Most business historians give the impression that Marseilles, a French

Question

Most business historians give the impression that Marseilles, a French Mediterranean city, was in dire economic straits from 1700 to 1715, when France was at war in the Mediterranean area. Their conclusions are based partly on a documented 30 percent decline in revenue generated by the  cottimo , an import tax collected on the cargo of ships returning to Marseilles from various Middle Eastern ports. The decline in revenue from this particular tax could hypothetically have been caused by a massive drop in levels of commercial activity in Marseilles. However, during the war years Marseilles' role as a grain importer grew, and most foodstuffs had always been—and remained—exempt from the tax. Also, due to a shift in trading patterns caused by the war, the city's merchants did more business with those Middle Eastern cities on whose trade the  cottimo  had always been collected at a lower rate. Moreover, during this period, a change occurred in the thinking of Marseilles merchants, who, in response to the war's challenges, displayed a new sense of daring. They sent some ships outside the Mediterranean and began to engage in trade in the Atlantic and Pacific. This was significant, since the  cottimo  was collected only on goods entering the city from Mediterranean ports in the Middle East.
   1 
 1. The primary purpose of the passage is to

A. correct a misimpression about the conclusions actually drawn by most business historians
B. challenge the interpretation of a piece of evidence on which certain business historians have based their conclusions
C. suggest the effects of a particular historical event on a city's commerce
D. explain why scholars, on the basis of information available to them, ought to have reached certain conclusions about trade
E. argue that, contrary to widespread belief, certain changes in trading patterns actually are signs of economic expansion

2 
 2. According to the author, most business historians see the decrease in  cottimo  revenues in Marseilles as providing evidence of which of the following?

A. A decline in the city's economy
B. A change in entrepreneurial thinking
C. A shift in Mediterranean patterns of trade
D. An increase in trade outside the Mediterranean
E. A drop in the amount of goods imported for later reexport

3 
 3. If the information in the passage is accurate, which of the following must be concluded?

A. Most business historians are wrong in believing that France's war in the Mediterranean had adverse effects on commercial activity in the Mediterranean.
B. The decline in tax revenues in Marseilles during the period 1700–1715 was only temporary, since it was due to short-term shifts in trade patterns.
C. Merchants in Marseilles paid less in total taxes to the city during the period 1700–1715 than they did in earlier periods.
D. Decreases in  cottimo  revenue in Marseilles during the period 1700–1715 do not necessarily indicate concurrent decreases in the city's overall commercial activity.
E. Losses in Marseilles due to shifts in trading patterns in the Mediterranean during the period 1700–1715 were adequately balanced by the expansion of the city's trade in other areas of the world.

Source: Skills Insight

GMATNinja · Accepted Answer

Question 1 
 
Let's start by breaking down the passage:

The author begins by presenting a conclusion held by most business historians: that Marseille was in "dire economic straits from 1700 to 1715."   Next, we are told why the historians believe this: because there was a 30% decline in the cottimo.   Finally, we are given three reasons why economic activity might not have fallen  despite  the fact that the cottimo fell (i.e. basically, because imports grew from items that were not subject to the cottimo tax).

Let's now consider the question and answer choice (A):

The author does seem to want to correct something. But is it a "misimpression about the conclusions" drawn by historians? Not really.

Keep in mind, the author is attacking the  basis  of certain historians' conclusions. In other words, the author isn't trying to correct a "misimpression" about the conclusion  itself  that Marseille was in "dire economic straits." Rather, the author objects to the idea that a fall in the cottimo  supports  this conclusion. As the author points out, even if the cottimo fell, imports could have gone up. Eliminate (A).

Consider (B):

Let's start by relating the above statement to the passage. The "conclusion" of historians is that "Marseille was in dire economic straits." The "piece of evidence" is the decline of the cottimo. The "interpretation" of this piece of evidence is that it supports the conclusion that Marseille was in "dire economic straits." How well does that match the passage?

Pretty well. The author is mainly concerned with attacking the idea that the fall in the cottimo really indicates "dire economic straits." In fact, the author thinks that imports could have gone up, even if the cottimo fell. So it makes sense to say the author is challenging the "interpretation of a piece of evidence."

For that reason, (B) is correct.

