1. Home
2. HSC
3. HSC Exams
4. 2011 HSC Exam papers
5. 2011 HSC Notes from the Marking Centre — Ancient History

2011 HSC Notes from the Marking Centre – Ancient History

Contents

• Introduction
• Section I – Cities of Vesuvius – Pompeii and Herculaneum (Core)
• Section II – Ancient Societies
• Section III – Personalities in Their Times
• Section IV – Historical Periods

Introduction

This document has been produced for the teachers and candidates of the Stage 6 Ancient History course. It contains comments on candidate responses to the 2011 Higher School Certificate examination, indicating the quality of the responses and highlighting their relative strengths and weaknesses.

This document should be read along with the relevant syllabus, the 2011 Higher School Certificate examination, the marking guidelines and other support documents developed by the Board of Studies to assist in the teaching and learning of Ancient History.

General comments

Teachers and candidates should be aware that examiners may ask questions that address the syllabus outcomes in a manner that requires candidates to respond by integrating their knowledge, understanding and skills developed through studying the course. It is important to understand that the Preliminary course is assumed knowledge for the HSC course.

Candidates need to be aware that the mark allocated to the question and the answer space (where this is provided on the examination paper) are guides to the length of the required response. A longer response will not in itself lead to higher marks. Writing far beyond the indicated space may reduce the time available for answering other questions.

Candidates need to be familiar with the Board’s Glossary of Key Words, which contains some terms commonly used in examination questions. However, candidates should also be aware that not all questions will start with or contain one of the key words from the glossary. Questions such as ‘how?’, ‘why?’ or ‘to what extent?’ may be asked, or verbs that are not included in the glossary may be used, such as ‘design’, ‘translate’ or ‘list’.

Section I – Cities of Vesuvius – Pompeii and Herculaneum (Core)

Part A

Question 4

Most candidates used Source C to identify three features of household religion in Pompeii and Herculaneum. Most correctly recognised Source C as a lararium. Better answers also included information on the elements depicted within Source C, such as the genius, and explained the role of household cults associated with the lares and penates.

Some candidates noted other features of household religion, such as statuary and wall paintings, from their own knowledge.

Question 8

Most candidates used the examples of graffiti given in Sources F and G to describe activities in Pompeii and Herculaneum, such as electioneering and gladiatorial contests. Many cited examples from their own knowledge, such as advertising.

In better responses, candidates used the sources to generalise on what the graffiti reveals about the society. Some candidates pointed to the levels of literacy required for graffiti to be effective. Others noted that the graffiti gave a voice to people not usually heard in other ancient sources.

Part B

Question 9

In better responses, candidates engaged with both Sources H and I and also provided other relevant information based on their own knowledge. They made a judgement on conservation issues and how they have changed over time, as well as how they continue to be a challenge at both Pompeii and Herculaneum. In reference to Source H, better responses recognised that the work of previous archaeologists had contributed to current conservation issues.

In better responses, some candidates also discussed the different approaches of contemporary archaeologists. They also often grasped the ideas presented in Source I about the difficulties facing present-day conservation efforts and integrated this into their answers. Some candidates often made reference to the work of Wallace-Hadrill and other recent studies. While it was not necessary to refer to all of this other research, mention of at least one of the above strengthened the response. In some responses, candidates who confined themselves to the issues raised in Sources H and I exclusively but provided detailed assessment were also awarded marks in the top range.

In mid-range responses, candidates tended to focus only on the sources and had difficulty integrating Source I in a meaningful way. In these responses, candidates tended to provide some information based on Source H about the decay and conservation of the sites, but with regard to Source I, they often simply rewrote it.

In weaker responses, candidates provided some general information about conservation with limited use of the sources.

Section II – Ancient Societies

General comments

In 2011, the most popular ancient societies chosen by candidates were:

• Egypt: Society in New Kingdom Egypt during the Ramesside Period, Dynasties XIX and XX
  
• Greece: Spartan society to the Battle of Leuctra 371 BC
  
• Greece: The Bronze Age – Society in Minoan Crete

Question 12 – Option C – Egypt: Society in New Kingdom Egypt during the Ramesside Period, Dynasties XIX and XX

1. Many candidates incorrectly identified Abu Simbel as a mortuary temple. Candidates are reminded that writing eight or more lines for a two-mark question is unnecessary.
   
   
2. Most candidates outlined the main features of Deir-el-Medina. In weaker responses, candidates concentrated on the lives of the people who occupied Deir-el-Medina instead of its features. Again, for a three-mark question, many candidates wrote overly long responses.
   
   
3. Many candidates provided generic answers that could apply to any priesthood. In better responses, candidates referred to the specific roles of priests, including religious, political and economic, as well as various types of priests.
   
