16Hit1600
Craft and StructureVery hardTwo historians on a famine's cause

Craft and Structure practice question

Text 1 The famine of 1770 was the work of the weather. Two monsoons failed in succession, the rice crop collapsed, and no government of the period could have fed a province whose harvest had vanished. Text 2 The monsoons did fail, but the grain that remained did not reach the hungry. Merchants holding stocks were allowed to export them, and the land tax was collected in full from villages that had nothing. A weaker harvest became a famine because of decisions that could have been made differently.

How would the author of Text 2 most likely respond to the claim in Text 1 that no government could have fed the province?

  1. A. By arguing that the question is not whether the government could have supplied food but whether its decisions made the shortage worse.Correct
  2. B. By denying that the monsoons failed.
  3. C. By agreeing that the weather alone explains the famine.
  4. D. By claiming that the harvest was in fact normal.

Answer: A. By arguing that the question is not whether the government could have supplied food but whether its decisions made the shortage worse.

Not the weather alone: exports and taxes.

Why the other answers are wrong

B. By denying that the monsoons failed.
Text 2 accepts the failed monsoons.
C. By agreeing that the weather alone explains the famine.
Text 2 rejects weather-only.
D. By claiming that the harvest was in fact normal.
Text 2 calls the harvest weaker.

More Craft and Structure questions

Not affiliated with the College Board. SAT is a trademark of the College Board.