NCEA Level 3 History (90657) 2009 — page 1 of 26

Assessment Schedule – 2009 History: Examine a significant decision made by people in history, in an essay (90657) Judgement Statement

Achievement Achievement with Merit Achievement with Excellence

Through her / his response to the Through her / his response to the Through her / his response to first part of the essay question, the first part of the essay question, the the first part of the essay candidate has accurately candidate has accurately question, the candidate has described factors that contributed explained factors that contributed to accurately and perceptively to the decision. the decision. explained factors that contributed to the decision.

(See content guidelines for (See content guidelines for (See content guidelines for examples of relevant historical examples of relevant historical examples of relevant historical information that could be included in information that could be included in information that could be the candidate’s answer.) the candidate’s answer.) included in the candidate’s answer.)

Through her / his response to the Through her / his response to the Through the breadth, depth second part of the essay question, second part of the essay question, and / or range of ideas in her / the candidate has accurately the candidate has evaluated the his response to the second described the consequences of the consequences of the decision. part of the question the decision. candidate has comprehensively evaluated (See content guidelines for the consequences of the (See content guidelines for examples of relevant historical decision. examples of relevant historical information that could be included in information that could be included in the candidate’s answer.) the candidate’s answer.) This evaluation should involve the comprehensive weighing This evaluation should involve up of the consequences. Eg weighing up the consequences of positive consequences this decision. Eg positive weighed up against negative consequences weighed up against consequences or one theory negative consequences, or one about the consequences theory about the consequences contrasted with another. contrasted with another.

(See content guidelines for (See content guidelines for examples of relevant historical examples of relevant historical information that could be information that could be included in included in the candidate’s the candidate’s answer.) answer.)

The candidate has structured and The candidate has structured and The candidate has structured organised her / his information using organised her / his information using and organised her / his an appropriate essay format. an appropriate essay format. information using an appropriate and effective essay format. • Introductory paragraph • Introductory paragraph • Relevant, structured and logically • Relevant, structured and logically sequenced paragraphs sequenced paragraphs • Introductory paragraph • Conclusion • Conclusion • Relevant, structured and logically sequenced paragraphs The candidate has provided an • Conclusion argument, ie the candidate has stated a view and supported it with relevant and accurate evidence The candidate has provided a (probably most obvious in the convincing argument, ie the evaluative part of her / his essay). candidate has a clearly NCEA Level 3 History (90657) 2009 — page 2 of 26

articulated view and has supported it with sound reasoning and relevant, accurate, and significant evidence (probably most obvious in the evaluative part of her / his essay). NCEA Level 3 History (90657) 2009 — page 3 of 26

Content Guidelines Topic One: Early Modern England 1558-1667

Topic One: Essay One Explain the factors that contributed to the decision of governing authorities in early modern England to follow a policy of restricting or transforming popular beliefs. Evaluate the consequences of this policy on the practice of popular beliefs between 1558 and 1667.

The candidate’s response to the first part of the essay question could include: • Popular beliefs in magic, fortune telling, astrology, prophecy, witchcraft and spirit beings rose from traditional oral culture based primarily on early pagan superstitions. Although by 1558 they did contain an amalgam of aspects of Christianity, they offered an alternative belief system that undermined the authority of the Church. The governing authorities wanted to restrict the error-filled pagan element and transfer the adherence of common traditional beliefs to the teachings of Protestantism. • Popular beliefs encompassed all sectors of the population and involved a range of changing beliefs and practice in different regions where each community had its own customs. The governing authorities wanted to instill a uniformity of belief in official doctrine and worship practices. • Churches wanted people to accept that a supernatural world existed alongside the natural everyday world and that there was a supernatural / spiritual explanation in almost everything, but wanted to replace fascination with pagan spiritual forces (goblins, fairies, witches, sorcerers, vampires and werewolves) with recognition of Christian spiritual forces (demons and angels). Churches wanted belief in the devil and the potential damnation or salvation of each soul to be a basic element of popular consciousness – something to dread (hell) and something to hope for (heaven). • The seasons and weather had a significant influence on an individual’s well-being and survival. People worried about such things as the length and intensity of winter, the failures of the harvest, and the success of hunting and fishing ventures. A series of traditional rites and ceremonies were important in allaying these concerns, eg New Year’s Day to encourage the return of spring, fasting before Easter helped conserve food for the latter part of winter. But the Church authorities wanted people to be less concerned with the daily affairs, dangers and misfortunes of their earthly life and more with eternal life – their salvation after death. The Church sought, therefore, to incorporate some of the rites and ceremonies into its own calendar and give them a more religious significance. • Popular beliefs and practice the governing authorities wanted to restrict or transform were trust in: o Magic and folklore (tokens, charms or flowers, divining rods, magic words, the power of healers and cunning men). Instead of using charms, spells, and herbal remedies to protect themselves from personal misfortune, people should, the Church preached, rely on ministers and prayer. o Black Witchcraft, which was believed to involve the surrender of one’s soul to the devil in return for certain powers. Women who were poor were the most common victims of charges of maleficium (the causing of harm using invisible powers). Witches were popularly believed to have familiars (animals who did their bidding) that they suckled. The authorities wanted people to abhor witches and expel them from their communities. o Taking part in festivals and ceremonies gave members of a community a sense of identity and were important times of release from the rigours of daily life (eg giving gifts on New Year’s Day reinforced status and obligation ties). The Church authorities recognised these positive factors and absorbed some of these practices into its own religious calendar as a means of attracting people to its services and exposing them to its teachings. On important holy days, work ceased or was reduced so that people could attend religious services, feasts and pageants. o Astrology and horoscope readings were commonly seen as compatible with Christianity because God ruled the heavens, so stars and planets were his agents. Popular reliance on consulting astrologers about important decisions because they were believed to be able to give some guidance about the future was, therefore, permitted by the governing authorities. Leading practitioners like John Dee were even used to advise the monarch. • The Church as an institution had a considerable hold over the everyday life of people: o The church building was the main meeting place, and the clergy were leaders in every community. o Rites of passage – birth, adolescence (confirmation), marriage and death – were celebrated there. o It was compulsory for heads of households to attend church regularly, and daily household prayers and grace before meals were said. NCEA Level 3 History (90657) 2009 — page 4 of 26

• However, the governing authorities were very concerned that the continuance of popular beliefs undermined the authority of the Church and government officials, encouraged immoral conduct, prevented understanding of the truth, and contributed to an erosion of church attendance among ordinary people. Irreverence during services, popular ignorance, and limited church attendance were frequently recorded by Anglican clergy.

The candidate’s response to the second part of the essay question could include: • The pre-Reformation Church over a long period had accommodated seasonal festivals and pre-Christian ceremonies, so there was a blurring of the margins as to what was clearly of pagan origin and what was allowably Christian, eg Rogationtide and the beating of the parish bounds, which sought God’s protection for newly planted seeds, was also a pagan fertility rite. But after the 1559 Elizabethan Church Settlement, Protestants attempted to eliminate any Roman Catholic customs and ceremonies that had a stronghold on the common people. Symbols of traditional Catholicism (paintings, statues, altars, rood screens and carvings) were destroyed by Elizabethan commissioners, although many were hidden in an effort to preserve them. The 125 holy days of the Catholic calendar were replaced with about 30 Protestant holy days and festivals; but some, like May Day, could not be eliminated. The Major-Generals’ attempt to ban Christmas was almost universally unpopular and ensured their puritanical administration would never be accepted. Only slowly were traditional forms and ritual altered in a Protestant direction. Some festivals once organised by the pre-Reformation church eventually became embedded folk customs. • Sermons – effectively government-written homilies – were used by authorities to teach the morality of the Old Testament and reinforce a pattern of obedience to one’s superiors. Catechisms – simplified instruction books on the basics of the Protestant message – were circulated. Over the period, governments sought to increase the number of clergy with university degrees (23 per cent in 1580 to 84 per cent in 1640). Wrightson concludes that by 1650, England probably never had a better manned and financed Church or a more active preaching ministry, yet it failed to eradicate popular beliefs. • Institutional forms of religion were only a thin ‘veneer’ over the continuity of many forms of popular religious beliefs, according to Barry Reay. People transformed the new Protestant beliefs and traditional popular beliefs into new forms. The Bible became a holy talisman, through which God could speak to people. Common people clung to their magic charms and spells in their daily lives and simply added Christian prayers to them. They were often oblivious to (or uninterested in) contradictions in their belief structure and, not appreciating explanations of misfortune in their lives offered by the church, preferred traditional ones. Long-established rituals were more comforting than personal faith, despite the disapproval of the established church. • Outright attacks on magic, witchcraft and other forms of popular religion by the authorities were even less successful. Church court records provide evidence that popular religious customs continued. Some parish clergy and JPs responsible for administering the edicts of the established church and government tended to enforce only requirements they favoured or knew their communities would not resist. Regular church attendance was poor (about 20 per cent). When people did attend, the effect was often negligible or negative. There was a considerable degree of religious indifference. • Belief in superstition, magic and witchcraft declined only gradually through 1558–1667. Acts against witchcraft were passed in 1563 and 1604, making it a capital offence. Accusations of witchcraft increased in times of economic hardship when people were less willing to give to charity, but generally those who practiced magical arts were still valued by their communities. Practices that were outlawed – such as Candlemas – were transferred from churches to homes. Popular literature such as ballads, almanacs, and chapbooks helped to preserve many elements of traditional culture as folklore satisfying important emotional needs. People proved reluctant to part with things that gave them reassurance, protection or comfort. The decline over time of traditional practices and beliefs appears to have had more to do with the gradual secularisation of society and the growth of legal toleration than initiatives of governing authorities. There is also some debate as to whether the propensity of some festivals to turn into disorder and rioting that was difficult to control did genuinely cause the governing class to abandon popular culture over the period. However, it is clear that by 1660, separation was being drawn between church and civic or communal festivities. NCEA Level 3 History (90657) 2009 — page 5 of 26

Topic One: Essay Two Explain the factors that eventually led to Elizabeth I’s decision to sign the death warrant of Mary Queen of Scots in 1587. Evaluate the political and religious consequences of Mary’s execution for Elizabeth and England between 1587 and 1603.

