The manor was the sphere of operations of a manor court.

Question

The manor was the sphere of operations of a manor court. On every manor the tenants gathered at frequent periods for a great amount of petty judicial and regulative work. The most usual period for the meeting of the manor court was once every three weeks, though in some manors no trace of a meeting is found more frequently than three times, or even twice, a year. In these cases, however, it is quite probable that less formal meetings occurred of which no regular record was kept.

Different kinds of gatherings of the tenants are usually distinguished according to the authority under which they were held, or the class of tenants of which they were made up. If the court was held by the lord simply because of his feudal rights as a landholder, and was busied only with matters of the inheritance, transfer, or grant of lands, the fining of tenants for the breach of manorial custom, or failure to perform their duties to the lord of the manor, the election of tenants to petty offices on the manor, and such matters, it was described in legal language as a court baron. If a court so occupied was made up of villain tenants only, it was called a customary court. If, on the other hand, the court also punished general offences, petty crimes, breaches of contract, breaches of the assize, that is to say, the established standard of amount, price, or quality of bread or beer, the lord of the manor drawing his authority to hold such a court either actually or supposedly from a grant from the king, such a court was called a court leet. With the court leet was usually connected the so-called view of frank pledge.

Frank pledge was an ancient system, according to which all men were obliged to be enrolled in groups, so that if any one committed an offence, the other members of the group would be obliged to produce him for trial. View of frank pledge was the right to punish by fine all who failed to so enroll themselves. In the court baron and the customary court it was said by lawyers that the body of attendants were the judges, and the steward, representing the lord of the manor, only a presiding official, while in the court leet the steward was the actual judge of the tenants. In practice, however, it is probable that not much was made of these distinctions and that the periodic gatheringswere made to do duty for all business of any kind that needed attention, while the procedure was that which had become customary on that special manor, irrespective of the particular form of authority for the court.   1  
 1. Which of the following can be inferred from the information in the passage?

A. The concept of frank pledge was created to promote solidarity within groups of people
B. The duration between successive meetings of a manor court was not fixed
C. A court baron had more powers than a customary court
D. The manor court was the highest legal authority during the period mentioned in the passage
E. The manor court did not always have a presiding official

2 
 2. Each of the following is mentioned in the passage as a power of the court baron EXCEPT:

A. To judge matters related to inheritance
B. To resolve disputes related to grants of land
C. To punish tenants for negligence of duties
D. To elect tenants to offices on the manor
E. To fine petty criminals

3  
 3. According to the information in the first para, the fact that ‘in some manors no trace of a meeting is found more frequently than three times, or even twice, a year’ does NOT necessarily suggest that:

A. more meetings were actually not held during that period
B. meetings were not necessarily held every three weeks
C. informal meetings may have been held during this period
D. manor courts probably did not keep a record of all their meetings
E. some courts met fewer times than the others

4 
 4. According to the information in the passage, which of the following is a point of difference between a cour baron and a court leet?

A. A court baron could elect tenants to petty offices whereas a court leet could not
B. A court leet was authorised by the king whereas a court baron was not
C. A court baron treated a steward as a presiding official whereas a court leet treated a steward as a judge
D. A court baron could judge matters related to inheritance whereas a court leet could not
E. A court leet was always connected to the frank pledge whereas a court baron was not

Gmatsaiyan · Answer

Topic and Scope 
The passage discusses the different types of manor courts and their features
 Passage Map 
Para 1 introduces the manor court with respect to its sphere of operations and duration between successive meetings
Para 2 discusses different types of manor courts - court baron, customary court, and court leet
Para 3 explains the concept of frank pledge and discusses who comprised the body of attendants at a court

Gmatsaiyan · Answer

Official Answers and Explanations

Q1) Which of the following can be inferred from the information in the passage?
A. The concept of frank pledge was created to promote solidarity within groups of people
B. The duration between successive meetings of a manor court was not fixed
C. A court baron had more powers than a customary court
D. The manor court was the highest legal authority during the period mentioned in the passage
E. The manor court did not always have a presiding official
The 1st para states that successive meetings of a manor court were usually held every 3 weeks but this does not mean that they were compulsorily held every 3 weeks. Hence (B) can be inferred from the passage and is the correct answer.
A - According to para 3, frank pledge was actually intended to deter people from committing dishonest acts
C. The passage does not provide any such comparison
D. Extreme option. There might have been higher legal authorities at that time
E. The passage never states this. In fact from the passage it appears that the manorcourt always had a presiding official

Q2) Each of the following is mentioned in the passage as a power of the court baron EXCEPT:
A. To judge matters related to inheritance
B. To resolve disputes related to grants of land
C. To punish tenants for negligence of duties
D. To elect tenants to offices on the manor
E. To fine petty criminals
According to the 2nd para, a court leet could judge and punish petty crimes. Hence (E) is the correct answer.
A - Mentioned in the 2nd para
B - Mentioned in the 2nd para
C - Mentioned in the 2nd para (‘fining of tenants.........’)
D - Mentioned in the 2nd para