I hope that helps!

Taulark1 · Answer

1. The primary purpose of the passage is to

A. correct a misimpression about the conclusions actually drawn by most business historians
- Its not a misimpression , the historians didn't wrongly interpret , they did what they needed to. Its just that the passage is suggesting that what the evidence indicates might not be that serious of a situation as the historians are exaggerating.
B. challenge the interpretation of a piece of evidence on which certain business historians have based their conclusions
- Yes, The passage challenges the historians interpretation of the evidence . (i.e it's not as bad as they think it to be)
C. suggest the effects of a particular historical event on a city's commerce
- The passage's primary concern is not to tell us about the effects of the war on citys commerce. It is to tell us that the situation what the historians interpret isn't as bad as they think it to be
D. explain why scholars, on the basis of information available to them, ought to have reached certain conclusions about trade
- The passage isn't telling us why the scholars have reached their conclusion.
E. argue that, contrary to widespread belief, certain changes in trading patterns actually are signs of economic expansion
- The passage isn't saying that these changes are signs of economic expansion , nor is it saying that this a widespread belief

3. If the information in the passage is accurate, which of the following must be concluded?

A. Most business historians are wrong in believing that France's war in the Mediterranean had adverse effects on commercial activity in the Mediterranean.
- No , they aren't wrong in believing that the war had adverse effects(it can have adverse effects). They are wrong in believing that the war had such adverse effects that Marseilles was in dire economic straits. [Again , its not as bad as they think it to be]
B. The decline in tax revenues in Marseilles during the period 1700–1715 was only temporary, since it was due to short-term shifts in trade patterns.
- We don't know if decline in tax revenues was temporary or permanent. Again what tax revenues are we talking about ? import tax, total tax?
C. Merchants in Marseilles paid less in total taxes to the city during the period 1700–1715 than they did in earlier periods.
- No mention about the TOTAL taxes, nor mention about the earlier period taxes
D. Decreases in cottimo revenue in Marseilles during the period 1700–1715 do not necessarily indicate concurrent decreases in the city's overall commercial activity.
- Exactly what the passage is talking about

E. Losses in Marseilles due to shifts in trading patterns in the Mediterranean during the period 1700–1715 were adequately balanced by the expansion of the city's trade in other areas of the world.
- Yes , trade did expand , but losses were BALANCED ?? , if it were balanced , then why would marseilles be in economically bad situtation

E. Losses in Marseilles due to shifts in trading patterns in the Mediterranean during the period 1700–1715 were adequately balanced by the expansion of the city's trade in other areas of the world. - Yes , trade did expand , but losses were BALANCED ?? , if it were balanced , then why would marseilles be in economically bad situtation

jabhatta2 · Answer

For Question 1 - i dont think 1 (b) is right

In (B) - When you read the red - isnt the red talking about the  hypothetical  view ?

If the red is talking about the  hypothetical  view - then the purple doesnt make sense

Why ? because we dont know how many business historians believe in the  hypothetical  view

The author brings up the  hypothetical  view -- but do historians believe in the 2nd  hypothetical  view ?

Most business historians believe in the  1st view    but the passage never mentions if business historians believe in the  2nd view  at all ?

VerbalNote · Answer

GMATNinja  Please elaborate option A and B for question 1

singhaz · Answer

Most business historians give the impression that Marseilles, a French Mediterranean city, was in dire economic straits from 1700 to 1715, when France was at war in the Mediterranean area. Their conclusions are based partly on a documented 30 percent decline in revenue generated by the cottimo, an import tax collected on the cargo of ships returning to Marseilles from various Middle Eastern ports. The decline in revenue from this particular tax could hypothetically have been caused by a massive drop in levels of commercial activity in Marseilles. However, during the war years Marseilles' role as a grain importer grew, and most foodstuffs had always been—and remained—exempt from the tax. Also, due to a shift in trading patterns caused by the war, the city's merchants did more business with those Middle Eastern cities on whose trade the cottimo had always been collected at a lower rate. Moreover, during this period, a change occurred in the thinking of Marseilles merchants, who, in response to the war's challenges, displayed a new sense of daring. They sent some ships outside the Mediterranean and began to engage in trade in the Atlantic and Pacific. This was significant, since the cottimo was collected only on goods entering the city from Mediterranean ports in the Middle East.