The candidate’s response to the first part of the essay question could include: • In 1559, Elizabeth returned England to Protestantism, and hoped to embrace Catholics into her Church Settlement. Under the Act of Uniformity, a shilling fine was levied for each failure to attend church on Sundays and other designated days. A person upholding the Pope as the rightful head of the Church would lose property for the first offence, all goods and liberty for the second offence, and be executed for the third. For the first ten years of Elizabeth’s reign, this legislation against Catholics was not strictly enforced, and it appears many conformed to the Elizabethan Settlement because it did not threaten them too much. In 1564, a national survey of JPs for the Privy Council revealed that there were large numbers of ‘Church Papists’ — Catholic sympathisers who attended Anglican worship to stay clear of trouble, while in the north, Marian priests continued to say Mass with little interference from the authorities. However, Elizabeth’s hope that the advantages of conforming would eventually win over the Catholic laity was to face major challenges during the 19 years of Mary Queen of Scots’ presence in England. • Mary Queen of Scots’ arrival in England (1568), the Rebellion of the Northern Earls (1569), and the excommunication of Elizabeth by Pope Pius V (1570) signalled a complete change in Elizabeth’s position. In Catholic eyes, she was now certified a heretic and a usurper. Mary Queen of Scots was Elizabeth’s cousin and an accessible successor, with (to Catholics) a sounder claim to the throne than Elizabeth. English Catholics were urged to disobey Elizabeth and actively seek to supplant her. Mary was to become the focus for even further plots and rebellions against Elizabeth. • In 1571, the Ridolfi Plot sought to marry Mary to the Duke of Norfolk and replace Elizabeth as queen. After discovery of the plot, Parliament and most of her Privy Councillors wanted Elizabeth to execute both Mary and Norfolk. However, Elizabeth believed that executing a divinely appointed legitimate monarch without absolute proof of Mary’s personal involvement in the plot would set a dangerous precedent and give England’s enemies cause to launch a crusade against her. The St Bartholomew’s Day massacre of Protestants in France in 1572 made that possibility appear very real. • With the arrival of seminary and Jesuit priests trained at Douai (in the Netherlands), Rheims (in France), Valladolid (in Spain) and Rome (in Italy), through the 1570s and 1580s, it was clear the Catholic community in England was being given external sustenance and encouragement. The mission of these priests was to prepare the way for the re-conversion of England once a Catholic regime had been established. • The Papacy actively encouraged rebellion, assassination and foreign conquest. Both King Philip II of Spain and the Guise party in France were prepared to lend their support to plots to remove Elizabeth and replace her with Mary (Ridolfi 1571, Throckmorton 1583, Parry 1585, and Babington 1586). In these circumstances, harbouring Mary came to seem increasingly like aiding the development of a mortal enemy within. She posed real challenges to the security of the state, Elizabeth’s life and continuance of the established Church. • The assassination of William of Orange (by a Catholic) and the potential for Spanish domination of the Netherlands in 1584 made it clear that England had an important role in ensuring the survival of Protestantism in a European-wide conflict and that the Catholic forces of the Counter-Reformation were virulent and merciless. Parliament passed the Bond of Association and ordered all Catholic priests to leave the country or be executed. • The outbreak of war with Spain in 1585, Philip II’s preparations for an armada to invade England and the discovery in Mary’s communication of her agreement to the Babington Plot brought unanimous demands for her execution from Elizabeth’s Privy Council and the 1586 Parliament. • Elizabeth did agree to put her on trial for treason at Fotheringhay Castle in Northamptonshire. Mary was found guilty and sentenced to death, but Elizabeth refused to sign the death warrant until February 1587. Even then she refused to let it be sent to Fotheringhay. William Davidson, her secretary, was persuaded by the Privy Council to release it and Mary was executed on 8 February, passing her claim to Elizabeth’s crown to Philip II of Spain.

The candidate’s response to the second part of the essay question could include: • Immediately, Elizabeth wrote to the young King James VI of Scotland (who was now her heir), apologising for his mother’s death. She refused to speak to Cecil for a month and imprisoned Davidson. James declaimed his mother’s execution but said he blamed the English Privy Council rather than Elizabeth and took no further action. Sixteen years later, he inherited the English throne with Cecil’s son as his chief minister. The execution of Mary had opened up the succession to James and gave Elizabeth a legitimate Protestant heir. NCEA Level 3 History (90657) 2009 — page 6 of 26

• The French protested strongly. However, King Henry III was more worried about the growing power of Spain and the threat of civil war in France. By the end of Elizabeth’s reign, England and France were allies. • England and Spain were already at war. Mary’s passing of her claim to the English throne to Philip II made little difference to his planned invasion of England. The Armada did set sail the following year but was destroyed before it could transfer an army to England’s shores. Despite the building of further armadas, Philip’s intentions never came to fruition. • However, the consequences for English Catholics who were seen as potential traitors were severe. There were proactive attempts to penalise Roman Catholics through the late 1580s and 1590s. The fortunes of Catholic families diminished. The Act to retain her Majesty’s Subjects in their True Obedience made it treason to persuade someone to be a Catholic. Recusancy fines were increased to £20 a month, with higher fines imposed for hearing or saying Mass. In 1587, recusants defaulting on payment of their fines could have their land seized. The Five Mile Act 1593 required recusants to be confined to within five miles of their homes. These acts of suppression meant that by 1603 there were only about 40 000 Roman Catholics in England (1% of the population), but may have provoked the Irish Catholic rebellion of the 1590s. • The Act against Jesuit and Seminary Priests meant that Catholic priests failing to leave the country within 40 days were to be executed, and anyone helping or harbouring a priest was liable to suffer death. The Privy Council claimed that the priests were sentenced not for their beliefs but for their implied treason and at their trials all faced the Bloody Question: Whose side would you take if the Bishop of Rome [the Pope] or other prince by his authority should invade the realm? The courage with which execution victims faced their deaths ensured Catholicism survived. Over the period, about 250 Catholics were put to death or died in captivity, among them 180 priests. • Mary’s execution in 1587 had removed a major internal threat to Elizabeth’s reign. English Catholics were reluctant to support Spain’s armadas, and there was no further rebellion. Only a tiny minority became involved in plots. Elizabeth’s greatest ally had been the political and largely instinctive loyalty felt by most Catholic gentry towards their monarch. She had the good sense not to jeopardise it. Even in the 1580s and 1590s, those occasionally guilty of recusancy were welcome at court and sat in the House of Lords. It has been calculated that recusancy fines were levied on only 220 people between 1581 and 1593.

NCEA Level 3 History (90657) 2009 — page 7 of 26

Topic One: Essay Three Explain the factors that led both James I and Parliament to consider and eventually reject the Great Contract of 1610 as a means of financing government. Evaluate the consequences of the decision for the financing of Stuart government till 1629.

The candidate’s response to the first part of the essay question could include: The antiquated and archaic nature of the state in Early Modern England made the financing of government extremely difficult. The Crown was always short of money, and the state appeared to have limited means to tap the wealth of the country. The regular finances of the Crown, known as Ordinary Revenue, were: • Crown Land: The Crown still owned large estates, and this generated an income in the form of rents or they could be used as collateral if the monarch needed to borrow money. Sale of Crown land could raise ready money but would decrease royal assets. • Revenue from Trade: The Crown had the right to regulate trade by imposing tariffs, or customs duties, on imports and exports. The value of such duties varied according to the level of trade. Customs duties included Tonnage and Poundage on wool and wine and impositions that were levied on a wide range of goods. Because there was no paid bureaucracy, collection of customs duties was sometimes rented out to customs farmers, who paid the Crown an annual sum for the right to collect the duties and pocket any surplus over and above what they paid the Crown. • Feudal Dues: The old feudal relationship of service in return for land had been superseded by one where the Crown obtained money in lieu of feudal obligations. These included: o Purveyance – the right of the Royal Household to buy goods and services at below market prices. o Wardship – When the heir to an estate was a minor or a woman, the estate was taken over by the Crown and guardianship was sold through the Court of Wards. All profits from the estate accrued to the guardian and the Crown until the heir came of age or the heiress married. o Entry Fees – when an heir took over an estate, a fee was payable to the Crown. o Distraint of knighthood – all those with an income of £40 per year had the right to ‘take up’ knighthood. Few did and so paid a ‘one-off fine’ when their property was valued at this level. • Monopolies: The Crown could sell, or grant as patronage, monopolies of particular goods and services, eg soap manufacture, importing sweet wines, the licensing of inns. Monopolies were unpopular, as they increased prices and reduced the quality of goods and services. • Income from the Church: The Crown had a right to ‘first fruits’ and ‘tenths’. The former was the income derived from a clergyman’s first year’s income and the latter one-tenth of his subsequent income. In some cases, bishoprics were left vacant so the Crown could collect revenue from diocesan lands. • The Monarch was expected to rely on these sources of revenue in all but emergencies (such as war), when they could ask Parliament to vote taxes, or ‘Extraordinary’ revenue, to meet additional costs. o Fifteenths and tenths were a tax on ‘movables’ (chattels, livestock, merchandise) and land. One-fifteenth of the value in rural areas and a tenth in urban areas was levied on counties. o Subsidies were worth much more and were a direct tax on an individual’s income. However, the lack of a paid bureaucracy made tax assessment and collection unreliable. It was customary to evade tax by underestimating your income. • Taxes could be levied only with Parliament’s consent, as Parliament represented the communities that were being taxed. However, if Parliament were not sitting in times of emergency, the monarch could require a forced loan equivalent to a subsidy from communities.

• James had inherited this ramshackle revenue system with a debt up to £400 000. The customs revenue was last revised in 1558, and reassessment of Crown lands was long overdue. He had appointed competent Treasurers in Dorset and Salisbury, but they were unable to bring about the necessary reductions in expenditure. James’s extravagance, particularly to Scottish courtiers, made MPs unsympathetic to pleas of royal poverty. • Requisitioning officers for James’s court had used purveyance regularly, oversupplying the royal households with discounted supplies and on-selling the surplus for personal profit. In 1606, the Crown’s right to impose (Impositions) duties to regulate trade was confirmed by Bates’ case, but they remained a sore point with the governing class. The 1608 revised Book of Rates added “new impositions” that proved very unpopular with merchants. Both purveyance and impositions became ongoing grievances aired by the governing class in parliament. • The Great Contract of 1610 drawn up by Salisbury was a major attempt at financial reform to fund government by regular taxation. It required that Parliament should vote the King ‘supply’ to eliminate his accumulated debt and grant ‘support’ through a permanent tax on property each year. In return, the crown would surrender many of its despised feudal prerogatives and abolish purveyance and the Court of Wards. However, MPs returned to NCEA Level 3 History (90657) 2009 — page 8 of 26

the Commons after the summer recess with the same story – that Impositions was the one single issue that concerned most of their constituents. James complained that they were too slow in their decision-making and made it clear that if the Commons wanted Impositions drawn into the Great Contract, he would have to be suitably compensated. The Commons announced that they would not proceed with the Great Contract. • Parliament was alarmed at the possibility that the annual sum might prove too sufficient – especially during periods of good trade and buoyant customs (hence the attempt to include Impositions). It might mean that the King could dispense with calling Parliament at all. Moreover, the sums involved were so large (the equivalent of three subsidies a year) that they were beyond the Commons’ constituent’s comprehension. There was also skepticism about James’s ability to restrain his generosity and keep to the limits of his expanded income. • Meanwhile, James feared losing elastic feudal revenues in favour of a fixed income that might prove insufficient, thus leaving him at the mercy of Parliament, and thereby demeaning his majesty. Rather than give up Impositions without compensation, he dismissed Parliament.

