This document contains an answer scheme for a history exam on South Asia. Section A provides answers to multiple choice questions. Section B identifies important sites and religions. Section C requires analyzing two sources about the Aryan invasion theory. The sources suggest the theory was fabricated and recent evidence disproves it. Section D asks structured essay questions about the caste system in India and the reduction of power of elites in China and Qin Shihuang's role in Melaka's success as a trading port, which involved more than just its location.

1. Sec 1 History SA 2 2010 Answer Scheme
Section A: MCQ
1.D
2.A
3.C
4.B
5.B
6.C
7.B
8.C
9.C
10.A
Section B: Identification Work
(a) Borobudur / Borobodur
(b) Trengganu Stone
(c) Oracle bone
(d) Terracotta soldiers/warriors
(e) Hinduism
Section C: Source-Based Questions
(a)Study Source A. [ 4m ]
What does this tell you about the Indus Valley Civilisation?
L1: Describing the source 1m
The source depicts a citadel in the ancient city of Mohenjo-daro.
L2: Makes inference with no reference to the source. 2m
The people in the ancient city of Mohenjo-daro were well-prepared in the
event of an enemy attack.
The people in the ancient city of Mohen-jodaro had rather sophisticated
architectural skills to enable the construction of a citadel.
L3: Makes inferences with support 3m - 4m
3m for 1 inference with support
4m for 2 inferences with support
The people in the ancient city of Mohen-jodaro were well-prepared in the
event of an enemy attack. The evidence is the existence of the citadel (as
shown in the source) which has tall walls to allow people to take shelter if an
enemy attacked the city.
The people in the ancient city of Mohen-jodaro had rather sophisticated
architectural skills to enable the construction of a citadel. The evidence lies in
the fact that the citadel depicted in the source requires a lot of architectural
knowledge and technology.
Possible answers include: Students can infer that there is a form of
government, the civilisation has experienced war, there is organisation of
society.
(b)Study Source B. [ 5m ]
Why did the author make this comment?

2. L1: Lifts from source 1m
The author made this comment to state that it is necessary to re-examine the
Aryan myth, look at the kinds of misconceptions it has given and the recent
scientific evidence which will prove that the invasion never happened.
L2: Inference without support 2m
The author wants to emphasise on the fact that the Aryan invasion theory is
something created / fabricated by the Europeans to create disharmony in the
Indian society.
AND/OR
The author made this comment to convince people that the Aryan invasion
theory is false because it has been dismissed by scientific proof.
L3: Inference of purpose with support 3m – 4m
3m for 1 inference (supported)
4m for 2 inferences (supported)
The author wants to emphasise on the fact that the Aryan invasion theory is
something made up / fabricated by the Europeans to create disharmony in the
Indian society. The evidence is “India's ancient history has been altered by
Europeans who attempt to sow discord in the Indian society by using the
Aryan invasion theory which is completely made up.”
The author made this comment to convince people that the Aryan Invasion
theory is false because it has been dismissed by scientific proof. The evidence
is “it is necessary to re-examine the Aryan myth, look at the kinds of
misconceptions it has given and the recent scientific evidence which will prove
that the invasion never happened.”
L4: Inference of a higher purpose (With L3/3) 5m
The author wants to condemn the Europeans for the distortion of historical
information to fit their selfish purposes. The evidence is “India's ancient history
has been altered by Europeans who attempt to sow discord in the Indian
society by using the Aryan invasion theory which is completely made up.”
Therefore, it can be inferred that rather than just to inform readers, the author
is also condemning the Europeans for their propagation of a theory that is
wholly groundless and not based on solid scientific evidence.
(c)Study Sources B and C. [ 5m ]
How different are Sources B and C?
L1: Based on provenance and source type 1m
Both are textual sources
Both are about the Aryan Invasion Theory.
L2: Based on content, without support. 2m - 3m
2m for 1 valid similarity/difference without support.
3m for 1 similarity and 1 difference without support.
Both sources are similar in showing that existing scientific evidence disproves
the Aryan Invasion theory/ the Aryan invasion did not happen.
Both sources are different in showing the ways the historical information on