   
4. Most candidates wrote a descriptive response and most referred to Source L. Some focused entirely on evidence in the source, that is, women and leisure, and if this was well supported with other specific sources, candidates could achieve a mark in the higher ranges. The main problem for candidates was citing and using specific sources. Many resorted to generalisations such as ‘as seen in tombs and temples’. A number of candidates used sources such as Hatshepsut, Tutankhamen and others outside the set period.

Question 16 – Option G – Greece: The Bronze Age – Society in Minoan Crete

1. In better responses, candidates showed sound knowledge of the meaning of the term larnax. They understood its purpose in Minoan burial practices and described the various shapes, decorations and developments in the larnax over time.
   
   
2. In better responses, candidates identified pillar crypts as places of religious worship, noting their various features, where they were found and the activities that may have been associated with them. Some candidates confused the term with Minoan burial practices.
   
   
3. In better responses, candidates provided detailed and accurate information about the possible role of the palace elite and included some details of their political, economic, religious, administrative or social leadership. Many correctly discussed the inconclusive nature of evidence.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates gave a general description of palaces or activities within palaces.
   
   
4. In better responses, candidates effectively used the evidence in both Source P and other sources to describe peoples’ lives in Minoan Crete. They not only named and described sources but linked them to various aspects of peoples’ lives. The question also allowed for discussion of the various interpretations of sources.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates simply described the given source or gave broad, general descriptions of Minoan society with little reference to other sources or the question.

Question 18 – Option I – Greece: Spartan society to the Battle of Leuctra 371 BC

1. Most candidates provided accurate and relevant information on the Great Rhetra. In weaker responses, candidates could only state one feature.
   
   
2. Most candidates outlined the main features of the syssitia. In weaker responses, candidates confused the syssitia with other groups in Spartan society.
   
   
3. In better responses, candidates wrote an informed and detailed description of the role of the ekklesia.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates did not provide much detail, or they provided answers on the role of the ephorate or the gerousia.
   
   
4. In better responses, candidates integrated the evidence in Source R and other sources to provide well-structured and detailed information on people’s lives in Sparta.  
   
   In weaker responses, candidates provided limited information with little reference to Source R and other evidence.

Section III – Personalities in Their Times

General comments

Candidates are reminded to respond to the focus of the question, but also to keep in mind the rubric for this section and the mark allocation. They should note that the rubric applies to both parts (a) and (b). This means that answers for both parts should refer to relevant sources. Note also that the syllabus areas examined by part (b) can be taken from any section of the content outline for a personality, not only the ‘Evaluation’ section.

Many candidates included relevant and detailed information supported by reference to a variety of ancient and modern sources. Most responses were of an appropriate length. Some responses contained large areas of irrelevant content. Candidates are reminded to read the question carefully and only provide information that is relevant.

Candidates needed to integrate sources to support their responses. Simply naming sources is not enough. In better responses to both (a) and (b) questions, candidates used the information from sources to support a description or a discussion.

In weaker responses, candidates referred to ‘some historians’ without being able to cite individual historians or their arguments, and mentioned non-specific sources such as ‘reliefs’ and ‘tombs’. There was frequent inaccuracy in references to the quoted sources. There was also a failure to elaborate and provide sufficient detail to show comprehensive and accurate knowledge in some responses.

1. This section of the paper was generally well answered. However, teachers and students are reminded that part (a) responses should be supported by explicit relevant sources. In better responses, candidates incorporated a range of archaeological and/or written sources. It is essential for responses to have a clear focus on the key elements of the question.
   
   
2. In better responses, candidates answered comprehensively and discussed a range of issues, but did not necessarily address all aspects of the personality. These judgements were sustained and well supported by accurate historical detail and relevant sources. In better responses, candidates discussed the historiographical debates associated with the evidence.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates relied on presenting a narrative account, often focusing on only one aspect of the personality. Some responses left out several key areas relevant to the question.

Question 20 – Option A – Egypt: Hatshepsut

1. In better responses, candidates displayed a sound understanding of why Hatshepsut undertook her building program, and supported their responses with information, particularly from archaeological sources. Many demonstrated comprehensive and accurate historical knowledge.
   
   
2. In better responses, candidates examined a number of aspects of Hatshepsut’s relationship with Thutmose III, both within her time frame and a re-interpretation of them in modern times.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates struggled with the nature of Hatshepsut’s relationship with Thutmose III and instead provided a narrative about how she was able to claim the throne. They did not include references to sources, or merely named historians without incorporating their ideas into the response.

Question 21 – Option B – Egypt: Akhenaten

1. In better responses, candidates used evidence to comprehensively address how Akhenaten administered the Egyptian empire.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates failed to address the question and instead lapsed into an irrelevant narrative of Akhenaten’s achievements.
   
