Hello, and welcome to today's history lesson.

My name is Mr. Merrett, and I'll be guiding you through today's lesson.

So let's get started.

Today's lesson on the Norman England historic environment is looking at how to structure your answer to the historic environment lesson for Pevensey Castle.

And by the end of today's lesson, we'll be able to understand ways to approach the 16-mark historic environment question.

In order to do that, we need to use some key terms. And our key terms for today are second order concepts, continuity, causation, and consequence.

Second order concepts are ways in which questions about history are shaped.

And continuity is when something continues without changing.

Causation is why something happens, what its causes are.

And the consequence means the results or impacts of something.

And all of those are second order concepts.

Today's lesson will consist of three separate learning cycles.

And our first learning cycle is looking at knowledge about the sites.

So let's get going.

Now, sometimes historians look at the causes of things in Norman England, such as why William won the Battle of Hastings.

Sometimes historians are interested in what changed or stayed the same, what continued after the Norman Conquest, or what happened as a consequence of events or actions.

And we call these second order concepts.

Change, continuity, causation, and consequence, all of those are second order concepts.

Now, all historic environment questions will feature one second order concept.

So your question will be focused on either change, continuity, causation, or consequence.

So you know that going into the exam.

For example, defence was the main reason for castle building in Norman England.

How far does the study of Pevensey Castle support the statements? Now, the phrase, the main reason for, shows the question is about causation.

What was the reason for means the same as what caused? So you might find that the question is phrased slightly different to what you'd expect.

But as long as you understand what the phrases mean, you know it's gonna be one of those four secondary concepts.

So quick check for understanding now.

Which of these statements is about causation? Is it religious devotion was the main reason for cathedral building in Norman England, church reforms under Lanfranc had relatively little impact in Norman Wales, or the Normans kept more than they changed in governments and law in England? Make your choice now.

Okay, if you chose A, then very well done.

That's the answer.

Right, so historians do not always agree with each other about change, continuity, causation, or consequence, or frequently about many things in history, to be honest.

One might argue that there was very little continuity, while another might argue that, in fact, there was very little change.

Historians certainly do not always agree about the causes or consequence of historical events or processes.

Or if they do agree about them, then they might necessarily agree about their importance.

So another quick check for understanding now.

Which second order concept are these two historians arguing about? So the first historian says, "In my view, Norman tactics were much less significant than Harold's basic lack of preparation.

He rushed down to Hastings without all his troops, and his best troops were exhausted after a rapid march south from York." Whereas the second historian argues, "The victory at the Battle of Hastings was because of superior Norman tactics, the feigned retreat was crucial.

It weakened the Anglo-Saxon shield wall until the Normans could break from it." So which second order concept are they discussing? Pause the video while considering that question, and I'll see you again in just a moment.

Okay, if you chose causation, then very well done.

They are arguing about causation.

I now to be convincing, historians need to do more than simply state their argument.

They also need to use evidence to back up their claim.

And this, of course, applies to you as well.

When you answer your historic environment question, you need to use your knowledge about your historic environment sites in order to support the points that you make.

It's absolutely essential that you do that.

So here is parts of an answer to a question about the main reason for castle building in Norman England.

And this answer says, "Defence was the most important factor for castle building in Norman England.

Pevensey Castle was built on the first day of the Norman Conquest on the 28th of September 1066 because William wanted to keep his army safe from attack from the Anglo-Saxons.

William chose to build his motte-and bailey castle at Pevensey because the existing Roman walls of Anderitum provided an additional layer of protection." Now, what we're waiting to think about here is, where has a student use their own knowledge within this answer? So pause the video while you consider that, and we'll come back again in just a moment.

Okay, so hopefully you've worked out that effectively pretty much that whole paragraph is using their own knowledge.

That first sentence, they've made their points.

They've stated the points, and then following on from that, they used evidence to support the point that they are making.

So there's a variety of different examples of specific knowledge that is included within that paragraph.

Okay, another quick check for understanding now.

So here is another part of a student's answer, and I wanna consider how many pieces of relevant evidence are used to support the answer here.

So is it one, two, or three or more? But let's just read through the answer to make sure we're happy with it.

"Castle building in Norman England was mainly introduced to provide a central location for economic management of William's new territory.

For example, at Pevensey Castle, the sheriff was tasked with controlling the Rape of Pevensey due to the absence of its Lord, Robert, Count of Mortain.

One of the sheriff's main duties was to collect taxes, which were then stored in the keep, as it was the safest location, before the money was moved to the treasury in Winchester." So consider that question now, pause video while you do so, and I'll see you again in just a moment.

