GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

 It is currently 19 Jan 2019, 04:44

### GMAT Club Daily Prep

#### Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

## Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in January
PrevNext
SuMoTuWeThFrSa
303112345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
272829303112
Open Detailed Calendar
• ### Free GMAT Strategy Webinar

January 19, 2019

January 19, 2019

07:00 AM PST

09:00 AM PST

Aiming to score 760+? Attend this FREE session to learn how to Define your GMAT Strategy, Create your Study Plan and Master the Core Skills to excel on the GMAT.
• ### FREE Quant Workshop by e-GMAT!

January 20, 2019

January 20, 2019

07:00 AM PST

07:00 AM PST

Get personalized insights on how to achieve your Target Quant Score.

# Historian: The vast majority of scholars studying the American Civil

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Intern
Joined: 08 Sep 2014
Posts: 48
Concentration: Economics, Entrepreneurship
Schools: NUS '18
GMAT Date: 03-17-2015
Historian: The vast majority of scholars studying the American Civil  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Mar 2015, 01:06
2
25
00:00

Difficulty:

75% (hard)

Question Stats:

52% (02:31) correct 48% (01:39) wrong based on 1233 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Historian: The vast majority of scholars studying the American Civil War regard Confederate generals as superior to their Union counterparts. They also acknowledge that the Confederate soldier was, on average, more committed to the cause and, therefore, willing to fight harder than the Union soldier. However, most of these same scholars agree with my contention that when the Civil War began in 1861, it was already true that the Confederacy could not prevail without the intervention of a major foreign power such as Great Britain or France.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the historian's contention?

(A) Both the Confederate and Union troops started the war using similar single-shot muzzle-loading guns to which bayonets could be attached.

(B) The Confederacy had a greater proportion of officers who had attended the United States Military Academy at West Point and had served with distinction in the Mexican War.

(C) The Union had four times the total population of the Confederacy and most of the industrial manufacturing in North America.

(D) The Confederacy won several important victories early in the war and earned the respect of foreign leaders.

(E) By the end of the war in 1865, many Union soldiers were armed with the new Spencer repeating rifles that fired seven shots before reloading; the Confederate army continued to rely on slower, single-shot weapons for its soldiers.

This question asks for the answer choice that strengthens the contention that it was true at the start of the Civil War that the Confederacy could not have won without foreign intervention.

The correct answer is Choice C, because it provides two overwhelming Union advantages to counter the superior generals and more committed soldiers on the Confederate side. It is also a factor that was in place at the beginning of the war.

Choice E also provides a significant advantage to the Union, but this advantage was not in place at the beginning of the war as required by the historian's contention.

Choice A provides a factor that provides a similarity between the Confederate and Union forces.

Choice B gives a factor that might be considered another advantage for the Confederacy.

Choice D is irrelevant because it is not an advantage for either side, but just a report of the results earlier in the war.
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 52294
Re: Historian: The vast majority of scholars studying the American Civil  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Aug 2018, 23:19
rajthakkar wrote:
Historian: The vast majority of scholars studying the American Civil War regard Confederate generals as superior to their Union counterparts. They also acknowledge that the Confederate soldier was, on average, more committed to the cause and, therefore, willing to fight harder than the Union soldier. However, most of these same scholars agree with my contention that when the Civil War began in 1861, it was already true that the Confederacy could not prevail without the intervention of a major foreign power such as Great Britain or France.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the historian's contention?

A. Both the Confederate and Union troops started the war using similar single-shot muzzle-loading guns to which bayonets could be attached.

B. The Confederacy had a greater proportion of officers who had attended the United States Military Academy at West Point and had served with distinction in the Mexican War.

C. The Union had four times the total population of the Confederacy and most of the industrial manufacturing in North America.

D. The Confederacy won several important victories early in the war and earned the respect of foreign leaders.

E. By the end of the war in 1865, many Union soldiers were armed with the new Spencer repeating rifles that fired seven shots before reloading; the Confederate army continued to rely on slower, single-shot weapons for its soldiers.

VERITAS PREP OFFICIAL EXPLANATION:

(Don't get caught up in the terminology you do not need to know what the union and confederacy are...)

Explanation: This question asks for the answer choice that strengthens the contention that it was true at the start of the Civil War in 1861 - that the Confederacy could not have won without foreign intervention. This is despite the fact that the Confederacy had advantages in troops being more committed and in having better generals. What is needed is a very strong advantage for the union that will counter this and in fact help explain the union victory.

