Original, AI-authored English practice with worked guidance. Selected topics only; independent teacher review is pending. This is not a complete syllabus, official past-paper collection or predicted exam score. Check your own exam-board specification: these concepts are not certified against a particular board or exam year.
73 original questions across 12 selected topic areas. No account or payment required to practise.
7 questions in this topic. Exact English revisions checked in an AI-assisted academic review; independent teacher approval is still pending.
All topics
Selected original English practice for identified 2027 concepts; not complete teaching, assessment or option coverage.
Selected subtopics: Fascist state and Church · Soviet policy and opposition · International treaties
7 of 7 questions shown
Write a response before opening the indicative guidance. Responses are not saved if you leave or reload this page.
Question 1The Lateran Treaty of11February1929, Articles1-3 in the Vatican's Italian primary text, reaffirms Catholicism as Italy's state religion, recognises the Holy See's international sovereignty, and creates Vatican City under its sovereign jurisdiction. Explain how an agreement with a distinct religious authority complicates the claim that Fascist government simply eliminated every other centre of authority. State what further evidence is needed to judge social support.4 indicative marks
Explain with evidence and reasoning4 indicative marksNo calculator
The Lateran Treaty of11February1929, Articles1-3 in the Vatican's Italian primary text, reaffirms Catholicism as Italy's state religion, recognises the Holy See's international sovereignty, and creates Vatican City under its sovereign jurisdiction. Explain how an agreement with a distinct religious authority complicates the claim that Fascist government simply eliminated every other centre of authority. State what further evidence is needed to judge social support.
Cambridge 2027: Partial conceptual match
h-lateran Vatican primary Italian Articles1-3 and11Feb1929 heading read; English factual paraphrase cross-checked against treaty terms. A4 Italy1.2 p44/1.4 p45, limited Church relationship not full social policy. Bounded original practice; no teacher approval or full topic coverage inferred.
Read the three terms together. The settlement formalises a relationship between two authorities rather than describing a state without any independent religious institution. Mussolini's participation can therefore be examined as accommodation and consolidation, not only coercive elimination. But its political benefit is a historical question requiring evidence of response and implementation. The treaty does not prove that every Italian approved or that Church-state conflict ceased. These are English paraphrases of specified provisions, not an official translation of the entire Lateran settlement or Concordat.
Self-marking points
Recognition of the Holy See's sovereignty is not the same as absorbing it into the Italian state.
The state-religion provision shows a formal accommodation with Catholic authority.
A negotiated settlement can support a government's legitimacy while leaving an institutionally distinct partner; agreement is not proof that all tensions disappear.
Reception among clergy, believers, opponents and later practice is needed to assess support; treaty terms are not a public-opinion measure.
Examiner tip
Indicative points for this original short task, not an official essay band. Support each inference; other well-evidenced answers may be valid.
Question 2Feigin's9April1932 letter to Ordzhonikidze, in the Library of Congress primary translation, reports507 milch cows at Ziuzia compared with2000 in1928. He disputes the favourable picture from wider official counts and discusses inadequate feed and livestock contracting. Calculate the reported percentage decline. Evaluate what this local report can establish about collectivisation's economic success.4 indicative marks
Explain with evidence and reasoning4 indicative marksCalculator allowed
Feigin's9April1932 letter to Ordzhonikidze, in the Library of Congress primary translation, reports507 milch cows at Ziuzia compared with2000 in1928. He disputes the favourable picture from wider official counts and discusses inadequate feed and livestock contracting. Calculate the reported percentage decline. Evaluate what this local report can establish about collectivisation's economic success.
Cambridge 2027: Partial conceptual match
h-feigin primary translated letter opening read:507 versus2000 milch cows at Ziuzia, writer's census challenge, feed and contracting discussion. Independent1493/2000=74.65%; A4 Stalin2.3 p46. No national extrapolation. Bounded original practice; no teacher approval or full topic coverage inferred.
Use the earlier2000 as denominator: the surviving507 is25.35% of it, so the reported decline is74.65%. The letter's detail gives a testable counterpoint to favourable aggregates, but report is not an independently audited national census. Check whether categories and dates match and whether the chosen farm represents others; compare requisitions, fodder, disease and local implementation before assigning a single cause. It is evidence for serious local disruption, not a numerical estimate of all Soviet livestock decline or a total evaluation of industrialisation.
Self-marking points
Reported decline=2000-507=1493cows.
1493/2000 x100=74.65% decline from the1928 baseline.
A contemporary internal report can challenge claims of unqualified success and offer mechanisms such as feed shortage.
One selected farm and an interested correspondent cannot establish a national causal effect; verify comparable records, categories, other locations and chronology.
Examiner tip
Indicative points for this original short task, not an official essay band. Support each inference; other well-evidenced answers may be valid.
