Level:
Correct: 0
Incorrect: 0
Marks: 0/0
Exam Practice
Subject:
Topics:
Avg
score:
–
Topics
done:
0/12

Expansion in Africa

Practise 35 exam-style questions on Expansion in Africa for AQA GCSE History (Migration, empires and the people). Write your answer as you would in the exam and get it marked in seconds against the mark scheme, point by point, with an AI tutor on hand if you get stuck.

  • 35 questions
  • 1–20 marks each
  • Instant marking
  • No sign-up needed
20 questions, marked as you go

Sample questions with model answers

Here are 4 of the questions in this topic, each with a model answer, an explanation of why it earns the marks and the mark scheme an examiner would use.

Question 1

2 marks

Figure 1 is a flow chart showing the road to the Boer War.

What should replace A and B?

The road to the Boer War, 1886-1899. Flow chart of 6 boxes joined by arrows, read from top to bottom. The first box is "Gold found on the Witwatersrand (1886)", which leads to "Thousands of Uitlanders arrive", which leads to "Kruger refuses Uitlanders the vote", which leads to box A, which leads to "Milner and Kruger fail to agree (1899)", which leads to box B.

Model answer

A is the Jameson Raid of 1895-96, when Jameson led a force into the Transvaal hoping to start an Uitlander rising. B is the start of the Boer War in October 1899, after the Boers issued an ultimatum to Britain.

Explanation

The gold of the Witwatersrand made the Transvaal rich and drew in thousands of Uitlanders, whom Kruger refused to give the vote. The failed Jameson Raid destroyed trust; after the Bloemfontein talks between Milner and Kruger failed in 1899, the Boers issued an ultimatum and war began on 11 October 1899.

Mark scheme
  1. 1 mark

    A: the Jameson Raid (December 1895 - January 1896), a failed attempt by Leander Starr Jameson, backed by Cecil Rhodes, to start a rising of Uitlanders and overthrow Kruger's government.

    Accept: Jameson Raid on its own.

  2. 1 mark

    B: the Boer ultimatum and the outbreak of the Boer War (October 1899).

    Accept: the Boer War begins / the Boers invade Natal and the Cape / war is declared.

Question 2

8 marks

Source A: from a private letter written by the Prime Minister, Benjamin Disraeli, to Queen Victoria on 24 November 1875, after the British government had agreed to buy the Khedive of Egypt's shares in the Suez Canal Company without waiting for Parliament's approval.

'It is just settled; you have it, Madam. The French Government has been out-generalled. ... Four millions sterling! and almost immediately. There was only one firm that could do it - Rothschilds. They behaved admirably ... and the entire interest of the Khedive is now yours, Madam.'

How useful is Source A to an historian studying the reasons for British involvement in Egypt?

Explain your answer using Source A and your contextual knowledge.

Model answer

Source A is useful because it shows some of the main reasons for British involvement in Egypt. Disraeli is delighted that 'the French Government has been out-generalled', which shows that rivalry with France was important. The Suez Canal had been built by a French company and opened in 1869, and Britain did not want France to control Egypt. The letter also shows how much the canal mattered to the British government: Disraeli spent 'four millions sterling' and arranged the money 'almost immediately' through the Rothschild bank. This fits what I know, because the canal had cut the journey from Britain to India by about 40 per cent, and most of the ships using it were British, so it was vital to Britain's trade and to the defence of India.

The provenance makes the source valuable. It is a private letter from the Prime Minister to the Queen, written immediately after the deal, so it shows the real thinking of the government rather than public propaganda. However, Disraeli liked to flatter Victoria and wanted to impress her, so he exaggerates when he says that 'the entire interest of the Khedive is now yours'. The shares gave Britain a large stake, about 44 per cent, but not control of the canal. The letter also does not mention India directly, even though protecting the route to India was the main strategic reason for British interest.

The source is also limited because it dates from 1875. It does not explain why Britain went on to occupy Egypt in 1882. That happened after Egypt went bankrupt, Britain and France took control of its finances, and Urabi's nationalist revolt threatened foreign interests, leading Gladstone's government to defeat Urabi at Tel el-Kebir. Overall, Source A is useful for showing the importance of the canal and rivalry with France, but it gives only part of the explanation for British involvement in Egypt.

Explanation

Disraeli's private letter shows the excitement over buying the Suez Canal shares and the rivalry with France, but he exaggerates the gain, and the letter predates the occupation of 1882. Level 4 uses content, provenance and context (the route to India, Egypt's debts, Urabi) to judge its usefulness.

