CIE IGCSE Hist Pp1 2025 – Suggested Mark Scheme
SECTION A: CORE CONTENT
Question 1: The 1848 Revolutions Eventually Failed
1(a) What were the Hungarian ‘March Laws’? [4]
Marking Levels:
Level 1 (1 mark): Provides a basic fact about the March Laws.
o Example: The March Laws were a set of reforms.
Level 2 (2-3 marks): Identifies key aspects of the March Laws.
o Example: They included demands for civil liberties, a national assembly, and
the abolition of serfdom.
Level 3 (4 marks): Fully describes the March Laws and their significance.
o Example: The March Laws, enacted in March 1848, included civil liberties, the
establishment of a national assembly, and the abolition of serfdom, aiming to
increase Hungarian autonomy from the Austrian Empire.
1(b) Why was Charles Albert important in 1848–49? [6]
Marking Levels:
Level 1 (1 mark): Identifies a role of Charles Albert.
o Example: He was the king of Sardinia.
Level 2 (2-3 marks): Explains one reason for his importance.
o Example: He declared war on Austria in 1848, leading an army of 60,000
men, reflecting his commitment to Italian unification.
Level 3 (4-5 marks): Explains two or more reasons, supported by specific evidence.
o Example: Charles Albert played a critical role in the 1848 revolutions by
declaring war on Austria, believing he could lead Italy to independence.
Despite being defeated at the Battle of Novara in 1849, his actions inspired
the nationalist movement and positioned him as a key figure in the struggle
for unification.
Level 4 (6 marks): Provides a comprehensive answer with detailed evidence.
o Example: Charles Albert, as king of Sardinia, declared war on Austria in 1848,
leading an army of 60,000 in hopes of unifying Italy. His initial successes,
followed by defeat at Novara in 1849, highlighted both his ambitions and the
challenges of Italian unification, making him a pivotal figure in this
transformative period.
1(c) ‘The revolutions in France and Prussia in 1848 were similar.’ How far do you
agree with this statement? Explain your answer. [10]
Marking Levels:
, Level 1 (1 mark): Identifies a similarity or difference.
o Example: Both revolutions aimed for political reform.
Level 2 (2-3 marks): Describes similarities or differences with minimal explanation.
o Example: The revolutions in both countries sought to overthrow monarchies
and establish republics.
Level 3 (4-6 marks): Explains similarities and differences with some detailed
evidence.
o Example: Both revolutions aimed for democratic reforms and were sparked by
economic hardship. In France, the February Revolution led to the
establishment of the Second Republic, while in Prussia, the revolution
resulted in a constitutional assembly but ultimately failed to achieve lasting
change.
Level 4 (7-9 marks): Provides a balanced evaluation with specific historical
evidence.
o Example: The revolutions in France and Prussia in 1848 shared goals of
political reform and popular sovereignty, fueled by economic distress.
However, the French revolution successfully established the Second
Republic, while Prussia’s failed to achieve significant reform, highlighting their
differing outcomes despite similar initial motivations.
Level 5 (10 marks): Offers a nuanced judgment, considering various perspectives
with comprehensive evidence.
o Example: While both revolutions aimed for political reform and were driven by
economic grievances, they diverged significantly in outcomes; France
established the Second Republic, while Prussia's revolution failed to secure
meaningful change, illustrating the varying political contexts that influenced
these events.
,Question 2: Individuals and Italian Unification
2(a) Describe Austria’s position in Italy at the beginning of 1848. [4]
Marking Levels:
Level 1 (1 mark): Provides a basic fact about Austria's role.
o Example: Austria controlled northern Italy.
Level 2 (2-3 marks): Identifies key aspects of Austria's influence.
o Example: Austria dominated Lombardy and Venetia, exerting significant
control over Italian states.
Level 3 (4 marks): Fully describes Austria's position with context.
o Example: At the beginning of 1848, Austria held significant power in northern
Italy, controlling Lombardy and Venetia, and influencing the smaller states
through military presence and political pressure, which sparked nationalist
sentiments among Italians.
2(b) Why did Garibaldi go to Sicily in 1860? [6]
Marking Levels:
Level 1 (1 mark): Identifies a reason for Garibaldi's actions.
o Example: He aimed to liberate Sicily.
Level 2 (2-3 marks): Explains one reason for his expedition.
o Example: Garibaldi sought to support the nationalist cause and unify Italy by
liberating the southern regions.