Question 3A28October1990 resolution of the society Unity, published in the Library of Congress primary translation, condemns Gorbachev's perestroika as a restoration of capitalism and calls for his removal through party action. Explain how it evidences opposition to reform within communist politics, and why the resolution cannot alone establish that reform caused every aspect of Soviet collapse.4 indicative marks
Explain with evidence and reasoning4 indicative marksNo calculator
A28October1990 resolution of the society Unity, published in the Library of Congress primary translation, condemns Gorbachev's perestroika as a restoration of capitalism and calls for his removal through party action. Explain how it evidences opposition to reform within communist politics, and why the resolution cannot alone establish that reform caused every aspect of Soviet collapse.
Cambridge 2027: Partial conceptual match
h-unity primary resolution28Oct1990 read including removal demands and claimed socialist-renewal alternative. A4 international7.3 p59/7.4 p60.1990 opposition not conflated with proof of1991 collapse. Bounded original practice; no teacher approval or full topic coverage inferred.
Identify who is opposing whom and what remedy is sought: the resolution invokes communist ideals against a communist general secretary. This complicates a binary reformers versus outsiders account. Its language also seeks to mobilise, so causal accusations should be investigated rather than repeated as fact. Compare its demands with actual party power, reform decisions and developments in republics and satellite states. The authors' reported unanimous acceptance at their own conference is not unanimity across the Soviet population or party.
Self-marking points
A communist organisation attacks reform from a position claiming socialist legitimacy, not simply from an anti-communist platform.
Its call for party intervention demonstrates an organised political demand, not proof that the entire party agreed.
Accusations of capitalist restoration reveal the authors' framing and aims, not automatically a neutral causal finding.
Collapse requires comparison with decisions, economic evidence and national movements over time; a1990 demand alone cannot establish the full1991 outcome or sole cause.
Examiner tip
Indicative points for this original short task, not an official essay band. Support each inference; other well-evidenced answers may be valid.
Question 4The1905 Treaty of Portsmouth primary translation in FRUS recognises Japan's predominant political, military and economic interests in Korea (ArticleII); ArticleIX cedes southern Sakhalin below the50th parallel to Japan. Explain how these terms evidence an altered regional power relationship, and why treaty gains alone cannot explain all causes of Japan's emergence as a world power.4 indicative marks
Explain with evidence and reasoning4 indicative marksNo calculator
The1905 Treaty of Portsmouth primary translation in FRUS recognises Japan's predominant political, military and economic interests in Korea (ArticleII); ArticleIX cedes southern Sakhalin below the50th parallel to Japan. Explain how these terms evidence an altered regional power relationship, and why treaty gains alone cannot explain all causes of Japan's emergence as a world power.
Cambridge 2027: Partial conceptual match
h-portsmouth primary ArticlesII/IX read; southern island boundary50N, not wholeSakhalin, and Korea interests not1910 annexation. AS7.3 p31 (retained Empire/world-powers option, not removed China/Japan1912-45). Bounded original practice; no teacher approval or full topic coverage inferred.
Link specific clauses to the inference. ArticleII concerns Russian recognition of Japanese interests, while ArticleIX defines a territorial boundary at50degrees north; neither is equivalent to unrestricted sovereignty over all East Asia. These terms demonstrate concrete regional leverage. Explaining its emergence requires a chronological argument about preceding capabilities and relationships. The treaty's imperial signatories cannot stand for the consent of Korean or other affected populations, and recognised predominance should not be confused with the later1910 annexation.
Self-marking points
Russia's recognition of Japanese predominance in Korea is a diplomatic concession concerning regional influence.
Cession of southern Sakhalin is a territorial gain, not transfer of the entire island.
A major-power treaty accepting such gains is evidence of Japan's strengthened position after the war.
Earlier modernisation, military capability, alliances and diplomacy require separate evidence; settlement terms show outcomes, not all causes or local consent.
Examiner tip
Indicative points for this original short task, not an official essay band. Support each inference; other well-evidenced answers may be valid.
Question 5Article16 of the League of Nations Covenant distinguishes members' economic/financial measures against covenant-breaking war from a Council recommendation about the forces member governments should contribute. From this primary provision, explain why collective security depended on member action and identify what evidence is needed to move from institutional design to an explanation of actual1930s failure.4 indicative marks
Explain with evidence and reasoning4 indicative marksNo calculator
Article16 of the League of Nations Covenant distinguishes members' economic/financial measures against covenant-breaking war from a Council recommendation about the forces member governments should contribute. From this primary provision, explain why collective security depended on member action and identify what evidence is needed to move from institutional design to an explanation of actual1930s failure.