The candidate’s response to the second part of the essay question could include: • Now that a parliamentary solution to the Crown’s financial problems had dissolved, James (and later Charles) was forced to set about reconstructing royal finances on a prerogative basis despite Parliament’s displeasure.

• Salisbury devised a scheme for the sale of baronet titles, which raised a total of £90 000 1611—1614. • James hoped to raise money by obtaining a large dowry from the marriage of his sons, Henry (till 1612) and Charles. • Looking for large profits in 1614, he sponsored the Cockayne project, but instead it collapsed the woollen cloth trade, bringing an economic downturn. • After 1614, there were no more attempts at economic reform and Cranfield urged retrenchment with little success until he was impeached for corruption. • James was forced to increasingly use feudal devices such as wardship, purveyance, monopolies and forest fines as the revenue from Crown lands declined. These measures were increasingly vilified by the traditional governing class. Parliament was so angry it impeached two monopolists and passed a bill in 1624 restricting the Crown’s right to grant further monopolies. • Although the governing class resented paying for a Crown increasingly unable to live on its own, the Court increasingly felt Parliament was no longer fulfilling its role in supporting the Crown and this justified the use of prerogative measures to raise money such as the forced loans of 1622 and 1623. Even when a popular war with Spain was begun, Parliament granted subsidies only on the proviso that accounts and receipts were obtained to prove proper expenditure. • Charles was unable to get enough finance from Parliamentary means despite being involved in wars with both Spain and France because he was never prepared to trade the settling of grievances for subsidies. The two subsidies voted in 1625 and the five voted in 1628 were all he obtained. A single subsidy yielded only £55 000 by 1628. • Charles, therefore, also resorted to prerogative measures such as forced loans in 1625 and 1626 on all subsidy payers (in effect community taxation without parliamentary sanction), impositions and the technically illegal collection of Tunnage and Poundage (Parliament had granted it for one year only). The Commons later told Charles “there were never any monies demanded and paid with greater grief and general dislike of all your faithful subjects”. The loans were seen to be attacking the fundamental liberties of English subjects, but the Five Knights Case 1627 upheld the Crown’s right to imprison non-payers of forced loans without trial. • Charles did extract loans from the City of London, but only by giving it the last major body of crown lands. The ruinously expensive wars with Spain and France and falling returns from customs duties because of the recession in trade had adversely affected his income. • Charles made his position plain when he said to the 1628 Parliament that if it failed to provide him with funds to meet the common danger, then “I must...take those other courses which God hath put into my hands.” Parliament offered five subsidies to grant Tunnage and Poundage but expected him to safeguard the liberties of the subject by acceptance of the Petition of Right. When, after the assassination of Buckingham, it became clear that, despite the Petition of Right, Charles intended to continue resorting to extra-Parliamentary taxation, Parliament passed the Three Resolutions. • Charles decided to rule without Parliament. He imprisoned nine MPs as well as those refusing to pay forced loans, impositions, and tonnage and poundage. He believed the governing class had brought these measures on themselves by not granting the revenues that traditionally were due to him. • The failure of the Great Contract had led to a severe breakdown of trust between king and governing class over financial issues. NCEA Level 3 History (90657) 2009 — page 9 of 26

Topic One: Essay Four Explain the factors that led to Charles I’s decision to allow William Laud and Thomas Wentworth to enforce royal authority. Evaluate the consequences of this decision for the multiple kingdoms of Charles I between 1630 and 1642.

The candidate’s response to the first part of the essay question could include: • Charles’s court was cultured and dignified. He preferred ritual, ceremony and order. He paid little attention to public opinion and saw no reason why he should explain his policies. He emphasised that the Crown’s authority and prerogatives must be respected. Charles’s belief in the principle of ‘divine right’ and that all privileges of parliament derived from the monarch made it difficult for him to understand the conflicts he had experienced with his parliaments between 1625–29 and led him to rely on loyal crown servants to enforce his authority. • As head of the English Church, he made it clear he personally favoured Arminian teachings, particularly because they supported the divine right of monarchs. By appointing Arminians to key positions in the church, Charles could establish a network of loyal and disciplined clergy who would reinforce royal policy from the pulpit. After suspending the orthodox Archbishop of Canterbury, George Abbot, for refusing to licence sermons supporting the forced loans of 1626, Charles had complete freedom to promote Arminians when offices became vacant. • When Abbott died in 1633, Charles appointed William Laud to his office. A client of Charles’s favourite, Buckingham, Laud had been rapidly promoted since 1626 to Bishop of London, Chancellor of Oxford University (where clergy were trained) and the Privy Council. His opening sermons to the 1625 and 1626 Parliaments urged obedience to the sovereign as being necessary for the maintenance of the divine order. As Bishop of London, he also declared that the institution of bishops was jure divino (by divine right), and he had enforced visitations to crack down on clerical nonconformity. Charles appreciated his single-mindedness, sincerity and bureaucratic efficiency. Laud would reliably and strongly enforce royal religious policy. • Buckingham’s assassination in 1628 and the Three Resolutions episode in Parliament had inflamed the political situation, pushing Charles into resorting to personal rule. To some, he appeared to be setting up a continental-style absolutist state, having rejected the traditional basis of government by co-operation with the governing class. However, personal rule without parliament was legal and allowed him greater freedom of action to impose his will in foreign policy and resolve his financial crisis. Convinced of a conspiracy by restless spirits ‘that all things may be overwhelmed with anarchy and confusion,’ he determined to maintain what he saw as the divinely ordained order in both Church and State. • Through the 1630s, Charles pursued efficient and effective maintenance of royal authority – a policy given the name of ‘Thorough’. He relied on the prerogative courts and councils to enforce this. The Council of the North, under Thomas Wentworth, was especially active in imposing royal decrees. Wentworth had been imprisoned as a nonpayer of the forced loan in 1627 and an active critic of Buckingham in the 1628 Parliament, but late in that year he entered the King’s service as Lord President of the North and a member of the Privy Council. His declaration that ‘The authority of the King is the keystone which closeth up the arch of order and government’ indicated that he did not blame Charles for the political conflict, but the poor advice of his ministers. In the role of leading the Council of the North (essentially controlling a third of England), Wentworth excelled, closely supervising JPs, enforcing law and order, reducing the power of local magnates and clans, and, through the Poor Law, protecting the powerless and destitute. • As a consequence, in 1633, Charles sent him to his most lawless region. As Lord Deputy of Ireland between 1633 and 1639, Wentworth was entrusted with imposing order, raising revenue and strengthening the Anglican Church.

The candidate’s response to the second part of the essay question could include: • The consequences of Laud’s appointment as Archbishop of Canterbury were the tightening of royal control of the Church throughout the multiple kingdoms through rigorous discipline of dissidents, as well as attempts to improve the economic foundations of the Church. • Laud used the High Commission and instituted metropolitan visitations to discipline not only Puritan clergy, but also lenient bishops. Surplices and vestments had to be worn, altars were moved to the east end of the church and railed off, and lecturers (preachers) were regulated and private family pews removed. To Laud, the altar was ‘the greatest place of God’s residence upon earth’. • Laud tried to regain impropriated tithes and adjust tithes in order to improve the economic position of the Church and raise the education level and social status of the clergy despite alienating many gentry. He was seen as undermining not only the Protestant nature of the Church in England (teaching about predestination now became a crime), but the social structure as well. NCEA Level 3 History (90657) 2009 — page 10 of 26

• Laud’s membership of the Privy Council involved him in politics and the Star Chamber judgements. His brutal treatment of Prynne, Burton and Bastwick in 1637 gained him the abhorrence of most gentry for what was seen as his abuse of power and lack of respect for rank and dignity. • Laud was seen as an enemy of Parliament who hoped to become Richelieu of England. His actions in England, on behalf of the King, inflamed religious issues and stimulated anti-Catholic feeling dating back to the Armada and further compounded by the Gunpowder Plot, the Thirty Years War and Court Catholicism. • Laud’s work in Ireland and Scotland aggravated the opponents of Charles in the three kingdoms. In Ireland, he supported the centralising policies of Wentworth, which alienated both Catholics (by trying to regain church lands) and Calvinists (who resented the imposition of Laud’s brand of Protestantism). In Scotland, Laud drew up the new Scottish Prayer Book, and the resulting ‘Bishops Wars’, were seen as being fought to oppose an alien king, who had attacked their property rights and now sought to dictate how they worshipped and what they believed. Without the support of Scottish nobility or the Kirk, royal authority throughout Scotland ceased to exist. In this sense, Laud played a key part in precipitating the crisis of 1640. • By 1641, Laud had been imprisoned in the Tower by the Long Parliament, and many of the ‘innovations’ he was accused of had been removed. Laud was made a scapegoat for the political and religious ills of the country but, without Laud, the policies of Charles I during the 1630s would not have been carried out with such efficiency. • Wentworth’s mandate from the King had been to make royal authority in Ireland effective by extending law and order and promoting the Church of England in Ireland. He was to reverse the situation by which expenditure on Ireland had outstripped income from it by £20 000 a year, by bringing in money from customs and the development of industry and trade. He pursued Laud’s church policies, regained impropriated tithes, exacted feudal revenue, hounded political opponents and pressed the royal claim to lands. Wentworth also had success in trebling the size of the Irish army and giving it better training and equipment, and developing the navy as a means of protecting maritime trade to rid the Irish sea of pirates. • Wentworth’s advocacy of Laud’s policy in Ireland secured the enmity of the New English, bolstered by the Scottish Presbyterian settlers, and had the undesirable effect of strengthening links between the New English and the Protestant opposition to Charles in England. Similarly, the English governing class felt sympathy for the Scottish cause against Charles’s imposition of the new Prayer Book, and he had difficulty raising a willing and effective English army to suppress the Covenanters during the Bishops Wars. • The Scottish rebellion led to the recall and ennoblement of Wentworth (as Earl of Strafford), but his failure to put down the Scots forced the King to call the English parliament. The English governing class feared Strafford and saw his rule in Ireland as a blueprint for the kind of tyranny Charles would impose on them. The English parliament, therefore, impeached Strafford and forced the King to have him executed. Wentworth’s removal caused alarm in Ireland at the ‘hot’ Protestantism of the English Parliament and at its sympathy for, and possible collusion with, the Scots. In October 1641, this instability fostered the Irish Rebellion and forced the issue in England of whether or not the King could be trusted with command of the armed forces. Conflict over this and Charles’s attempted coup by trying to arrest parliament’s leaders eventually led to the collapse of royal authority in his multiple kingdoms and the outbreak of Civil War in July 1642.

NCEA Level 3 History (90657) 2009 — page 11 of 26

Topic One: Essay Five Explain the factors that led to Charles I’s decision to arrest five members of Parliament in 1642. Evaluate the immediate and long-term consequences of this decision for Charles I’s relationship with Parliament between 1642 and 1649.

The candidate’s response to the first part of the essay question could include: • The Long Parliament was called in 1640 with Charles I desperate for Parliament’s aid to contain an armed rebellion by the Scots that had escalated to an invasion of the north of England. However, Parliament had a number of past grievances with the King, developed through the previous years of his reign, that they wanted resolved before they granted him subsidies. • Their grievances involved: o Charles’s association with despotism through his mismanagement of parliament 1625–29, his claim to rule by divine right alone, the years of personal rule 1629 to 1640 and dismissal of the Short Parliament 1640. This had resulted in the alienation of the governing class to what they believed were – arbitrary taxation: Tunnage and Poundage, impositions, forced loans, ship money, forest fines, distraint of knighthood. – arbitrary imprisonment: Five Knights case, Sir John Eliot, use of Star Chamber, John Hampden’s case. – arbitrary government: Thorough policy under Thomas Wentworth, Earl of Strafford, in the northern counties and Ireland. o Charles’s association with Catholicism through his marriage to Henrietta Maria and tolerance of Catholicism at court, his promotion of Arminianism through Archbishop William Laud in the Church of England and the use of harsh enforcement through bishops and the Court of High Commission. • Throughout the Long Parliament, therefore, John Pym and other leaders aimed: o To do away with evil counselors (eg Strafford and Laud), so that the ‘natural advisors’ from the governing class could be listened to. This challenged Charles’s right to appoint ministers. o To attack the instruments of Charles’s personal rule and make him more economically dependent on Parliament. This subverted his prerogative right to raise revenue. o Ensuring a permanent place for Parliament in the machinery of government. This changed the authority kings normally exercised over Parliament. • Pym and his group considered that by their proposed legislation they were restoring the traditional balance between King, Lords and Commons under the constitution; but Charles saw them as restricting his prerogative rights. o The passage of the Triennial Act placed a three-year limit on any period of personal rule, forcing the King to summon Parliament after that time. o The Act against the dissolution of Parliament meant the king could not dissolve Parliament without its own consent. o By the Tunnage and Poundage Act, the King was forced to give up the right to impose any customs duties without Parliament’s assent. o Revenue-gathering innovations (such as ship money, forest fines and distraint of knighthood) used during the personal rule were abolished, conflicting with the monarch’s prerogative rights of extra-ordinary taxation. o Prerogative courts used to enforce royal policy during the personal rule, eg Star Chamber, High Commission, and regional councils were abolished attacking the King’s rights as the fount of justice. o The “Root and Branch Petition” calling for the abolition of the episcopacy infringed on the King’s rights as Head of the Church. • Further challenges to the royal prerogative in the second session of the Long Parliament such as the “Grand Remonstrance” arose from the need to have an army in Ireland to put down the Catholic rebellion there. It split the Commons over whether Parliament should have the right to veto the King’s appointment of ministers and control of the militia simply because they suspected he might use those powers to reverse the gains they had already made. The printing of the Grand Remonstrance without seeking the consent of the Lords was especially inflammatory. It seemed that the House of Commons was appealing to the masses for support. Further rumours abounded about the impending impeachment of 12 bishops and Queen Henrietta Maria. • The Grand Remonstrance had been passed by the narrow margin of 11 votes. Moderate Royalist support was beginning to emerge, led by Lord Falkland and Edward Hyde. They were concerned at the flood of radical political and religious pamphleteering caused by the relaxation of censorship and the scarcely controlled London mob. Charles, on the other hand, represented stability. NCEA Level 3 History (90657) 2009 — page 12 of 26

• Charles returned from Scotland, having failed to win support from their nobility. But encouraged by the swing of moderates to him after the Grand Remonstrance, he offered the Secretary-ship to Falkland and the Chancellorship to Pym. Pym declined it. Perhaps underestimating his opponents, after several hours of discussion with his Queen, Charles, on 4 January 1642, decided to send 500 soldiers to arrest five leading MPs (including Pym) while they sat in the House of Commons. They were warned and fled. Charles’s action was met with cries of ‘privilege’. The resort to force was ill-conceived and ill-timed. • Charles had accepted the attack on his prerogative rights during the first session of the Long Parliament because he was facing a Scottish rebellion and occupation of northern England without the means to prevent it. No doubt he considered that once the crisis was over, he could regain his authority. However, the massacres in Ireland at the beginning of the second session forced Parliament to countenance even greater challenges to the royal prerogative in order to protect the gains already made. Believing his opponents were losing moderate support, he took a precipitate action to grasp the initiative and forestall his enemies. Charles had unwittingly made it clear that he did not intend to permanently accept any limits to his authority.

The candidate’s response to the second part of the essay question could include: • The fiasco of the attempted arrest of the Five Members confirmed suspicions that Charles could not be trusted to accept the recent changes and caused the Long Parliament to further attack the royal prerogative by excluding bishops from the House of Lords and passing the Militia Ordinance, granting control of the militia to Parliament itself. • Concerned for his family’s safety, Charles left London on 10 January and called the Commission of Array, attempting to secure the support of the county militias. Parliament offered him the Nineteen Propositions (claiming control of Ministers, the militia and Church matters as well as guardianship of his children). As a basis for negotiation, it left little room for compromise. Charles formally declared war on Parliament on 22 August 1642. He now chose armed conflict to defend what he believed were his God-given royal powers. • John Pym’s death in 1643 took away the glue and organising force that had unified Parliament in its opposition to the King. But the Solemn League and Covenant that Pym helped cement gained Parliament a military alliance with the Scottish Covenanters in return for a commitment to introducing in England a national Presbyterian system of church government. This made agreement with the King even more difficult to obtain and entrenched deep religious-political rifts among the Parliamentarians. • During the first Civil War, most believed Charles had been led astray by ‘evil counsellors’ (they had fought absolutism and Roman Catholic influences rather than Charles himself) and anticipated a settlement. But the creation of the New Model Army provided a religious-political force capable of revolutionary action. The Army was increasingly to regard itself as the instrument of God’s providence, especially after victory at Naesby in June 1645. When Charles’s opponents interpreted his actions as consistent with resisting God’s verdict, it gave rise to new ideas and radical political forces including Republicanism and the Leveller movement. • Once he had lost the Civil War, Charles still believed it would be impossible to have a political settlement that did not include him in a central role. He attempted to play off different rebellious power groups against each other – the Scots, Parliament and the New Model Army leadership. His stubbornness and duplicity through this period made it difficult to arrive at a compromise or feel that he could be trusted. Charles believed any agreements could be broken and that his only duty was to regain his rightful God-given place as monarch. Charles believed all his opponents were traitors acting against the law and his God-given authority, and he steadfastly refused to accept any limitation to his prerogative powers or alteration of the Church. He believed his enemies would eventually fall out among themselves. • When the Presbyterians in Parliament (led by Denzil Holles) tried to disband the army without the arrears of pay it was due in 1647, they alienated, united and politicised the army. Taking possession of the King, the Army Council presented him with the ‘Heads of Proposals’ and strengthened their position by occupying London (6 August). • But Charles’s escape and actions in the Second Civil War only entrenched the determination of some of his opponents to sweep away the powers of “this man of blood” (who had refused to accept God’s judgement on his rule) altogether. He had shown once again he could not be trusted to abide by any changes won by Parliament or the army. Only his removal would allow the necessary conditions for a permanent settlement. • Army leaders purged Parliament so that it could use the remaining 60 MPs to put the King on trial. After his execution in 1649, the monarchy was abolished.

NCEA Level 3 History (90657) 2009 — page 13 of 26

Topic One: Essay Six Explain the factors that led to Oliver Cromwell’s decision to become Lord Protector in 1653. Evaluate the extent to which Cromwell’s political and religious aims for the Protectorate were achieved between 1653 and 1658.

The candidate’s response to the first part of the essay question could include: • On 7 February 1649, monarchy in England was officially abolished as being ‘unnecessary, burdensome and dangerous’. Overriding all of this was the ghost of Charles I, and questions over the legality of his execution. • The execution of Charles I created a power vacuum in England. It was filled by a variety of political experiments of doubtful legality that had difficulty finding stability and acceptance in a time of chaos and turmoil. • England now officially became a Commonwealth, with the House of Lords abolished. Conservatives realised they were under a military regime using the Rump Parliament as a cloak of legality and respectability. Seizure of power by the army had alienated the majority of the traditional governing class, who recognised the threat to their own status and authority. Furthermore, they could not accept a government associated with regicide. All males over the age of 18 were required to swear the ‘Engagement Oath’ to be ‘true and faithful’ to the Commonwealth. This was too much for many gentry, who preferred to drop out of public life. • Between 1649 and 1653, Cromwell became the arbiter of English affairs despite the fact that military campaigns took him away from politics at first. As the Commonwealth’s most successful general, Cromwell was required to ensure her security from outside threats and used the army to re-impose English control of Ireland and suppress Charles II’s attempt, with the support of the Scots, to invade England. He also put down a Leveller mutiny in the army at Burford. His experiences of leading the army to victory over all opponents, combined with his deep religious convictions, made him believe that he and the army were God’s chosen instruments. • On 17 May, the Rump Parliament (the 60 to 70 survivors of Pride’s Purge from the elected Long Parliament of 1640) enacted that England should be governed by a Council of State with 40 members (31 MPs and 9 army officers). The Rump Parliament itself continued in constant session. It had to cope with dislocation caused by the Civil Wars, the expectations of a politicised army, the hopes of republicans, an economic slump and pressures for religious reform. • By 1653, the Rump Parliament’s continued obstruction of even modest social, legal and religious reforms and avoidance of the prospect of new elections frustrated army leaders. Cromwell found himself having to choose between his role as an MP and army commander-in-chief. Having no large group of civilian MPs to support him, Cromwell chose to break all links with traditional forms of government and used the army to dissolve the Rump. The New Model Army was now the sole political authority directing affairs and Cromwell its most important leader. • The Barebones Assembly that replaced the Rump was simply a reflection of the army leadership’s desire (and perhaps Cromwell’s) to experiment with ‘godly reformation’ in England. It was an appointed group of 140 gentry selected for their ‘godliness’ with 5 representatives from Scotland and six from Ireland. Despite constant divisions between radicals and conservatives, they did introduce civil marriage, registration of births, deaths and marriages, more humane treatment of the mentally ill and simplified law court procedures. However, an attempt to abolish tithes upset those who were still profiting from their impropriation of what was meant to be a source of Church revenue, and moderates in the Assembly voted to dissolve themselves and hand power back to Cromwell. Cromwell, himself, appears to have been seriously alarmed at the confused wrangling within the Assembly. • A council of army officers then devised the Instrument of Government. England was to be ruled by a Lord Protector (Cromwell refused the title of monarch) chosen by Parliament for life. He would be assisted by a Council of State. A Parliament of 400 would represent England, Ireland and Scotland and would be called every three years to sit for five months. The Engagement Act was repealed to allow a greater number to be willing to serve. A standing army of 30 000 men would be maintained under the Lord Protector. Religious toleration would be granted except to Anglicans and Catholics. • Cromwell had become Lord Protector because he was the only choice. He had led the army to a remarkable series of victories and sympathised with many of its aims and aspirations. The army trusted him and he could control its more radical elements. As a typical country gentleman concerned for law and order and stability, he had some standing with the conservative governing class. It seemed that without him, the country might descend into chaos. To some extent, he also saw himself as God’s chosen instrument for that time. ‘I am one of those whose heart God hath drawn out to wait for some extraordinary dispensations.’

