Writing an analytical narrative account that selects relevant events, places them in order and explains how each event led to the next towards an outcome.

What this dot point is asking

The narrative account question (worth 8 marks on Paper 1) asks you to write a connected account of how a sequence of events unfolded. It is not a list: the marks come from linking events so the reader sees how one thing led to another towards an outcome.

Selecting and sequencing events

Pick three or four key events that drive the story forward. Use the two stimulus points the question gives you, then add at least one extra event of your own to show wider knowledge. Place them in strict chronological order, because a narrative account depends on the correct sequence of cause and effect. Choosing too many events leads to a thin list; three or four developed, linked events score best.

For example, a question asking you to "write an account of the ways in which Hitler's actions raised tension in Europe between 1935 and 1938" might be given two stimulus points such as rearmament and the Anschluss. A strong answer would add a third event of its own, the remilitarisation of the Rhineland in 1936, placed in order between them, so that the account becomes rearmament, then the Rhineland, then the Anschluss. The added event both shows wider knowledge and strengthens the causal chain, because the unopposed Rhineland gamble helps explain why Hitler dared to attempt the Anschluss. Choosing events that genuinely connect, rather than three unrelated facts, is what allows the analysis of links that the mark scheme rewards.

Linking events together

Aim for a clear opening event, a middle that shows escalation or development, and a final event that reaches the outcome named in the question. Anchor each step with precise detail (dates, names, places) so the analysis is well supported.

The connectives are doing the analytical work, so use them deliberately. Rather than writing "Hitler remilitarised the Rhineland in 1936. He then carried out the Anschluss in 1938", which is a list, write "Because France did nothing when Hitler remilitarised the Rhineland in 1936, his confidence grew, which in turn encouraged him to attempt the Anschluss with Austria in March 1938". The second version explains how one event led to the next. The same technique works in any topic: in the rise of the Nazis, the Wall Street Crash "led to" mass unemployment, which "as a result" drove voters to the extremes, so that the Nazi vote "consequently" rose sharply. A narrative account is judged on these explained connections, not on the number of facts you can fit in.

Try this

Q1. State how many events a good narrative account usually develops. [Knowledge recall]

• Cue. Three or four linked events, including the two stimulus points and at least one of your own.

Q2. Explain how a narrative account differs from a description. [Short explanation]

• Cue. A description lists events; a narrative account links them, explaining how each led to the next towards an outcome, which is what earns the marks.