Level 3 (4-5 marks): Explains two or more reasons with details and context.
o Example: Garibaldi went to Sicily in 1860 to lead a volunteer army, known as
the Thousand, aiming to liberate the island from Bourbon rule. His successful
campaign was part of a larger effort to unify Italy under a single nation,
responding to nationalist fervor across the peninsula.
Level 4 (6 marks): Provides a comprehensive answer with detailed evidence.
o Example: In 1860, Garibaldi traveled to Sicily to liberate it from Bourbon
control, rallying support from nationalists. Leading the Thousand, he captured
Palermo and continued his campaign across southern Italy, significantly
contributing to the unification process and demonstrating his role as a key
figure in the nationalist movement.
2(c) ‘Cavour was an Italian nationalist.’ How far do you agree with this statement?
Explain your answer. [10]
Marking Levels:
Level 1 (1 mark): Identifies a fact about Cavour.
o Example: Cavour was a politician from Piedmont.
Level 2 (2-3 marks): Describes aspects of Cavour’s beliefs or actions with minimal
explanation.
, o Example: Cavour aimed to unify Italy but was also focused on strengthening
Piedmont.
Level 3 (4-6 marks): Explains both nationalist and non-nationalist aspects of
Cavour's actions and beliefs.
o Example: While Cavour played a crucial role in Italian unification through
diplomacy and alliances, such as with France in the 1859 war against Austria,
he was more a realist focused on strengthening Piedmont's position rather
than a fervent nationalist like Garibaldi.
Level 4 (7-9 marks): Provides a balanced evaluation with specific historical
evidence.
o Example: Cavour’s actions, such as his support for the war against Austria
and his diplomatic efforts, illustrate his commitment to Italian unification.
However, his primary motivation was to enhance Piedmont’s power rather
than a deep-seated nationalism, contrasting with leaders like Garibaldi who
prioritized national identity.
Level 5 (10 marks): Offers a nuanced judgment, considering multiple perspectives
with comprehensive evidence.
o Example: Cavour was instrumental in the Italian unification process,
employing diplomacy and military action to achieve his goals. While he is
often seen as a nationalist due to his ultimate aim of unifying Italy, his
pragmatic approach focused on strengthening Piedmont’s influence,
suggesting that his nationalism was more strategic than ideological compared
to other figures in the movement.
SECTION A: CORE CONTENT
Question 1: The 1848 Revolutions Eventually Failed
1(a) What were the Hungarian ‘March Laws’? [4]
Marking Levels:
Level 1 (1 mark): Provides a basic fact about the March Laws.
o Example: The March Laws were a set of reforms.
Level 2 (2-3 marks): Identifies key aspects of the March Laws.
o Example: They included demands for civil liberties, a national assembly, and
the abolition of serfdom.
Level 3 (4 marks): Fully describes the March Laws and their significance.
o Example: The March Laws, enacted in March 1848, included civil liberties, the
establishment of a national assembly, and the abolition of serfdom, aiming to
increase Hungarian autonomy from the Austrian Empire.
1(b) Why was Charles Albert important in 1848–49? [6]
Marking Levels:
Level 1 (1 mark): Identifies a role of Charles Albert.
o Example: He was the king of Sardinia.
Level 2 (2-3 marks): Explains one reason for his importance.
o Example: He declared war on Austria in 1848, leading an army of 60,000
men, reflecting his commitment to Italian unification.
Level 3 (4-5 marks): Explains two or more reasons, supported by specific evidence.
o Example: Charles Albert played a critical role in the 1848 revolutions by
declaring war on Austria, believing he could lead Italy to independence.
Despite being defeated at the Battle of Novara in 1849, his actions inspired
the nationalist movement and positioned him as a key figure in the struggle
for unification.
Level 4 (6 marks): Provides a comprehensive answer with detailed evidence.
o Example: Charles Albert, as king of Sardinia, declared war on Austria in 1848,
leading an army of 60,000 in hopes of unifying Italy. His initial successes,
followed by defeat at Novara in 1849, highlighted both his ambitions and the
challenges of Italian unification, making him a pivotal figure in this
transformative period.
1(c) ‘The revolutions in France and Prussia in 1848 were similar.’ How far do you
agree with this statement? Explain your answer. [10]
Marking Levels:
, Level 1 (1 mark): Identifies a similarity or difference.
o Example: Both revolutions aimed for political reform.
Level 2 (2-3 marks): Describes similarities or differences with minimal explanation.
o Example: The revolutions in both countries sought to overthrow monarchies
and establish republics.