Okay, welcome back.

Hope you got okay with that.

So if you answered C, there are three or more pieces of relevant information in the answer, then you are absolutely correct.

And again, as with the previous answer we looked at, other than the initial sentence, pretty much the whole of that answer is using specific evidence, and that's what you want to try and do as well.

Okay, let's go for our first task force today in our learning.

So I've got a table on the screen in front of you here, and what I would like you to do is complete that table.

In order to do that, you need to use your knowledge about Pevensey Castle to add relevant details to support these arguments.

So there are three arguments here.

The main reason for castle building was defence, what details you had to support that argument? Conversely, you could say the main reason for castle building was economics, and what arguments you have for that? And finally, the main reason you could argue for castle building was control, and what details do you have to support that argument? So pause the video while you complete that table.

Try and get at least two pieces of evidence for each of these particular arguments.

If you can get more, that's even better.

But two should be the bare minimum, really.

Pause the video while you complete this task, and I'll see you again in just a moment.

Okay, welcome back.

Hopefully you're okay with that task.

Let's think about some of the evidence which you could have included.

So in terms of the main reason for castle building was defence.

You might have said that steep-sided mottes could be up to 30 metres in heights and they were surrounded by ditches and palisade walls.

So there's a few bits of evidence there you could throw in.

In terms of the economic argument, you could say that Pevensey's settlement grew from 27 Burgess in the 1070s to 60 in 1086, which then provided 39 shillings a year in rents.

And finally, for the control argument, the evidence could use for that could be that Anglo-Saxon landowners were replaced by Normans.

Robert, Count of Mortain, was given control of Pevensey.

Now, if you've got any other relevant details to support those arguments, then that's absolutely fantastic.

The more the better.

But hopefully, you've got at least two for each row within your table.

Okay, let's go to our next learning cycle for today, which is looking at adding alternatives.

Now, when discussing an historical topic, historians often make counter arguments if they disagree with another historian's interpretation.

It's not to say that you are wrong, it's to say you are wrong because.

So they add an alternative viewpoints.

And you will also need to add alternatives when writing your answer to the historic environment question.

Now, here's an example here we've got.

So the first historian makes an argument, and we can see, they say that the main reason for castle building in Norman England was control.

Pevensey was taken from his Anglo-Saxon landowner and given to Robert, Count of Mortain, to enable the Normans to rule over their new territory.

The second historian then makes a counterargument.

And this one says, "Although important, that was not the main reason.

The Normans were mostly concerned with their own safety.

Motte-and-bailey castles allowed small numbers of soldiers to safely defend themselves against large numbers of Anglo-Saxon attackers." So hopefully you can see there that the second historian says that although I acknowledge your argument, I disagree, and this is the reason why I disagree.

So that's the key thing there.

Not to say you are wrong, you are wrong because, that's what you need to do.

And another example, now I've adding alternatives.

So the first historian in this screen makes the argument that the main reason for castle building in Norman England was that the Normans were keen to boost economic activity in England, as "Domesday Book" details how Pevensey grew to one of the top 20% biggest towns in England by 1086.

And the counter argument by the second historian states, "This was important, but there is evidence to suggest that the Normans were not overly concerned with boosting England's economic activity.

Upon their arrival in Pevensey, they destroyed 40% of the value of Sussex and wasted several villages that still had not recovered by 1086." So again, both historians here are including specific details to explain the reason for their opinion, and hopefully you can do the same as well.

Now, a quick check for understanding.

I'd like you to match the argument with a relevant counter-arguments.

So the arguments we have is that the Anglo-Saxons did not know how to deal with cattle walls.

The Normans improved the economy in areas around castles.

And castles were a sign that the Normans were now in control over the Anglo-Saxons.

In terms of the counterarguments, they are that the Normans wasted many towns during their conquest that took many years to recover.

The Anglo-Saxons have been building buhrs, which are walled towns, for hundreds of years.

And many of the Normans who gained land in England spent almost all of their time in Normandy.

So matched the argument to the relevant counter argument now, pause the video while you do so, and I'll see you again in just a moment.

Okay, welcome back.

Hope you've got okay with that task.

So in terms of that first argument that the Anglo Saxons did not know how to deal with castle walls, where the counter argument say that the Anglo-Saxons had been building buhrs, which were walled towns, for hundreds of years.

In terms of the argument that the Normans improved the economy in areas around castles, you could say that, well, actually, the Normans wasted many towns during their conquest that took many years to recover.

And finally, the argument that castles were a sign that the Normans were now in control over the Anglo-Saxons.

