‪ 263 77 574 8754‬: For physical weathering.

it involves the breaking

[16:07, 28/03/2017]+
down of rocks without any chemical reaction involved.it operates near or at the earth's
surface whre temp change ae most frequent.types freeze thraw etc

Then kna wakunyora unobudisa madffrnces on a same statement

Ndomafungiroo angu

‪ 263 77 865 4954‬: Answers by Simeon Matare

[21:04, 28/03/2017]+

Remember i am not a scholar but a student

Discuss the origins of the Rozvi state

Rozvi state is have to br an offshoot of GZ.. Changamire Dombo had an ambition fo rule
his own state. After the death of GZ king he moved out of GZ simultaneously with Mutota.

Rozvi cm from Mutapa state. Dombo is believed to have been a cattle hearder in the
Mutapa state and he also had many cattle . Dmbo is also believed to have magic powers
of changing colours of the cattle . After Dombo had defeated the Portuguese in the Mutapa
he further went on to establish his own state.

Dombo is believed to have been born in the religious family of the Torwa state . After the
collapse of Rozvi he went on and joined his state with Changamire . This suggests that
Dombo and Changamire were two different people .

However Acc to D.N Beach he argues that there is nothing like Nyatsimba Mutota or
Mutapa state . Which wanted to dismis the point of Rozvi an offshoot of Mutapa state
Add some if you have

‪ 263 77 865 4954‬: Answers by Simeon Matare

[06:13, 29/03/2017]+

Remember um not a scholar but a student.

How far do u agree with the assertion that the Prazero system in the zambezi valley was an
Africanisation of a European institution

Prazo system of the Portuguese in the Zambezi valley was an Africanisation of European
institutes in the Zimbabwean Plateau. Introduction of the Prazo system reduced land from
the Mutapa people. Portuguese distributed fertile and more land to themselves living the
Mutapa people landless. Therefore making Mutapa state a European institution.

Forced Mutapa people to work in their Prazo system.They forced them using the Chikunda
army , making them abandone their field works and other activities.

Raped Mutapa woman in the Prazo system.

However .....

Portuguese introduced or brought new crops into the Mutapa . These crops which are
maize , pawpaws and pease increased food production and improved diet. As such it is
articulated that they did not make Africans their European instututes...

Then add more flesh to these borns. And correct some mistakes

‪ 263 77 370 9211‬: Answers by Simeon Matare

[09:48, 29/03/2017]+

Remember um not a scholar but a student.

How far do u agree with the assertion that the Prazero system in the zambezi valley was an
Africanisation of a European institution
Prazo system of the Portuguese in the Zambezi valley was an Africanisation of European
institutes in the Zimbabwean Plateau. Introduction of the Prazo system reduced land from
the Mutapa people. Portuguese distributed fertile and more land to themselves living the
Mutapa people landless. Therefore making Mutapa state a European institution.

Forced Mutapa people to work in their Prazo system.They forced them using the Chikunda
army , making them abandone their field works and other activities.

Raped Mutapa woman in the Prazo system.

However .....

Portuguese introduced or brought new crops into the Mutapa . These crops which are
maize , pawpaws and pease increased food production and improved diet. As such it is
articulated that they did not make Africans their European instututes...

Then add more flesh to these borns. And correct some mistakes

africanisation of a european institution in reference to the prazo system only signify a

change.

-we all agree that the Prazo System was as system which was applied in European
countries such as Brazil and Portugal hence never existed in Africa.

-Due to the arrival of the Portuguese in Africa in general and in the Mutapa State they
applied the system but based of A fican concepts

-so to answer the question properly just consider African concepts within the System as it
was applied in the interior such as African labour, crops, tools.

-However it was an European institution based on European concepts considerin the

European principles as it was applied in the Mutapa State

‪ 263 77 131 5046‬: A Level History Paper 1 Questions and Answers by F.

[22:48, 29/03/2017]+
Nyabando (+263773 709 211)

What contributed more to the downfall of Napoleon Bonaparte: his ceaseless search for
glory or intense nationalist resistance in Europe?
The key issue is a comparative analysis of the reasons for the downfall of Napoleon
Bonaparte. Answers will be well illustrated and at the end will take a clear position as to
which contributed more.

