Pearson Edexcel A Level History Paper 2a 2025 Qp Pdf

Get the official Pearson Edexcel A-Level History Paper 2 Option 2A question paper from the June 2025 examination series (9HI0/2A) covering Anglo-Saxon England and the Anglo-Norman Kingdom, c1053–1106, and England and the Angevin Empire in the reign of Henry II, 1154–89. This examiner-issued PDF contains the complete original paper layout, all Section A source-analysis questions, Section B essay questions, and the official source booklet used in the live Summer 2025 examination.

This paper assesses major themes in medieval English history including the Battle of Hastings, Norman conquest, Henry II’s legal reforms, Church-state conflict, the Great Rebellion of 1173–74, Anglo-Saxon government, and Angevin royal authority. Questions cover Harold Godwinson’s defeat, William I and William Rufus’ relationship with the Church, the Assize of Clarendon, and Henry II’s attempts to control the Church. Pair it with the matching Edexcel 9HI0/2A June 2025 mark scheme on markscheme.net for complete examiner-standard revision and essay-marking practice. Updated for the 2025/2026 academic year, optimised for mobile and desktop, and instantly downloadable from markscheme.net — your fastest route to top-grade A-Level History revision.

This document is designed for Year 12 and Year 13 students preparing for the 2026 Pearson Edexcel A-Level History examinations, including retake candidates targeting A and A* grades, sixth-form learners, and home-educated students studying medieval England and Anglo-Norman political developments. It is especially valuable for students refining source evaluation, depth-study essays and analytical historical writing under timed exam conditions.

It is equally useful for teachers, private tutors, revision-course providers and parents supporting advanced History revision at home. The paper can be used to run timed mocks, assess understanding of Norman and Angevin England, practise source interpretation, standardise essay-marking approaches, and identify weaknesses in contextual analysis, judgement and historical argumentation.