In Roman times, defeated enemies were generally put to death

This topic has expert replies
Legendary Member
Posts: 784
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2011 3:51 am
Thanked: 114 times
Followed by:12 members
In Roman times, defeated enemies were generally put to death as criminals for having offended the emperor of Rome. In the Middle Ages, however, the practice of ransoming, or returning prisoners in exchange for money, became common. Though some saw this custom as a step towards a more humane society, the primary reasons behind it were economic rather than humanitarian.

In those times, rulers had only a limited ability to raise taxes. They could neither force their subjects to fight nor pay them to do so. The promise of material compensation in the form of goods and ransom was therefore the only way of inducing combatants to participate in a war. In the Middle Ages, the predominant incentive for the individual soldier to participate in a war was the expectation of spoils. Although collecting ransom clearly brought financial gain, keeping a prisoner and arranging for his exchange had its costs. Consequently, several procedures were devised to reduce transaction costs.

One such device was a rule asserting that the prisoner had to assess his own value. This compelled the prisoner to establish a value without much distortion; indicating too low a value would increase the captive's chances of being killed, while indicating too high a value would either ruin him financially or create a prohibitively expensive ransom that would also result in death.

A second means of reducing costs was the practice of releasing a prisoner on his word of honor. This procedure was advantageous to both parties since the captor was relieved of the expense of keeping the prisoner while the captive had freedom of movement. The captor also benefited financially by having his captive raise the ransom himself. This "parole" was a viable practice since the released prisoner risked recapture or retaliation against his family. Moreover, in medieval society, breaking one's word had serious consequences. When, for example, King Francois I broke his word to the Emperor Charles V in 1525, his reputation suffered immensely.

A third method of reducing costs was the use of specialized institutions to establish contact between the two parties. Two types of institutions emerged: professional dealers who acted as brokers, and members of religious orders who acted as neutral intermediaries. Dealers advanced money for the ransom and charged interest on the loan. Two of the religious orders that became intermediaries were the Mercedarians and the Trinitarians, who between them arranged the ransom of nearly one million prisoners.

1. The primary purpose of the passage is to
(A) discuss the economic basis of the medieval practice of exchanging prisoners for ransom
(B) examine the history of the treatment of prisoners of war
(C) emphasize the importance of a warrior's "word of honor" during the Middle Ages
(D) explore three ways of reducing the costs of ransom
(E) demonstrate why warriors of the Middle Ages looked forward to battles

2.Which of the following best describes the organization of the passage?
(A) An assertion is made, briefly explained, and then several examples that refute the assertion are given.
(B) A hypothesis is offered, carefully qualified, and then supporting data is analyzed.
(C) A generally accepted historical viewpoint is presented in order to introduce discussion of its strengths and limitations.
(D) A historical analysis is made of a phenomenon and supporting details are offered.
(E) A historical dispute is introduced, and the case for one side is examined in detail.

[spoiler]1- OA A. Why D is wrong - does the use of 'explore' makes it an incorrect option
2- Confused btn B & D. OA is D, but how does 'historical' in D is justified.[/spoiler]

Pls explain.

thanks

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 258
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 5:32 am
Thanked: 16 times

by x2suresh » Wed May 18, 2011 8:27 pm
Q1) D- discuss three points.. is that main point ask yourself..again and again..

passage structure
p1) roman time.. --> death for crimals.
Middle ages --> practice of ransoming..for prisoners..(For economic region)
p2) necessaisty for prison exchange for money
p3,p4,p4 --> examples supporting p2

definitely.. D is not main point..

q2) historical.. Roman time --> Middle ages (time changge-- historical)

User avatar
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 57
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2011 7:39 pm
Location: Singapore
Thanked: 6 times
Followed by:2 members

by abhi0697 » Fri May 20, 2011 7:16 pm
1) Last sentence of the first paragraph states that "the primary reasons behind it were economic rather than humanitarian" and then in the subsequent paragraphs author has tried to "discuss the economic basis of the medieval practice of exchanging prisoners for ransom"
Correct answer is A

2) D clearly states that this passage is about historical analysis rather than assertion, hypothesis, or dispute.

Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2010 7:56 pm
GMAT Score:730

by prakhag » Sat May 21, 2011 10:22 am
Q1 option D talks about decreasing the cost of RANSOM, however the passage discusses three ways of reducing the TRANSACTION COSTS associated with ransom, not the ransom itself.

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 43
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 7:32 am
Thanked: 2 times

by subhashghosh » Thu Jun 02, 2011 6:13 am
1 - A

2 - D

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1325
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 6:24 am
Thanked: 105 times
Followed by:14 members

by vikram4689 » Mon Jun 06, 2011 1:48 am
1.A - 3 points are mentioned but this is not the reason why author wrote this passage
2.D - passage i related to roman times, also B is wrong coz no analysis is done as is mentioned in B
Premise: If you like my post
Conclusion : Press the Thanks Button ;)

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1325
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 6:24 am
Thanked: 105 times
Followed by:14 members

by vikram4689 » Wed Jun 22, 2011 12:00 am
Additional Question for same passage .....

It can be inferred from the passage that the process of arranging ransoms during medieval times was
(A) more lucrative for medieval soldiers and kings than the winning of spoils
(B) a procedure so costly that it was not economically worthwhile for the captors
(C) futile for the captive since he risked recapture even after his ransom was paid
(D) a potential source of income for others aside from the captors of the prisoners
(E) handled only through Mercedarian or Trinitarian intermediaries

[spoiler]OA:D, I could not find anyone correct but i think A is closest.[/spoiler]
Premise: If you like my post
Conclusion : Press the Thanks Button ;)