NCEA Level 3 History (90657) 2009 — page 14 of 26

The candidate’s response to the second part of the essay question could include: • The Instrument of Government permitted a return to more familiar and traditional political mechanisms that might be more acceptable to the governing class and bring greater stability. Cromwell was anxious that decisions should be taken by the civilian-dominated Council rather than by him or army leaders. He rejected kingship and military dictatorship. He wanted a return to “the old ways” and showed due respect to civil rights and the rule of law. • Although it required a greater taxation burden, a standing army would ensure Britain’s security against foreign threats and rebellion from the disaffected. However, the presence of such a large army made it difficult to avoid the accusation of government by military coercion. Certainly, it guaranteed Cromwell’s control on the direction of potential political, social and religious reform. • Cromwell’s desire for religious toleration for all extended to Jews, Catholic worship in secret and Anglican services without a royalist flavour. To him, it made sense because it prevented disorder and promoted harmony. • However, Cromwell had to deal with a Britain deeply divided by politics and religion. The Protectorate’s constitution was not fully accepted by the ensuing Parliament. Argument arose over the role and size of army, Cromwell’s powers and the degree of religious toleration permitted. Cromwell was compelled to dismiss the first Protectorate Parliament as soon as he could legally do so. • In 1655, after the Royalist Penruddock Rising, Cromwell embarked on a period of ‘personal rule’ through his Major-Generals, dividing England into eleven districts. Setting up a new reliable militia to be trained by the professional army to improve national security may have been the excuse, but moral reform of the public was also clearly a motive. The Major-Generals were directed to vigorously prosecute drunkenness, blasphemy, swearing and adultery within their provinces. They were also to suppress gaming houses, alehouses and brothels. To reduce the burden of taxation of local communities, a 10 per cent decimation tax on wealthy ex- Royalists was levied. • But the seizure of political power in the localities by the army had alienated the majority of the traditional governing class, who deeply resented the threat ‘lowborn’ army officers represented to their local status and authority. The traditional governing class withdrew from an active part in local government, leaving their roles to new men from the lesser gentry. The moral reforms of the Major-Generals were highly unpopular and a cause for much bickering and quarrelling that severely damaged Cromwell’s hopes of ‘healing and settling’ the governing class. • The 1657 parliament proposed a new civilian constitution – The Humble Petition and Advice – to replace the Army’s Instrument of Government. They wanted Cromwell to become King instead of Lord Protector and the succession to be hereditary. It also called for a second chamber (the Other House) to be restored to parliament and a biennial parliament to have control over appointments to the Council of State and over the national religion. Since the offer of the new constitution came from Parliament, it would have a validity and legality that the Instrument (created by the Army Council) lacked. As King, Cromwell would be likely to get more support from the traditional governing class, who were concerned at the continuance of a government whose sole authority rested on force available through the Army. However (after weeks of discussion), Cromwell declined the Crown, but accepted the rest of the Humble Petition and Advice. As the man used by God as His instrument to be the destroyer of monarchy, for Cromwell to become king would be an act of total apostasy. “I will not seek to set up that that Providence hath destroyed and lain in the dust.” • The army in general did not welcome the changes, but senior officers were reassured that their interests would be protected through seats in the Upper House. But although the Upper House was packed with Cromwellians, the Lower House lacked strong and influential supporters of Cromwell. No longer having the ability to block MPs from sitting, opponents were returned who were determined to attack the The Humble Petition and Advice and restore the Rump. • Cromwell lost patience and dissolved the Parliament within a month. He was working on a further purge of the army to preserve its unity and the nation’s security and intended to call another parliament when he took ill and died. It was clear; he had failed in his political aim to find a settlement acceptable to the nation that could replace traditional monarchy. There had been little legal and social reform. After his death, there was no potential for a stable civilian government under any one else’s leadership. • His personal appeals for “liberty for tender consciences” had largely fallen on deaf ears. The Protectorate Parliament’s determination to control religious belief and action by punishing dissent as evidenced in the 1656 James Naylor would have caused Cromwell to recognise the futility of his hopes for religious toleration. • His more lasting legacy was the result of his victories in Ireland and Scotland, the Navigation Act, the development of a powerful navy and defeat of the Dutch – an enhanced international reputation for Britain.

NCEA Level 3 History (90657) 2009 — page 15 of 26

Content Guidelines Topic Two: New Zealand in the Nineteenth Century

Topic Two: Essay One Explain the beliefs and fears about the state of affairs in New Zealand shared by Māori chiefs and the British Government that led to their decision to negotiate the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840. Evaluate the extent to which the Treaty of Waitangi had addressed the concerns of both parties by 1860.

The candidate’s response to the first part of the essay question could include: • There were common beliefs and fears that influenced both parties to become involved in a treaty: o A relationship had already been established between the British and Māori, eg 1831 Petition to King William IV by northern chiefs to be a friend and guardian, James Busby and the United Tribes & Declaration of Independence 1835. o Concerns over foreign influence – French and American intentions in NZ. Fear of the French in the North (du Fresne, de Thierry, Catholic influence through Bishop Pompallier and his missions). US Consulate had been set up. o Commercial transaction – an expectation of increased material benefits and trade. o Law and order needed to be established. o An increase of settlers were expected – less were expected by Māori, an unspecified amount were expected by the British government o Pressure and persuasion by missionaries who were concerned about the welfare of Māori, especially amongst humanitarians – Kororareka – Hellhole of the Pacific – drunkenness, prostitution, violence. o Resolution of inter-tribal rivalries and to bring peace amongst the age-old enemies. o Guarantees of sovereignty and control over land for both sides – British thought they would be given it, Māori thought they would not be surrendering it. o Concern about speculative land purchases of dubious legality taking place around the country. Missionaries and Australians ‘buying’ or claiming blocks of land from Māori, often transactions where Pākehā and Māori intentions and expectations were quite different. The British promised to investigate these ‘dodgy’ land sales. Māori expected to sell and / or lease some land to the extra settlers that would come.

The candidate’s response to the second part of the essay question could include: • Rather than addressing the concerns of both parties, misunderstanding resulted from the mistranslations within the Treaty – Pākehā understanding that Māori had signed sovereignty away and Māori understanding that their rangatiratanga had been guaranteed. This meant continuing tension and friction as each tried to assert their sovereignty and get what they thought the Treaty had given them. “Hastily drafted, ambiguous, inconsistent and contradictory document.” Ruth Ross. • Hobson’s Proclamation of Sovereignty in May 1840 over the whole of New Zealand – North Island by ceding sovereignty, South Island by Cook’s discovery. New Zealand instantly painted ‘imperial pink’ – Belich. • Between 1840 and 1858, Māori sovereignty began to be slowly eroded and race relations deteriorated. • Commissioner Spain investigated validity of land purchases – land found illegally acquired by Pākehā would not revert to Māori but would go to the Crown as surplus land – “this seriously shook Māori confidence” – Claudia Orange. • Wasteland Policy – settlers constantly pressured Governors to take over land not cultivated or occupied by Māori. • Some Māori benefited from land rent arrangements with Pākehā – Wairarapa. • The first 15 years after the Treaty saw a period of economic expansion and prosperity for many tribes, especially those close to Pākehā markets. • Growth of Pākehā population – equalled Māori in 1858 and their desire for and acquisition of land led to conflict and economic dominance. • New Zealand Company settlements established in Wellington, Wanganui, Nelson, New Plymouth, also Canterbury and Otago. These settlements and the growth of Auckland saw close economic links formed with Māori to ensure food supply and survival. However, when Pākehā population overtook Māori, the cooperation between the races declined. NCEA Level 3 History (90657) 2009 — page 16 of 26

• Some settler attitudes toward Māori were Eurocentric and superior, and they had little interest in understanding Māori culture – arrogance and intolerance. • Māori were excluded from the 1852 Constitution – denied franchise and participation in government. • Government instituted restrictions on Māori harvesting of flax and timber – went against Article 2 of Treaty. • Difficulties in the North 1841–42 – Hobson directed customs duties to go to the Crown not Māori; Hobson issued a regulation prohibiting the felling of Kauri; hanging of Maketu. • Wairau Incident 1843 – Pākehā attempted to enforce their rights over land before Commissioner Spain could investigate the land claim by surveying the Wairau and building huts. Te Rauparaha burnt the huts, Arthur Wakefield and about 50 armed settlers tried to arrest Te Rauparaha; a fight broke out, resulting in settler and Māori deaths. Governor Fitzroy investigated and declared the settlers guilty of provoking the fighting and proposed to do nothing further. Māori and Pākehā became more suspicious of each other. • Conflict in the North 1844–46 – loss of mana and economic decline because of move of capital to Auckland, application of pre-emption, loss of customs revenue, fewer land sales led to resentment. Hone Heke’s grievances – loss of rangatiratanga and independence led to cutting down of the flagstaff four times, sack of Kororareka, and war between Heke, Kawiti and the government and Tamati Waka Nene. Battles at Puketutu, Ohaeawai and Ruapekapeka. Through Waka Nene, Governor Grey negotiated peace with Heke; no Māori land was confiscated but Heke’s concerns were not addressed. • Governor Grey actions – Grey attempted to force Māori to sell wasteland in the Wellington region, which threatened the mana of Te Rauparaha and Te Rangihaeata. Incidents of fighting occurred in the Hutt Valley in 1846. Grey arrested Te Rauparaha. Grey acquired 30 million acres of the South Island and 3 million acres of the North Island before he left NZ in 1853. His negotiation and methods of purchase were questionable, payments were minimal, and promises were not kept especially in the South Island. • Rise of the King Movement was an attempt by Māori to retain land and sovereignty. In 1859, Potatau Te Wherowhero was confirmed as holding the mana of kingship, supported by Waikato and central North Island tribes. Pākehā and the Governor saw the King Movement as a threat to British sovereignty. The Kohimarama Conference of 1860 was an attempt by Governor Gore-Browne to re-examine the Treaty and deal with the problem of Māori refusal to sell land, especially the King Movement. • Outbreak of war in Taranaki – Pākehā desire to purchase land in Waitara led to Te Teira offering to sell it to the Crown. Wiremu Kingi denied Te Teira’s right to sell and refused to sell the land, maintaining his mana and rangatiratanga over Waitara. Governor Gore-Browne felt British sovereignty had to be asserted by denying Wiremu Kingi’s authority over Waitara. Fighting began in March 1860. Waikato Kingites joined the fighting in support of Kingi and Māori autonomy.