Napoleon Bonaparte had unending desire to destroy British naval power and its economy.
After Amiens Napoleon could not rest until Britain was defeated, hence the Continental
System. It is obvious that Napoleon, in his increasing pride and self-con fidence and in his
determination to beat Britain, simply took on too much. To beat Britain he proclaimed the
Continental System: to maintain that system he had to control the whole of Europe. It was a
task beyond the power of any one man or any one nation, even when the man was
Napoleon and the nation the French. Even if he had crushed all Europe utterly, he would
have gone on to the Turkish Empire, to India and to the Americas. Hence his schemes were
all too long, he simply could not last.

A well trained army and effective military strategies were employed. Defeat of Austria and
Russia took Napoleon Bonaparte to Tilsit. C.A Leeds in his book titled European History
1789-1914 says, “If Napoleon had died in 1807 after Tilsit, his career would have seemed
the most miraculous in military history. He had acquired wealth and power for himself and
his family.” His ideas became increasingly negative, he relied mainly on the sword to
maintain his rule and felt a single defeat would end his career. He failed to recognise the
peak of his power hence the Moscow Campaign, the Peninsular war and the war of the
fourth coalition. After 1807 and 1810 respectively because of his ceaseless search for
glory, he was without his two chief aides, Talleyrand and Fouche. They had felt his policies
would end in defeat and were dismissed after intriguing against him. Napoleon a great
military leader without Talleyrand’s help was an inflexible and poor diplomatist. This was
shown in his imposition of harsh terms on his enemies when he was successful, not
conducive to securing the permanent friendship of Austria. It also helped to alienate
sympathy for Napoleon in other states. His failure to accept good terms when they were
offered to him by Metternich in 1813 and 1814.

On balance, far from implementing the principle of nationalism, however, Napoleon

Bonaparte invoked the spirit of nationalism against himself, particularly in Spain and
Germany. In other words, his rise was inspired by the two enormously powerful forces
whose history makes up so much of the history of the nineteenth century-the forces of
liberalism and patriotism. Strangely enough, these same two forces contributed powerfully
to his downfall. While he fought against governments which lacked a liberal or popular
backing he was consistently successful; but when the middle or lower classes fell in
strongly behind their governments he began to fail. For example, the German liberals
turned against him wholeheartedly after 1806, when French domination had proved to give
them little freedom.

The Italians, the Swiss, the Dutch were all overtaxed. In Russia and Spain the French
Revolutionary doctrines made no impression at all on very backward people, and here he
was faced with disaster right from the beginning. Further, after his introduction of the
Continental System, the middle and lower classes in every country felt the effect of his rule
in high prices, strict customs rules and declining trade. Everywhere the tide of patriotic
sentiment, whether national or local, turned against Napoleon and he waa defeated largely
by the hostility of those whose good will had enabled him earlier to triumph. This was
caused by inflicting heavy defeats on European states and dominating them, imposing
alien rulers on other states, imposing a uniform pattern on Europe, annexations and
territorial changes and using multinational armies. The British were resilient, the Russians
rallied together in the Moscow campaign. Prussia which had been neutral joined the fourth
coalition. Austria’s humiliation at Pressburg must be considered.

In summation, as a result of ceaseless search of glory across the length and breadth of
Europe, Napoleon Bonaparte’s enemies became intensely aware of national differences or
aspirations.

‪ 263 73 483 7752‬: [03/29, 20:15] +

[07:19, 31/03/2017]+ ‪ 263 78 448 6903‬: Charles x

-He succeeded Loius xviii in 1824.

-He wanted to reverse the clock and restore all the privileges of the Ultra Royalist.

-He refused to rule using a Charter .He was quoted saying",l would rather chop wood than
to rule in an old fashioned way of King of Britain".

-It was as a result of this that his reign was shortlived.

DOMESTIC POLICY

-Political Reforms.

-Charles x banned the political parties in the country.

-Political opponents were arrested and the Ultras were given overall control over
everything that took place in the country.

-Elections were suspended .

-Charles x appointed all the government of ficials.

-He appointed unpopular ministers such as Polignac and Martigac.

