1. Sec 1 History SA 2 2010 Answer SchemeSection A: MCQ1.D2.A3.C4.B5.B6.C7.B8.C9.C10.ASection B: Identification Work(a) Borobudur / Borobodur(b) Trengganu Stone(c) Oracle bone(d) Terracotta soldiers/warriors(e) HinduismSection C: Source-Based Questions(a)Study Source A. [ 4m ]What does this tell you about the Indus Valley Civilisation?L1: Describing the source 1mThe source depicts a citadel in the ancient city of Mohenjo-daro.L2: Makes inference with no reference to the source. 2mThe people in the ancient city of Mohenjo-daro were well-prepared in theevent of an enemy attack.The people in the ancient city of Mohen-jodaro had rather sophisticatedarchitectural skills to enable the construction of a citadel.L3: Makes inferences with support 3m - 4m3m for 1 inference with support4m for 2 inferences with supportThe people in the ancient city of Mohen-jodaro were well-prepared in theevent of an enemy attack. The evidence is the existence of the citadel (asshown in the source) which has tall walls to allow people to take shelter if anenemy attacked the city.The people in the ancient city of Mohen-jodaro had rather sophisticatedarchitectural skills to enable the construction of a citadel. The evidence lies inthe fact that the citadel depicted in the source requires a lot of architecturalknowledge and technology.Possible answers include: Students can infer that there is a form ofgovernment, the civilisation has experienced war, there is organisation ofsociety.(b)Study Source B. [ 5m ]Why did the author make this comment?
2. L1: Lifts from source 1mThe author made this comment to state that it is necessary to re-examine theAryan myth, look at the kinds of misconceptions it has given and the recentscientific evidence which will prove that the invasion never happened.L2: Inference without support 2mThe author wants to emphasise on the fact that the Aryan invasion theory issomething created / fabricated by the Europeans to create disharmony in theIndian society.AND/ORThe author made this comment to convince people that the Aryan invasiontheory is false because it has been dismissed by scientific proof.L3: Inference of purpose with support 3m – 4m3m for 1 inference (supported)4m for 2 inferences (supported)The author wants to emphasise on the fact that the Aryan invasion theory issomething made up / fabricated by the Europeans to create disharmony in theIndian society. The evidence is “Indias ancient history has been altered byEuropeans who attempt to sow discord in the Indian society by using theAryan invasion theory which is completely made up.”The author made this comment to convince people that the Aryan Invasiontheory is false because it has been dismissed by scientific proof. The evidenceis “it is necessary to re-examine the Aryan myth, look at the kinds ofmisconceptions it has given and the recent scientific evidence which will provethat the invasion never happened.”L4: Inference of a higher purpose (With L3/3) 5mThe author wants to condemn the Europeans for the distortion of historicalinformation to fit their selfish purposes. The evidence is “Indias ancient historyhas been altered by Europeans who attempt to sow discord in the Indiansociety by using the Aryan invasion theory which is completely made up.”Therefore, it can be inferred that rather than just to inform readers, the authoris also condemning the Europeans for their propagation of a theory that iswholly 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 - 3m2m 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 disprovesthe 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 - 5m4m for 1 valid similarity/difference with support5m for 1 valid similarity and 1 valid difference with supportBoth sources are similar in showing that existing scientific evidence disprovesthe Aryan Invasion theory/ the Aryan invasion did not happen. The evidencefrom Source B is “the recent scientific evidence which will prove that theinvasion never happened.” Source C also states that “detailed skeletalanalysis has shown that the victims were biologically different from the Induspeople.”.Both sources are different in showing the ways the historical information onAryan information is skewed. Source B talks about Europeans deliberatelyfabricating a theory on Aryan invasion. The evidence is “Indias ancient historyhas been altered by Europeans who attempt to sow discord in the Indiansociety by using the Aryan invasion theory which is completely made up.”Source C talks about how there is a flaw in archaeologists interpretations ofartefacts. The evidence is “Thirty-seven skeletons found in the ruins ofMohenjo-daro were put forth as evidence of a massacre at the hands of theAryans...these skeletons did not belong to people who died at war.”L4: Based on purpose (With L3/4m) 6mBoth sources are similar in that they both aim to raise the awareness of thereaders and highlight the discrepancies found in a theory as widespread asthe Aryan invasion theory. The evidence from Source B is “Today, it isnecessary to re-examine the Aryan myth, look at the kinds of misconceptions ithas given and the recent scientific evidence which will prove that the invasionnever happened.” and the evidence from Source C is “. In fact, detailedskeletal analysis has shown that the victims were biologically different from theIndus people.”Section D: Structured-Essay questions2. Government and Organisation of Societya.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 shis lands and armies after he unified China. Explanation: By taking away their lands and armies, the shis 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 Shihuangs 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 Melakas strategic location was the only reason why it became one of themajor trading centres in the history of Southeast Asia? [ 7m ] Stand: I agree or I disagree (1m) Point - Parameswaras 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 - Parameswaras 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 – Melakas 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 Melakas 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 philosophya.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 civilisationat that point in time. In trying to emulate India, the rulers invited Hindu priests to their courts inSoutheast Asia so that they may be exposed to the teachings of Hinduism.Explanation: Southeast Asian rulers converted to Hinduism in an attempt to associate themselveswith an advanced civilisation.AND/ORPoint – Divine Kingship. (2m)Elaboration/Example: Divine kingship is the belief that kings are like gods. This is a concpet that isencompassed in Hinduism in India.Explanation: In adopting Hinduism, Southeast Asian rulers are able to use the concept of DivineKingship 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 inSoutheast 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 standL2/ 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