NCEA Level 3 History (90657) 2009 — page 17 of 26

Topic Two: Essay Two Explain the factors that led to Edward Gibbon Wakefield’s decision to organise the planned settlement of New Zealand. Evaluate the consequences of Wakefield’s decision on New Zealand society until 1855.

The candidate’s response to the first part of the essay question could include: • The Wakefields’ desire to make money – The New Zealand Company was founded as a commercial operation designed for investors. • The desire of Wakefield to avoid the problems experienced in other “less organised” colonies, especially those in Canada and Australia through systematic colonisation. Wakefield believed that the haphazard nature of the peopling of the Australian colonies had led to the wrong sorts of people (a “squattocracy”) gaining control of the land. Wakefield’s desire was to create a “Britain of the South” where class distinctions were preserved. • His belief that emigration was the key to solving the problems of social distress – mass unemployment and urbanisation – that had been caused by the Industrial Revolution in Britain. Wakefield adhered to the widespread view that population growth – regarded as desirable – was related to food production, and that the solution to mass starvation was to export surplus population. • Wakefield argued that to make emigration to a colony ‘pay’, and to promote a ‘civilised’ society rather than a dispersed, barbaric settlement, land should be charged at ‘a sufficient price’. This would ensure that only some would be able to afford to buy land, and that landowners would have labourers to work for them. • Wakefield was looking for a new land that was not tainted by the criminal class exported to Australia (the “convict stain”). • In England, Edward Gibbon Wakefield spoke in glowing terms to a House of Commons committee in 1836, “Very near to Australia there is a country which all testimony concurs in describing as the fittest in the world for colonization, as the most beautiful country with the finest climate, and the most productive soil; I mean New Zealand.” • New Zealand in 1839 was not yet a British colony, but all indications suggested that it would soon become one. Therefore, the time was right for the Company to buy land before any restrictions were legally placed upon it. If the New Zealand Company could establish their Wellington colony before the annexation of New Zealand, this would lead to huge profits as land prices would increase (especially if Wellington became the capital of the new colony). • Investors in the company were promised 100 acres (40.5 hectares) of farmland and one town acre; the initial 1000 orders were snapped up in a month. But how to attract the labourers? To combat negative notions about New Zealand, the company used books, pamphlets and broadsheets to promote the country as ‘a Britain of the South’, a fertile land with a benign climate, free of starvation, class war and teeming cities. • Agents spread the good news around the rural areas of southern England and Scotland. As added inducement, the company offered free passages to ‘mechanics, gardeners and agricultural labourers’.

The candidate’s response to the second part of the essay question could include: • The first ships arrived in Wellington from January 1840, Wanganui from September 1840, New Plymouth from November 1841, and Nelson from February 1842. Two offshoots of the company, the Otago Association and the Canterbury Association, brought people to Dunedin in 1848 and Christchurch in 1850. • The company’s promises were flights of fancy, only partially made good by dubious land purchases from Māori, one of which eventually led to violence on the Wairau in Marlborough. Wakefield’s neat plans did not work out – land titles were uncertain, there was a lack of useable land and no obvious way to generate income through exports, and there were too many absentee landowners (about three-quarters of those in the Nelson settlement). • By 1843, the new settlers were short of food and the company was virtually bankrupt. Two interventions by the British government saved it from total disaster. Yet the company began to organise large-scale migration to New Zealand. Advertising and propaganda attracted thousands of people over the next 100 years, and the main drawcard, the free or assisted passage, became hugely important. Company immigrants sent letters back home which encouraged others to come out over the years.

• The New Zealand Company had a remarkable impact on immigration to New Zealand. Of the 18 000 settlers who came directly from Britain between 1840 and 1852, about 14 000 were brought in by the company or its successors. As a result of the company’s policy, by 1852 the European population in New Zealand had reached some 28 000. The New Zealand Company established the outlines of immigration from Britain to New Zealand, setting in place the mechanisms and promotional pitch that were used by the provinces and the government in later years. NCEA Level 3 History (90657) 2009 — page 18 of 26

• The vast majority of passengers whose fares were paid by the New Zealand Company came out in family groups; there were as many women as men, and almost half of this group were children. Apart from the Otago Association settlers, who were recruited largely in Scotland, most were from England. • The company wanted mechanics and agricultural labourers, and this is what they got. A third of the adult men were farm labourers, and another two-fifths were ‘mechanics’ – traditional rural craft workers such as builders or blacksmiths. They were not starving down-and-outs, but people under threat as farm wages fell and the old crafts disappeared. These skilled rural folk looked to New Zealand to fulfil dreams of independence through land ownership. There were few industrial workers or even clerks. • About a fifth of the New Zealand Company recruits came as paying cabin passengers, often the younger sons of the gentry or ‘remittance men’ – black sheep sent out to the colonies. There were retired military officers, and a few professionals such as doctors aspiring to a higher social status. Many were single males, although there were also spinsters keen to work as governesses or to find a husband. In general, the New Zealand Company migrants were a more genteel group than later arrivals. • People with similar ideas about new colonial societies such as the need for self-government, the importance of education, came as migrants who gave a big boost to colonial development. • The revenue from land sales was used to divert some immigrants to New Zealand from the mainstream of world migration – New Zealand was put on the immigration map. • The class structure, which developed in the new settlements, was a loose one – there was no agricultural capitalist group and the labourers would not accept an inferior status. • Immigrants had greater opportunities and aspirations. Equality and natural rights for all were promoted. Colonial values and social customs were relaxed, eg men no longer had to tip their hat at a landowner. • The New Zealand Company settlers may have been disproportionately influential because they were the first, and they established the nature and ethos of their cities, and developed a British character in New Zealand. • The comparatively successful settlement of Otago. Many of these early settlers came to escape Scottish poverty. The ‘sufficient price’ was set too low to generate the ‘vertical slice’. • The comparatively successful settlement of Canterbury, where the ‘sufficient price’ much more successfully produced the desired vertical slice. • Most of Wakefield’s theories were not implemented or did not work in practice in the New Zealand Company settlements. There were also difficulties in getting the settlements up and running because of the New Zealand Company’s inadequacies. • The Company failed to deliver on the promise to the working class; most English gentry bought land as a passive investment with no intention to migrate. This created a shortage of capitalists to act as investors and employers – unemployment was high and wages were poor. Some immigrants faced starvation. In Wellington and Nelson, the Company had to provide relief work for discontented labourers. • There was conflict over the purchase of land. The influence of the New Zealand Company officials was controlled by the Crown pre-emption clause in the Treaty of Waitangi. Most of the early Governors were not well disposed to Company aims. • Capitalists also suffered from failed promises – Māori disputed selling land, development was hindered and inter-racial conflict resulted from the inability of the New Zealand Company to fulfil their promises of land in Nelson (Wairau Incident 1843, in which Arthur Wakefield was killed), Wellington (wars in the Hutt Valley and Porirua against Te Rangihaeata and his Ngāti Toa supporters, 1846). • The New Zealand Company had inadequate knowledge of the geography of sites for settlement. Immigrants were often disappointed when they saw what the site was really like. Land was sold by ballot in England, unseen and unsurveyed. • Settlement sites were often not prepared when settlers arrived, and the New Zealand Company’s administration was inefficient. Settlers experienced frustrating delays, and progress in establishing an economic base was slow in the 1840s. • Much of the land turned out to be unsuitable for agriculture despite the fact that it had been promoted as flat and fertile land. Sheep farming was more suitable to the land. Settlers moved inland. Some land owners had to deal with squatters and land disputes. • Some had to turn to shop-keeping or small businesses and trades when agriculture ventures did not go to plan, eg many Wellington farmers moved north for better conditions and so there was less employment for labourers in the city region. Some immigrants left New Zealand for Australia. • The sufficient price of land was never implemented in the way Wakefield intended – labourers often could not afford land when they first arrived but were able to buy land much more rapidly than Wakefield had planned. • Labourers set up small family farms, which became the dominant type of farm in the new settlements but didn’t employ many labourers themselves. NCEA Level 3 History (90657) 2009 — page 19 of 26

• There was political rivalry between the settlers from the Wakefield settlements and the settlers from non- planned settlements (especially Auckland). • The increased number of Pākehā settlers brought demands for governments to take Māori land for the use of Pākehā settlers. Confiscated land and unscrupulous land deals were associated with the provision of land for new immigrants.

• The nature of nineteenth-century community – the atomisation / tight-knit community debate. NCEA Level 3 History (90657) 2009 — page 20 of 26

Topic Two: Essay Three Explain the factors that led to the decision by the Imperial Government to grant constitutional independent government to New Zealand in 1852. Evaluate the consequences of this decision on New Zealand politics between 1852 and 1876.

The candidate’s response to the first part of the essay question could include: • New Zealand became a Crown Colony in November 1840. Governors were appointed and received their instructions directly from the Secretary of State for the Colonies. To help them rule, the Governors appointed an Executive Council to initiate and administer policy and a Legislative Council to pass ordinances. In practice, they met infrequently and had little power. The Governors initiated legislation and had the power to act against the advice of Council if necessary. Moreover, instructions from the Colonial Office were no great hindrance to the Governors’ freedom of action, since they were usually out of date or not specific enough to deal with the peculiarities of a situation. Thus, in principle, the Governors enjoyed almost autocratic power and upon them rested huge settler expectation of economic progress and prosperity. • In practice, however, they were unable to deliver (Judith Bassett – ‘impotent autocrats’) as they had very few resources – they had little money to buy land or provide administration (Could make reference to Hobson, FitzRoy, Gore-Browne, Grey). So political life in the Crown Colony period witnessed a struggle between the Governors and the wealthier educated settlers who demanded a constitution. • An earlier proposed constitution of 1846 had not been implemented, but its existence shows that right from the outset Pākehā settlers had wanted self-government. Accusations of ‘despotism’ also accompanied Grey’s success in achieving the postponement of the NZ Constitution Act of 1846, which effectively excluded Māori from its proposed provincial and national assemblies. Grey argued that Māori-Pākehā relations were still too unsettled for devolution of power to Pākehā settlers and Grey warned of a possible Māori uprising. • Settlers forming “Constitutional Societies” as pressure groups targeting both the Colonial Office and the Governor. They claimed the Governor was exaggerating the potential for violence and simply refused to share power. • Until the 1940s, historians agreed, however, Keith Sinclair has shown that at least some of Grey’s concerns were genuine. The timing was wrong and, in the long run, Grey himself could take no more responsibility than anyone else for the achievement of the 1852 constitution. • The key problem for early Governors was an ability to balance settler hunger for land with their duty to protect Māori interests. From the settlers’ point of view, the Governors’ policies were seen as philo-Māori and were a hindrance to their progress. Thus prompted a vigorous campaign to end the gubernatorial system. Many settlers wanted their own government in order to get their hands on cheap Māori land and government funding. • The British Government was unwilling to continue to be responsible for New Zealand because of the mounting costs. • British settlers were keen to establish British institutions and systems in New Zealand. They also wanted more say in government than they had had in Britain. • There was also a significant assumption made by Pākehā settlers that they would dominate Māori. The 1853 constitution, by weakening the power of the governor to protect them, would achieve this. • The regional nature of the country also contributed to the clamour for change. The term ‘irresponsible government’ was levelled at the Auckland-based gubernatorial system for its administrative ‘neglect’ of the Southern provinces.

