Elizabeth I: Government and Court c.1568–1603

Mark Scheme: 4 marks (2 × 2 marks) — must give inference + supporting detail from source

Point 1: I can infer that the Northern Rebellion was strongly motivated by religion. [1] The rebels "caused the Holy Mass to be said" in Durham Cathedral — a deliberate Catholic ceremony that had not taken place there for years, showing they wanted to restore the old faith. [1]

Point 2: I can infer that the rebellion had significant popular support in the north of England. [1] The source states a force of "six thousand footmen and sixteen hundred horsemen" — a large army that could only be raised if many northern people supported the cause. [1]

Do not merely describe what the source says — you must make an inference (what it implies/suggests) and support it with detail from the source.

Mark Scheme: 8 marks — AO3 (Analysis of sources)

Band 4 (7–8 marks): Evaluates utility using content AND NOP; reaches a substantiated judgement; uses contextual knowledge to contextualise and challenge the source.

Example answer structure:

Utility from content: Source A is useful because it shows Elizabeth's style of governing through emotional appeals to loyalty. Her emphasis on subjects' love as "the glory of my crown" demonstrates how she used rhetoric to manage Parliament. This is historically useful — it matches what historians know about her political methods across her reign.

Utility from provenance: It is a primary source from Elizabeth herself (1601), giving us direct evidence of how she presented herself to Parliament. However, as the Queen's own speech, it is deliberate propaganda designed to reassure Parliament after the Essex Rebellion crisis.

Limitations: Contextual knowledge tells us that 1601 was a difficult year — Parliament was angry about monopolies and had been challenging Elizabeth on economic policy. The speech does not reveal these tensions. It omits the reality of Elizabeth's many clashes with Parliament over succession, Mary QoS, and religion.

Judgement: Useful for studying Elizabeth's political rhetoric and self-presentation, but limited as evidence of the actual relationship between monarch and Parliament, since it hides as much as it reveals.

Mark Scheme: 8 marks — AO2 (Narrative with analysis of causation/consequence)

Band 4 (7–8 marks): Accurate, detailed narrative; links causes to events to consequences; uses appropriate historical terms; shows how one event leads to another.

Example answer:

The Northern Rebellion of 1569 was the most serious internal threat to Elizabeth's rule and grew from long-standing religious and political grievances in the north of England. The arrival of Mary Queen of Scots in 1568 gave northern Catholics a figurehead — someone who, as a Catholic with a claim to the throne, represented everything Elizabeth was not. The Earls of Northumberland and Westmorland, resentful of Protestant southern advisors like Cecil who dominated the Privy Council, saw an opportunity to restore Catholicism and their own influence.

In November 1569, the earls raised an army of around 6,000 men and marched south, holding Catholic Mass in Durham Cathedral — a symbolic act of religious defiance. However, the rebellion rapidly lost momentum. A royal army moved north and the rebels, unwilling to fight, retreated. By December the rebellion had collapsed without a major battle.

The consequences were severe: over 600 rebels were executed in a deliberate show of royal authority, far more than in previous rebellions. The Earl of Northumberland was captured and executed in 1572. These consequences were significant for Elizabeth's government in two key ways. First, she could never again trust the great Catholic northern nobles — the traditional power structures of the north had proved unreliable, and she tightened royal control over the region. Second, Mary Queen of Scots' role as a Catholic figurehead was starkly demonstrated; pressure on Elizabeth to execute or at least more tightly confine her intensified. The rebellion thus accelerated the events that would lead, eighteen years later, to Mary's execution in 1587.

Mark Scheme: 16 marks — AO2 (Analysis and explanation; judgement)

Band 4 (13–16 marks): Analytical explanation of multiple factors; convincing, substantiated judgement; factors weighed against each other; specific factual support throughout.

Suggested essay plan:

Argument FOR (Mary as main reason): Mary's presence in England from 1568 provided a Catholic figurehead around whom plotters could rally. The Northern Rebellion 1569 aimed to free Mary and place her on the throne. The Ridolfi Plot 1571 planned to marry her to Norfolk and use Spanish troops to overthrow Elizabeth. The Throckmorton (1583) and Babington (1586) plots both centred on Mary. For nearly 20 years, every major Catholic conspiracy had Mary as its focus — suggesting she was the single most persistent cause of threats.

Counter-argument 1 — Religious division: Many threats existed before and independently of Mary. The Pope's excommunication of Elizabeth in 1570 gave all Catholics a religious duty to oppose her. The Northern Rebellion had deep roots in religious grievance predating Mary's arrival — Catholic communities in the north resented the Protestant settlement from 1559.

Counter-argument 2 — The succession question: Elizabeth's refusal to marry or name an heir created permanent anxiety. Parliament repeatedly warned that without an heir, any accident to Elizabeth could plunge England into civil war. This structural problem — not Mary — drove much of the instability, since Protestant nobles too were concerned about the succession.

Counter-argument 3 — Noble ambition: The Essex Rebellion (1601) had nothing to do with Mary (who had been dead for 14 years) — it was driven entirely by Essex's personal ambition and resentment at losing Elizabeth's favour. This shows that threats could arise from purely personal/political grievances unconnected to religion or Mary.

Judgement: Mary Queen of Scots was the most significant single factor in Catholic threats between 1568 and 1587 — her presence gave plots an international dimension and a human focus they would otherwise have lacked. However, the underlying causes of threat were structural: religious division, the succession question, and noble ambition all existed independently of her. After her execution in 1587, threats continued (Essex 1601), proving Elizabeth's vulnerability was not solely down to Mary. A balanced conclusion might argue Mary was the catalyst for many threats but not their root cause.