3. Aryan invasion is skewed.
Both sources are different in their presentation of their arguments.
L3: Based on content, with support. 4m - 5m
4m for 1 valid similarity/difference with support
5m for 1 valid similarity and 1 valid difference with support
Both sources are similar in showing that existing scientific evidence disproves
the Aryan Invasion theory/ the Aryan invasion did not happen. The evidence
from Source B is “the recent scientific evidence which will prove that the
invasion never happened.” Source C also states that “detailed skeletal
analysis has shown that the victims were biologically different from the Indus
people.”.
Both sources are different in showing the ways the historical information on
Aryan information is skewed. Source B talks about Europeans deliberately
fabricating a theory on Aryan invasion. The evidence is “India's ancient history
has been altered by Europeans who attempt to sow discord in the Indian
society by using the Aryan invasion theory which is completely made up.”
Source C talks about how there is a flaw in archaeologists' interpretations of
artefacts. The evidence is “Thirty-seven skeletons found in the ruins of
Mohenjo-daro were put forth as evidence of a massacre at the hands of the
Aryans...these skeletons did not belong to people who died at war.”
L4: Based on purpose (With L3/4m) 6m
Both sources are similar in that they both aim to raise the awareness of the
readers and highlight the discrepancies found in a theory as widespread as
the Aryan invasion theory. The evidence from Source B is “Today, it is
necessary to re-examine the Aryan myth, look at the kinds of misconceptions it
has given and the recent scientific evidence which will prove that the invasion
never happened.” and the evidence from Source C is “. In fact, detailed
skeletal analysis has shown that the victims were biologically different from the
Indus people.”
Section D: Structured-Essay questions
2. Government and Organisation of Society
a.Why were the lower castes in India willing to accept their positions? [ 4m ]
Point – Hinduism (2m)
Elaboration/Example: Hindus believed that if they performed their duties accorded to them by
their caste faithfully, they will be born into a better caste in the next life.
Explanation: The belief in Hinduism thus compelled the pariahs to perform their duties faithfully
because they want to be born into a better caste in the next life.
AND/OR
Point - Rigidity of the caste system (2m)
Elaboration/Example: The pariahs cannot hope to move up the caste and do something
different because the caste system dictates that one follows his or her parents' caste.

4. Explanation: Given the rigidity of the caste system and the lack of social mobility, pariahs are
left with the option of staying in their caste and performing their duties faithfully.
b.How did Qin Shihuang reduce the power of the shi? [ 4m]
Point - Abortion of the old shi system (2m)
Elaboration/Example: Unlike the shi system during Zhou dynasty, Qin Shihuang confiscated the
shi's lands and armies after he unified China.
Explanation: By taking away their lands and armies, the shi's power was greatly reduced since
power was tied to the amount of land you owned and the armies you controlled.
AND/OR
Point - Unitary government (2m)
Elaboration/Example: Even though the empire was divided into 36 provinces, each still came
under Qin Shihuang's direct control. All officials, including the shi who was responsible for the
provinces, had to report directly to him.
Explanation: Since the shi did not have the right to make decisions, their power was largely
reduced.
c.Do you agree that Melaka's strategic location was the only reason why it became one of the
major trading centres in the history of Southeast Asia? [ 7m ]
Stand: I agree or I disagree (1m)
Point - Parameswara's use of diplomacy (2m)
Elaboration/Example: Parameswara formed a friendship with the Chinese emperor to ensure
protection from enemy attacks since China was very powerful then.
Explanation: With the protection of the Chinese fleet, traders were more attracted to Melaka as
a trading port because it was considered safe from external threats.
AND/ OR
Point - Parameswara's conversion (2m)
Elaboration/Example: Parameswara married a Muslim princess from Pasai and converted to
Islam.
Explanation: By doing so, Parameswara won the support of rich Indian-Muslim and Arab
traders. These traders then shifted their trading headquarters from north Sumatra to Melaka.
This means that there was an influx of traders from the Muslim region which would not have
happened had Parameswara not converted.
AND/ OR
Point – Syahbandars (2m)

5. Elaboration/Example: Parameswara appointed syahbandars to look after the needs of the
foreign traders who stopped at the port in Melaka.
Explanation: When traders' needs were cared for, they were more likely to return to the same
port over and over again. The influx of traders and goods helped boost the economy
exponentially.
AND/OR
Point – Melaka's strategic location (2m)
Elaboration/Example: The position of Melaka was along the trade route between India and
China.
Explanation: This strategic position helped ensure that traders going to and from India and
China would stop at its port and trade, helping it become the major trade centres in the region.
Conclusion: I disagree with the statement. While Melaka was indeed located at a strategic
location, along the Straits of Melaka, its position alone could not have helped secure Melaka's
wealth. Firstly, traders were attracted to the fact that Melaka was a relatively safe port which
was well-protected against pirates. Secondly, traders' needs were taken care of which meant
there was an added incentive for the traders to trade there. Finally, the conversion of
Parameswara himself created an environment that was perceived to be welcoming to the
Muslim traders who had a lot of goods to offer. All these factors helped Melaka become wealthy
and powerful.
3. Religion and philosophy
a.Why did Southeast Asian rulers convert to Hinduism? [ 4m ]
Point: Southeast Asian rulers look up to India. (2m)
Elaboration/Example: Southeast Asian rulers look up to India as it was a very advanced civilisation
at that point in time. In trying to emulate India, the rulers invited Hindu priests to their courts in
Southeast Asia so that they may be exposed to the teachings of Hinduism.
Explanation: Southeast Asian rulers converted to Hinduism in an attempt to associate themselves
with an advanced civilisation.
AND/OR
Point – Divine Kingship. (2m)
Elaboration/Example: Divine kingship is the belief that kings are like gods. This is a concpet that is
encompassed in Hinduism in India.
Explanation: In adopting Hinduism, Southeast Asian rulers are able to use the concept of Divine
Kingship to justify their positions and legitimise their power.
b.How did Taoism, as a philosophy, turn into a religion? [ 4m ]
Point – Ancestral worship (2m)