Level 3 (4-6 marks): Explains similarities and differences with some detailed
evidence.
o Example: Both revolutions aimed for democratic reforms and were sparked by
economic hardship. In France, the February Revolution led to the
establishment of the Second Republic, while in Prussia, the revolution
resulted in a constitutional assembly but ultimately failed to achieve lasting
change.
Level 4 (7-9 marks): Provides a balanced evaluation with specific historical
evidence.
o Example: The revolutions in France and Prussia in 1848 shared goals of
political reform and popular sovereignty, fueled by economic distress.
However, the French revolution successfully established the Second
Republic, while Prussia’s failed to achieve significant reform, highlighting their
differing outcomes despite similar initial motivations.
Level 5 (10 marks): Offers a nuanced judgment, considering various perspectives
with comprehensive evidence.
o Example: While both revolutions aimed for political reform and were driven by
economic grievances, they diverged significantly in outcomes; France
established the Second Republic, while Prussia's revolution failed to secure
meaningful change, illustrating the varying political contexts that influenced
these events.
,Question 2: Individuals and Italian Unification
2(a) Describe Austria’s position in Italy at the beginning of 1848. [4]
Marking Levels:
Level 1 (1 mark): Provides a basic fact about Austria's role.
o Example: Austria controlled northern Italy.
Level 2 (2-3 marks): Identifies key aspects of Austria's influence.
o Example: Austria dominated Lombardy and Venetia, exerting significant
control over Italian states.
Level 3 (4 marks): Fully describes Austria's position with context.
o Example: At the beginning of 1848, Austria held significant power in northern
Italy, controlling Lombardy and Venetia, and influencing the smaller states
through military presence and political pressure, which sparked nationalist
sentiments among Italians.
2(b) Why did Garibaldi go to Sicily in 1860? [6]
Marking Levels:
Level 1 (1 mark): Identifies a reason for Garibaldi's actions.
o Example: He aimed to liberate Sicily.
Level 2 (2-3 marks): Explains one reason for his expedition.
o Example: Garibaldi sought to support the nationalist cause and unify Italy by
liberating the southern regions.
Level 3 (4-5 marks): Explains two or more reasons with details and context.
o Example: Garibaldi went to Sicily in 1860 to lead a volunteer army, known as
the Thousand, aiming to liberate the island from Bourbon rule. His successful
campaign was part of a larger effort to unify Italy under a single nation,
responding to nationalist fervor across the peninsula.
Level 4 (6 marks): Provides a comprehensive answer with detailed evidence.
o Example: In 1860, Garibaldi traveled to Sicily to liberate it from Bourbon
control, rallying support from nationalists. Leading the Thousand, he captured
Palermo and continued his campaign across southern Italy, significantly
contributing to the unification process and demonstrating his role as a key
figure in the nationalist movement.
2(c) ‘Cavour was an Italian nationalist.’ How far do you agree with this statement?
Explain your answer. [10]
Marking Levels:
Level 1 (1 mark): Identifies a fact about Cavour.
o Example: Cavour was a politician from Piedmont.
Level 2 (2-3 marks): Describes aspects of Cavour’s beliefs or actions with minimal
explanation.
, o Example: Cavour aimed to unify Italy but was also focused on strengthening
Piedmont.
Level 3 (4-6 marks): Explains both nationalist and non-nationalist aspects of
Cavour's actions and beliefs.
o Example: While Cavour played a crucial role in Italian unification through
diplomacy and alliances, such as with France in the 1859 war against Austria,
he was more a realist focused on strengthening Piedmont's position rather
than a fervent nationalist like Garibaldi.
Level 4 (7-9 marks): Provides a balanced evaluation with specific historical
evidence.
o Example: Cavour’s actions, such as his support for the war against Austria
and his diplomatic efforts, illustrate his commitment to Italian unification.
However, his primary motivation was to enhance Piedmont’s power rather
than a deep-seated nationalism, contrasting with leaders like Garibaldi who
prioritized national identity.
Level 5 (10 marks): Offers a nuanced judgment, considering multiple perspectives
with comprehensive evidence.
o Example: Cavour was instrumental in the Italian unification process,
employing diplomacy and military action to achieve his goals. While he is
often seen as a nationalist due to his ultimate aim of unifying Italy, his
pragmatic approach focused on strengthening Piedmont’s influence,
suggesting that his nationalism was more strategic than ideological compared
to other figures in the movement.