   
2. In better responses, candidates discussed the nature of Akhenaten’s religious reforms and used specific evidence to support their discussion.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates lapsed into a general narrative.

Question 24 – Option E – The Near East: Xerxes

1. In better responses, candidates provided detailed information about Xerxes’ administration. These responses were coherently presented and incorporated a range of both ancient and modern sources. Some candidates integrated historiography into their response.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates demonstrated a limited knowledge of Xerxes’ administration and relied on general statements.
   
   
2. In better responses, candidates provided comprehensive discussion on Xerxes’ military achievements and supported this with detailed historical knowledge. These responses made reference to a range of sources and integrated them throughout.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates provided a narrative about Xerxes’ military achievements and only examined one aspect of his military successes.

Question 30 – Option K – Rome: Julius Caesar

1. In better responses, candidates provided detailed and concise information on Julius Caesar’s military activities and achievements up to 60 BC. Candidates supported their answers with accurate information from relevant sources.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates did not restrict their description to the set time frame and provided a large amount of irrelevant detail.
   
   
2. In better responses, candidates provided comprehensive discussion about the nature of Julius Caesar’s reforms as dictator and supported their response with relevant information from a variety of sources.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates tended to describe a limited number of reforms without references to relevant sources.

Question 31 – Option L – Rome: Agrippina the Younger

1. In better responses, candidates provided detailed descriptions of Agrippina’s Julio–Claudian background from written and archaeological sources. Some better responses clearly understood the two branches of the family and provided accurate detail about both parts.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates did not provide detail and made general comments about Agrippina’s family. Some did not limit their discussion to her family background, but covered her whole life.
   
   
2. In better responses, candidates provided a comprehensive discussion on the basis of Agrippina’s power and influence. They supported their answers with evidence from ancient and modern sources.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates provided limited information and often gave narrative responses. These were generally not supported by accurate information from relevant sources.

Section IV – Historical Periods

General comments

In 2011, the most popular historical periods chosen by candidates were:

• Egypt: New Kingdom Egypt to the death of Thutmose IV
  
• Egypt: New Kingdom Egypt from Amenhotep III to the death of Ramesses II
  
• Greece: The Greek World 500–440 BC
  
• Rome: The Fall of the Republic 78–31BC
  
• Rome: The Augustan Age 44 BC – AD 14
  
• Rome: Rome in the time of the Julio–Claudians AD 14–69.

The distinguishing characteristics of better responses included detailed, comprehensive, logical and well-structured answers and accurate historical knowledge that integrated ancient and modern sources. Candidates who take the time to organise their thoughts and structure their responses before writing generally produce better quality answers.

Candidates are reminded that they should prepare for the possibility of questions that cover the entire historical period and therefore are strongly advised not to concentrate on one area of the period.

Candidates should be aware that quotations can be provided with the question from a relevant source. While candidates are required to integrate the source into their response, they need to remember that they are still answering a set question and should not be limited by the given source.

Candidates should only choose questions from options that have been studied. Some candidates are disadvantaged by attempting to answer questions from one option using information that is relevant to another option.

A number of candidates answered both alternatives in the one historical period. Candidates should answer either part (a) OR part (b) from the historical period they have studied.

Egypt

Question 32 – Option A – Egypt: From Unification to the First Intermediate Period

1. In better responses, candidates responded equally to both aspects of the question. They included discussion on the accepted notions of unification together with acknowledgement of a range of influences and specific references to sources other than the Narmer Palette.
   
   In mid-range responses, candidates tended to provide a narrative response.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates gave poor accounts of the Narmer Palette, or confused the period in this question with the New Kingdom period.
   
   
2. In better responses, candidates gave broad assessments of the importance of the sun cult, rather than simply references to pyramids and a range of sources.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates tended to make limited statements about the sun cult, and often confused the cult with the Aten, which is more relevant to the New Kingdom period.

Question 33 – Option B – Egypt: New Kingdom Egypt to the death of Thutmose IV

1. In better responses, candidates clearly understood the nature of the cult of Amun across the entire period and utilised a range of sources. Candidates debated the progression of the cult and differentiated between a range of pharaohs and how they used the cult.
   
   In mid-range responses, candidates tended to provide a narrative on the building programs of pharaohs such as Hatshepsut and Thutmose III at Karnak.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates provided limited sources and excessive philosophising on religion.
   
   
2. In better responses, candidates defined the Egyptian empire in this period and commented on the different influences that Egypt had on its neighbours, including differentiating between the treatment of Nubia and Syria–Palestine. Although these responses were both well written and structured, some candidates tended to concentrate only on Thutmose III.
   
   In mid-range responses, candidates provided a narrative on the development of the Egyptian empire and supported this with the use of some evidence.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates tended to focus on the conflict with the Hyksos, providing a rudimentary account and little reference to the empire.

