Alevel 2018 sources
The overarching argument of extract A is that Elizabeth I was highly qualified in government due
to her personal qualities, but at times she let her personal biases undermine her political goals.
The extract argues that Elizabeth had great qualifications and showed a masculine approach to
government, ruthlessly subordinating the Court and Council to her will. This is convincing as
Elizabeth was considerably well educated regarding government for a woman of that time,
learning much from her personal and political experiences. As compared to her predecessor
queen Mary, Elizabeth had a shrew grasp of political processes and took an interest in
decision-making. This is seen as “masculine” as Elizabeth subordinated the court and council to
her will in the sense that she did not allow the passing of laws or discussion of topics that she
did not agree with. Elizabeth regularly intervened in the passing of laws she did not agree with,
overall refusing around 60 bills. The extract argues that Elizabeth was able to put personal
preferences aside to achieve political goals, exemplifying her turning away from marriage with
Dudley. This is partially convincing as Elizabeths’ decision not to get married with Dudley was
supported by Cecil and the marriage with Dudley had potential political consequences such as
the threat of factional rivalry since Dudley’s family would be more powerful if tied with the
monarch. However, Elizabeth’s decision not to marry her other suitors was more so a personal
preference, despite the numerous attempts of the members of the numerous privy council to
convince her to solve the marriage issue. Elizabeth viewed marriage as her royal prerogative,
and was not interested in listening to the advice of others in court or the council regarding the
topic. She had “outbursts of irritation" in 1563 and 1566 when the House of Commons and
members of the privy council sought to debate the issue of her marriage and succession and
banished Lester from the privy chamber. The extract argues that Elizabeth’s approach to
government witnessed her personal biases alternating with political calculation especially when
regarding Mary stuart. This argument is convincing as when Mary Queen of Scots was found
guilty of treason in 1586, Elizabeth hesitated to execute her despite the clear threats she posed.
Mary queen of Scots was the figurehead of numerous plots and seen by catholics as the rightful
monarch. Elizabeth could have hesitated because of the potential threat to the security of her
position, as she feared a catholic rebellion in retaliation if she executed Mary. The extract
argues that Elizabeth’s good political judgment allowed her to garner and keep admiration which
helped her when she was seriously challenged in 1569. This is partially convincing as Elizabeth
had demonstrated her good political judgment in choosing capable advisors. However, the
threat Elizabeth faced in 1569 from the Northern rebellion was not as serious as implied by the
source. The rebellion was weak in numerous aspects such as poor leadership by Northern
earls, poor organization and lack of foreign support. The strength of the Elizabethan
governments’ intelligence operations and Cecil’s carefully planned course of actions allowed
them to easily put down the rebellion.
The overall argument of Extract B is that Elizabeth made the final decisions in government and
credit for the triumph of the period should go to her. Extract B argues that Elizabeth took a
personal interest in all aspects of government, but was able to pick good ministers to whom she
delegated authority. This interpretation is only partially convincing. Elizabeth did pick good
ministers and delegated authority to them. This was successful whilst Cecil was her first
The overarching argument of extract A is that Elizabeth I was highly qualified in government due
to her personal qualities, but at times she let her personal biases undermine her political goals.
The extract argues that Elizabeth had great qualifications and showed a masculine approach to
government, ruthlessly subordinating the Court and Council to her will. This is convincing as
Elizabeth was considerably well educated regarding government for a woman of that time,
learning much from her personal and political experiences. As compared to her predecessor
queen Mary, Elizabeth had a shrew grasp of political processes and took an interest in
decision-making. This is seen as “masculine” as Elizabeth subordinated the court and council to
her will in the sense that she did not allow the passing of laws or discussion of topics that she
did not agree with. Elizabeth regularly intervened in the passing of laws she did not agree with,
overall refusing around 60 bills. The extract argues that Elizabeth was able to put personal
preferences aside to achieve political goals, exemplifying her turning away from marriage with
Dudley. This is partially convincing as Elizabeths’ decision not to get married with Dudley was
supported by Cecil and the marriage with Dudley had potential political consequences such as
the threat of factional rivalry since Dudley’s family would be more powerful if tied with the
monarch. However, Elizabeth’s decision not to marry her other suitors was more so a personal
preference, despite the numerous attempts of the members of the numerous privy council to
convince her to solve the marriage issue. Elizabeth viewed marriage as her royal prerogative,
and was not interested in listening to the advice of others in court or the council regarding the
topic. She had “outbursts of irritation" in 1563 and 1566 when the House of Commons and
members of the privy council sought to debate the issue of her marriage and succession and
banished Lester from the privy chamber. The extract argues that Elizabeth’s approach to
government witnessed her personal biases alternating with political calculation especially when
regarding Mary stuart. This argument is convincing as when Mary Queen of Scots was found
guilty of treason in 1586, Elizabeth hesitated to execute her despite the clear threats she posed.
Mary queen of Scots was the figurehead of numerous plots and seen by catholics as the rightful
monarch. Elizabeth could have hesitated because of the potential threat to the security of her
position, as she feared a catholic rebellion in retaliation if she executed Mary. The extract
argues that Elizabeth’s good political judgment allowed her to garner and keep admiration which
helped her when she was seriously challenged in 1569. This is partially convincing as Elizabeth
had demonstrated her good political judgment in choosing capable advisors. However, the
threat Elizabeth faced in 1569 from the Northern rebellion was not as serious as implied by the
source. The rebellion was weak in numerous aspects such as poor leadership by Northern
earls, poor organization and lack of foreign support. The strength of the Elizabethan
governments’ intelligence operations and Cecil’s carefully planned course of actions allowed
them to easily put down the rebellion.
The overall argument of Extract B is that Elizabeth made the final decisions in government and
credit for the triumph of the period should go to her. Extract B argues that Elizabeth took a
personal interest in all aspects of government, but was able to pick good ministers to whom she
delegated authority. This interpretation is only partially convincing. Elizabeth did pick good
ministers and delegated authority to them. This was successful whilst Cecil was her first