Q3) According to the information in the first para, the fact that ‘in some manors no trace of a meeting is found more frequently than three times, or even twice, a year’ does NOT necessarily suggest that:
A. more meetings were actually not held during that period
B. meetings were not necessarily held every three weeks
C. informal meetings may have been held during this period
D. manor courts probably did not keep a record of all their meetings
E. some courts met fewer times than the others
The last line of the 1st para states that just because in some manors meetings were held twice or thrice a year does not necessarily mean that in these manors more informal meetings were not held during that period. Hence the information in the quoted line does not suggest that more meetings were actually not held during that period i.e. (A) is the correct answer.
B - Opposite. This information actually does suggest that meetings were not always held every three weeks
C - Opposite. This information could suggest that informal meetings may have been held during that period
D - Again if unrecorded informal meeting are a possibility then the quoted lines do suggest that manor courts probably did not keep a record of all their meetings
E - Opposite. This information clearly suggests that some courts met fewer times than the
others

Q4) According to the information in the passage, which of the following is a point of difference between a cour baron and a court leet?
A. A court baron could elect tenants to petty offices whereas a court leet could not
B. A court leet was authorised by the king whereas a court baron was not
C. A court baron treated a steward as a presiding official whereas a court leet treated a steward as a judge
D. A court baron could judge matters related to inheritance whereas a court leet could not
E. A court leet was always connected to the frank pledge whereas a court baron was not
The 3rd para states that ‘In the court baron and the customary court it was said by lawyers that the body of attendants were the judges, and the steward, representing the
lord of the manor, only a presiding official, while in the court leet the steward was the actual judge of the tenants’. Thus (C) is clearly the correct answer.
A - The passage describes a court leet as a body that could, in addition to what a court baron could do, also do a few other things such as punish petty crimes and breaches of contract. Hence a court leet could do everything that a court baron could do but a court baron could not do everything that a court leet could do.
B - A court leet may not always have been authorised by the king as implied by the lines ‘authority to hold such a court either actually or supposedly from a grant from the king’
D - Same as A
E - Again the passage states that a court leet was usually (and not ̳always‘) connected to the concept of a frank pledge

anushree01 · Answer

Can someone please provide explanation for Question number 2. Thanks!

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Hello anushree01

Each of the following is mentioned in the passage as a power of the court baron EXCEPT:

Remember this is an  EXCEPT  question and we have to find an answer which is  NOT  mentioned as a  power of the court baron .

Read the relevant text about the power of court baron in the passage:

"If the court was held by the lord simply because of his feudal rights as a landholder, and was busied only with matters of the inheritance, transfer, or grant of lands, the fining of tenants for the breach of manorial custom, or failure to perform their duties to the lord of the manor, the election of tenants to petty offices on the manor, and such matters, it was described in legal language as a court baron."

(A)  is out as it is mentioned as matters of inheritance

(B)  Mentioned. Matters of transfer or grant of lands.

(C)  This is also mentioned. "fining of tenants for the breach of manorial custom".

(D)  This one is also mentioned "Election of tenants to petty offices on the manor"

(E)  is not mentioned.

Answer: E

gullyboy09 · Answer

The manor was the sphere of operations of a manor court.

Isn't this statement a bit redundant, it talks about Manor and relates it with Manor court. Can anybody explain what this statement even mean?

gullyboy09 · Answer

Q3) According to the information in the first para, the fact that ‘in some manors no trace of a meeting is found more frequently than three times, or even twice, a year’ does NOT necessarily suggest that:

A. more meetings were actually not held during that period
B. meetings were not necessarily held every three weeks
C. informal meetings may have been held during this period
D. manor courts probably did not keep a record of all their meetings
E. some courts met fewer times than the others

Isn't A and E are same here?

does not necessarily means, so for A, it means there might be a possiblity that more meetings were actually held. Similarly for E it means courts met more than fewer times. In simple words both are trying to say meetings held more frequently then what it looks like.

guddo · Answer

3. According to the information in the first para, the fact that ‘in some manors no trace of a meeting is found more frequently than three times, or even twice, a year’ does NOT necessarily suggest that:

The first paragraph makes one point very clear: in some manors, the records show only two or three meetings a year, but that does  not  mean only two or three meetings actually happened. The author immediately says that less formal meetings probably occurred without regular records. So the question is asking which option wrongly treats lack of recorded evidence as proof that no other meetings occurred.

(A) more meetings were actually not held during that period

This is the correct answer. That is exactly what the passage says we cannot conclude. The records are incomplete, so we cannot say no additional meetings were held.

(B) meetings were not necessarily held every three weeks

This is suggested. The paragraph says once every three weeks was the most usual pattern, but not all manors followed it.

(C) informal meetings may have been held during this period

This is directly suggested by the last sentence of the paragraph.

(D) manor courts probably did not keep a record of all their meetings

This is also suggested, because the passage says less formal meetings may have occurred without regular record.

(E) some courts met fewer times than the others

This is consistent with the paragraph at least at the level of recorded meetings. Some manors show meetings much less often than the usual once every three weeks.

The trap is between A and D.  D is supported because the passage explicitly allows unrecorded meetings. A is the one that goes too far, because it turns missing records into proof that extra meetings did not happen.

Answer: (A)

The manor was the sphere of operations of a manor court.

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

The manor was the sphere of operations of a manor court.

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