The candidate’s response to the second part of the essay question could include: • The British Parliament passed the Act, which granted New Zealand the right to set up a democratic style government. (Whilst Governor Grey helped prepare the constitution and to set up the Provincial governments, he refused to call a general assembly and this was left for Lt. Col. Wynyard [Administrator] to do so in 1854.) • The General Assembly or Parliament had three parts: the Governor, Legislative Council (upper house), and House of Representatives (lower house). • A representative government was set up in 1854 with the first New Zealand Parliament meeting on 27 May 1854. Though ministers came from the House of Representatives, the Governor and his officials still held power. From 7 May 1856, ministers were responsible to the elected House of Representatives, not the Governor – this is known as responsible government. • A Central parliament consisting of an Upper House and a Lower House would control national affairs. The Governor continued to control defence, foreign relations, and Māori Affairs until they were devolved to Ministers in the 1860s. NCEA Level 3 History (90657) 2009 — page 21 of 26

• Elected parliamentary government held authority over everyone in New Zealand, including Māori. Like Crown Colony government, self-government was based on the English version of Article One of the Treaty of Waitangi, ignoring the Māori understanding of the Treaty and Māori traditional power structures. • The 1852 Act set up six provinces, each with its own provincial government, an elected superintendent, and wide powers over local affairs including land revenue and purchase, customs revenue, public works, education, and immigration. They objected to interference by central government. • Local government, primarily through borough and road boards, was established by the Provinces after 1852, and regularised by the Municipal Corporations Acts of 1867 and 1876. A vast number of local bodies were set up, some very small. Harbour Boards were created from 1870 to help develop ports. • Most Members of the House of Representatives were well-off Pākehā property owners, professional men, merchants, and substantial farmers or run holders. They were a small elite group who focused substantially on improving their own situations. Some were ex-New Zealand Company men. • There were no political parties. Without a tight party structure, politics was largely personality-based and alliances were sometimes formed around significant business advantages offered. Shifting alliances meant some ministries were only briefly in power, but this did not usually mean instability since there was often considerable continuity of personnel. • There was plenty of “Pork Barrel” politics – political rivalry and desire often influenced national politics. People of specific regions and provinces expected their Members to get what they could for their area. • Eventually, the Provincial government system began to financially implode. A financial downturn in the later 1860s stopped all borrowing and, therefore, development. • There were different development rates of provinces also – gold in Otago and Westland, war in the North. Only the larger better-off provinces such as Canterbury and Otago could borrow the capital needed for development. Many provincial governments got into financial difficulties, especially in the late 1860s recession. • The issue of the capital city became more important with responsible government. Many MHRs and MLCs found it difficult to get to Auckland, especially those from the South Island. There was also concern that the issues of war with Māori in the Waikato and Auckland’s desire for land were dominating government too much in the early 1860s. In 1865, Parliament was shifted from Auckland to the more central Wellington, which became the capital. • Julius Vogel proposed large-scale borrowing to establish a railway, telegraph water supply, and immigration on a national basis. By the mid-1870s, the success of the Vogel Scheme led directly to the demise of the Provincial governments, which were abolished in 1876. • Franchise was male and property-based initially with a plural voting system. Māori were effectively unable to vote because they did not own land as individuals. Women were also excluded. • Māori franchise began in 1867 – four Māori seats were established as part of the resolution of the wars. The seats were regionally not tribally based, but all Māori men could vote. Māori seats were limited to four regardless of Māori population. This separate representation made sure there could be no possibility, if Māori did choose to vote, of Māori numbers influencing Pākehā government, even though Māori had been given all the rights of British citizens in the Treaty of Waitangi. • The franchise for Pākehā men was still bound by property qualifications. Pākehā representatives were numbered as a proportion of the Pākehā population. Pākehā men gained universal suffrage in 1879 (and women both Māori and Pākehā in 1893). • The Secret Ballot was introduced in 1870 (and Plural Voting was abolished in 1889).

NCEA Level 3 History (90657) 2009 — page 22 of 26

Topic Two: Essay Four Explain the factors that led to Parliament’s decision to abolish the Provincial Councils in 1875. Evaluate the political, social, and economic consequences of the abolition of these councils between 1876 and 1890.

The candidate’s response to the first part of the essay question could include: • The 1852 Constitution had established three levels of government – The Legislative Council (Upper House), the House of Representatives, and the Provincial Councils. There was a proviso that the provinces could be abolished by a simple vote in the House of Representatives. The Abolition of the Provinces Bill was introduced to the General Assembly by Harry Atkinson in 1875. It was carried on the third reading by 40 votes to 21. Nearly all of the opposition came from Auckland and Otago members. • By the 1870s, many MHRs believed that the three-tiered system of government and, particularly, the provincial tier had become an inefficient way of governing New Zealand. • Each province had its own methods and standards for land survey, and a divided administration meant that there was no accurate system of triangulation to which land titles could be adjusted. • Different provinces had built railways with different gauges, which stunted the growth of national lines. • Steamships, telegraphs, railways, and the shifting of the capital to Wellington reduced the communication problems that had led to the initial decision to set up the provincial system. • The Pākehā population had boomed in the 1860s and 1870s, and the new migrants were too removed to be committed to the founding principles of their founding fathers. The Wakefield experiments were effectively over, and the Otago gold rush had ended the dreams of a tight Free Church Presbyterian settlement in Dunedin. • The gold rush had also led to transience. People moved around the country in search of gold, and this created less parochial regionalism, but it annoyed the miners that there were different regulations and rules in each province. It seemed ridiculous that the miners should have to apply for a new “Miner’s Right” when they moved from an Otago goldfield to a West Coast one. • Most of the provinces were financially weak. Only Otago and Canterbury had generated significant revenue from the sale of land. Most relied on loans from central government to stay afloat. • With some justification, Vogel was able to accuse the provinces of being inward-looking. Conversely, the provinces seemed to always be objecting to the interference of central government. • The provinces were developing at different rates. While Taranaki had war, Otago had gold. • There was concern in the central government about the quality of education throughout the country. Education was a provincial responsibility, and many MHRs believed that the provinces were spending too little on it. • The abolition of the provinces was part of a gradual process as central government gradually absorbed the functions of provincial government. In 1867, the provinces lost the power to raise overseas loans. By 1875, they had also lost their immigration and public works responsibilities. • Vogel’s public works projects had made central government popular. They also placed centralist and provincial interests in direct conflict. The final catalyst for the abolition of the provinces was the refusal of several provinces to guarantee a Vogel loan by creating a Crown endowment of reserve land adjacent to the railways.

The candidate’s response to the second part of essay question could include: • The Abolition of the Provinces Act became operative in November 1876, and the administration of local matters was made the responsibility of elective borough and county councils. • The Counties Bill of 1876 required the merger of the 314 road boards into 39 counties, but parochial interests ensured that there were 63 counties by the time the Bill became an Act. • Following the abolition of the provinces in 1876, several major consolidating Acts assimilated the mass of provincial legislation into the law of the colony. The most important of these was the Education Act of 1877, which provided for “free, secular and compulsory” schooling throughout New Zealand. • The Municipal Corporations Act (1876) and the Counties Act (1876) legislated for local government. The Land Act (1877) brought the survey and sale of land under the control of one government department. • The old provinces still served as administrative areas for the education boards and for the decentralised offices of several government departments, including Lands and Survey. • Regionalism continued to exist, but now central government could dominate all the New Zealand economy, society and economics. • The abolition of the provinces strengthened the House of Representatives and ensured that it could dominate both the Legislative Council and the Governor. NCEA Level 3 History (90657) 2009 — page 23 of 26

• There was an increase in the number of New Zealanders who voted. This was also stimulated by the economic downturn that coincidentally took place in the early years after the abolition of the provinces. • Government became more involved in the lives of New Zealanders and in a wider range of activities. Most citizens approved of government intervention.

Topic Two: Essay Five Explain the factors that led to the Government’s decision to order the military invasion of the settlement of Parihaka in 1881. Evaluate the consequences of the 1881 invasion on Te Whiti o Rongomai, Tohu Kakahi, and their followers between 1881 and 1900.

The candidate’s response to the first part of the essay question could include: • The military invasion of Parihaka is set in the context of the New Zealand wars, followed by large-scale confiscation of land. • Located halfway between Mount Taranaki and the Tasman Sea, Parihaka became the centre of a peaceful resistance movement from the mid-1860s. The movement involved not only other Taranaki tribes, but also Māori from around the country. The confiscation of Taranaki Māori land prompted Te Whiti-o-Rongomai and Tohu Kakahi to develop a campaign to resist European settlement on confiscated land. • Parihaka was created in 1867. Te Whiti and Tohu Kakahi and their 600 followers developed a community centred on religion and peace. It was a model village built on hard work, enterprise and communal responsibility. Though they did reject some Pākehā institutions, the spiritual leadership provided by Te Whiti and Tohu was very positive. The aim of Te Whiti and Tohu was to save the land and restore the self-respect of the people. Energy was directed into developing large-scale cultivations of maize, potatoes, tobacco and vegetables. • Parihaka was established on land that had been confiscated but not yet occupied. Te Whiti felt that the confiscation of the land was unfair. He was angered by the government’s failure to keep its promise to set aside reserves for the Māori people. • In 1879, the government planned to open up the Waimate Plains to Pākehā farmers. Surveying began on confiscated land on the Waimate Plain without setting aside Māori reserves. The surveyors ran their projected roads right through the cultivations of the Parihaka settlement. • In response, Te Whiti devised a policy to put pressure on the government. Under the leadership of Te Whiti and Tohu Kakahi, Parihaka Māori embarked upon a ploughing campaign to protest against European settlement on confiscated Māori land. This campaign used non-violent methods. Te Whiti’s followers disrupted these surveys by ploughing and fencing land occupied by settlers. Each day, two men went out from Parihaka with a team of horses to plough up the land of Pākehā farmers nearby. Many were arrested and held without trial in the South Island. As each pair was arrested, another two were sent out. The protests continued, and more took part. They also cut the numbers off survey pegs and pulled them out. They erected fences across the roads. • In 1881, the West Coast Settlements Act was passed, making it legal to jail protestors without trial for up to two years. The jails could not hold the prisoners, and most were released. • Parihaka became a concern to the government as it was seen as a place that could reignite Māori opposition to Pākehā progress. Hazel Riseborough wrote ‘Parihaka had become a haven for the dispossessed and disillusioned from the length and breadth of the coast, and as far away as North Auckland, the King Country, Wairarapa and the Chatham Islands.’ • Te Whiti was turned into a bogeyman by the Pākehā press. He was seen not just as a raving religious fanatic but also as a threat to the stability of the whole country. According to the press, he was preparing for rebellion against the Queen. The presence of Titokowaru in the Parihaka settlement was enough to make alarm bells ring in the minds of the Taranaki settlers, who were strongly represented in Parliament by leading politicians like Harry Atkinson. • Parihaka became a symbol for many Māori, and its people received food and other supplies from many tribes throughout the country – including those as far away as the Chatham Islands. • The invasion decision based on the imminent return to New Zealand of Governor Gordon, who would never have agreed to the attack. Judge Prendergast signed the invasion order. (Dick Scott, p 100) • In October 1881, a government proclamation demanded that Te Whiti and Tohu step aside and accept the confiscations or risk war. Te Whiti must be taught a lesson and be made to recognise the dominance of the Pākehā. Rumours that Parihaka was fortified also inflamed Pākehā fears. NCEA Level 3 History (90657) 2009 — page 24 of 26

