Source B by the views of Kaiser William II and in Source C, the description of anti-Austrian feeling in Serbia. On the other hand, the claim is contradicted by other Sources. Source C records the fears of a Serbian Ambassador in Britain that Austria would react whilst Grey, the British Foreign Minister, had asked the Austrian government to pursue oderate policies. Source E proves that the Serbian government was willing to punish those who were responsible for the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand and sought good relations with Austria. UCLES 2008 www. xtremepapers. net www. studyguide. pk Page 6 Mark Scheme GCE A/AS LEVEL May/June 2008 L4 BY INTERPRETING/EVALUATING SOURCES CHALLENGE OR SUPPORT THE HYPOTHESIS. IN CONTEXT, Syllabus 9697 FINDS Paper 01 attest TO 1416 These answers are exposed of using sources as evidence, i. e. demonstrating their utility in testing the hypothesis, by interpreting them in their historical context, i. . not simply accepting them at face value. For example, It is more accurate that Austria exaggerated the crisis caused by the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand. Source A is violently anti-Austrian and regards the A rchduke as a tyrant. It was particularly offensive to issue such a statement soon after the assassination of the Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife. However, the Black Hand group was a small minority and not necessarily representative of the wider Serbian opinion. The Kaisers support of stern Austrian action in Source B is typical of his volatile tendencies.It is not reliable as evidence of Austrias reaction. Source C is a long account of anti-Austrian feeling in Serbia but is not necessarily reliable although it is written by a diplomat. It is contradicted by the views of the Serbian Ambassador in Source D, who claims that Austria had pursued anti-Serbian policies for a long time, and even more by the Serbian Ambassador in Source E. There cap tycoon have been strong anti-Austrian feeling in Serbia, as Source C reports, but Source E is strong evidence of the wish of the Serbian government not to provoke Austria.Source D includes the views of other governments. Both the French an d British governments believe that the Austrian government should remain calm. There was a long history of ill feeling surrounded by Austria and the Balkan states, especially in Serbia. The assassination of a leading member of the Austrian royal family (the Emperors heir) was particularly hammy but Austria shared the blame for the poor relations between these countries. L5 BY INTERPRETING AND EVALUATING SOURCES IN CONTEXT, FINDS EVIDENCE TO CHALLENGE AND SUPPORT THE HYPOTHESIS. 1721 These answers know that testing the hypothesis involves attempting both to confirm and disconfirm the hypothesis, and are capable of using sources as evidence to do this (i. e. both confirmation and disconfirmation are done at this level). For example, (L4 plus) However, the sources can also be interpreted to show that Serbia was most to blame for the Sarajevo Crisis. Source A comes from a member of a terrorist group that had carried out the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand and its programme was widely supported in Serbia.There is no sign that the Black Hand would end its activities and, although it had few members, the danger that they represented had already been proved by their bureau in the assassination. Source B includes the provocative views of the Kaiser but the German Ambassadors letter does not criticise the Austrians for exaggerating the crisis he only wishes the Austrians to be moderate in their response. Source C is strong evidence of the anti-Austrian sentiments in Serbia. The diplomat was correct in his belief that such feelings were very widespread in Serbia.It is also true that Serbia, like other Balkan states, believed that Austria was a declining baron. Austria had to take strong action to counter this opinion. Even more insulting was the allegation that Austria had caused the assassination. UCLES 2008 www. xtremepapers. net www. studyguide. pk Page 7 Mark Scheme GCE A/AS LEVEL May/June 2008 Syllabus 9697 Paper 01 L6 AS L5, PLUS EITHER (a) EXPLA IN WHY EVIDENCE TO CHALLENGE/SUPPORT IS BETTER/ PREFERRED, OR (b) RECONCILES/EXPLAINS PROBLEMS IN THE EVIDENCE TO SHOW THAT NEITHER CHALLENGE NOR SUPPORT IS TO BE PREFERRED. 2225For (a), the argument must be that the evidence for challenging or supporting the claim is more justified. This must involve a comparative judgement, i. e. not just why some evidence is better, but why some evidence is worse. For example, Although there is evidence in the Sources both to challenge and support the claim that Serbia was most to blame for the Sarajevo Crisis, the more convincing case contradicts the claim. The strongest evidence is from the Sources that show how anxious the Serbian government was to take away the situation. These are Source D and especially Source E.Although Source D is a letter from the Ambassador of a country that was not friendly towards Austria, it is probably an accurate account of the discussions that he was involved in. It can be supported by own knowledge that the Serb ian government was fearful of