#24 - Must Be True

[James Finch]

Hi M,

The inference that (A) is asking test takers to draw is that not only will lenders raise interest rates on loans to potential borrowers who may default without consequence, but in fact either limit or refuse to lend to them at all. While the third paragraph that discusses the expansion of the English and French empires makes no explicit reference to loan limits, the end of the fourth paragraph mentions that after Parliament took power over the Crown's budget in England, the Crown's "borrowing increased and interest rates fell." (Line 47)

From this we can infer that before the Glorious Revolution, and thus within the scope of "the absence of limitation on the legal power of English and French monarchs in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries" that the monarchs had difficulty financing the expansion of the empire because lenders were reluctant to lend to them, as the monarchs could and would repudiate their debt at will.

(E) is half supported by the passage, as it discusses the Glorious Revolution and Parliament's taking control of Crown finances, including loan guarantees. But it says nothing about what was happening in France during this time or whether French monarchs "were forced to demonstrate a willingness to respect property rights." Be wary of allowing any outside knowledge of the French Revolution seep into the answer, despite it fitting within the timeframe; we are looking only for what must be true according to the passage, nothing else.

Hope this clears things up!

[mhsk]

Hi,

After reading the explanations with regard to answer choice (A) and (D), I would like to clarify answer choice (D). So, answer choice (D) is NOT necessarily true? In other words, it could be true, but it is not a must be true?

As mentioned in the previous post, once the monarchs' power was restricted, those monarchs borrowed more. But am I correct in saying that, according to the information provided by the passage, it is unclear as to whether "if their power had been restricted," then "those monarchs borrowed more money than they would have"?

Sorry if my question seems odd, but I wanted to check whether I have correctly eliminated (D) when I was between (A) and (D).

Thanks!

-Rachel

[nicholaspavic]

Hi Rachel,

Welcome to the forum.

Actually answer option (D) is saying the exact opposite of what the passage is telling us. Let's rephrase it as a sufficient/necessary statement in order to clarify: if their power had been restricted, then those monarchs borrowed more money than they would have with such restrictions. In other words, the amount borrowed went up according to the statement, when in the passage, it actually decreased. So it's actually a false statement, not one that could be true. Thanks for the great question and I hope this helps!

[mhsk]

Hi Nicholas,

Please correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding of the passage (especially, paragraph 5) has been that "the Crown's borrowing increased (line 46-47) when the power was limited ("Parliament controlled the Crown's purse strings" (line 41-42)). What do you mean by passage saying that borrowing decreased???

Thanks!

[James Finch]

Hi Rachel,

Looking over this question, Nick is right about (D) being an Opposite answer, at least in regards to England. As stated in the passage (lines 44-48)

"The Crown's newfound inability to dishonor its commitments translated into a newfound ability to borrow; the Crown's borrowing increased and interest rates fell, because lenders concluded that the Crown would honor its debts."

So in fact the English monarch was able to borrow more after Parliament restricted his ability to repudiate debt than before, as lenders were now willing to extend credit where they weren't before. So based on this information alone, (D) cannot be true, and is thus a wrong answer.

[TheKingLives]

Could you explain further why C is incorrect? I was debating between A and C and can't remember why I disliked A, but I don't think it's too much of a stretch to equate having lower interest rates asked of the wealthy subjects with them having an increasingly easy time borrowing money (lower interest rates = more favorable to borrowing). If anything I wasn't sure if monarchs had difficulty financing their empires. They took the money they needed and presumably kept borrowing even if interest rates were increased, right? The passage never states that monarchs began seeing their requests for loans denied, so I assumed the difficulty lay in them paying their loans back, not receiving them in the first place.

[Adam Tyson]

The consequences are all in the fourth paragraph, TheKingLives, and they were all problems for the monarchs. Interest rates for them went up, because lenders knew they might renege on their commitments. That made borrowing more difficult.

There are no consequences discussed for anyone other than the monarchs. Lower interest rates were not a consequence of the lack of limitations on the monarchs, but rather of the new limitations that came with the Glorious Revolution.

Focus again on what the question is asking, and on the evidence about that, and that should help you eliminate answer C!