Well, it can counter argue that and say that many of the Normans who gained land in England spent almost all of their time in Normandy.

So far, you've got an understanding that for any argument that is made, there's always, or generally speaking, there is always a decent counter argument to be made in your answer, in your historic environment answer.

You wanna try and think about what those counter arguments are as well 'cause it'll really improve your answer if you do so.

Now, the historic environment question puts forward one arguments, for example, the main reason for A was B, and you were asked how far you agree.

Now your next steps for that should be, you need to explore the evidence to support the argument in the question.

How convincing is that line of arguments? It's okay if you completely disagree with it, it's okay if you completely agree with it, but you need to explain your reasoning behind that.

And also, you consider the strength of the counter arguments as well.

You then need to of course explore one or more other arguments.

Maybe the very main reason for A was actually C or D.

So again, if you find the statement completely convincing, that's okay, but you need to acknowledge the fact that maybe not every historian will agree with you and the interpretation.

So you need to explain that there are other counterarguments, here is what they are, here is the evidence to support them, and this is why I actually I don't agree with them as well.

Now, here's a question about Pevensey Castle.

Defence was the main reason for castle building in Norman England.

How far does a study of Pevensey Castle support this statements? I need to explain your answer.

So that's what one of your questions could look like in the actual exam.

What we need to think about now though is what other reasons for castle building could be considered? Now, here are some possible alternatives.

You could say that it was for defence, that actually castles are built to intimidate, or they were built to impress, they were built in order to improve the economy, they were built to control, or they were built for administrative purposes.

So you can choose a variety of these different reasons to include within your own answer as well.

Quick check for understanding now, how many of the missing alternatives can you recall? So you've just seen it on the previous slides, how many can you now remember? So pause the video once you think about that, and I'll see you again in just a moment.

Okay, welcome back.

So hopefully you've remembered that the reasons for castle building in Norman England consisted of defence, intimidation, to impress people, to improve the economy, to control, and for administrative purposes.

So if you remembered a few of those, that's great.

This is fantastic.

Now, here's the same question again.

Defence was the main reason for castle building in Norman England.

How far does a study of Pevensey Castle support the statements? Explain your answer.

So I'm now gonna show you the start of a student's answer to this question.

And what I would like you to do is to continue the answer by adding alternatives.

So what other arguments, what counterarguments are there to the line of argument that this student has already made? So here is the starts.

Defence was certainly an important reason for castle building in Norman England because the Normans were invaders in a foreign land.

William only had about 8,000 soldiers with him to control 2 million Anglo-Saxons.

So the Normans were outnumbered and needed a way to keep themselves safe.

However, other reasons were important too.

Here are some sentence starters to help you out with the next part of this particular answer.

So pause a video while you use those and finish the question, and I'll see you again in just a moment.

Okay, welcome back.

Hope you're gonna carry with that task.

Let's think about what you could have said.

So you could have said, "Another important reason for castle building in Norman England was intimidation.

This was important for the Normans because Anglo-Saxon rebellions occurred all across England in the years following the Norman Conquest, from Exeter to York.

Pevensey was part of Harold Godwinson's, who was the former Anglo-Saxon king, who were part of his personal domain.

So a rebellion here would've been likely.

However, the sites of the motte-and-bailey castle surrounded by the large Roman walls discouraged the local people from rebelling against Norman occupation and a rebellion did not take place.

It was actually economic improvement, not defence, that was the main reason for castle building in Norman England 'cause new towns sprung around castles, or existing towns grew due to the security that castles provided.

This increased population led to greater economic activity.

For instance, Pevensey settlement founded by Robert, Count of Mortain, had 27 burgesses in the 1070s, which provided Robert with 14 shillings per year in rents.

By 1086, Pevensey's settlement had grown to 60 burgesses and now made Robert 39 shillings per year in rents." So hopefully, you've got a similar answer to myself, in the sense that I provided specific evidence to support the point that I'm making in each paragraph.

There's a variety of evidence as well.

If you've got different lines of argument to myself, that's absolutely okay.

This is just a practise.

And again, there's no right or wrong answer to this whole overall question.

It's all about your opinion and how well can you argue that.

So at the very least, you need to include a few bits of specific evidence to support the point that you're making, and then explain how the evidence supports the point you're making as well.

Okay, let's go through our third and final learning cycle for the day, which is looking at how to reach your judgement.

Now, one approach to answering an historic environment question could look like this.

You, first of all, unpack the question.

By that, I mean you think about what is the second order concept that you've been asked to discuss here.

You then need to include your own knowledge and the questions arguments as well.

