**2013: History - Before/After **

Straight Talking Online Frank

northern Ireland section was a strange one...... no terrance or bookebrah cmon man....cmon

andrew369

Straight Talking Online Frank wrote: »

northern Ireland section was a strange one...... no terrance or bookebrah cmon man....cmon

A lot of their influence and the welfare state was under the education, health and housing question.

SecondMan

Straight Talking Online Frank wrote: »

northern Ireland section was a strange one...... no terrance or bookebrah cmon man....cmon

Tut tut! You shouldn't have expected them!! They both came up last year. But if you did the welfare state kind of question you could have talked about them for the whole exam if you liked.

The Pheasant

For the the education, health and housing question I pretty much only talked about developments from welfare state...managed to get 5 pages out..is that alright though that I only talked about welfare state?

0mega

If you answered the developments in ed, hous & health q and you got like 4 pages out of talking about Welfare State alone is that alright? Like because the data parameters went on further were you except to include more?

buyer95

Nice paper but was caught for time, would take my B2 from the pre's

Aksa94

How much did ye compare land and strike and lockout. I only did it at start an finish and covered lockout in between. Is that ok

Somefag

MusicChick94Xx wrote: »

Got to talk about propaganda and the treaty

There was no question on the 1921 treaty bro, which is what I assume you were talking about when referring to ''treaty''.

MusicChick94Xx

Somefag wrote: »

There was no question on the 1921 treaty bro, which is what I assume you were talking about when referring to ''treaty''.

Well I talked about it in how anglo-irish relations developed under de Valera

Historyguy941

Was pretty screwed when I first looked at the Northern Ireland section. Did not study the welfare state and no direct q on the Sunningdale Agreement. So I attempted the strengths and weakness of Faulkner. I said that he's strength was that he was the head Unionist politician during the period of the Sunningdale Agreement and beyond. I also said that he weakness was that he failed to unite the unionist party behind the agreement and that he Also failed to get any concessions from the republic and Britain about the powers of the council of Ireland and that's why it was hard for him to sell the agreement to sceptical unionist community ? That any good?

stephenjmcd

For the economy q 22-39 could you mention how in 39 dev took policy or neautrality to protect economy for the future

SecondMan

Historyguy941 wrote: »

Was pretty screwed when I first looked at the Northern Ireland section. Did not study the welfare state and no direct q on the Sunningdale Agreement. So I attempted the strengths and weakness of Faulkner. I said that he's strength was that he was the head Unionist politician during the period of the Sunningdale Agreement and beyond. I also said that he weakness was that he failed to unite the unionist party behind the agreement and that he Also failed to get any concessions from the republic and Britain about the powers of the council of Ireland and that's why it was hard for him to sell the agreement to sceptical unionist community ? That any good?

I always though Faulkner kind of caused the failure of Sunningdale because of his indecisiveness and because he caused a split in his party. I'm sure everyone is marked on their own interpretation anyways.

Jolly Red Giant

Mick_95 wrote: »

Delighted to see other people used Coleraine i there welfare state question thought id chanced a bit too much

All three case studies came up -

Q.1 the welfare state and Coleraine
Q.2 on Faulkner was about the Sunningdale Agreement and the collapse of the power-sharing government
Q. 4 Apprentice Boys.

MusicChick94Xx

Jolly Red Giant wrote: »

All three case studies came up -

Q.1 the welfare state and Coleraine
Q.2 on Faulkner was about the Sunningdale Agreement and the collapse of the power-sharing government
Q. 4 Apprentice Boys.

I was going to take a chance and do Q2 on Faulkner and talk about the Sunningdale agreement but I thought I was wrong, ended up doing the apprentice boys which is the one essay I forgot to cover >.<

stephenjmcd

For the economy q 22-39 could you mention how in 39 dev took policy or neautrality to protect economy for the future

Legion.

Absolute beaut of a paper. Documents Q was really easy, did the Goverments vs economic problems for the Pursuit of Sovereignty, did about the Apprentice Boys and how Catholics like x, Protestant liked y in Northern Ireland Then did about Race Relations for America, lovely lovely paper. A lot of people I know are complaining about how bad it was, but they mostly gambled on a couple of essays and it didn't pan out.