The correct answer is Choice C, because it provides two overwhelming Union advantages to counter the superior generals and more committed soldiers on the Confederate side. It is also a factor that was in place at the beginning of the war. This answer is saying that the Union had four times as many people and nearly all of the manufacturing.

Choice E also provides a significant advantage to the Union, but this advantage was not in place at the beginning of the war as required by the historian’s contention.

Choice A provides a factor that provides a similarity between the Confederate and Union forces and so could not explain why the Confederates would need help in order to win.

Choice B gives a factor that might be considered another advantage for the Confederacy.

Choice D is irrelevant because it is not an advantage for either side but just a report of the results earlier in the war.
_________________
##### General Discussion
Director
Joined: 07 Aug 2011
Posts: 533
GMAT 1: 630 Q49 V27
Re: Historian: The vast majority of scholars studying the American Civil  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Mar 2015, 01:51
2
rajthakkar wrote:
Historian: The vast majority of scholars studying the American Civil War regard Confederate generals as superior to their Union counterparts. They also acknowledge that the Confederate soldier was, on average, more committed to the cause and, therefore, willing to fight harder than the Union soldier. However, most of these same scholars agree with my contention that when the Civil War began in 1861, it was already true that the Confederacy could not prevail without the intervention of a major foreign power such as Great Britain or France.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the historian's contention?

a) Both the Confederate and Union troops started the war using similar single-shot muzzle-loading guns to which bayonets could be attached.
b) The Confederacy had a greater proportion of officers who had attended the United States Military Academy at West Point and had served with distinction in the Mexican War.
c) The Union had four times the total population of the Confederacy and most of the industrial manufacturing in North America.
d) The Confederacy won several important victories early in the war and earned the respect of foreign leaders.
e) By the end of the war in 1865, many Union soldiers were armed with the new Spencer repeating rifles that fired seven shots before reloading; the Confederate army continued to rely on slower, single-shot weapons for its soldiers.

First lets sort out that what is contention 'Scholars are saying C were better than U' , our historian is saying that 'C were helped by major foreign power' and most of the scholars agree to this .

a) Both the Confederate and Union troops started the war using similar single-shot muzzle-loading guns to which bayonets could be attached.
---this is just another fact . it is not strengthening the historian contention.
b) The Confederacy had a greater proportion of officers who had attended the United States Military Academy at West Point and had served with distinction in the Mexican War.
--- This one too does not supports the historian's contention.
c) The Union had four times the total population of the Confederacy and most of the industrial manufacturing in North America.
---this looks promising , as this stmt tells us that most of the C were less in number and U were more and so C would not have prevailed without help of foreign power.
d) The Confederacy won several important victories early in the war and earned the respect of foreign leaders.
---this one is very tricky (atleast for me) and here is my reasoning , C had earned respect of foreign leaders , when would this happen when C were fighting alone or were helped by Foreign Power .
C would earn more respect when former is the case i.e. they were fighting without foreign help. however historian days that they were helped by foreign powers and this is his contention.
so this is also a wrong choice.
e) By the end of the war in 1865, many Union soldiers were armed with the new Spencer repeating rifles that fired seven shots before reloading; the Confederate army continued to rely on slower, single-shot weapons for its soldiers.
---Ok . So C were using slower single shot guns, how come they were helped by foreign powers ? this is easy to out option.

Suggestions and discussions on above reasoning are welcome.
Thanks
Lucky

consider +1 kudo if you like this post.
Intern
Joined: 08 Sep 2014
Posts: 48
Concentration: Economics, Entrepreneurship
Schools: NUS '18
GMAT Date: 03-17-2015
Re: Historian: The vast majority of scholars studying the American Civil  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Mar 2015, 04:55
Lucky2783 wrote:
rajthakkar wrote:
Historian: The vast majority of scholars studying the American Civil War regard Confederate generals as superior to their Union counterparts. They also acknowledge that the Confederate soldier was, on average, more committed to the cause and, therefore, willing to fight harder than the Union soldier. However, most of these same scholars agree with my contention that when the Civil War began in 1861, it was already true that the Confederacy could not prevail without the intervention of a major foreign power such as Great Britain or France.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the historian's contention?

a) Both the Confederate and Union troops started the war using similar single-shot muzzle-loading guns to which bayonets could be attached.
b) The Confederacy had a greater proportion of officers who had attended the United States Military Academy at West Point and had served with distinction in the Mexican War.
c) The Union had four times the total population of the Confederacy and most of the industrial manufacturing in North America.
d) The Confederacy won several important victories early in the war and earned the respect of foreign leaders.
e) By the end of the war in 1865, many Union soldiers were armed with the new Spencer repeating rifles that fired seven shots before reloading; the Confederate army continued to rely on slower, single-shot weapons for its soldiers.