Once you've done that, you can think about an alternative arguments.

you use specific knowledge to back up your arguments.

And ideally, you'll discuss two other alternative arguments.

So essentially, you'd have three arguments in total in this answer.

The first argument will be the argument that the question puts forward, and that's for you to support.

And then the other two arguments will be your counter arguments as well.

Finally, you need to include a judgement.

So to what extent do you agree with that statement? And as I said, it doesn't necessarily matter what you write for that.

You cannot be wrong as long as you support your answer with evidence and you fully explain what your opinion is.

That's what the examiner's looking for here.

So quick check for understanding.

What is missing from the bottom of this diagram? You just saw in the previous slide, what is it here? So pause the video while you think about that, and I'll see you again in just a moment.

Okay, if you said judgement , how far do I agree, then very well done.

That's the correct answer.

So unpacking the question means identifying what judgement it is asking you to make.

So an example here, the main change the Norman's introduced to England was control of strategic locations.

How far does a study of Pevensey Castle support the statements? Explain your answer.

And you should refer to Pevensey Castle and your contextual knowledge.

Now, what this means is that if we unpack the question, the second order concept that this question is asking you to use is change.

So how much change was there? The argument is that it was the control or strategic locations that was the main change in England.

So that's what you'll need to discuss in your first paragraph.

And the judgement at the end there, how far do you agree that control or strategic locations was the main change? And it's entirely up to you to decide the extent to which you agree with that statement.

It's okay if you completely agree, it's okay if you completely disagree, it's okay if you have an opinion somewhere between that range.

As long as you can back it up with evidence and fully explain why you hold that opinion, you'll have a great answer.

So the judgement also requires you to focus in on the historic environment.

So you need to make sure that you're discussing Pevensey Castle when you are actually answering, well, the question as a whole, but certainly also that judgement , that final paragraph as well.

You need to include Pevensey Castle within your judgement.

So how do you reach judgement ? Well, you need to consider the question's arguments against what you know from your historic environment sites.

You'd consider the extent to which what you know supports the arguments.

So do the facts support the statements, yes or no? You need to think about what is an alternative argument, or ideally, what are internal alternative arguments? You also need to consider how far does what you know support those alternative arguments as well.

It's all very well good saying, well, it could be this or this instead, but do you have the evidence to back that up? And then finally, you need to use your decision about how far in order to make your judgement.

So another quick check for understanding now.

Here's another historic environment-style question.

What is the judgement you are being asked to make? So the question is, the Norman's built castles in England in order to impress.

How far does a study of Pevensey Castle support the statements? So pause the video while you consider that question, and I'll see you again in just a moment.

Okay, welcome back.

So you answer may have said that how far do you agree the main reasons why the Norman has built castles was to impress.

So effectively that's what the question is, is asking you to do.

So you can make judgements all the way through your answer.

You don't need to wait until the final paragraph to actually make your argument.

You can actually make an argument, you can make a judgement , and then support it within each paragraph throughout the whole of your answer.

And this is called a sustained judgement.

It's a really high-level skill.

It's really good if you can do this in your answer.

So within that first paragraph, my knowledge plus the argument's question, to what extent do you agree? How far do you agree with your first counter argument? And then how far do you agree with your second counter argument? If you can do that within your answer, then the final paragraph can effectively be kind of a rounding up of all the arguments you've already made, plus an additional argument just to kind of really cement it.

So when you're being asked to use your knowledge to make your judgement or judgments, specific historic environment knowledge is best.

So, ideally, the evidence you want to include will be evidence about Pevensey Castle.

If you can't think of anything about Pevensey Castle, but you can think about maybe evidence from a different castle, by all means, put that in as well 'cause any evidence is good evidence.

The ideal evidence would be evidence about the historic environment location.

So Pevensey Castle.

So students sometimes write general answers without referring enough to their historic environments, and these are not successful answers.

So, hopefully, you need to make sure that you remember all the things you you've learned about Pevensey Castle when you're actually writing your answer to the exam question.

Okay, another quick check for understanding now.

So have a statement here, the Normans built castles in England in order to impress.

How far does Aisha agree with this statements? So Aisha writes, "A really important factor in castle building was the need for the Normans to impress the Anglo-Saxon people.

Wherever possible, the Normans built their castles using existing Roman fortifications in order to suggest continuation and imply that they were natural heirs to the Romans.

At Pevensey, the motte-and-bailey castles was built inside the huge walls of the Roman fort of Anderitum.

So to what extent does Aisha agree with this statements? Does she fully agree with it? Does she somewhat agree with it? Or does she completely disagree with it? So make your choice now.

Okay, if you said that Aisha 100% fully agrees with it, then very well done.

Her evidence supports the statements.

And another quick check for understanding.

I'd like to add a judgement to Aisha's answer to show that she agrees that the Norman's built castles in England in order to impress.

So it's the same argument that Aisha made before.

You need just now need to add a judgement to show that she agrees.

So pause the video while you do that, and I'll see you again in just a moment.

Okay, so you could have said, "This shows that the need to impress the Anglo-Saxon people was the main reason for castle building in Norman England, as Roman buildings were still in use across England more than 600 years after they had left, testament to the might of Roman engineering.

By suggesting that they were the heirs to the Romans, the Normans hoped to gain the same respect and awe that the Anglo-Saxons afforded the Romans." So hopefully you got a similar sort of answer to myself there, in the sense that I've fully explained how my evidence supports the point that I'm trying to make.

Okay, let's go for our next task for today.

So I'd like to complete the tables in the screen in front of you about three possible reasons for castle building in Norman England.

And I completed some parts of the table for you already.

So the main reason for castle building we've got here is for defence, to impress, and for economic improvements.

And to help you out there, I've also considered some counter arguments for each of those arguments as well.

So all you need to do is to fill in the arguments there.

So pause the video while you complete that task, and I'll see you again in just a moment.

Okay, welcome back.

I hope you're okay with that task.

So let's think what you could have said then.

So in terms of why was the main reason for castle building defence? Well, you could have said that the Normans only had a limited number of soldiers.

In term of what could counter that.

Well, actually, the Normans proved repeatedly that they could defeat the Anglo-Saxons on the battlefield.

So there's an argument and a counterargument you've got there for that particular line.

Then another reason for castle building might have been to impress.

And you could have argued that the Norman castles blended with the Roman forts at Pevensey.

A counter argument to that could well be though that Anglo-Saxon houses were frequently torn down to provide room for castles, which I imagine the local Anglo-Saxons wouldn't have been overly impressed with.

And then finally, another main reason for castle building might have been for economic improvements.

And you could argue that Pevensey was Robert, Count or Mortain's, second richest territory in England, but a counterargument to that could well be that the Normans pillaged and wasted many towns during their conquests.

So, hopefully, you've got similar sort of arguments to myself.

If you've got different ones to me, that's absolutely fine as long, as they actually linked to the main reasons on the table there as well.

Okay, let's go for another task now then.

So I'd like you to consider how far do you agree that the need to impress was the main reason for castle building in Norman England? I'd like to write one paragraph, explaining your judgement.

And I always want you to make sure that your judgement is based on knowledge of the historic environment.

So make sure that your answer refers to Pevensey Castle.

Pause the video while you complete that task, and I'll see you again in just a moment.

Okay, welcome back.

Hope you're okay with that task.

So let's think what you could have said then.

So you might have said, "Although the need to impress was an important factor in castle building, it was not the main reason the building of Pevensey Castle.

It is true that Pevensey's motte-and-bailey castle was built inside the walls of the Roman fort Anderitum, but that was less about impressing the local people and more about providing the Norman army with additional defence on their first day of their invasion.

As invaders in a foreign land and with limited numbers of troops, the Normans needed castles like Pevensey to keep them safe from Anglo-Saxon armies initially, and once the con was complete, from Anglo-Saxon rebellions." So if you disagree with this statement, your answer might have followed a similar sort of vein to mine on the screen there as well.

Alternatively, if you agree with the statements, then your argument might have looked something more like this.

"The need to impress was a critical reason for the building of Pevensey Castle.

Whilst the Normans did need to defend themselves against Anglo-Saxon aggressors, in the years following the conquest, it was more effective to control the population by amazing them with feats of Roman engineering than by waging costly campaigns against rebels.

The wooden motte-and-bailey castle at Pevensey was converted into a grand stone structure after William was crowned king.

And coupled with the restoration of the existing Roman walls, Pevensey Castle would've been a grand and impressive structure that would've impressed the local Anglo-Saxons, who did not possess the ability to construct these buildings." So hopefully your answer follows one or the other of the arguments that I've got on the screen there for you.

Okay, let's summarise today's lesson now then.

So all historic environment questions will feature one second order concepts, either change, continuity, causation, or consequence.

Different arguments can be made about change, continuity, causation, or consequence as well.

Historians make about how far they agree with an argument on the basis of evidence.

And in writing answers to historic environment questions, using knowledge about the site is very important.

Thank you very much for joining me today.

Hopefully you've enjoyed yourself.

Hope you learned something.

And hopefully I'll see you again next time.

Bye-bye.