Scuid Mhór

None of my favourite essays came up but I feel like I recovered excellently :cool:

mossy95

Was document A racist when they asked you are both documents racist? I was going to say the black guy was depicted with 'monkey lips'but refrained from saying that and said document A was nt racist

rugrats

Historyguy941 wrote: »

Was pretty screwed when I first looked at the Northern Ireland section. Did not study the welfare state and no direct q on the Sunningdale Agreement. So I attempted the strengths and weakness of Faulkner. I said that he's strength was that he was the head Unionist politician during the period of the Sunningdale Agreement and beyond. I also said that he weakness was that he failed to unite the unionist party behind the agreement and that he Also failed to get any concessions from the republic and Britain about the powers of the council of Ireland and that's why it was hard for him to sell the agreement to sceptical unionist community ? That any good?

Yeah. Hopefully. That's what I did. That NI question was a pain compared to some of the past papers. I knew civil rights and Sunningdale inside out, but they had to ask such ambiguous questions! I did the same thing as you, except I wrote a page about how he was prime minister during Operation Demetrius and Motorman only to realise at the end that that was Chichester Clarke, so I just put it in a feint bracket just in case they thought I was a retard. I still had three pages of relevant material and my other questions were beautiful. I'll live in hope...

shootie

A nice enough paper, a bit stuck for time though. Pursuit of Sov, Katanga and USA all brilliant. I gambled on Government, Economy and Society that Sean Lemass or Jack Lynch would make an appearance (they do just about every year) but the S.E.C trolled me and left them out. Managed to slightly recover the situation with a 49-59 question but I don't expect more than a C from this exam, RSR included.

Aksa94

mossy95 wrote: »

Was document A racist when they asked you are both documents racist? I was going to say the black guy was depicted with 'monkey lips'but refrained from saying that and said document A was nt racist

Oh god I actually said that was a monkey. I saw the bottom of the rope and thought that was a tail

stephenjmcd

Looking at it now and it is a monkey

SeanMcG95

mossy95 wrote: »

Was document A racist when they asked you are both documents racist? I was going to say the black guy was depicted with 'monkey lips'but refrained from saying that and said document A was nt racist

I said it was racist cause the black guy was made to look like an idiot who didn't realize the consequences for both of them by cutting the rope

Dropping No Eaves

Yeah, I said he somewhat resembled a monkey. I'm sure there's no definite answer.

Legion.

You won't get marked wrong either way if you backed it up. The whole point of political cartoons is that they are open to interpretation, making them a weak source.

shootie

Yeah I mentioned the depiction of the Congolese as an animal was a racial slur too. Surely that can't be wrong?

Captain Hman

I mentioned how the black congolese solder was highly exaggerated and stereotypical by saying the mans
skin was black as coal as opposed to the actual colour of african people

Kingkumar

absolute beauty of a paper. only thing is for the GAA essay i spent like 2 paragraphs out the 11 describing cultural nationalism...hopefully wont get marked down too much for it. and for the document i said the soldier was badly drawn with exaggerated lips said he looked a bit like a platypus lol. i'm sure it doesnt matter we all interpret stuff differently. Just wondering does spelling matter much in history essays...cause mine was atrocious don't really have time to correct mistakes...heck donṭ even have time to think in history its just writing for 3hrs. i feel like my hand is dead...

dizzymenace

Aksa94 wrote: »

So by talking about land acts, I did the wrong question

no no no . you did the right thing by talking about the land acts . the q asked about the successes of land agitation and those came through in the land acts . if you were to talk about agrarian voilence or parnell you wouldnt be answering the question . the only time you would talk about all the other stuff is if the question asked you "the struggles for land reform" or "how did land agitation lead to lan reform" , trust me , i did the question like a boss , sleep easy tonight

dizzymenace

SecondMan wrote: »

I don't do that topic but I always thought it meant land evictions!

what are you talking about . you had to compare the successes of the lockout with that of the land agitation