In the exam you will be asked to evaluate an issue in classical Athens or ancient Rome for 12 marks. What this means is that you will have to identify 3 key features of an aspect of Athenian or Roman life and use your knowledge to describe them and evaluate their importance/links between them. There is no source, you’re on your own for this one. However, you do have a choice. The “to what extent” questions offer you an (A) option and a (B) option. You get to choose which one to do.
The question is worth 12 marks. This is subdivided as follows.
Knowledge = 8 marks. But it is most definitely not 1 mark per point you make as in the ‘How Fully’ and ‘Evaluate the Usefulness’ questions. As mentioned above, you must identify three different aspects relevant to the question and you are awarded up to 3 marks for each of these blocks of knowledge. The more detailed, accurate and relevant your points, the more marks you get.
Evaluation = 4 marks. These marks are awarded for making evaluative comments about the aspects of knowledge you have described. This might mean making comments about their importance/relevance or positivity/negativity or strengths and weaknesses for example.
If your answer is simply descriptive without any evaluation, the maximum marks you can be awarded is 5/12
Let’s walk you through an example question and I’ll show you how to answer one of these questions and I’ll make comments on my thinking as we go through it. Below is a typical example of what one of these questions looks like.
Attempt EITHER question 2(a) OR 2(b)
2. (a) To what extent was the life of a female slave worse than that of a male slave? -(12 marks)
OR
2. (b) To what extent did the strengths of Athenian democracy outweigh its weaknesses? -(12 marks)
As you can see you’ve got a choice of two questions to answer so pick the one that you feel most comfortable with.
It’s good practise to divide your answer up into 3 short paragraphs. One for each of the aspects you are describing. You should begin each of these with an introductory sentence that clearly identifies the aspect you will be writing about. In this example, I don’t like the look of the slavery question so I’m going to go for my preferred option of (b) which asks me to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of Athenian democracy. So first thing’s first, what are my three aspects going to be that I’ll write about?
Okay so I know that the Athenian democratic topic is essentially divided up into the institutions of democracy and citizens’ rights and responsibilities. I could write about any of these things as long as I can pick 3 clearly identifiable aspects of knowledge. So here goes:
Step 1:
I’ve decided that the three areas I’m going to write about are:
Being a direct democracy/ the Assembly
Ostracism
Generals and military service
Okay, that’s me decided on my three. This part can be quite tricky and the only way to make it easier is to really know your subject matter well!
Step 2:
Now I’ve decided this, I need to start writing about my first topic, the Assembly. I’m going to give some detailed information about it and then evaluate it in terms of strengths and weaknesses, in other words directly answering the question asked. The more detailed information I write, the more likely I am to be awarded the full knowledge marks for this aspect. Here goes:
“The first aspect of Athenian democracy that had a number of strengths was that it was a direct democracy where citizens could participate in government if they wanted to. The Assembly met every 9 days on the hill of the pnyx and was the sovereign body by which laws were passed in Athens. Six thousand citizens could attend and this was the number required in order for any vote to be legal. Any male citizen over the age of 18 and who had served two years in the military could attend and have their voice heard and this was actively encouraged. This was a huge strength of the democratic system as it meant that although the meetings took up a lot of time, the people who would be affected by new laws and that would have to fight in any wars Athens declared were the ones who made the decisions. However, wealthier citizens had an advantage over the poor in that they could more easily afford the time that at least 40 meetings a year required. Poorer citizens who did not own slaves to carry on their business in their absence found it difficult to attend so many meetings particularly if they lived further away from the city. The wealthy could also dominate the assembly by spreading their wealth to become more popular and thus sway the public voting there.
So is the above any good? Well, the parts of the answer that are in pink show good detailed, relevant knowledge about direct democracy and the Assembly. The blue part is some evaluation that shows a number of strengths and also some counter viewpoints in the form of weaknesses of the system.
This means that we’re probably looking at 3 marks for our knowledge in this aspect and at least 2 marks for our evaluative comments.
Step 3
We need to repeat this process for our next two aspects so here they are. Again, evaluative points showing strengths, weaknesses, connections and inconsistencies and contradictions will be highlighted in blue.
“The next aspect that had a number of strengths was ostracism. Athenian citizens could decide each year if they wanted to ostracise a citizen which meant that they would be exiled or ostracised from Athens for a period of ten years. Citizens would scratch the name of the person they wanted to ostracise onto an ostracon and if this person received the most votes from a total pool of 6,000 votes they would be ostracised. This was a strength of democracy as all citizens could take part in the process and it was an effective way of stopping anyone who was a potential threat to democracy, perhaps by dominating the will of the Assembly, as they could be removed from the political scene. However, someone could be ostracised for clashing with another politician citizen and the whole system could be corrupt or based on petty rivalries and quarrels.
The final aspect that had a number of strengths was military service and the holding of generalships. All Athenian citizens had to be prepared to fight in Athens defence and equip themselves according to their wealth. This was the price that had to be paid for the political freedom that citizens enjoyed and given that Athens was frequently at war in the 5th century BC, it meant that citizens were often in danger. Wealthier men had to pay a liturgy which was used to equip a warship but the upside of this was that they were allowed to command it. Athenian military commanders were elected annually in the Assembly with ten being chosen, one from each of the tribes of Athens. Here the wealthy had a significantly greater chance of being elected than the poor as these men needed to be charismatic, well-spoken individuals who had undergone training in commanding men. The generals were very accountable to the Assembly and had to invest a great deal of effort in their craft. If they performed poorly or dishonourably in battle, they could be fined or even put to death for their performance. However, the considerable power they wielded was worth the risk and effort as a successful general could be elected year after year and hold great sway over the Assembly as Pericles demonstrated when he was elected 15 years in succession.”
In the above two paragraphs there is again a good range of relevant, detailed facts while there is a lot of evaluative comments that highlight the strengths and weaknesses of democracy This would lead to the answer being awarded the full 12 marks.