6. Elaboration/Example: Taoism, as a philosophy, gradually turned into a religion because people
combined ancestral worship with it.
Explanation: Through the combination of the philosophy and ancestral worship, Taoism
morphed into a religion which requires its followers to venerate their deceased ancestors in the
form of worship.
AND/OR
Point: Legends and folklores (2m)
Elaboration/Example: People eventually combined Taoist beliefs with legends and folklores.
Explanation: The Taoist philosophy turned into a religion where figures from legends and
folklores were raised and worshipped as deities.
c.Do you agree that the role played by ancient rulers was the only reason why religions spread in
Southeast Asia? [ 7m ]
Stand: I agree / I disagree (1m)
Point: Ashoka (2m)
Elaboration/Example: Ashoka carved Buddhist teachings on rocks and pillars all over the
empire to spread the religion and advised his people to behave in the right manner. He also
sent Buddhists to foreign places to spread the teachings of Buddhism.
Explanation: The reason as to why Buddhism reached present-day Sri Lanka, Myanmar and
China was because Ashoka was a firm advocator of the Buddhist faith. Also, he used his
position of authority and wealth to help forward the Buddhist teachings to places outside of
India, that would have been otherwise inaccessible.
AND/OR
Point: Sultan Muzaffar Shah (2m)
Elaboration/Example: During the reign of Sultan Muzaffar Shah, Melaka conquered many of
her neighbouring kingdoms in the Malay Peninsula and Sumatra. As Islam was the official
religion of Melaka, many of the rulers of those kingdoms converted to Islam to show respect for
the Sultan of Melaka.
Explanation: Conquests by Muslim leaders not only helped spread Islam, it also catalysed the
process of conversion for the people since those under them convert to show their reverence to
the rulers.
AND/OR
Point: Southeast Asian rulers and Hinduism (2m)
Elaboration/Example: Hinduism came to Southeast around the 1st century CE. It is believed
that Hindu priests from India were invited to the courts of ancient Southeast Asian rulers to
teach Indian culture. This was because India was considered to be one of the most advanced
civilisations of the ancient world and the rulers wanted to learn from the Indians.
Explanation: By virtue of their wealth and authority, Southeast Asian rulers were able to invite

7. Hindu priests from India which helped expose the rulers and the people to Hinduism. This in
turn, encourageD the spread of the religion itself.
AND/OR
Point: Traders (2m)
Elaboration/Example: Many Javanese traders who came to trade at Melaka converted to
Islam. When these traders returned to Java, they spread the teachings of Islam to their
relatives and friends. From Java, Islam spread to the other islands of present-day Indonesia.
Explanation: Traders helped carry the teachings of religion back to their hometowns. This
helped in the spread of religions especially when these traders acted as the eyes and ears of
most people back in their hometowns.
AND/OR
Point – Missionaries (2m)
Elaboration/Example: Missionaries travelled all over the country, and even out of it, to spread
the various religious teachings.
Explanation: Missionaries effectively brought the religion to places that had inhabitants who
were not mobile and therefore, could not have been exposed to any form of religion if these
missionaries did not arrive. Missionaries played an important role in the spread of religions.
Conclusion: I disagree that the role played by ancient rulers was the only reason why religions
spread in Southeast Asia. However, it cannot be denied that the role of the ancient rulers in the
spread of religions (Islam, Hinduism or Buddhism) was very important. This is because the
rulers were the ones who were vested with wealth and authority, thus giving them the
advantage of sponsoring the construction of temples and even sponsoring missionaries in the
mission trips within and outside of their country. Without their wealth and authority, it seems
virtually impossible for the common folk to make an impact on the people. Secondly, the
influence of the leaders was compelling enough for the people under them to adopt the religion
of their rulers. Therefore, it is no exaggeration to say that the ancient rulers played a very
important role in the spread of religions. However, we cannot ignore the fact that traders and
missionaries themselves were also crucial. Without the convictions of these people, many
would not have been exposed to these religions to convert. These traders and missionaries
gained access to places that were relatively disconnected from the large city centres and
spread the teachings of their respective religions.
Marking scheme for 2C and 3C:
L1/ 1m : Stating a stand
L2/ 2m: Describing factor (s)
L3/ 3m – 4m: Fully explaining ONE given factor OR ONE other factor.
L4/ 5m – 6m: Fully explaining BOTH given factor and other factor.
L5/ 7m: Level 4 + Conclusion