First lets sort out that what is contention 'Scholars are saying C were better than U' , our historian is saying that 'C were helped by major foreign power' and most of the scholars agree to this .

a) Both the Confederate and Union troops started the war using similar single-shot muzzle-loading guns to which bayonets could be attached.
---this is just another fact . it is not strengthening the historian contention.
b) The Confederacy had a greater proportion of officers who had attended the United States Military Academy at West Point and had served with distinction in the Mexican War.
--- This one too does not supports the historian's contention.
c) The Union had four times the total population of the Confederacy and most of the industrial manufacturing in North America.
---this looks promising , as this stmt tells us that most of the C were less in number and U were more and so C would not have prevailed without help of foreign power.
d) The Confederacy won several important victories early in the war and earned the respect of foreign leaders.
---this one is very tricky (atleast for me) and here is my reasoning , C had earned respect of foreign leaders , when would this happen when C were fighting alone or were helped by Foreign Power .
C would earn more respect when former is the case i.e. they were fighting without foreign help. however historian days that they were helped by foreign powers and this is his contention.
so this is also a wrong choice.
e) By the end of the war in 1865, many Union soldiers were armed with the new Spencer repeating rifles that fired seven shots before reloading; the Confederate army continued to rely on slower, single-shot weapons for its soldiers.
---Ok . So C were using slower single shot guns, how come they were helped by foreign powers ? this is easy to out option.

Suggestions and discussions on above reasoning are welcome.
Thanks
Lucky

consider +1 kudo if you like this post.

I am non native and dont know much about american civil war....so my question is that how can we assume that all the population was involved in war?
consider this scenario....If the contenders have less population but more soldiers than the union hs....then???
Director
Joined: 07 Aug 2011
Posts: 533
GMAT 1: 630 Q49 V27
Re: Historian: The vast majority of scholars studying the American Civil  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Mar 2015, 05:13
I dont think we are talking about entire population.
there were two soldier groups U and C where U=4C and U contains more people from industry .

Posted from my mobile device
Intern
Joined: 17 Jun 2013
Posts: 27
Re: Historian: The vast majority of scholars studying the American Civil  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Mar 2015, 08:31
rajthakkar wrote:
Historian: The vast majority of scholars studying the American Civil War regard Confederate generals as superior to their Union counterparts. They also acknowledge that the Confederate soldier was, on average, more committed to the cause and, therefore, willing to fight harder than the Union soldier. However, most of these same scholars agree with my contention that when the Civil War began in 1861, it was already true that the Confederacy could not prevail without the intervention of a major foreign power such as Great Britain or France.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the historian's contention?

a) Both the Confederate and Union troops started the war using similar single-shot muzzle-loading guns to which bayonets could be attached.
b) The Confederacy had a greater proportion of officers who had attended the United States Military Academy at West Point and had served with distinction in the Mexican War.
c) The Union had four times the total population of the Confederacy and most of the industrial manufacturing in North America.
d) The Confederacy won several important victories early in the war and earned the respect of foreign leaders.
e) By the end of the war in 1865, many Union soldiers were armed with the new Spencer repeating rifles that fired seven shots before reloading; the Confederate army continued to rely on slower, single-shot weapons for its soldiers.

Does not this question require little knowledge of civil war?Its getting difficult for me to comprehend fully as I am a non-native.

I have no knowledge of the civil war and didn't find this question difficult. The passage starts and praises the confederate troops throughout until the last sentence.
The "However" signals a contrast is coming and the last sentence basically says that the confederate could not win the war without the help of the union.

So to strengthen this question, I was looking for an answer that further explains why the confederacy couldn't win without the union's help.

A) & E) are details
D) Weakener, praises the confederacy

Ans: C) the only choice that shows the power of the union in respect to the confederacy
Manager
Joined: 17 Jun 2015
Posts: 208
GMAT 1: 540 Q39 V26
GMAT 2: 680 Q46 V37
Re: Historian: The vast majority of scholars studying the American Civil  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Sep 2015, 01:29
1
A,B and D are off.
Between C and E.

