Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Apr 2912:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
Learn how Kamakshi achieved a GMAT 675 with an impressive 96th %ile in Data Insights. Discover the unique methods and exam strategies that helped her excel in DI along with other sections for a balanced and high score.
Apr 3001:30 AM EDT
-02:30 AM EDT
At one point, she believed GMAT wasn’t for her. After scoring 595, self-doubt crept in and she questioned her potential. But instead of quitting, she made the right strategic changes. The result? A remarkable comeback to 695. Check out how Saakshi did it.
May 0111:00 AM PDT
-12:00 PM PDT
Free- full-length test + 15 concept videos + 150+ short videos + study plan!
May 0306:30 AM PDT
-08:30 AM PDT
Verbal trouble on GMAT? Fix it NOW! Join Sunita Singhvi for a focused webinar on actionable strategies to boost your Verbal score and take your performance to the next level.
05 Jul 2012, 14:21
Kudos
Bookmarks
In August 1348 the bubonic plague, or Black Death, suddenly appeared in England. Its germs were carried by the fleas on black rats that came into the country on ships from abroad. The first outbreak of the plague was of intense ferocity, for the people had no immunity and persons living close to the margin of subsistence fell victims to the disease.
Returning in 1361, the plague caused high mortality among children born since 1348; there were other visitations in 1368 and 1375. High farming in the thirteenth century had been based on the scarcity of land, a large population, and a great demand for food—conditions that had forced the peasants to remain on their holdings and to accept the burdens of serfdom. But when the demand for food was less, the profits of agriculture shrank. High farming, which had already been slipping before 1348, came to an end.
The startling fact about those figures is the amazing drop in population between 1348 and 1377. It may be the number of people in overcrowded England already was beginning to decline before the coming of the Black Death. There were floods and famines in the years between 1315 and 1317. Certainly the plague caused a high mortality. In some monasteries the monks all but disappeared (it is thought that half the clergy in England fell victims to the pestilence). The Black Death had its most striking effect on the rural economy. The balance between the number of labourers and the amount of land under cultivation and the relations between lord and peasant were quickly altered. There were deserted villages and many unoccupied peasant holdings. After the first visitation widows and widowers remarried quickly and produced as many children as before; but because of the high mortality among young people this population increase was not maintained later in the century.
The work of the manor could not be performed by the villeins who had survived the plague; the lord had to employ casual labor at wages that doubled within a decade. Moreover, a villein, once tied to his holding by economic necessity, could easily run away to another manor where employment would be offered to him with no questions asked.
Landowners complained bitterly of the labour shortage and of the wages they had to pay. In 1351 they obtained the Statute of Laborers, which fixed wages at the rates before the plague, declared that all landless men must accept work when it was offered to them, and prohibited peasants from moving from one manor to another. For a time the statute had some effect, but in the long run it was useless, for wages continued to rise and employers had to pay them. There was also a scarcity of tenants. Few manors were without vacant holdings; hence the yield was less and income from the land declined. Agricultural products no longer fetched high prices. Yet the cost of luxuries and of manufactured goods was rising.
Thereafter the plague subsided in the rural areas but remained endemic in London and other towns, where it could become active at any time
3. Which of the following claims would, if true, most substantially weaken the author‘s claim that the plague brought an end to the practice of high farming?
A. The practice of high farming was reinforced after the floods and famines in the 1310s reduced the amount of arable land.
B. Immediately following the plague, the profits of agriculture would see a rebound due to the stabilization in wages and food prices.
C. The numbers of peasants working on English farms decreased throughout much of the years of plague.
D. The Statute of Laborers began to be strictly enforced when it became apparent that wages were still rising.
E. Over the next few years following the plague, the incomes of agriculturists kept falling lower and lower
Returning in 1361, the plague caused high mortality among children born since 1348; there were other visitations in 1368 and 1375. High farming in the thirteenth century had been based on the scarcity of land, a large population, and a great demand for food—conditions that had forced the peasants to remain on their holdings and to accept the burdens of serfdom. But when the demand for food was less, the profits of agriculture shrank. High farming, which had already been slipping before 1348, came to an end.
The startling fact about those figures is the amazing drop in population between 1348 and 1377. It may be the number of people in overcrowded England already was beginning to decline before the coming of the Black Death. There were floods and famines in the years between 1315 and 1317. Certainly the plague caused a high mortality. In some monasteries the monks all but disappeared (it is thought that half the clergy in England fell victims to the pestilence). The Black Death had its most striking effect on the rural economy. The balance between the number of labourers and the amount of land under cultivation and the relations between lord and peasant were quickly altered. There were deserted villages and many unoccupied peasant holdings. After the first visitation widows and widowers remarried quickly and produced as many children as before; but because of the high mortality among young people this population increase was not maintained later in the century.