• On the morning of 5 November 1881 (while the Governor was out of the country), some 1 600 volunteers and Armed Constabulary invaded the settlement. More than 2 000 villagers sat quietly on the marae and put up no resistance as a group of singing children greeted the force led by Native Minister John Bryce. Bryce had described Parihaka as ‘that headquarters of fanaticism and disaffection’. He was a local MP and had fought in the war against Titokowaru.

The candidate’s response to the second part of the essay question could include: • Bryce ordered the arrest of Parihaka’s leaders. In the following days, he ordered the destruction of the village and the dispersal of the bulk of its inhabitants. The soldiers then systematically wrecked the settlement, and Māori tradition speaks of brutality and rape. • Te Whiti and Tohu were arrested in 1881 and exiled and imprisoned until 1883. In their absence, Parihaka was rebuilt and the ploughing campaigns continued into the 1890s. The imprisonment of Parihaka protesters without trial also continued until the late 1890s. • Te Whiti was charged with ‘wickedly, maliciously, and seditiously contriving and intending to disturb the peace’. Held without trial, he was not released until 1883, when he returned to the ruined Parihaka settlement. Te Whiti and Tohu continued to lead peaceful Māori protest, and Te Whiti was imprisoned again for six months in 1886. • Long promised reserves were eventually set aside for Māori owners, but most were placed in public trust and let to settlers on terms over which the Māori owners had no control. • In 1892, the West Coast Settlement Reserves Act brought in a system of renewable leases to settlers on over 200 000 acres of Māori land. Māori persisted with the ploughing campaigns in protest at the Act. In 1897, 92 Māori were arrested for ploughing in protest at delays in resolving the grievances over the Native Trustee’s management of these leases. • The presses were banned from the field of action by Bryce. They were ambivalent about the government’s actions, but the great majority of colonists were reportedly in favour. Te Whiti and Tohu were detained without trial for 16 months. The government managed to suppress all official documents relating to these events, and their publication in New Zealand was delayed until 1883 and 1884. • Some prisoners were held for up to 18 years without trial. In the absence of the leadership, Parihaka fell away and ceased to pose a threat to the government. Parihaka was destroyed for a time as a viable village. It never regained its full strength. • Bryce and others were in time shown up as heavy-handed and fanatical. • Parihaka and other Taranaki villages lost most of their land to the confiscations. • Te Whiti and Tohu died in 1907 within a few months of each other. The white albatross feather, which Te Whiti’s followers adopted as a symbol protecting the mana of the Parihaka settlement, remains an enduring emblem among Te Ati Awa.

NCEA Level 3 History (90657) 2009 — page 25 of 26

Topic Two: Essay Six Explain the factors that led to the decision by women’s groups to campaign from the 1850s onwards for the right of women to vote. Evaluate the political and social consequences that gaining the right to vote in 1893 had on New Zealand women’s lives until the early 1900s.

The candidate’s response to the first part of the essay question could include: • The limited and changing roles of women led to a desire amongst some women for greater independence and equality towards the end of the century. The desire found expression in the women’s suffrage campaign. • The valuable contribution of women in marriage and to their family in New Zealand gave women greater independence in colonial society. Women had different roles because New Zealand was such a young, raw frontier society with a weaker class structure and because farming areas were isolated and had to be self- sufficient. o In 1870, women couldn’t vote, serve on a jury, or own property if married; yet, they could be arrested on suspicion of prostitution. Other issues for women were equal pay for equal work, the divorce laws and legal disabilities, and gender issues such as male alcohol consumption and male violence. Colonial women also faced a number of unsettling circumstances and problems such as: o Health problems – diseases and problems with childbirth, physically hard work o Personal danger from male alcoholism, violence, prostitution o Social problems such as disorder, poverty, law and order issues and unemployment o Relationship breakdowns such as desertion, sexual double standards. • Women experienced much discrimination in New Zealand during the 1800s. The marriage laws were discriminatory and unequal, but they gradually changed in women’s favour during the latter part of the century: o Deserted wives gained the right to their wages and property in 1860. o Married women had no control of property that they brought to a marriage or of their wages before the Married Women’s Property Act 1884 gave them the same rights as their husbands in these areas. o Until 1898, the Divorce Laws made it much easier for a man to divorce his wife than it was for a woman to divorce her husband. Wives could divorce their husbands only for aggravated adultery. • The Contagious Diseases Act of 1869 legislated for the arrest, inspection for venereal disease, and incarceration of women suspected of being prostitutes. Their male clients were not inspected. This law was regarded by women as a blatant example of sexual double standards and sexual discrimination. • Women did much unpaid domestic work in the 19th century. Paid employment was usually lower-paid work, with many women working as servants or in farming and later in factories. • The Education Act of 1877 made schooling compulsory for boys and girls, but the curriculum prepared girls for the domestic sphere and girls’ participation was less than boys’. Girls often started primary school later and withdrew earlier. The first woman university graduate was Kate Edger who graduated BA in 1877; about half of the Arts students at Canterbury University College in the 1890s were women. • There were clear boundaries to women’s independence in 19th century Pākehā society, and as a consequence increasing questioning by some women of their limited roles. • A female culture emerged in the main centres, which had more women and older women than in the smaller towns and rural areas. Problems such as drunkenness affecting women were more visible in the main centres. • Middle class women especially wanted greater independence and equality. and this found expression in a social mobilisation of some, but not all, women in the latter 19th century – women moving beyond the family and raising feminist issues. • The women’s franchise campaign in New Zealand began in the 1850s after some articles were written by Mary Muller from Nelson, but the debate really escalated after Sir George Grey’s Government advocated women’s franchise in the late 1870s. The “woman question” was the subject of articles and debates in the 1860s and 1870s. Mary Ann Muller (Femina), Mary Taylor, and Mary Colclough (Polly Plum) were key writers about women’s rights. In particular, they focused on the injustices of inequalities between women and men before the law and within the constitution. • 1850–1900 saw some challenging of women’s roles, eg some questioning of women’s subordinate position in marriage, arguing for schools for girls, establishing cycling clubs, women entering the paid workforce, women’s trade unions (Tailoresses Union), the emergence of the Rational Dress Movement. • In 1875, women ratepayers were granted a vote in local body elections; and from 1877, they could sit on school committees. In 1882, women won the right to vote for licensing committees; in 1884, the Married Women’s Property Act enabled married women to own property in their own right; previously all of a woman’s NCEA Level 3 History (90657) 2009 — page 26 of 26

property passed to her husband on marriage. In 1885, women won the right to vote for hospital and Charitable Aid Boards. • The founding of the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union (WCTU) in 1884. Concerns over alcohol abuse advanced the programme for prohibition and temperance. Initially, this was a temperance organisation, but soon the vote for women became one of its major goals. Securing the vote for women could be used to pass prohibition laws through Parliament. • In 1891, Kate Sheppard essentially turned the WCTU into a single-issue pressure group that dominated the franchise campaign. The WCTU organised letters, public meetings, deputations and nationwide petitions to publicise issues and put pressure on male politicians, and a major controversy resulted. The suffrage movement was supported by a number of important MPs such as Robert Stout and John Hall.

• In 1892, the Women’s Franchise League (WFL) was formed. A WFL petition in 1893 had 30 000 signatures. • Women’s suffrage was finally won in 1893, resulting in the entry of women into political sphere.

The candidate’s response to the second part of the essay question could include: • Success of female suffrage by 1900 – 78 percent of women registered for the 1893 election and 85 percent (90 000) of these voted. Only 70 percent of men on the roll voted. The Liberal Government was elected. • Women largely voted conservatively. Female voting patterns don’t appear to have been much different to those of men, but male politicians did start to take note of issues concerning women and families. • Women were not granted the right to stand for parliament till 1919. • The first woman MP was Elizabeth McCombs in 1933: she was elected after the sudden death of her husband. • The National Council of Women was set up in 1896 to agitate for further improvements, a broadening of women’s rights, and the passing of humanitarian laws in areas such as care of children and prison reform. • Women became politically active in groups such as the Society for the Protection of Women and Children. • Towards the end of the century, some women made it in the workplace despite the patriarchal society (eg Kate Edger, Elizabeth Yates, and Ethel Benjamin entering professions); but the majority of women were in a limited range of jobs, most of which were related to their accepted domestic roles. • There was an appearance of the ‘new woman’ – dress reform and the wider use of bicycles by women. • Rutherford Waddell’s sermon, the Sweating Commission and the Liberal legislation (Factory Act 1896, Shop and Shop Assistants Act), that resulted helped women improve their working conditions. • Development of trade unions such as the Tailors and Tailoresses Union helped improve pay and working conditions for women. • Very few women had economic independence from men and were still tied to marriage and children. • Women were appointed to sit on Charitable Aid Boards. • There was still a double standard in attitudes to sex. Women had little control over their fertility and were generally ignorant about their own reproductive functions. • Meri Mangakahia sought rights for Māori women through Kotahitanga; in 1895, Te Hauke enabled Māori women to discuss land matters / equal rights for women within Kotahitanga. • The franchise movement of the 1880s–90s led to wider debate on the comparative physical and intellectual capabilities of men and women and their social positions. • More liberal legislation of the sort women wanted was passed after 1893, in part because of the new influence of women as voters: o Infant Life Protection Act (1896). o The Married Women’s Property Act improved the situation of women but was still well short of equality. o Divorce Act Reform (1898) gave equal access to divorce for men and women. o The repeal of the Contagious Diseases Act. • Although there had been progress, women were not emancipated to any great extent.