CAT 2024 Slot 2 VARC Question & Solution
Passage
Spices were a global commodity centuries before European voyages. There was a complex chain of relations, yet consumers had little knowledge of producers and vice versa. Desire for spices helped fuel European colonial empires to create political, military and commercial networks under a single power.
Historians know a fair amount about the supply of spices in Europe during the medieval period - the origins, methods of transportation, the prices - but less about demand. Why go to such extraordinary efforts to procure expensive products from exotic lands? Still, demand was great enough to inspire the voyages of Christopher Columbus and Vasco Da Gama, launching the first fateful wave of European colonialism.
So, why were spices so highly prized in Europe in the centuries from about 1000 to 1500? One widely disseminated explanation for medieval demand for spices was that they covered the taste of spoiled meat. Medieval purchasers consumed meat much fresher than what the average city-dweller in the developed world of today has at hand. However, refrigeration was not available, and some hot spices have been shown to serve as an anti-bacterial agent. Salting, smoking or drying meat were other means of preservation. Most spices used in cooking began as medical ingredients, and throughout the Middle Ages spices were used as both medicines and condiments. Above all, medieval recipes involve the combination of medical and culinary lore in order to balance food's humeral properties and prevent disease. Most spices were hot and dry and so appropriate in sauces to counteract the moist and wet properties supposedly possessed by most meat and fish.
Where spices came from was known in a vague sense centuries before the voyages of Columbus. Just how vague may be judged by looking at medieval world maps. To the medieval European imagination, the East was exotic and alluring. Medieval maps often placed India close to the so-called Earthly Paradise, the Garden of Eden described in the Bible.
Geographical knowledge has a lot to do with the perceptions of spices’ relative scarcity and the reasons for their high prices. An example of the varying notions of scarcity is the conflicting information about how pepper is harvested. As far back as the 7th century Europeans thought that pepper in India grew on trees "guarded" by serpents that would bite and poison anyone who attempted to gather the fruit. The only way to harvest pepper was to burn the trees, which would drive the snakes underground. Of course, this bit of lore would explain the shriveled black peppercorns, but not white, pink or other colors.
Spices never had the enduring allure or power of gold and silver or the commercial potential of new products such as tobacco, indigo or sugar. But the taste for spices did continue for a while beyond the Middle Ages. As late as the 17th century, the English and the Dutch were struggling for control of the Spice Islands: Dutch New Amsterdam, or New York, was exchanged by the British for one of the Moluccan Islands where nutmeg was grown.
Question 1
It can be inferred that all of the following contributed to a decline in the allure of spices, EXCEPT:
Solution:
✅ Correct Option: B
Objective: We need to find which factor did not contribute to a decline in the allure of spices.
Evidence: From passage: "the demand was driven by cultural and medical factors rather than availability."
Logic: The key word/concept here is "availability" -> this implies that although spices were scarce, their desire was based on cultural and medicinal needs. The author is suggesting that the allure of spices persisted regardless of how available they became.
So the thought process is: High demand existed due to cultural practices -> Availability of spices increased -> Allure is not necessarily tied to how available they are.
Elimination Process:
🟠 Option A -> too-extreme -> While refrigeration would reduce the need for spices for preservation, it doesn't imply all allure would vanish.
🟠 Option C -> partial truth -> Changes in medical treatment can impact spice use, but may not directly indicate a decrease in allure.
🟢 Option B -> correct -> An increase in availability contradicts the scenario of declining allure.
🟠 Option D -> context-shift -> Changes in European cuisine may contribute to declining spice allure, but this isn't absolute.
Student Confusion: You might think Option C sounds appealing because it directly relates to spices having medicinal uses, but it is wrong because it suggests medical changes alone amount to a decline in spice appeal, which is not nuanced enough.
Question 2
In the context of the passage, the people who heard the story of pepper trees being guarded by snakes would be least likely to arrive at the conclusion that
Solution:
✅ Correct Option: A
Objective: We need to identify what conclusion cannot be drawn from the myth about pepper trees guarded by snakes.
Evidence: From passage: "The story of snakes and burning trees implies that pepper was difficult and dangerous to harvest."
Logic: The key word/concept here is "spiciness" -> this implies a misunderstanding between the myth and the actual taste of pepper. The author is suggesting that the connection between the myth and the physical characteristics of pepper is flawed.
So the thought process is: Danger in harvesting is highlighted -> Connection to taste is misleading -> Conclusion about pepper's heat lacks validity.
Elimination Process:
🟠 Option B -> partial truth -> The story does explain why the pepper is costly due to the danger involved in harvesting, making this a logical conclusion.
🟢 Option C -> correct -> It follows logically that people would think it’s unwise to attempt to gather pepper due to the represented dangers.
🟢 Option D -> correct -> The story implies a difficult harvest, supporting the conclusion that supplies are limited due to the myth.
Student Confusion: You might think Option B sounds acceptable because it relates to costs, but it is wrong because it doesn't connect the myth to the heat of pepper, which misleads the reasoning process.
Question 3
In the context of the passage, which one of the following conclusions CANNOT be reached?
Solution:
✅ Correct Option: B
Objective: We need to determine which conclusion is unsupported by the passage regarding colonization and the spice trade.
Evidence: From passage: "the desire for spices played a significant role in driving European colonial expansion."
Logic: The key word/concept here is "spices and gold" -> this implies that while spices were crucial, there is no definitive evidence in the text about gold being a significant reason for the colonization of India. The author is suggesting that spices primarily motivated colonial actions rather than insinuating co-motives like gold. So the thought process is: Spices are cited as motivators -> No explicit mention of gold as a co-reason -> Conclusion about gold lacks support.
Elimination Process:
🔴 Option A -> incorrect -> The passage indicates that spice trade effectively promoted colonial expansion.
🔴 Option C -> incorrect -> The passage states that spices did not have the same commercial appeal as tobacco, indicating that tobacco was indeed more marketable.
🔴 Option D -> incorrect -> The text indicates that spice demand was a major player in motivating colonialism.
Student Confusion: You might think Option A sounds good since it's generally factual but it is wrong to connect it to gold without clear passage support; the focus was on spices and that's crucial in understanding the conclusion validity.
Question 4
If a trader brought white peppercorns from India to medieval Europe, all of the following are unlikely to happen, EXCEPT:
Solution:
✅ Correct Option: B
Objective: We need to identify which scenario is likely to occur if white peppercorns are brought to Europe.
Evidence: From passage: "Europeans would likely doubt the myth of harvesting pepper by burning trees."
Logic: The key word/concept here is "doubt" -> this implies skepticism regarding inconsistencies in the traditional myth. The author is suggesting that new evidence (white pepper) would challenge established beliefs about pepper harvesting.
So the thought process is: Arrival of white peppercorns would introduce doubt -> This skepticism targets harvesting myths more than occurrences relating to navigation or price.
Elimination Process:
🔴 Option A -> scope-error -> The passage indicates that medieval maps were not reliable for navigation, making this outcome unlikely.
🔴 Option C -> context-shift -> The scarcity of spices suggests that the arrival of a single type of pepper would not significantly impact prices, therefore reducing likelihood.
🔴 Option D -> obvious error -> Due to the rarity and background surrounding spices, even white pepper would still be considered exotic.
🟢 Option B -> correct -> The doubt concerning harvesting inconsistencies is a valid conclusion based on the introduction of white peppercorns, as the story surrounding black pepper would not hold for white.
Student Confusion: You might think Option A sounds appealing due to navigation, but it is wrong because the passage notes that medieval maps were not reliable, indicating their use wouldn't change with the arrival of white pepper.