Cambridge 2027: Partial conceptual match
h-league primary Article16 read; economic undertaking distinguished from Council force recommendation. AS8.2 p33/9.2 p35; no automatic permanent-army claim or invented crisis statistics. Bounded original practice; no teacher approval or full topic coverage inferred.
Read the different verbs and actors: members undertake economic measures, while the Council recommends military contributions to governments. Collective action is therefore mediated through states. That creates a plausible enforcement vulnerability, but one must still show whether and how it operated in named crises. Compare actual sanctions, military choices, membership and strategic interests before ranking causes of failure. This task spans creation/design and later performance; it does not supply a complete Manchuria or Abyssinia source dossier.
Self-marking points
Economic and financial severance relies on implementation by member states.
The Council recommends member force contributions; the article does not describe a self-sufficient permanent League army.
States' capacity, cooperation and willingness can therefore affect enforcement.
A failure explanation needs evidence from particular crises, decisions and outside actors rather than assuming that legal design alone determines every outcome.
Examiner tip
Indicative points for this original short task, not an official essay band. Support each inference; other well-evidenced answers may be valid.
Question 6Daladier's message to Bonnet of30September1938 in the French Yellow Book (document13) says the Munich agreement was reached by four powers, acknowledges that no Czechoslovak representative was present, and presents avoiding war as a reason for accepting painful sacrifices. Analyse what this reveals about appeasement and the limits of the source as a verdict on whether it succeeded.4 indicative marks
Explain with evidence and reasoning4 indicative marksNo calculator
Daladier's message to Bonnet of30September1938 in the French Yellow Book (document13) says the Munich agreement was reached by four powers, acknowledges that no Czechoslovak representative was present, and presents avoiding war as a reason for accepting painful sacrifices. Analyse what this reveals about appeasement and the limits of the source as a verdict on whether it succeeded.
Cambridge 2027: Partial conceptual match
h-munich document13 primary message read, author/recipient/date, four-power terms, absence and antiwar rationale verified. AS9.3 p35-36; justification separated from policy verdict. Bounded original practice; no teacher approval or full topic coverage inferred.
Use the message's own situation: its author needs Prague to accept an agreement negotiated elsewhere and stresses the cost of war. That is direct evidence of a justification for concession and of exclusion from the negotiating table, not a disinterested assessment written after all consequences. Its concern to deny personal responsibility for exclusion can itself be analysed. To judge policy, add contemporary alternatives and later developments without assuming either that every alternative was easy or that war was already inevitable.
Self-marking points
The reported absence of a Czechoslovak representative shows a disparity between negotiators and the state directly affected.
Avoiding war frames concessions as a protective necessity in the message.
Daladier's need to secure agreement and defend the outcome can shape his presentation; purpose qualifies rather than automatically invalidates evidence.
Contemporary justification cannot prove later success or inevitability; compare subsequent decisions, military conditions and other actors' evidence.
Examiner tip
Indicative points for this original short task, not an official essay band. Support each inference; other well-evidenced answers may be valid.
Question 7The Lancaster House constitutional conference report's opening paragraphs list agreement on an independence constitution, pre-independence arrangements and a ceasefire. Participants undertake to accept the Governor's authority and the agreed arrangements. Explain why this was more than a declaration of an independence date, and why the text alone cannot prove that intimidation or conflict immediately ceased everywhere.4 indicative marks
Explain with evidence and reasoning4 indicative marksNo calculator
The Lancaster House constitutional conference report's opening paragraphs list agreement on an independence constitution, pre-independence arrangements and a ceasefire. Participants undertake to accept the Governor's authority and the agreed arrangements. Explain why this was more than a declaration of an independence date, and why the text alone cannot prove that intimidation or conflict immediately ceased everywhere.
Cambridge 2027: Partial conceptual match
h-lancaster original report opening paragraphs1-4 read in archive: constitution, transition and ceasefire enumerated, Governor/electoral framework stated. A4 international8.4 p62, not removed broad sub-Saharan route. Compliance not inferred from agreement. Bounded original practice; no teacher approval or full topic coverage inferred.
Separate the three connected problems: a future constitutional order, authority while moving towards it, and stopping armed hostilities. A date alone would not settle these. The report is valuable evidence of formal commitments among negotiating parties, but the existence of a ceasefire clause cannot establish that all local actors obeyed at once. A full explanation of Zimbabwean independence must also analyse armed struggle, political pressures, negotiations and the later electoral process, not replace them with treaty signing alone.
Self-marking points
Constitutional provisions address the future distribution and legal basis of power.
Pre-independence administration and supervised elections address the transition's procedure.
Ceasefire commitments address armed conflict and require implementation by parties and forces.
Agreed obligations are evidence of a negotiated framework, not full compliance; monitoring, participant accounts and events must test implementation.
Examiner tip
Indicative points for this original short task, not an official essay band. Support each inference; other well-evidenced answers may be valid.
