Section IV - Historical Period (1 Viewer)

[Scorch]

Re: Section IV - Historical Periods

what battles did youse talk about for the 500-440 naval one

i did artemisium and salamis in mad detail

Well, I didn't particularly reference the battle and just shove a random summary of the battle in for no reason. The crux of my argument that was since Salamis set the stage for a Greek victory at Plataea, it was, in essence, the most important battle of the war. If the Greeks had lost at Salamis, they would have faced a Persian force at Salamis that was led by the king, well-supplied, very confident with great morale and considerably larger, while they would have had considerably less men (given the amount of states that swapped sides or changed from neutrality after Salamis) and considerably less confidence. The Greeks would have surely lost at Plataea if they didn't win at Salamis. I also talked about how Themistocles is often regarded as the most important figure of the war, simply because he shifted Athens' focus onto the navy, and this is regarded by Plutarch to have won the war for them.

I talked about Artemesium a bit, and how it gave Themistocles the idea for the plan at Salamis.

 

[blackall46]

Re: Section IV - Historical Periods

Well, I didn't particularly reference the battle and just shove a random summary of the battle in for no reason. The crux of my argument that was since Salamis set the stage for a Greek victory at Plataea, it was, in essence, the most important battle of the war. If the Greeks had lost at Salamis, they would have faced a Persian force at Salamis that was led by the king, well-supplied, very confident with great morale and considerably larger, while they would have had considerably less men (given the amount of states that swapped sides or changed from neutrality after Salamis) and considerably less confidence. The Greeks would have surely lost at Plataea if they didn't win at Salamis. I also talked about how Themistocles is often regarded as the most important figure of the war, simply because he shifted Athens' focus onto the navy, and this is regarded by Plutarch to have won the war for them.

I talked about Artemesium a bit, and how it gave Themistocles the idea for the plan at Salamis.

thats nearly 100% what i talked about. i opened up with the importance of navy in relation the army, the role of Themo, artimisium then salamis and how important/shmick it was.

oi mycale aint even a sea battle... they went ashore.

 

[Hermes3]

Re: Section IV - Historical Periods

hey people that did NKE - Thuty 4 whatd u guys talk about in your essays for part (b)

hey, i talked about the military campaigns in chronological order amose--amenhotep II, concetrated on thutmose III and his 17 campaigns. Outlinet the significance of having army, benefits of army(wealth, safety, employment, buildings) and referred to some sources such as Ahmose son of Ebana and historians..

you?

 

[Scorch]

Re: Section IV - Historical Periods

Awesome.

I actually had a few perfect quotes from Plutarch for the topic. One was when he said "The Greeks were saved, in the end, by their supremacy at sea", and when he discussed Themistocles' victory at Salamis, he said that in playing a role in winning that battle he became "the man most directly responsible for helping the Greeks to victory in the war".

 

[fishy89sg]

Re: Section IV - Historical Periods

hey, i talked about the military campaigns in chronological order amose--amenhotep II, concetrated on thutmose III and his 17 campaigns. Outlinet the significance of having army, benefits of army(wealth, safety, employment, buildings) and referred to some sources such as Ahmose son of Ebana and historians..

you?

o crap. i talked 2 pages about the hyksos and now military campaigns were important for the stability of egpyt or some crap
then how the ahmose's military campaigns was important in the establishment of the 'empire'...................................................... then i talked about amenhotep i, thuty 1, 2, hatshepsut, VERY vaguely on thuty 3(cant remba anything on that guy) and i said some crap like thut4 and amenhotep ii focused on cultural development over military valour............ wtf

all in all, it was extremely short (in words)

 

[samuel slack]

Re: Section IV - Historical Periods

Dude, Thut III is like the most important military figure in the New Kingdom Breasted calls him "The Napoleon of Ancient Egypt". Dammit, when am I ever going to need to know that again, but I bet I remember it forever... and yes to someone else's post earlier, I am confident. I went into that exam expecting failure, and came out stoked. It's nice to recover from maths like that. Don't knock my good mood.

 

[airbag]

Re: Section IV - Historical Periods

Tiberius wasn't asked last year. The question was on reforms and policies of one ruler and most students did Claudius.

I must be getting mixed up with a practice essay i've done then

 

[fishy89sg]

Re: Section IV - Historical Periods

Dude, Thut III is like the most important military figure in the New Kingdom Breasted calls him "The Napoleon of Ancient Egypt". Dammit, when am I ever going to need to know that again, but I bet I remember it forever... and yes to someone else's post earlier, I am confident. I went into that exam expecting failure, and came out stoked. It's nice to recover from maths like that. Don't knock my good mood.