Question 34 – Option C – Egypt: New Kingdom Egypt from Amenhotep III to the death of Ramesses II

1. In better responses, candidates provided a comprehensive assessment of Horemheb’s reforms with accurate reference to the quotation and other evidence.
   
   In mid-range responses, candidates tended use a narrative style with limited sources and focused on Horemheb as a destroyer of Atenism and or Aten’s building program.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates demonstrated a limited knowledge of the period and their responses contained substantial errors and inaccuracies.
   
   
2. Many candidates assumed that administration of the Egyptian empire referred to the internal administration of Egypt. In better responses, candidates understood the nature of the empire and its development throughout the entire period. These responses utilised a range of sources with good use of historiography.
   
   In mid-range responses, candidates referred to some aspects of New Kingdom foreign policy, often concentrating on internal governance and building programs.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates often made general statements about the governance of Egypt or about the consequences of the Amarna period.

Near East

Question 37 – Option F – The Near East: Persia from Cyrus II to the death of Darius III

1. In better responses, candidates demonstrated a comprehensive knowledge of the period and discussed both the strengths and weaknesses of Darius in addition to using the quotation. These answers also referred to other sources, both ancient and modern.
   
   In mid-range responses, candidates tended to provide a narrative with some use of sources, and may have referred to the quotation.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates often limited themselves to dealing with Herodotus’s comments. These answers provided discussion on one or two achievements, or were limited in the facts presented.
   
   
2. Stronger responses were well structured and covered the entire period. Candidates clearly understood the question, providing comprehensive detail and making good use of sources to support their answer.
   
   Mid-range responses were generally narrative in style and limited in their coverage of the period, with often only the early kings of the period discussed.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates were limited in their use of facts.

Greece

Question 39 – Option H – Greece: The Greek world 500–440 BC

1. In better responses, candidates integrated the quote from Herodotus into their answer and went on to examine the role of the navy and other important factors and personalities relevant to the defeat of the Persians. These candidates understood that a ‘to what extent’ question involved a response that made a judgement regarding the range of factors that were involved in the defeat of the Persians, and used a variety of ancient and modern sources to support their answers.
   
   Weaker responses mostly provided a narrative of the Persian Wars’ battles, including Marathon, Salamis, Plataea and Mycale.
   
   
2. In better responses, candidates clearly addressed the ‘how effectively’ stem of the question. They addressed the effectiveness with which Athens exerted political, military and economic dominance over its allies.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates failed to understand the concept of allies, often confusing the Delian League allies with the Persian War period. Many simply gave a narrative description of the formation of the development and the transformation of the league.

Rome

Question 44 – Option M – Rome: The fall of the Republic 78–31 BC

1. In better responses, candidates analysed the degree to which Pompey deserved the title ‘the Great’. They supported their responses with detailed and accurate information from relevant sources.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates simply agreed with the premise of the quotation and gave a narrative of the successful elements of his career.
   
   
2. In better responses, candidates made a judgement on the role of the optimates in bringing about the decline of the Republic, which demonstrated a comprehensive and accurate historical knowledge.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates failed to provide criteria with which to assess the optimates. Typically, they gave a simple definition of the optimates and outlined the role they played in Roman politics.

Question 45 – Option N – Rome: The Augustan Age 44 BC – AD 14

1. In better responses, candidates integrated the quote into their answer and effectively dealt with the ‘to what extent’ nature of the question across the entire historical period. Strong knowledge of both ancient and modern sources was evident.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates provided a basic narrative or description of Augustus’s career and, typically, stopped at the battle of Actium, utilising few, if any, sources.
   
   
2. In better responses, candidates developed a sustained and logical argument with regard to the administration of the empire both within and outside Rome. Many took a thematic approach that dealt with areas that included the army, provinces, economy and relationship with the senate.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates wrote simple narratives or focused solely on limited aspects of administration in Rome.

Question 46 – Option O – Rome in the time of the Julio–Claudians AD 14–69

1. In better responses, candidates addressed the ‘to what extent’ nature of the question and demonstrated a comprehensive and accurate historical knowledge with relevance to the success of the reign of Tiberius. They also included a range of relevant sources and historical terms and concepts.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates provided a limited outline of the reign of Tiberius, and often included irrelevant digressions that were based on their knowledge of Seutonius.
   
   
2. In better responses, candidates developed a sustained and logical argument with regard to the administration of the empire both within and outside Rome. Many took a thematic approach that dealt with areas that included the army, provinces, economy and relationship with the senate.
   
   Weaker responses were simple narratives that gave biographical details of the emperors. Candidates made little attempt to address the question, and displayed a limited historical knowledge and use of historical terms and concepts.