Austria and that the British government, represented by Grey, called for moderation. Source E is very probably an accurate account of a Serbian governments message to Austria and its wish to avoid extreme action. Source A should not be given much weight as justification for harsh policies by Austria. The members of the Black Hand group were few.They were a danger to Austria but this did not justify action against Serbia as a whole. The handwritten notes of William II in Source B are an exaggerated response in support of Austria. They contrast with the more sensible attitude of the German Ambassador in this extract. Whilst Source C is probably a generally accurate account of anti-Austrian feeling in Serbia, it ignores Austrias responsibility for bad relations between the states. For (b) include all L5 answers which use the evidence to modify the hypothesis (rather than simply seeking to support/contradict) in order to cleanse it.For example, An alterna tive explanation is that, although Austria did not exaggerate the horror of the assassination in the short term, it was not justified in using it as the excuse for a major war against Serbia which was then to involve all of the major countries in atomic number 63. The assassination did not only horrify Austria but all major European countries, the members of the Triple Entente as well as those of the Triple Alliance. Austria used the assassination to justify the complete suppression of Serbia, which had been its enemy for a long time. Source C is the only extract that refers to long-term issues and it is very one-sided.However, the crisis in Sarajevo can only be understood when we consider these long term issues, including the animosity between the Austrian Empire and the more recently independent Balkan states and Austrias membership of the Triple Alliance, with its rivalry to the major states in the Triple Entente. The Serbian government could have done more to suppress anti-Austr ian terrorist groups but it did not have direct responsibility for the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand at Sarajevo and well-tried seriously to defuse the situation. UCLES 2008 www. xtremepapers. net www. studyguide. pk Page 8Mark Scheme GCE A/AS LEVEL May/June 2008 Syllabus 9697 Paper 01 Section B Essay Questions 2 How far did snooze Bonaparte ensure liberty and equality in his domestic government of France? The advert issue is the nature of Napoleons government of France. The question clearly refers to domestic issues discussions of foreign policy or the impact of Napoleons rule on other countries will not be relevant unless they are a brief part of introductions or conclusions. One would expect answers in Bands 1 (2125) and 2 (1820) to consider arguments for and against Napoleons support for liberty and equality.However, examiners should not require an equal balance. The balance will reflect the argument. For example, it mogul reject liberal measures as of minor importance. Answers in other Bands might plump for an argument that accepts or rejects liberty and equality without considering the alternative at all. It will be relevant to discuss the Code Napoleon (1804), an attempt to unify the diverse laws of France. Its confirmation of equality before the law and the end of privilege, and religious toleration would point towards Napoleons liberalism. Careers were open to talent.However, associations of workers were banned and women were given fewer rights than men. Napoleon kept a tight hold on power through his ascendant rule. Officials were nominated and the Empire ensured Napoleons personal rule. Opposition was suppressed and reference might be made to the work of Fouche as Minister of Police. Equality was limited by the restriction of promotion to Napoleons supporters. 3 Why did industrialisation have all- grievous(prenominal) political effects on Europe during the nineteenth century? (You should refer to developments in at least dic kens of the following countries Britain, France and Germany in your answer. The key issue is the link between industrialisation and political developments. Candidates are asked to refer to at least 2 countries. This should help to avoid vague responses. However, examiners will not expect any balance between the two or three countries and the question does not specify how much time should be given to particular examples. It will not be required to describe the development of the Industrial Revolution per se but to link developments to the key issue. It might be argued that the Industrial Revolution encouraged the growth of a new middle class.Its scotch wealth enabled it to play a more important political role. Reference might be made to the Reform Acts (1832 and 1867) in Britain and to political advances in France from 1848. The position of the urban working class, although it lacked economic power, was enhanced by its concentration in large towns. Gradually political concessions had to be made to them, partly to avoid unrest. Reference might be made to the Reform Acts (1867 and 1884), with its supplements such as the Secret balloting Act, in Britain and to political events in France.Political concessions were also made to the working class in Germany by the end of the nineteenth century. It will be relevant to discuss social reform, for example in education and housing, which came about largely because of the political pressures from the working class. High credit should be given when candidates point out the link between industrialisation and new political ideas such as Socialism and Marxism. UCLES 2008 www. xtremepapers. net www. studyguide. pk Page 9 4 Mark Scheme GCE A/AS LEVEL May/June 2008 Syllabus 9697 Paper 01Why was capital of North Dakota more successful than the revolutionaries of 184849 in unifying Germany? The key issue is the contrast between von von Bismarcks success and the failure of the German revolutionaries in 184849. Examiners shou ld expect a reasonable balance. 