.... you're scaring me

 

[Hermes3]

Re: Section IV - Historical Periods

o crap. i talked 2 pages about the hyksos and now military campaigns were important for the stability of egpyt or some crap
then how the ahmose's military campaigns was important in the establishment of the 'empire'...................................................... then i talked about amenhotep i, thuty 1, 2, hatshepsut, VERY vaguely on thuty 3(cant remba anything on that guy) and i said some crap like thut4 and amenhotep ii focused on cultural development over military valour............ wtf

all in all, it was extremely short (in words)

Samuel is right, I have even included this quote 'napoleon of Egypt' (Breasted), but what u talked about is good too... It was not specifically asked to talk about Thut 3 like in 2006, so ur answer is not bad. Mm.. Thut 4 focused on cultural development, but Amenhotep II was very classical "warrior king".. and very brutal :wave:

 

[lil mon]

Re: Section IV - Historical Periods

hey, i talked about the military campaigns in chronological order amose--amenhotep II, concetrated on thutmose III and his 17 campaigns. Outlinet the significance of having army, benefits of army(wealth, safety, employment, buildings) and referred to some sources such as Ahmose son of Ebana and historians..

you?

Yeah, I went chronologically as well but I only had 45 mins for this section so I could only write 11 pages and everything was really summarised. And I think i started saying stuff like 'and this shows' and 'as we can see' and other very unsophisticated phrases - Did anyone find that they were doing this as well?
Also how detailed did you guys get? - Its soooo freakin impossible to fit everything in!!!!!!
It was my strongest topic so Im a bit disappointed.

 

[fishy89sg]

Re: Section IV - Historical Periods

Samuel is right, I have even included this quote 'napoleon of Egypt' (Breasted), but what u talked about is good too... It was not specifically asked to talk about Thut 3 like in 2006, so ur answer is not bad. Mm.. Thut 4 focused on cultural development, but Amenhotep II was very classical "warrior king".. and very brutal :wave:

Oh. My. God. i think i failed that section......................... well 8/10 units of good marks is still good ..... right

 

[ahen]

Re: Section IV - Historical Periods

seems like no one else did Amenhotep III - Ramses II

anyway i answerd the question on Amenhotep because it was sooo bloody general and simple though i could've also done the queens one since we did that as an assessment task. Actually we did the amenhotep one in class as well.
i wrote um about 6 pages with around 8-10 words a line, unfortunately i can NEVER remember what historian says what so i just chucked in redford and Giraud and breasted a few times from when i think they said...whatever they said.
couldn't think of much to say about amenhotep's buildings tho *sigh* oh well whatever, i always seem to get good marks in this subject , gawd knows how or why
YES ITS OVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! *dance*

 

[samuel slack]

Re: Section IV - Historical Periods

yeah it is fishy lol. Thats all I'm expecting. Damn maths. Please gods of scaling, save me.

 

[fishy89sg]

Re: Section IV - Historical Periods

yeah it is fishy lol. Thats all I'm expecting. Damn maths. Please gods of scaling, save me.

ok i think i got

20 for section 1
15 for section 2
20 for section 3
15 for section 4

 

[spence]

Does anyone else do Peloponnesian War? I haven't heard of any other schools who do it. But the questions were pretty good, similar to our trial which was good

 

[x0nel0vex]

Re: Section IV - Historical Periods

I did greek period 500-440 as well... and the naval one... i chose battles; artemisium, salamis and mycale... or platea.. haha whatever the sea battle is.. i am trying to forget it all!! Also talked in detail and themistocles and his role in the naval battles and a brief paragraph on the continuing effects of naval battles; into the athenian empire!!

Argh.. hated pompeiii so muhc!!

i did the same thing cept i didnt mention mycale/platea in detail unfortunately coz i dont really no that much on it to be honest coz i know the delian league best! was disappointed the delian league question was to do with role and contribution of aristiades and cimon coz i dont like writing about that its annoying. so i chose part a and i think i worked with what i knew well enuf, considering i was freaking out in the morning coz i culdn remember nething!
glad someone else talked about how the naval battles lead to athenian empire/athenian hegemony.
i also briefly mentioned that it brought the thetes to power too.


and yep pompeii sucked.

 

[braddio]

Re: Section IV - Historical Periods

i did greece 500-440.. i sorta liked it... it wasnt THAT bad...
i did mycale and salamis... i didnt no that much bout mycale so i talked about salamis more...but is sorta assessed it more than describe and talked bout how it was important to the lead up to athenian empire...which made it a bit better i think/hope...lol

 

[darrynXtreem]

Re: Section IV - Historical Periods

i did mycale and salamis...

Mycale is not a sea battle you tosser. The question asked for a "naval battle". Markers see your sort of rubbish and are turned off straight away. Have fun with your Band 2.

DazzaX

 

[bec007]

I did the Hykso. Pretty easy to manipulate the whole syllabus to the impact of the Hysko-how it was the catalsyt for the policy of deliberate expansion, and manipulate the stuff about Amun and how he was attributed with military success etc, and that in turn lead to internal growth because of the tribute, eg building programs

 

[goosiegoo]

Re: Section IV - Historical Periods

*jives*

I sat down when i was studying and went 'I think there is going to be a question on Queens' (AmIII-RamessesII) ... and so that's pretty much the thing i studied the most and there was a question on it! I was soooo happy.