Mark scheme
  1. 8 marks

    Levels of response (8 marks).
    Level 4 (7-8 marks): Complex evaluation of Source A with sustained judgement based on content and provenance: e.g. explains that it shows the importance of the canal, rivalry with France and the speed and secrecy of the purchase, supported by knowledge of the canal's role as the route to India and the later occupation of 1882, AND evaluates its provenance (a private letter from the Prime Minister to the Queen, written to flatter her and boast of his success; reveals real government thinking but exaggerates British gains, since the shares did not give control); recognises what it does not show (the strategic importance of India, Egypt's debts, the nationalist revolt and the reasons for the 1882 occupation); reaches a sustained judgement.
    Level 3 (5-6 marks): Developed evaluation based on content and/or provenance, supported by relevant knowledge.
    Level 2 (3-4 marks): Simple evaluation based on content and/or provenance, e.g. it shows Britain bought the canal to beat France; it was written by the Prime Minister.
    Level 1 (1-2 marks): Basic analysis: describes the source or makes general comments.
    0 marks: nothing worthy of credit.

    Indicative content (not a checklist; credit other valid points): Content: Britain has bought the Khedive's shares; the French have been 'out-generalled' (rivalry with France); the purchase cost 4 million pounds, raised quickly through a loan from the Rothschild bank; 'you have it, Madam' - a sense of triumph. Context: the Suez Canal, built by a French company under Ferdinand de Lesseps, opened in 1869 and cut the sea route from Britain to India by about 40 per cent; most ships using it were British; Khedive Ismail was deeply in debt and sold his 44 per cent stake; Parliament was not sitting, so Disraeli borrowed from Rothschild and Parliament approved the purchase later; Disraeli also had Victoria made Empress of India (1876). Later involvement: Egypt went bankrupt (1876) and Britain and France took joint control of its finances ('Dual Control'); Urabi's nationalist revolt (1881-82) and riots in Alexandria led Gladstone's government to bombard Alexandria and defeat Urabi at Tel el-Kebir (September 1882); Britain occupied Egypt, and Evelyn Baring (Lord Cromer) ran it as a 'veiled protectorate' (1883-1907); involvement in Sudan followed. Provenance: a private letter from the Prime Minister to the Queen, so it shows real government thinking and was not written for the public; but Disraeli was a flatterer who liked to impress Victoria, so he exaggerates - the shares gave Britain a large stake but not control of the canal, which was still run by the French company; it shows the view in 1875, not the reasons for the occupation in 1882. Possible judgement: useful for the importance of the canal and rivalry with France as reasons for British involvement, but limited because it does not mention India directly and predates the occupation.

Question 3

8 marks

Explain the significance of the discovery of diamonds and gold for British involvement in South Africa.

Model answer

The discovery of diamonds and gold was significant because it turned southern Africa from a strategic outpost on the route to India into one of the richest prizes of the empire. Diamonds were found near Hopetown in 1867 and at Kimberley in 1871. Britain quickly annexed the diamond fields, even though the Orange Free State claimed them. Kimberley became a boom town, and Cecil Rhodes made a fortune there; by 1888 his De Beers company controlled most of the world's diamond production. Rhodes then used this wealth to expand British rule northwards through the British South Africa Company.

Gold was even more significant. It was discovered on the Witwatersrand in the Boer republic of the Transvaal in 1886, and Johannesburg grew at astonishing speed. By the late 1890s the Transvaal was one of the world's largest gold producers and the richest state in southern Africa, which threatened Britain's dominance in the region. Thousands of Uitlanders, many of them British, came to work in the mines, but President Kruger refused to give them the vote. Rhodes backed the Jameson Raid in 1895-96 to overthrow Kruger, and when talks between Milner and Kruger failed in 1899, the Boer War began. Historians disagree about how far the war was fought for gold, but control of the gold mines was certainly a major factor.

The discoveries also had a huge impact on Africans. The mines needed vast numbers of workers, so hundreds of thousands of black Africans became migrant labourers, housed in closed compounds, controlled by pass laws and paid low wages.

In the long term, the mineral wealth shaped modern South Africa. After the Boer War, the Union of South Africa was formed in 1910 under white rule, and laws such as the Natives Land Act of 1913 laid the foundations of the segregation that later became apartheid.

Explanation

Diamonds (1867-71) and gold (1886) made southern Africa an economic prize, fuelling Rhodes's expansion, the Uitlander crisis, the Jameson Raid and the Boer War, and creating a migrant labour system with long-term effects. Level 4 explains several linked aspects.