The work of the manor could not be performed by the villeins who had survived the plague; the lord had to employ casual labor at wages that doubled within a decade. Moreover, a villein, once tied to his holding by economic necessity, could easily run away to another manor where employment would be offered to him with no questions asked.
Landowners complained bitterly of the labour shortage and of the wages they had to pay. In 1351 they obtained the Statute of Laborers, which fixed wages at the rates before the plague, declared that all landless men must accept work when it was offered to them, and prohibited peasants from moving from one manor to another. For a time the statute had some effect, but in the long run it was useless, for wages continued to rise and employers had to pay them. There was also a scarcity of tenants. Few manors were without vacant holdings; hence the yield was less and income from the land declined. Agricultural products no longer fetched high prices. Yet the cost of luxuries and of manufactured goods was rising.
Thereafter the plague subsided in the rural areas but remained endemic in London and other towns, where it could become active at any time
3. Which of the following claims would, if true, most substantially weaken the author‘s claim that the plague brought an end to the practice of high farming?
A. The practice of high farming was reinforced after the floods and famines in the 1310s reduced the amount of arable land.
B. Immediately following the plague, the profits of agriculture would see a rebound due to the stabilization in wages and food prices.
C. The numbers of peasants working on English farms decreased throughout much of the years of plague.
D. The Statute of Laborers began to be strictly enforced when it became apparent that wages were still rising.
E. Over the next few years following the plague, the incomes of agriculturists kept falling lower and lower
Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Where to now? Join ongoing discussions on thousands of quality questions in our Verbal Questions Forum
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block below for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
Thank you for understanding, and happy exploring!
10 Jul 2012, 11:03
Kudos
Bookmarks
This is a strange question, because it's not clear to me whether the question is asking for
or
Furthermore, the author never really explicitly claims that the plague is what brought about an end to high farming. He only implies it using a specific date, so it's odd that the question is asked in this way.
What's the source of the question?
- evidence that something besides the plague ended high farming,
or
- evidence that high farming did not actually end.
Furthermore, the author never really explicitly claims that the plague is what brought about an end to high farming. He only implies it using a specific date, so it's odd that the question is asked in this way.
What's the source of the question?
13 Jul 2012, 00:16
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hi
the source for the Q is Aristotle's RC 99
Below is the explanation given. However, the explanation is itself not clear to me.
Go back to Paragraph2 to review the author‘s argument that the plague ended high farming. The author argues that the peasantry depended on this sort of farming for subsistence and in Paragraph5 implies that landowners had previously taken high profits from the practice. If (B) is true, the second point, made in the last sentences of the passage, is directly contradicted: there would have been fewer reasons for high farming to collapse, and the author‘s argument would therefore be weakened.
(A): Out of Scope. Even if this were true, it would have no effect on the plague since it occurred several decades before the plague occurred.
(B): The correct answer
(C): Out of Scope. Is incorrect because the population decrease is one of the author‘s supporting pieces of evidence for the central argument.
(D): Out of Scope. Even if this is true, it has no impact on the fact that the plague brought an end to high farming. This is an effect of the plague‘s impact on high farming, not a fundamental piece of evidence supporting or refuting it.
(E): Opposite. This would strengthen the author‘s claim.
the source for the Q is Aristotle's RC 99
Below is the explanation given. However, the explanation is itself not clear to me.
Go back to Paragraph2 to review the author‘s argument that the plague ended high farming. The author argues that the peasantry depended on this sort of farming for subsistence and in Paragraph5 implies that landowners had previously taken high profits from the practice. If (B) is true, the second point, made in the last sentences of the passage, is directly contradicted: there would have been fewer reasons for high farming to collapse, and the author‘s argument would therefore be weakened.
(A): Out of Scope. Even if this were true, it would have no effect on the plague since it occurred several decades before the plague occurred.
(B): The correct answer
(C): Out of Scope. Is incorrect because the population decrease is one of the author‘s supporting pieces of evidence for the central argument.
(D): Out of Scope. Even if this is true, it has no impact on the fact that the plague brought an end to high farming. This is an effect of the plague‘s impact on high farming, not a fundamental piece of evidence supporting or refuting it.
(E): Opposite. This would strengthen the author‘s claim.
