Key Idea: Paper 1 always gives you three sources on ONE inquiry question from Climate and innovation. You never answer that inquiry question directly — you always answer three FIXED questions about the sources themselves: content, context, and perspectives. Learn this pattern once and it works for any exam sitting.
How this topic is tested
Paper 1 is worth 24 marks total and built from three source-based questions, always in this order.
| Question | Skill | Marks | What you must do |
|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 | Content | 6 | Explain how details from TWO sources help answer the inquiry question. |
| Q2 | Context | 6 | Analyse how ONE source's origin, purpose, time and place shape its value and limitation. |
| Q3 | Perspectives | 12 | Examine how viewpoints across ALL the sources compare — do they agree or differ, and why? |
Q1 needs TWO sources — using only one caps you at 3/6. Q3 needs EVERY source in the set — using only one caps you at 6/12, and only two caps you at 9/12. Always check how many sources you were given and use them all.
Must-know facts from every micro
Topic 1.3 has a single micro-topic (1.3.1), taught across four sections. Here is what each one covers.
| Section | Skill taught | Key idea |
|---|---|---|
| 1 — Content | Q1 [6] | Content is the information INSIDE a source. Pick a specific detail from each of two sources and explain how it helps answer the inquiry question — e.g. a saga's mention of Leif Erikson's westward voyage plus an archaeological report on L'Anse aux Meadows together show Norse innovation was both in sea travel and in settlement-building. |
| 2 — Context | Q2 [6] | Context is a source's origin (who/when/where) and purpose (why made). State both, then explain a value AND a limitation — e.g. a 1570 Spanish friar's account of the Aztec 'One Rabbit' famine preserves Indigenous memory (value) but is decades removed and written for a European audience (limitation). |
| 3 — Perspectives | Q3 [12] | Perspective is whose viewpoint a source shows. Sources can corroborate (agree) or contradict — both are useful if you explain WHY. A Norse saga celebrating ambition and a land-survey logging farmland shortage give different but complementary perspectives on the same innovation. |
| 4 — Summary | All three tied together | Recaps the full pattern and models a Q3 answer using Norse and Aztec-style sources together, showing how to state each perspective, compare them, then link back to the inquiry question. |
- Norse exploration (c.982–1020) — Erik the Red founds Greenland; his son Leif Erikson sails further west to 'Vinland'; L'Anse aux Meadows (Newfoundland) is the archaeological proof of a Norse settlement; the Medieval Warm Period made these voyages easier.
- Aztec Empire (c.1428–1469) — Itzcoatl founds the Triple Alliance (1428); Moctezuma I (r.1440–1469) drives imperial reform; Tenochtitlán is the capital; chinampas are the floating-garden farming innovation; the famine known as 'One Rabbit' is a key climate-driven crisis.
Modelled exam question
Examine how the perspectives in the sources can be used to answer the inquiry question: 'What factors prompted innovation?'
🔒 Model answer plan
See the mark-by-mark plan — for / against / judgement, with marking guidance — in study mode.
Important: The biggest mark-loser on this paper is stopping at description — naming a source's date or author and moving on. For Q2 you must explain HOW that origin/purpose creates a value and a limitation. For Q3 you must explain WHY perspectives agree or differ. Naming facts without explaining their effect caps you in the low markbands every time.
How many sources does Q1 need? Two. Explaining content from only one source caps your mark at 3 out of 6.
What three things does Q2 ask you to consider about a source? Its origin (who made it, when, where), its purpose (why it was made), and the value/limitation that origin and purpose create.
What happens if you only use two sources on Q3? Your mark is capped at 9 out of 12 — you must examine the perspective of every source in the set to reach the top band of 10–12.
Name one Norse fact and one Aztec fact you could use in a Q1 or Q2 answer. Norse: L'Anse aux Meadows is archaeological proof of a Norse settlement. Aztec: the famine known as 'One Rabbit' shows a climate-driven crisis that Aztec sources record from an official viewpoint.
Can two sources disagree and still both be useful for Q3? Yes. Corroboration (agreement) and contradiction are both useful outcomes — you just need to explain why the sources agree or differ, not just spot the difference.
What is the one skill that ties Q1, Q2 and Q3 together? Always link back to the inquiry question. Describing a source in isolation, without connecting it to the question being asked, loses marks on all three questions.
Q1 content [6]: two sources, connect their details to the inquiry question. Q2 context [6]: origin + purpose, then value AND limitation — analyse, don't just describe. Q3 perspectives [12]: every source, agree-or-differ, always explain why, always link back.