How do you plan and write the 36-mark depth-study essay, building an argument on and from the prescribed ancient sources?
The 36-mark depth-study essay: building a sustained argument on and from the prescribed ancient sources, integrating source evaluation with analysis, ranking factors, and reaching a substantiated judgement that weighs the evidence.
An OCR A-Level Ancient History technique guide to the 36-mark depth-study essay. Explains how to build a sustained argument on and from the prescribed ancient sources, integrate source evaluation with analysis (AO1, AO2 and AO3), rank factors, and reach a substantiated judgement that weighs the evidence, with a worked example transferable to the Sparta and Late Republic depth studies.
Reviewed by: AI editorial process; not yet individually human-reviewed
Have a quick question? Jump to the Q&A page
Jump to a section
What this dot point is asking
The 36-mark depth-study essay is the single biggest question in the exam, the whole of Section B. This page teaches the transferable skill of planning and writing it: how to build a sustained argument on and from the prescribed ancient sources, integrate source evaluation with analysis (AO1, AO2 and AO3), rank factors, and reach a substantiated judgement that weighs the evidence. It is what separates a source-anchored argument from a narrative or a generic essay.
The answer
Decode the command and rank
The command and the ranking are the skeleton; the difference at depth-study level is that the flesh is evaluated source evidence.
Build the argument on and from the sources
The top-band skill is integration: source evaluation is woven into the argument (this source supports the claim, but it is biased in this way, so I weigh it thus), not parked in a separate paragraph "on the sources".
Reach a judgement that rests on the evidence
The conclusion must reach a judgement that rests on the evidence: which factor or view the sources best support, and why. Because the question often asks "how far do the sources support" a view, the judgement is explicitly a verdict on what the evidence shows, having weighed the sources' value and their conflicts. The judgement should be signalled in the introduction and earned through the source-anchored body.
Examples in context
A model answer argues from named sources and evaluates them within the argument, reaching a judgement on what the evidence shows.
Try this
Q1. Outline how you would plan a 36-mark essay on whether Octavian defeated Antony mainly through propaganda, using the prescribed sources. [10 marks, technique style]
- What the marker wants. A plan that decodes "how far", ranks propaganda against Octavian's control of the west and Agrippa's generalship, attaches the specific sources (Plutarch, Dio) to each factor, evaluates them (the pro-Augustan tradition), and reaches a judgement that rests on the evidence.
Q2. What is the defining difference between the depth essay and the period essay? [2 marks]
- Cue. The depth essay must build its argument on and from the prescribed ancient sources, with source evaluation (AO3) integrated into the analysis, whereas the period essay is mainly AO1 and AO2.
Exam-style practice questions
Practice questions written in the style of OCR exam questions on this dot point, with worked answer explainers. The year tag is the paper they imitate, not the source.
OCR H407 201920 marksAssess an interpretation of a depth-study topic, using the ancient sources. [generic depth essay, shown at the 20-mark cap; worth 36 in the full paper]Show worked answer →
A generic AO1, AO2 and AO3 depth essay, shown at the 20-mark cap (worth 36 in the full paper).
Plan. Decode the command (test a claim or rank factors and judge). Build the argument around the prescribed sources: each section makes a claim, supports it with specific source evidence, and evaluates that evidence.
Top-level move. Integrate source evaluation with the argument (not a separate paragraph on "the sources"), weigh where sources conflict, and reach a judgement that rests on the evidence. The full 36 marks reward sustained argument built on and from the sources.
OCR H407 202120 marks'A single named factor best explains a development in your depth study.' How far do the sources support this view? [generic depth essay, shown at the 20-mark cap; worth 36 in the full paper]Show worked answer →
A generic AO1, AO2 and AO3 depth essay, shown at the 20-mark cap (worth 36 in the full paper).
Plan. Identify the named factor and the rivals, and decide the ranking. For each, marshal the specific prescribed sources and evaluate them.
Structure. Argue the case for the named factor from the sources, weigh the rivals from the sources, evaluate where the sources conflict or are biased, and judge how far the claim holds. The top level sustains an argument built on evaluated source evidence.
Related dot points
- The 20-mark period-study essay: decoding the command, selecting and ranking the relevant factors, organising thematically, supporting with precise ancient detail, and structuring towards a substantiated judgement for AO1 and AO2.
An OCR A-Level Ancient History technique guide to the 20-mark period-study essay. Explains how to decode the command, select and rank the relevant factors, organise thematically, support with precise ancient detail, and structure the essay towards a substantiated judgement for AO1 and AO2, with a worked example transferable to the Greek and Roman period studies.
- The 12-mark source-utility question: reading the sources against the enquiry, weighing each source's provenance, grouping and comparing where there are several, testing against context, and reaching a judgement on usefulness for AO3.
An OCR A-Level Ancient History technique guide to the 12-mark source-utility question. Explains how to read the sources against the enquiry, weigh each source's provenance, group and compare several sources, test against contextual knowledge, and reach a judgement on usefulness for AO3, with a worked example transferable to the Greek and Roman topics.
- Exam timing and revision: how to divide the 2 hour 30 minute paper across the short answers, the 20-mark essay, the 12-mark source question and the 36-mark depth essay, and how to revise the content, the prescribed sources and the exam skills.
An OCR A-Level Ancient History technique guide to exam timing and revision. Explains how to divide the 2 hour 30 minute paper across the short answers, the 20-mark period essay, the 12-mark source-utility question and the 36-mark depth essay, and how to revise the content, the prescribed ancient sources and the exam skills efficiently.
- AO3 source skills: evaluating ancient sources for their utility to a stated enquiry, using content, provenance (nature, origin and purpose) and contextual knowledge, and reaching a judgement on usefulness rather than labelling a source reliable or biased.
An OCR A-Level Ancient History skills guide to evaluating ancient sources for the AO3 source-utility question. Explains how to judge a source's value for a stated enquiry using content, provenance and contextual knowledge, why utility is not the same as reliability, and how to reach a judgement, with a worked example transferable to Greek and Roman topics.
- The four assessment objectives: AO1 knowledge, AO2 analysis using second-order concepts, AO3 the use and evaluation of ancient sources, and AO4 the evaluation of modern interpretations, and how each question type in H407 targets them.
An OCR A-Level Ancient History skills guide to the four assessment objectives. Explains AO1 (knowledge), AO2 (analysis with second-order concepts), AO3 (the use and evaluation of ancient sources) and AO4 (the evaluation of modern interpretations), which AO each H407 question type targets, and how knowing the target AO shapes your answer.
Sources & how we know this
- OCR A Level Ancient History H407 specification — OCR (2017)