-These ministers were unpopular and failed to introduce reforms that were wanted by the
people.

-Newspapers were censored and later he introduced the ordinance of St cloud which
heavily censored the newspapers.

-People were nolonger tried by jury.The system of justice now favoured the Ultra Royalist
at the expense of the ordinary people.
Charles x had powers of veto and he had overall control over the Legislative assembly.

Economic Reforms.

-The industries were taken and the Ultra Royalist were given authority over these
industries.

-A number of companies that the Ultra Royalist lost in 1789 were retaken.

-Industrial production was now firmly in the hands of the Ultra Royalist.

-Inflation started and the prices of goods started to increase.

-The bank of France started to give loans to the Ultra Royalist.This facility was abused and
this affected the people.

Social Reforms.

-Land was retaken from the peasants.This frustrated the people and Charles x lost support
from the people.

-Education was put under the Jesuits missionaries and this divided the church.

-Taxes were reintroduced and this frustrated the people.People were now burdened by
these taxes that Charles x introduced.

-Peasants were made to pay compensation to the Ultras.This angered the people and it
explains why Charles x lost support from the people.

-The rate of unemployment started to increase .Those who were working were
exploited.They worked for long hours and were given wages that were below poverty datum
line.Conditions at their workplaces were unbearable.

-Legion of honor and Career open to talent was done away with.

-The standards of Education started to fall.This was because Education was put under the
influence of the Ultras who were not educated.

Foreign Policy

In 1825 he invaded Spain.This was a success ,however he strained France relations with Br
itian.

NB*Charles x reign was less successful.

MUSO~

‪ 263 78 448 6903‬: TODAY'S TEST

[03/29, 20:15] +

1."The Restored Bourbons in France 1815-1830 ,learnt nothing and forgot nothing".How
far true is this assertion on the Bourbons .

2.Compare the reign of Louis xviii and Charles x ,showing their successes and failure.

3".Charles x failed to realize that the days of the ancient regime were over".To what extent
did this led to the downfall of Charles x.

4.Why were the reigns of the Restored Bourbons in France 1815-30 short-lived.

5."New wine in old bottles."How justi fied is this verdict on the Restored Bourbons in
France.

MUSO~

‪ 263 78 448 6903‬: VIENNA SETTLEMENT 1815

[03/29, 20:54] +

1.Restoration of Legitimate rulers.e.g.

a)Louis xviii of France.

b)Ferdinand vii of Spain

c)Ferdinand I of Naples.

d)Parma,Moderna ,Tuscany rulers from Austria.

e)Pope in the Papal states

f)King of Piedmont/Sardinia.

NB*This was a success to a greater extent because these were legitimate rulers who were
removed from their thrones by Napoleon.

*However these rulers were despotic and were not popular amongst the people.

2.Creation of buffer zones.

These were created by the statesmen to protect themselves against future French
aggression.e.g.

Lombardy and Venetia,

39 Germany states to Austria,Prussia getting areas along the Rhine,Genoa was added to
Piedmont etc.

NB*This was a success to a great extent because the statesman were not sure about the
reaction of France in the future.Therefore they were supposed to protect themselves.

* However small states were sacrificed at the expense of these big powers.

3.Balance of Power.

The great powers shared the spoils/territories equally amongst themselves. They shared
these territories basing on the Map of 1805..e.g.

Britain got Malta,Ceylon,Trinadid and Tobago etc , Russia got Finland and 2/3 of Poland
,Prussia got areas along the Rhineland,Posen etc and Austria got 39 Germany states,
Parma, Moderna and Tuscany etc.

NB*This again was a success to a greater extent.This was because they shared these
territories basing on what they possessed before 1804.

*However there was an element of greed and sel fishness.This explains why Prussia and
Russia clashed over Poland.
4.lgnorance of Nationalism and Liberalism.This principle was ignored when they united
small states e.g. Belgium and Holland, and made small states to be dominated by big
states.The statesmen viewed these principles as a threat to Europe.The Fins ,Serbs,
Belgians,Poles all lost their independences to big powers.

NB* This was a success to a great extent because the statesman wanted to maintain peace
in Europe and for this peace to be maintained they had to ignore these two
principles.These principles were regarded as dangerous for Europe.