C shows the superiority of the Union Soldiers. E shows the superiority of the rifles. Hence, C.
_________________

Fais de ta vie un rêve et d'un rêve une réalité

Manager
Joined: 07 Apr 2015
Posts: 164
Re: Historian: The vast majority of scholars studying the American Civil  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Sep 2015, 00:38
1
E refers to the end of the war. However the argument talks about the beginning of the war. So clearly insufficient. A,B,D are simply out of scope or weaken the argument, hence C is the only remaining and therefore the correct choice.
Intern
Joined: 01 Nov 2015
Posts: 36
Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, Entrepreneurship
WE: Engineering (Computer Software)
Re: Historian: The vast majority of scholars studying the American Civil  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Nov 2015, 09:40
1
E and C were both Strong contenders, but with E the time period is 1865 and the author is saying that it was clear in 1861 itself the Confederates were at a disadvantage against union

With C, I was thinking about the population factor as well. But, on the second part, we are told that most of the industrial manufacturing stayed with Union. So, even if the soldiers are superior, without proper equipment, they would be at a disadvantage and help from foreign nations regarding this would improve their chances...
Senior Manager
Status: Always try to face your worst fear because nothing GOOD comes easy. You must be UNCOMFORTABLE to get to your COMFORT ZONE
Joined: 15 Aug 2014
Posts: 286
Concentration: Marketing, Technology
GMAT 1: 570 Q44 V25
GMAT 2: 600 Q48 V25
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Re: Historian: The vast majority of scholars studying the American Civil  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Apr 2016, 07:20
rajthakkar wrote:
Historian: The vast majority of scholars studying the American Civil War regard Confederate generals as superior to their Union counterparts. They also acknowledge that the Confederate soldier was, on average, more committed to the cause and, therefore, willing to fight harder than the Union soldier. However, most of these same scholars agree with my contention that when the Civil War began in 1861, it was already true that the Confederacy could not prevail without the intervention of a major foreign power such as Great Britain or France.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the historian's contention?

a) Both the Confederate and Union troops started the war using similar single-shot muzzle-loading guns to which bayonets could be attached.
b) The Confederacy had a greater proportion of officers who had attended the United States Military Academy at West Point and had served with distinction in the Mexican War.
c) The Union had four times the total population of the Confederacy and most of the industrial manufacturing in North America.
d) The Confederacy won several important victories early in the war and earned the respect of foreign leaders.
e) By the end of the war in 1865, many Union soldiers were armed with the new Spencer repeating rifles that fired seven shots before reloading; the Confederate army continued to rely on slower, single-shot weapons for its soldiers.

Dear experts,

Please explain why option C is correct but not E
_________________

"When you want to succeed as bad as you want to breathe, then you’ll be successful.” - Eric Thomas

I need to work on timing badly!!

Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Sep 2014
Posts: 345
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
Re: Historian: The vast majority of scholars studying the American Civil  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Aug 2016, 22:32
Historian: The vast majority of scholars studying the American Civil War regard Confederate generals as superior to their Union counterparts. They also acknowledge that the Confederate soldier was, on average, more committed to the cause and, therefore, willing to fight harder than the Union soldier. However, most of these same scholars agree with my contention that when the Civil War began in 1861, it was already true that the Confederacy could not prevail without the intervention of a major foreign power such as Great Britain or France.

Two type of soldier
Confederate soldier & Union soldier

Contention : Confederacy could not prevail without the intervention of a major foreign power such as Great Britain or France.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the historian's contention?

c) The Union had four times the total population of the Confederacy and most of the industrial manufacturing in North America.

e) By the end of the war in 1865, many Union soldiers were armed with the new Spencer repeating rifles that fired seven shots before reloading; the Confederate army continued to rely on slower, single-shot weapons for its soldiers.
Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Sep 2014
Posts: 345
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
Re: Historian: The vast majority of scholars studying the American Civil  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Aug 2016, 22:33
sairam595 wrote:
rajthakkar wrote:
Historian: The vast majority of scholars studying the American Civil War regard Confederate generals as superior to their Union counterparts. They also acknowledge that the Confederate soldier was, on average, more committed to the cause and, therefore, willing to fight harder than the Union soldier. However, most of these same scholars agree with my contention that when the Civil War began in 1861, it was already true that the Confederacy could not prevail without the intervention of a major foreign power such as Great Britain or France.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the historian's contention?

a) Both the Confederate and Union troops started the war using similar single-shot muzzle-loading guns to which bayonets could be attached.
b) The Confederacy had a greater proportion of officers who had attended the United States Military Academy at West Point and had served with distinction in the Mexican War.
c) The Union had four times the total population of the Confederacy and most of the industrial manufacturing in North America.
d) The Confederacy won several important victories early in the war and earned the respect of foreign leaders.
e) By the end of the war in 1865, many Union soldiers were armed with the new Spencer repeating rifles that fired seven shots before reloading; the Confederate army continued to rely on slower, single-shot weapons for its soldiers.