Mark scheme
  1. 8 marks

    Levels of response (8 marks).
    Level 4 (7-8 marks): Complex explanation of aspects of significance: explains, with specific and accurate knowledge, how the discoveries of diamonds (1867-71) and gold (1886) changed southern Africa and British involvement, e.g. British annexations, the rise of Rhodes and the mining companies, the growth of the Transvaal and the Uitlander question, the Jameson Raid and the Boer War, the migrant labour system and its impact on Africans, and long-term effects (the Union of 1910, segregation); shows short- and long-term significance.
    Level 3 (5-6 marks): Developed explanation of two or more aspects with relevant knowledge, but less range or less sense of short- and long-term significance.
    Level 2 (3-4 marks): Simple explanation of one aspect, e.g. Britain wanted the gold, so it went to war with the Boers.
    Level 1 (1-2 marks): Basic explanation: general statements.
    0 marks: nothing worthy of credit.

    Indicative content (not a checklist; credit other valid points): Background: Britain took the Cape from the Dutch (1795, 1806); the Great Trek (from 1835) of Boers away from British rule; the Boer republics of the Transvaal (South African Republic, 1852) and the Orange Free State (1854). Diamonds: found near Hopetown (1867) and at Kimberley (1871); Britain annexed the diamond fields (Griqualand West, 1871) although the Orange Free State claimed them; Kimberley became a boom town; Rhodes's De Beers company came to control most of the world's diamond production (1888); African miners were housed in closed compounds; the wealth helped fund further expansion (the British South Africa Company, 1889). Britain tried to unite southern Africa: annexation of the Transvaal (1877), the Zulu War (1879: Isandlwana, Rorke's Drift, Ulundi), the First Boer War and Majuba (1881) restored Transvaal self-government. Gold: found on the Witwatersrand (1886); Johannesburg grew rapidly; by the late 1890s the Transvaal was one of the world's largest gold producers and the richest state in southern Africa, shifting the balance away from British-ruled colonies; British financiers invested heavily; thousands of Uitlanders (foreigners, many British) arrived but Kruger denied them the vote; the Jameson Raid (1895-96); Milner and Kruger's failed talks (1899); the Boer War (1899-1902) - historians debate how far gold was the cause (J. A. Hobson blamed mining financiers) compared with strategy and British supremacy. Impact on Africans: migrant labour from across southern Africa, pass laws, low wages, compounds. Long term: the Union of South Africa (1910) under white rule; the Natives Land Act (1913); the mining economy and segregation that later developed into apartheid. Possible judgement: the minerals turned southern Africa from a strategic outpost into an economic prize, drawing Britain into conflict with the Boers and reshaping African lives.

Question 4

20 marks

Has war been the main factor in the rise and fall of the British Empire?

Explain your answer with reference to war and other factors. Use a range of examples from across your study of Migration, empires and the people: c790 to the present day.
[16 marks] [SPaG 4 marks]

Model answer

War was the main means by which Britain gained its empire, and it played a large part in the empire's decline. However, wars were usually fought to protect economic interests, and the end of the empire owed as much to nationalism and to Britain's economic weakness as to war itself.

War shaped England's overseas possessions from the Middle Ages. Lands in France were won and lost by war: King John lost Normandy in 1204, and in the Hundred Years' War England won Calais in 1347 but lost almost everything else by 1453. Later, war built the empire. Cromwell's Western Design captured Jamaica from Spain in 1655. The Seven Years' War (1756-63) gave Britain Canada and made it the leading European power in India, where Clive's victory at Plassey in 1757 began the Company's rule over Bengal. Further wars against Mysore, the Marathas and the Sikhs extended British rule across India, and the Napoleonic Wars gave Britain the Cape and naval supremacy. In Africa, war was the means of conquest: the Zulu were defeated in 1879, Egypt was occupied after Tel el-Kebir in 1882, Sudan was reconquered at Omdurman in 1898, and the Boer republics were defeated in 1902.

War also contributed to the empire's fall. The American War of Independence lost Britain thirteen colonies in 1783. The First World War encouraged nationalism: more than a million Indians served, and when Indians demanded more say, the Amritsar massacre of 1919 turned many against British rule. The Second World War left Britain bankrupt and showed it could not defend its empire, as the fall of Singapore in 1942 proved; India became independent in 1947. The Suez Crisis of 1956 showed that Britain could no longer act as a great power without American support, and the Mau Mau emergency showed the cost of holding on to colonies.

However, other factors were also important. Economic resources explain why many wars were fought: the East India Company went to India to trade, and in Africa the discovery of gold led to the Boer War. Much expansion was carried out by companies, not by armies, such as Rhodes's British South Africa Company. The fall of the empire owed much to nationalism and to individuals who led it, such as Gandhi, whose Salt March of 1930 won worldwide attention, and Nkrumah, who led Ghana to independence in 1957. Government decisions also mattered: Attlee's government chose to leave India, and Macmillan accepted the 'wind of change' in Africa in 1960.