*However the statesman failed by ignoring these two principles.National interest were
sacrificed at the expense of these great powers.Uprising started to occur in these small
states after the Vienna Settlement.This was because they had ignored these two
principles.

*On the whole the Vienna Settlement was a success.This was because it managed to
maintain peace for a long period of time before another war broke out the so called
Crimean war.

~~MUSO~

‪ 263 78 448 6903‬: CONGRESS SYSTEM

[03/29, 20:54] +

1.Quadruple alliance.

-The allied powers agreed to cooperate and consult each other if future problems occured
in Europe.

2.Holy alliance.

-This was suggested by Tsar of Russia and he was criticized by Britain and Austria.

NB*The criticism of Tsar clearly showed that the Allied powers were not united and that the
Congress system wasn't going to last for a long time.

3.Congress of Aix-la-Chappell.
-lmportant points to note:

*Admission of France in the concert of Europe.(Quantruple alliance)

*Revolts in Spain and ltaly.

*Removal of stationed troops from the borders of France.

*Stopping slave trade, slavery and bibary pirates.

NB*The allied powers could not agree on the course of action to take in Spain and ltaly.

-Britain was again intervention.

NB*Britain clashed with Russia on how to stop slave trade ,slavery and bibary pirates.

-This clearly shows that the Congress system wasn't going to last for a long time.

4.Congress of Troppau.

-Great powers met because of continuous revolts in Spain and ltaly.The great powers
couldn't agree on what to do in Spain and Italy.

-Britain was against intervention.

-These disagreements led to the adjournment of the Troppau.

Troppau Protocol.

-Britain sent a representative on this Protocol.

-The great powers agreed to send troops in Spain and stop the revolts.

-Britain opposed this.

NB*Serious division amongst the great powers especially with Britian.This later
contributed to the collapse of the Congress system.

5.Laibach

-The great powers intervened on Spain.Troops were sent to stop these uprisings.

-Britain seriously opposed this.

-The congress system was doomed.

6.Congress of Verona.

a)Greek Revolts of 1822.

-Revolts took place in Turkey and Russia send troops to stop these revolts.

-This shocked Britian who had interest in Turkey .Britian wanted to safeguard the
Mediterranean and the Black sea.

-This led Britian to call for the London conference to discuss about the issue of Greece.

-Revolts were however stopped.

NB*Jealousy and Suspicious btw Britain and Russia.

-This later contributed to the collapse of the Congress system.

GREEK REVOLTS 1824.

-Revolts took place again in Greece, Turkey.

-Britain quickly intervened.

-Britain feared what Russia had earlier done.

-On this incident the other great powers were not invited.

-Britain thought the great powers were working together to frustrate her.

NB* Jealousy and Suspicion btw Britian and the other allied power.

-This again led to the collapse of the Congress system.

-France went on to send troops in Spain in 1825.

-This shocked Britain.

-Britain then went on to ally herself with USA formulating the Monroe doctrine.

NB*The concert of the Congress system was by no means dead.

7.The Congress of St Petersburg

-The great powers were heavily divided.

-It was only attended by few countries.

-The Congress system was dead.

OTHER FACTORS .

1.The Congress system didn't have a structure.

2.The founders of the Congress system were now dead.Those who succeeded them didn't
see the value of this Organization.

3.Different political ideologies btw Britian and the great powers.Britian had a constitutional
monarchy whilst the other countries had despotic rulers.

4.lgnorance of Nationalism and liberalism by the statesman on the Vienna Settlement.This

backfired on the Congress system.

5.Selfishness and Greedy amongst the great powers.

MUSO~

‪ 263 78 448 6903‬: QUESTIONS

[03/29, 20:54] +

1."Doomed from the start".How far true is this assertion about the Congress system.

2.To what extent did Britain non- interventionist policy led to the collapse of the Congress
system.

3."Jealousy and Suspicion led to the collapse of the Congress system".Discuss.

4.How successful was the Congress system in maintaining peace in Europe.

5.Assess the contribution of Russia in the collapse of the Congress system.

MUSO~

‪ 263 78 393 8044‬: Napoleon Bonaparte's downfall was inevitable How far true
[03/29, 21:16] +
z this assertion?