Dear experts,

Please explain why option C is correct but not E

E is wrong because of "By the end of the war in 1865" while we have to prove that When the Civil War began in 1861, it was already true that the Confederacy could not prevail without the intervention of a major foreign power such as Great Britain or France.
Manager
Joined: 27 Aug 2015
Posts: 85
Re: Historian: The vast majority of scholars studying the American Civil  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Feb 2017, 00:45
I'm not able to understand what exactly we need to strengthen?
Retired Moderator
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 2911
Location: Germany
Schools: German MBA
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
Re: Historian: The vast majority of scholars studying the American Civil  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Feb 2017, 04:55
rakaisraka wrote:
I'm not able to understand what exactly we need to strengthen?

The historian is the speaker, and he says, "my contention that when the Civil War began in 1861, it was already true that the Confederacy could not prevail without the intervention of a major foreign power such as Great Britain or France."

Therefore the contention that needs to be strengthened is "when the Civil War began in 1861, it was already true that the Confederacy could not prevail without the intervention of a major foreign power such as Great Britain or France."
Manager
Joined: 27 Aug 2015
Posts: 85
Re: Historian: The vast majority of scholars studying the American Civil  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Feb 2017, 05:47
sayantanc2k wrote:
rakaisraka wrote:
I'm not able to understand what exactly we need to strengthen?

The historian is the speaker, and he says, "my contention that when the Civil War began in 1861, it was already true that the Confederacy could not prevail without the intervention of a major foreign power such as Great Britain or France."

Therefore the contention that needs to be strengthened is "when the Civil War began in 1861, it was already true that the Confederacy could not prevail without the intervention of a major foreign power such as Great Britain or France."

Thanks , can you please suggest how option C strengthens?
Retired Moderator
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 2911
Location: Germany
Schools: German MBA
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
Re: Historian: The vast majority of scholars studying the American Civil  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Feb 2017, 10:02
1
rakaisraka wrote:
sayantanc2k wrote:
rakaisraka wrote:
I'm not able to understand what exactly we need to strengthen?

The historian is the speaker, and he says, "my contention that when the Civil War began in 1861, it was already true that the Confederacy could not prevail without the intervention of a major foreign power such as Great Britain or France."

Therefore the contention that needs to be strengthened is "when the Civil War began in 1861, it was already true that the Confederacy could not prevail without the intervention of a major foreign power such as Great Britain or France."

Thanks , can you please suggest how option C strengthens?

Conclusion: The Confederacy could not prevail without the intervention of a major foreign power such as Great Britain or France.

As option C states, if the Union had four times the population of Confederacy, Confederacy would be outnumbered unless it is supported by some other form of power (foreign power). Thus option C strengthens the conclusion: it would be difficult for Confederacy to prevail unless adequate (foreign) support to compensate for its lower population was available.
BSchool Forum Moderator
Joined: 28 Mar 2017
Posts: 1219
Location: India
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V41
GPA: 4
Re: Historian: The vast majority of scholars studying the American Civil  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Nov 2017, 11:37
Historian: The vast majority of scholars studying the American Civil War regard Confederate generals as superior to their Union counterparts. They also acknowledge that the Confederate soldier was, on average, more committed to the cause and, therefore, willing to fight harder than the Union soldier. However, most of these same scholars agree with my contention that when the Civil War began in 1861, it was already true that the Confederacy could not prevail without the intervention of a major foreign power such as Great Britain or France.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the historian's contention?

