NOTE - LSAT passages are lengthy and complex ,and the corresponding questions are easy. This quirk is not what GMAC practices. GMAT is more like standard (not too complex) passage with HARD questions. But LSATs are good for complex practice , as in for main point and para functions.
anyways -
In England before 1660, a husband controlled his wife’s property. In the late seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, with the shift from land-based to commercial wealth, marriage began to incorporate certain features of a contract. Historian have traditionally argued that this trend represented a gain for women, one that reflects changing views about democracy and property following the English Restoration in 1660. Susan Staves contests this view; she argues that whatever gains marriage contracts may briefly have represented for women were undermined by judicial decisions about women’s contractual rights.
( historians claim - significant positive effect on women
Stave's claim - Not really. Infact it undermined even more)
Sifting (to go through especially to sort out what is useful or valuable “sifted the evidence” often used with through “sift through a pile of old letters”) through the tangled details of court cases, Staves demonstrates that, despite surface changes, a rhetoric of equality, and occasional decisions supporting women’s financial power, definitions of men’s and women’s property remained inconsistent—generally to women’s detriment. For example, dower lands (property inherited by wives after their husbands’ deaths) could not be sold, but “curtsey” property (inherited by husbands from their wives) could be sold. Furthermore, comparatively new concepts that developed in conjunction with the marriage contract, such as jointure, pin money (pin money: money given by a man to his wife for her own use), and separate maintenance, were compromised by peculiar rules. For instance, if a woman spent her pin money (money paid by the husband according to the marriage contract for wife’s personal items) on possessions other than clothes she could not sell them; in effect they belonged to her husband. In addition, a wife could sue for pin money only up to a year in arrears—which rendered a suit impractical. Similarly, separate maintenance allowances (stated sums of money for the wife’s support if husband and wife agreed to live apart) were complicated by the fact that if a couple tried to agree in a marriage contract on an amount, they were admitting that a supposedly indissoluble bond could be dissolved, an assumption courts could not recognize. Eighteenth-century historians underplayed these inconsistencies, calling them “little contrarieties” that would soon vanish. Staves shows, however, that as judges gained power over decisions on marriage contracts, they tended to fall back on pre-1660 assumptions about property.
(summary - explanation for stave's claim. contentions by stave ...
function of 2nd para - furthering the opposing claim made by stave in 1st para)
Staves’ work on women’s property has general implications for other studies about women in eighteenth-century England. Staves revised her previous claim that separate maintenance allowances proved the weakening of patriarchy; she now finds that an oversimplification. She also challenges the contention by historians Jeanne and Lawrence Stone that in the late eighteenth century wealthy men married widows less often than before because couples began marring for love rather than for financial reasons. Staves does not completely undermine their contention, but she does counter their assumption that widows had more money than never-married women. She points out that jointure property (a widow’s lifetime use of an amount of money specified in the marriage contract) was often lost on remarriage.
( summary - the first sentence of the last para is basically the main idea of last para... rest all that follows is a derivation of the main claim in last para.... implications stave;s work on other studies
function - providing further implications of stave's work )
1. Which one of the following best expresses the main idea of the passage?
(A) As notions of property and democracy changed in late seventeenth-and eighteenth-century England, marriage settlements began to incorporate contractual features designed to protect women’s property rights.- Seriously??? just the first line?? WRONGGGGG
B) Traditional historians have incorrectly identified the contractual features that were incorporated into marriage contracts in late seventeenth-and eighteenth-century England.- incorrectly indentified the features?? NO ... they overestimated the effect of features. Plus this is so narow...SOOOO WRONG
(C) The incorporation of contractual features into marriage settlements in late seventeen-and eighteenth-century England did not represent a significant gain of women.- CORRECT - the main claim made by stave which is supported in para 2.
(D) An examination of late seventeenth-and eighteenth-century English court cases indicates that most marriage settlements did not incorporate contractual features designed to protect women’s property rights.- This is in second para whose function is to support the MAIN claim made by stave... SOOO WRONG.
(E) Before marriage settlements incorporated contractual features protecting women’s property rights, women were unable to gain any financial power in England. - Talks about time before the implementation of contarctual features.. SOOOOO WRONG
you can feel the difference between GMAT and LSAT... a GMAT question has answer choices too close and are annoyingly hard to eliminate...