‪ 263 78 433 4616‬: twaz unavoidable in the sense tt.. the continental system
[03/29, 21:23] +
made Napo tu v many enemies including powerful countries like Britain..

‪ 263 71 574 2013‬: The downfall of napoleon was unavoidable because Of

[03/29, 22:06] +
formation of the third and forth coalition/Moscow campaign/the rise of nationalism eg in
Spain/his methods of fighting were all known by the enemies/he was defeated because of
new methods of fighting e.g gorilla tactic and scotched earth policy/it is believe that some
of the soldiers ran away from napoleon/peninsular war

‪ 263 78 448 6903‬: *"It was the abuse of the French people by the ancient
[03/30, 14:53] +
regime and not the ideas of the philosophers that caused the outbreak of the French
Revolution of 1789." Do you agree?*

To a greater extent the French Revolution of 1789 broke out as a result of the abuse of the
people by the ancient regime than it was caused by the influence of the philosophers. The
Bourbon Monarchy was despotic, authoritative and failed to legislate the rights of the
people. _Letters de cache_ in particular were abusive and repressed the liberties of the
Frenchmen. The whole political system was burdensome to the people. Nonetheless
philosopher played a little role in enlightening the people of their problems especially
those which were political.

*Points to note*

- The politico-social system which existed in France throughout the rule of the Valois and
Bourbon dynasties, was half way between feudalism and modernity. France was ruled by a
powerful absolute monarch who relied on the doctrine of the Divine Right of Kings. The
absolute monarchy had the explicit support of the established Church.

- The king claimed to rule by the will of God and not by the consent of the people (Theory of
the Divine Right of Kings). Thus, the kings claimed to be responsible to no one but God.
The French Kings ruled in an absolute manner. They exercised unlimited powers. They
were the chief legislators, executive and dispensers of justice.

- They imposed taxes and spent money as they pleased.

- They declared wars and made peace as they wished. This led to the unjusti fied death of
ordinary Frenchmen enlisted as soldiers in the army.

- The government denied certain basic rights to its subjects. Heavy censorship denied
freedom of speech and press. Arbitrary arrest, imprisonment, exile or even execution was
the hallmarks of the royal absolutism in France.

- Before Louis XVI there was Louis XV who was also known as the 'Sun King'. Louis XV
believed in the divine sanction of absolutism. He used to say “I am the State”. Further he
claimed: “The sovereign authority is vested in my person, the legislative powers exist in
myself alone…My people are one only with me; national rights and national interests are
necessarily combined with my own and only rest in my hands.” In order to manifest his
power and glory, Louis XIV exercised unlimited power.

- Philosophers in no way could they have greatly contributed to the outbreak of the
revolution as their messages was too 'philosophical' to be understood by the majority who
were uneducated and illiterate.

- By the time the revolution broke out most philosophers were dead or imprisoned so they
could not have contributed.

- More so, philosophers did not encourage a revolution by rather wanted reforms that were
implemented during the course of the revolution.

*'However side'*

- Philosophers awaken the majority especially the peasants who were not aware that they
were being abused.

- As apostles of enlightenment, philosophers were extremely critical of the Ancient

Regime. In their writings, the French philosophers discredited the old order and generated
optimism about the future. The philosophers introduced ideas such as constitutional
monarchy, republicanism, popular sovereignty and social equality and influenced the
course of the Revolution.

- Voltaire attacked the church and absolutism; Montesquieu made English

constitutionalism fashionable and advocated the Theory of Separation of Powers,
Rousseau promoted the Social Contract Theory through which he highlighted his concept
of popular sovereignty.

- In several ways the philosophers demonstrated the rottenness of the French institutions
through satire and wit, criticism and comparison, analogy, sociological theory and
downright abuse. The French philosophers challenged the tradition and authority of the
King. They believed that the Ancient Regime must go in order to bring about a better world.
The philosophers questioned the basis of authority that existed upon revelation (religion),
formulated new theories, aroused new enthusiasm and fixed new ideas for all mankind.
The philosophers were the standard bearers of a faith that spread from France throughout
the civilized world. While destroying the old order, they established the basis of a new
order.