a) Both the Confederate and Union troops started the war using similar single-shot muzzle-loading guns to which bayonets could be attached. -Out of scope
b) The Confederacy had a greater proportion of officers who had attended the United States Military Academy at West Point and had served with distinction in the Mexican War. -This weakens the argument
c) The Union had four times the total population of the Confederacy and most of the industrial manufacturing in North America. -Correct
d) The Confederacy won several important victories early in the war and earned the respect of foreign leaders. -Earning respect doesn't tell us as to why Confederacy required foreign support
e) By the end of the war in 1865, many Union soldiers were armed with the new Spencer repeating rifles that fired seven shots before reloading; the Confederate army continued to rely on slower, single-shot weapons for its soldiers. -The conclusion is in respect to "even before the civil war started". So 1965, a much later time period, is out of scope
_________________
RC Moderator
Joined: 24 Aug 2016
Posts: 637
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Operations
GMAT 1: 630 Q48 V28
GMAT 2: 540 Q49 V16
Re: Historian: The vast majority of scholars studying the American Civil  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Aug 2018, 16:04
aroraishita02 wrote:
Historian: The vast majority of scholars studying the American Civil War regard Confederate generals as superior to their Union counterparts. They also acknowledge that the Confederate soldier was, on average, more committed to the cause and, therefore, willing to fight harder than the Union soldier. However, most of these same scholars agree with my contention that when the Civil War began in 1861, it was already true that the Confederacy could not prevail without the intervention of a major foreign power such as Great Britain or France.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the historian's contention?

A. Both the Confederate and Union troops started the war using similar single-shot muzzle-loading guns to which bayonets could be attached.
B. The Confederacy had a greater proportion of officers who had attended the United States Military Academy at West Point and had served with distinction in the Mexican War.
C. The Union had four times the total population of the Confederacy and most of the industrial manufacturing in North America.
D. The Confederacy won several important victories early in the war and earned the respect of foreign leaders.
E. By the end of the war in 1865, many Union soldiers were armed with the new Spencer repeating rifles that fired seven shots before reloading; the Confederate army continued to rely on slower, single-shot weapons for its soldiers.

Background: Confed is superior to Union for reason 1 & 2.
Conclusion : Still for a victory , foreign intervention was required.

Thoughts : There must be some reason where cofed< union. Thus, the foreign intervention was required in favour of cofed to make them stronger than the other.

Option 01 : Incorrect : C & U both used same weapon => same strength..... so more a neutral point towards the argument.
Option 02 : Incorrect : C > U in terms of experience => C stronger ...... so weakening the argument.
Option 04 : Incorrect : C > U in terms of experience and/or history => C stronger ...... so weakening the argument.
Option 05 : Incorrect : Completely out of scope , as it talks about the type of weapon used after the war by the two mentioned parties.

Option 03 : Correct : U>C .... in terms of 1.number & 2. access to industrial mfg =>U stronger ...... so strengthening the argument....... Hence [color=#00a651]Answer C[/color].
_________________

Please let me know if I am going in wrong direction.
Thanks in appreciation.

Director
Joined: 08 Jun 2013
Posts: 539
Location: France
GMAT 1: 200 Q1 V1
GPA: 3.82
WE: Consulting (Other)
Re: Historian: The vast majority of scholars studying the American Civil  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Aug 2018, 04:09
This question asks for the answer choice that strengthens the contention that it was true at the start of the Civil War that the Confederacy could not have won without foreign intervention. The correct answer is Choice C, because it provides two overwhelming Union advantages to counter the superior generals and more committed soldiers on the Confederate side. It is also a factor that was in place at the beginning of the war. Choice E also provides a significant advantage to the Union, but this advantage was not in place at the beginning of the war as required by the historian's contention. Choice A provides a factor that provides a similarity between the Confederate and Union forces. Choice B gives a factor that might be considered another advantage for the Confederacy. Choice D is irrelevant because it is not an advantage for either side, but just a report of the results earlier in the war.
_________________

Everything will fall into place…

There is perfect timing for
everything and everyone.
Never doubt, But Work on
improving yourself,
Keep the faith and
It will all make sense.

Manager
Status: IF YOU CAN DREAM IT, YOU CAN DO IT
Joined: 03 Jul 2017
Posts: 199
Location: India
Re: Historian: The vast majority of scholars studying the American Civil  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Aug 2018, 23:12
mikemcgarry can you please help me with this question . The conclusion of the argument is that the CG was more superior than the union counter parts and so we have to strengthen this conclusion. But its hard to understand why option C which talks about the UC is the correct answer
Re: Historian: The vast majority of scholars studying the American Civil &nbs [#permalink] 22 Aug 2018, 23:12

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 23 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by