6040 either way can merit any mark but 7030 would normally lead to the award of one Band lower than would otherwise be given. However, as in all answers, the overall quality of the argument will be the most important criterion. An excellent discussion of Bismarck in an otherwise unbalanced answer might still be worth a high mark.Band 5 (1113) will require a basic understanding of either Bismarck or the 184849 revolutions. The question asks Why? and the most effective answers will be analytical but answers that contain successive analyses of Bismarck and 184849 should not be undervalued. Bismarck was helped by Prussias strong military machine power whereas the earlier revolutionaries had been militarily weak. He was supported by William I whereas Frederick William IV spurned the possibility of a German crown. However, Frederick William IV did introduce a comparatively liberal constitution that became attractive to other German states.Prussias econo my was strong candidates can discuss the importance of the Zollverein. Bismarck was more skilful in handling the other German states. He was more successful in dealing with other countries through his diplomacy and use of war. Candidates can illustrate this through the Danish War (1864), the Austro-Prussian War (1866) and the Franco-Prussian War (1870). Meanwhile, Austria was a weaker rival by the 1860s and less able to prevent German unification. 5 Explain the problems European countries face in promoting imperial expansion during the later nineteenth century.The key issue is the problems faced by European countries when they engaged in imperial enterprises. Examiners will look for some examples, both from Europe and overseas. However, the range of possible overseas examples is wide and examiners will be realistic in their expectations. For example, some very good arguments might be supported by examples from a limited range of regions. There were problems in communication. Gover nments were sometimes involved in enterprises because of the actions of local officials, for example Britain and Cecil Rhodes. Sometimes different policies were favoured.For example, Bismarck was less enthusiastic than German public opinion. In break of hopes for profits, imperial expansion could be expensive. Imperialism resulted in tensions between countries and added to military costs because bigger and more expensive navies were needed. There was the danger of war and reference can be made to some crises such as Britain and Frances involvement at Fashoda (1898). Some candidates might slant the question to use problems as a device to explain the causes of imperialism, for example economic advantage or strategic interests.This will be valid as long as the link is made between causes and problems. UCLES 2008 www. xtremepapers. net www. studyguide. pk Page 10 6 Mark Scheme GCE A/AS LEVEL May/June 2008 Syllabus 9697 Paper 01 Why was the First World War so important in the downfall of the Romanov regime and the success of the Bolsheviks? The key issue is the link between the First World War and the events of 1917. Candidates might take either of two approaches. 191417 might be seen as the culmination of a long decline of tsaristic government, with less attention being given to the wartime period.Alternatively, answers might begin in 1914. Either approach is possible but the temptation in the first will be to spend too long on the pre-war period. In particular, the Bolsheviks were not in a strong position in 1914 and answers in Band 1 (2125) and Band 2 (1820) will need to show a sound understanding of the Bolshevik mastery by the end of 1917. Answers that deal only with the February or the October Revolutions might find it difficult to get beyond Band 3 (1617). The war discredited Nicholas IIs regime. Russia suffered heavy defeats with massive casualties.The resulting inflation done for(p) an economy that had been improving by 1914 but was still too weak t o sustain the pressures of the conflict. Food became short. The czars decision to take personal command showed his lack of ability as a military leader but it also discredited him politically. Russia was left to the rule of Tsarina Alexandra and Rasputin. The outcome was the February Revolution. In spite of their later propaganda, Lenin and the Bolsheviks were not important in this rising. Kerensky and the Provisional Government failed to establish a stable government.They tried to deal with grievances about food and land but ineffectively. The many political groups could not be managed. The war continued unsuccessfully and the resulting grievances increased. Although Lenin and the Bolsheviks were checked in the July Days, Kornilovs attempted coup discredited Kerensky. The October Revolution showed the ability of Lenin and the Bolsheviks, although a minority, to take decisive action. Lenins promise of major reforms and slogans such as All power to the soviets had an enthusiastic re sponse. Lenin soon abandoned his offer of a coalition government to install the Bolsheviks firmly in power. The unpopularity of the Versailles settlement was the most important reason why Hitler gained power in 1933. How far do you agree with this judgement? The key issue is the reasons why Hitler came to power in 1933. Candidates might continue the explanation passim 1933 by explaining the sequence of events from his appointment as Chancellor to the introduction of the Enabling Act. However, answers that end with the Chancellors appointment can merit any mark. The question asks candidates to consider particularly the importance of the Versailles settlement.This dismantled the German military. Colonies were surrendered. There were territorial concessions in Europe, especially the return of Alsace-Lorraine to France and the loss of areas in the east to Poland. People who were regarded as German were living in other countries. Reparations had to be paid. Unification with Austria was forbidden. The War Guilt clause attributed blame for the First World War to Germany. Hatred of the settlement, the stab in the back and the November Criminals united Germans. This can form the basis of a good answer.However, answers in Band 1 (2125) and Band 2 (1820) can be expected to go further and compare Versailles as a reason with other factors. Weimar Germany did not establish a stable democracy. Proportional representation allowed small parties to asseverate undue politician influence. Changes of government were frequent. source right and left-wing parties caused tensions. However, high credit should be given to candidates who understand the limited appeal of the Nazis in the 1920s. The Munich Putsch (1923) was put down easily. The army and the Junkers/traditionally strong right-wing social classes continued to exert influence.Nevertheless, Weimar seemed to have been more successful in the 1920s. It alleviated the worst economic effects of the war, came to agreements abou t the repayment of reparations and was accepted as a leading member of the League of Nations. The death of Stresemann was a blow and it can be argued that the Wall Street Crash (1929) that drove the Weimar Republic off-course. Hitler himself was an effective leader. He built up the Nazis through organisation and propaganda to become the second largest party in the 1930 election and the largest in 1932 but they really lost support in a later election that year.He kept his nerve when others, such as von Papen, thought that they could control him, refusing to accept any office except Chancellor. UCLES 2008 www. xtremepapers. net www. studyguide. pk Page 11 8 Mark Scheme GCE A/AS LEVEL May/June 2008 Syllabus 9697 Paper 01 How different were Stalins policies in governing Russia to 1939 from those of Nicholas II? The key issue is the contrast between Stalin and Nicholas II. Examiners can look for a balanced approach. 6040 either way can merit any mark but 7030 would normally lead to t he award of one Band lower than would otherwise be given.However, as in all answers, the overall quality of the argument will be the most important criterion. An excellent discussion of either Stalin or Nicholas II in an otherwise unbalanced answer might still be worth a high mark. Candidates are free to argue that the similarities were more important than the differences they were both autocrats they suppressed political opposition their secret police operated outside the law they represented a personal cult of government. However, it might be claimed that Stalins rule was more brutal. The millions of casualties went far beyond the verse who were prosecuted/persecuted by Nicholas II.Their ideologies were different. Stalin claimed, justifiably or not, that his regime was based on Marxism. Nicholas II ruled by foretell right. A few candidates might mention their different attitudes to religion and the Church but this is not necessary for any mark. Their economic policies were diffe rent. Stalin regarded economic change as a high priority. He pushed through radical reforms in agriculture and industry that had wholesale social implications. Nicholas II allowed some economic reforms for example the policies of Witte and Stolypin but they were not particularly important to his conservative mind.Nicholas II was averse to change, unlike Stalin who introduced constant political social and economic change. Although he enjoyed an autocratic position, Nicholas II was personally weak, open to advice especially from the Tsarina. He allowed some courtiers and Rasputin to have too much influence. Stalin shared power with nobody. He destroyed those who helped him to power, including Kamenev, Zinoviev and Bukharin. The purges destroyed people who were not a real threat to his regime. UCLES 2008 www. xtremepapers. net