Overall, war was the main factor in the rise of the British Empire, because almost every major addition of territory came through war, even if economic motives lay behind it. War was less clearly the main factor in its fall: the world wars weakened Britain, but nationalism, economic weakness and government decisions brought about the end of the empire. War was therefore the single most important factor across the whole story, but it worked alongside economic motives and nationalism.

Explanation

War won most of the empire (the Seven Years' War, Plassey, Omdurman, the Boer War) and contributed to its loss (America, the world wars, Suez), but economic motives, nationalism and government decisions also mattered. Level 4 needs a sustained judgement covering both rise and fall, with examples from across the period.

Mark scheme
  1. 16 marks

    Levels of response (16 marks).
    Level 4 (13-16 marks): Complex explanation of war and other factors (e.g. economic resources, government, individuals, ideas such as nationalism, science and technology), leading to a sustained judgement about whether war was the main factor in both the rise and the fall of the British Empire; precisely selected examples from across the whole period (including earlier English possessions overseas), showing how war interacted with other factors in both gaining and losing territory.
    Level 3 (9-12 marks): Developed explanation of war and at least one other factor, with relevant examples from more than one period; a judgement is reached but is not fully sustained, or covers rise or fall more fully than the other.
    Level 2 (5-8 marks): Simple explanation of war and/or other factors with some relevant knowledge; largely descriptive.
    Level 1 (1-4 marks): Basic explanation of one or more factors with limited, general knowledge.
    0 marks: nothing worthy of credit.

    Indicative content (not a checklist; credit other valid points): War and the rise: medieval possessions won and lost by war (the Angevin lands; Normandy lost in 1204; the Hundred Years' War, Calais held 1347-1558); Cromwell's Western Design took Jamaica (1655); the Seven Years' War (1756-63) gave Britain Canada and supremacy in India (Plassey 1757); the Anglo-Mysore and Anglo-Maratha wars, the Sikh wars (Punjab 1849); the Napoleonic Wars (the Cape, Ceylon, naval supremacy after Trafalgar 1805); in Africa - the Anglo-Ashanti wars, the Zulu War (1879), Tel el-Kebir (1882), Omdurman (1898), the Boer War (1899-1902); mandates after the First World War (e.g. Iraq, Palestine, Tanganyika). War and the fall: the American War of Independence (1775-83); the First World War encouraged nationalism (Indian troops; the Amritsar massacre, 1919); the Second World War bankrupted Britain, weakened its prestige (the fall of Singapore, 1942), and promises of self-government (the Cripps mission, 1942) led to Indian independence (1947); Suez (1956) showed Britain could not act without the USA; the Mau Mau emergency in Kenya (1952-60); the Falklands War (1982) kept a remaining territory. Other factors: economic resources - trade and companies (EIC, BSAC) drove expansion; Britain's post-war debts made empire unaffordable; government - charters, the Government of India Act (1858), Attlee's decision to leave India, Macmillan's 'wind of change' speech (1960); ideas - the civilising mission and social Darwinism; nationalism (Gandhi's campaigns, the Salt March 1930; Nkrumah, Ghana 1957; Kenyatta, Kenya 1963); individuals - Clive, Rhodes, Gandhi; science and technology - the Maxim gun, steamships. Possible judgements: war was the main means of gaining territory and the main trigger of decline, but economic motives drove expansion and nationalism, with Britain's economic weakness after 1945, did more than war to end the empire.

  2. 4 marks

    SPaG. High performance (4 marks): spells and punctuates with consistent accuracy; uses rules of grammar with effective control of meaning overall; uses a wide range of specialist terms as appropriate.
    Intermediate performance (2-3 marks): spells and punctuates with considerable accuracy; uses rules of grammar with general control of meaning overall; uses a good range of specialist terms as appropriate.
    Threshold performance (1 mark): spells and punctuates with reasonable accuracy; uses rules of grammar with some control of meaning and any errors do not significantly hinder meaning overall; uses a limited range of specialist terms as appropriate.
    0 marks: the student writes nothing, or the response does not relate to the question, or errors severely hinder meaning.

    SPaG marks are awarded only if the answer relates to the question.

Ready to try the rest? Every answer you write is marked against the mark scheme, so you can see exactly where the marks are.

AI Tutor Hints first, answers after you try

Hi! Stuck? Ask me for a hint and I’ll help you work it out. Once you’ve checked your answer I can explain exactly where the marks are.