Summary: Many business historians believe Marseilles a French Mediterranean city was in difficult economic situations from 1700 to 1715 because of french war in Mediterranean sea as during this period revenue from import tax on cargo ships was declined 30 percent. This decline could be the result of decline in commercial activity. In contrast, Marseilles imported more grain and also most foodstuffs had remain exempt from import tax. Also, because of war, city merchants do more trade with middle eastern cities with whom import tax (cottimo) had always been low. Also Marseilles merchants tried to do trade with atlantic and pcific region & since import tax was collected on goods entering from Mediterranean ports, this also can have a significant impact on tax collected.
 
1. The primary purpose of the passage is to

A. correct a misimpression about the conclusions actually drawn by most business historians
It will be misimpression if it tries to draw conclusion only from the information without changing the interpretation.
 B. challenge the interpretation of a piece of evidence on which certain business historians have based their conclusions
Correct: Evidence was decrease in import tax based on which conclusion was made which was corrected in passage. 
C. suggest the effects of a particular historical event on a city's commerce
D. explain why scholars, on the basis of information available to them, ought to have reached certain conclusions about trade
E. argue that, contrary to widespread belief, certain changes in trading patterns actually are signs of economic expansion

2. According to the author, most business historians see the decrease in cottimo revenues in Marseilles as providing evidence of which of the following?

A. A decline in the city's economy
correct: Most business historians give the impression that Marseilles, a French Mediterranean city, was in dire economic straits
 B. A change in entrepreneurial thinking
C. A shift in Mediterranean patterns of trade
D. An increase in trade outside the Mediterranean
E. A drop in the amount of goods imported for later reexport

3. If the information in the passage is accurate, which of the following must be concluded?

A. Most business historians are wrong in believing that France's war in the Mediterranean had adverse effects on commercial activity in the Mediterranean.
It has effects thats why merchants tried to sent ships to atlantic & pacific and also revenue was declined as mentioned "The decline in revenue from this particular tax could hypothetically have been caused by a massive drop in levels of commercial activity in Marseilles"
B. The decline in tax revenues in Marseilles during the period 1700–1715 was only temporary, since it was due to short-term shifts in trade patterns.
Not mentioned.
C. Merchants in Marseilles paid less in total taxes to the city during the period 1700–1715 than they did in earlier periods.
Not mentioned about earlier periods.
 D. Decreases in cottimo revenue in Marseilles during the period 1700–1715 do not necessarily indicate concurrent decreases in the city's overall commercial activity.
correct: As most foodstuffs are exempted, hence decrease in cottimo revenue in Marseilles during the period 1700–1715 do not necessarily indicate concurrent decreases in the city's overall commercial activity 
E. Losses in Marseilles due to shifts in trading patterns in the Mediterranean during the period 1700–1715 were adequately balanced by the expansion of the city's trade in other areas of the world.

manish8242 · Answer

I did not get the 3rd Q. it is mentioned in the passage that the tax revenue decreased by 30%. So we can say that tax revenue indeed decreased from the previous period.

GMATNinja · Answer

Question 3 
 
All we know is that there was a 30 percent decline in revenue generated by the   cottimo  . The cottimo is a very specific tax: "an import tax collected on the cargo of ships returning to Marseilles from various Middle Eastern ports."

We have no idea what OTHER taxes were paid by merchants in Marseilles during that time. If those other taxes went up, then it's possible that the TOTAL tax paid by the merchants also went up, even though the cottimo amount decreased. That's enough to rule out (C).

Also, the passage isn't very clear about when the 30 percent drop occurred. Does this mean that the 1715 cottimo revenue was 30 percent less than the 1700 cottimo revenue? Or that the cottimo revenue from 1700 to 1715 was 30 percent lower than the previous 15 years? Something else?

It isn't clear, and neither is the wording of choice (C): the word "periods" is plural, so what past periods is it referring to? These are additional reasons to eliminate (C).

The entire passage is dedicated to explaining why (D) is true, so that's a much better answer.

Most business historians give the impression that Marseilles, a French

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Reading Comprehension (RC) Questions

Most business historians give the impression that Marseilles, a French

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards