2016 HIGHER SCHOOL CERTIFICATE

EXAMINATION

History Extension

Total marks 50

Section I Pages 23

General Instructions 25 marks

Reading time 5 minutes Attempt Question 1
Working time 2 hours Allow about 1 hour for this section
Write using black pen
Section II Page 4

25 marks
Attempt Question 2
Allow about 1 hour for this section

2350
Section I

25 marks
Attempt Question 1
Allow about 1 hour for this section

Answer the question on pages 212 of the History Extension Writing Booklet. Extra writing
booklets are available.

Your answer will be assessed on how well you:

demonstrate knowledge and understanding of relevant issues of historiography

use relevant sources to support your argument

present a detailed, logical and cohesive response

Use Source A to answer the question that follows.

Source A

Among the distinctions historians customarily invoke when describing their

discipline is the difference between history and the past. The past is conceived to
include everything that ever happened, recorded or not; history, in contrast, is what
historians represent the past to have been
Parallel to the distinction between history and the past there exists a second, less
frequently noted distinction between evidence and the remains of the past. The
remains of the past comprise what survives of everything that ever happened;
evidence consists of those remains that historians use in making histories
But unlike the past, remains constitute an actual, not a virtual, reality and are thus
subject to the effects of time. Not everything in the past has left traces, and not all
traces have survived. In the absence of remains, there can be no evidence, and in
the absence of evidence, there can be no history.
But what constitutes evidence? This question has evoked two contrasting responses
from historians over the past half century. On the one hand, the definition of
evidence has expanded dramatically. From a heavy reliance on written documents,
historians have graduated to a more latitudinarian* approach that welcomes
scientific data on climate change and crop yields, medical records on health and
disease, anthropological data such as peasant tales, and material culture such as
pots and plowshares, not to mention elements of popular culture such as movies,
perfumes, and rock lyrics. Written documents, too, have been subjected to new
analysis
Yet as the breadth of the potential evidence has grown, so have doubts about its
interpretation. The hypertrophy** of data has coincided with the realisation that
their meanings remain elusive, conferred by the interpreter rather than imposed

Source A continues on page 3

2
Source A (continued)

by the evidence. Never have historians had so much evidence at their disposal;
never has there been so much mistrust about what the evidence shows. How do the
multiple pieces of the past cohere***? What is the common thread linking literary
texts, religious art, popular songs, marriage customs, and farm implements? That
human beings created all these things may not be enough to confer an integrated
meaning on clues that are not clearly linked or on witnesses of uncertain authority.
This difficulty is particularly characteristic of the realm of values, beliefs, and
attitudes culture in the broadest sense
The desire to push history to the very edge of documentary evidence has produced
both exhilarating vistas and a significant unease at the prospect that the ground
where historians stand, gazing into the past may suddenly give way. On the one
hand historians currently enjoy a bracing sense of adventure; on the other, they
are struggling to impose coherence on what threatens at times to become nothing
more than a tale.
JAMES WILKERSON
A Choice of Fictions: Historians, Memory and Evidence
January 1996
(c) Reprinted by permission of the Modern Language Association

*latitudinarian: an interpretation that is broad or wide

**hypertrophy: excessive growth
***cohere: stick together

Question 1 (25 marks)

To what extent has the changing nature of evidence influenced approaches to history over
time?

In your response, make close and explicit references to Source A and at least TWO other
sources to support your argument.

Please turn over

3
Section II

25 marks
Attempt Question 2
Allow about 1 hour for this section

Answer the question on pages 1424 of the History Extension Writing Booklet. Extra writing
booklets are available.

Your answer will be assessed on how well you:

demonstrate knowledge and understanding of an appropriate case study

engage with the historiography of the areas of debate selected for discussion

present a sustained, logical and cohesive response

Question 2 (25 marks)

Source B

We are currently seeking permission to publish this material, but due

to copyright implications, it cannot be displayed until permission has
been obtained.

Where possible, a link to the original source has been provided below.

JOYCE APPLEBY, LYNN HUNT and MARGARET JACOB

Telling the Truth About History, 1994

How relevant is the view expressed in this statement to the historical debates in your case
study?

In your response, make explicit references to Source B and at least ONE area of debate in your
case study. Identify your case study at the beginning of your answer.

End of paper

4
2016 Board of Studies, Teaching and Educational Standards NSW