All Courses
Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity Get the App Login Join for Free
Sign in Open App
GMAT Exam  >  GMAT Questions  >  Directions: Read the given passage carefully ... Start Learning for Free
Directions: Read the given passage carefully and answer the question as follow.
The manor was the sphere of operations of a manor court. On every manor the tenants gathered at frequent periods for a great amount of petty judicial and regulative work. The most usual period for the meeting of the manor court was once every three weeks, though in some manors no trace of a meeting is found more frequently than three times, or even twice, a year. In these cases, however, it is quite probable that less formal meetings occurred of which no regular record was kept.
Different kinds of gatherings of the tenants are usually distinguished according to the authority under which they were held, or the class of tenants of which they were made up. If the court was held by the lord simply because of his feudal rights as a landholder, and was busied only with matters of the inheritance, transfer, or grant of lands, the fining of tenants for the breach of manorial custom, or failure to perform their duties to the lord of the manor, the election of tenants to petty offices on the manor, and such matters, it was described in legal language as a court baron. If a court so occupied was made up of villain tenants only, it was called a customary court. If, on the other hand, the court also punished general offences, petty crimes, breaches of contract, breaches of the assize, that is to say, the established standard of amount, price, or quality of bread or beer, the lord of the manor drawing his authority to hold such a court either actually or supposedly from a grant from the king, such a court was called a court leet. With the court leet was usually connected the so-called view of frank pledge.
Frank pledge was an ancient system, according to which all men were obliged to be enrolled in groups, so that if any one committed an offence, the other members of the group would be obliged to produce him for trial. View of frank pledge was the right to punish by fine all who failed to so enrol themselves. In the court baron and the customary court it was said by lawyers that the body of attendants were the judges, and the steward, representing the lord of the manor, only a presiding official, while in the court leet the steward was the actual judge of the tenants. In practice, however, it is probable that not much was made of these distinctions and that the periodic gatherings were made to do duty for all business of any kind that needed attention, while the procedure was that which had become customary on that special manor, irrespective of the particular form of authority for the court.
Q. According to the information in the passage, which of the following is a point of difference between a court baron and a court leet?
  • a)
    A court baron could elect tenants to petty offices whereas a court leet could not.
  • b)
    A court leet was authorised by the king whereas a court baron was not.
  • c)
    A court baron treated a steward as a presiding official whereas a court leet treated a steward as a judge.
  • d)
    A court baron could judge matters related to inheritance whereas a court leet could not.
  • e)
    A court leet was always connected to the frank pledge whereas a court baron was not.
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Clear all your GMAT doubts with EduRev
Verified Answer
Directions: Read the given passage carefully and answer the question a...
The third para states that ‘In the court baron and the customary court it was said by lawyers that the body of attendants were the judges, and the steward, representing the lord of the manor, only a presiding official, while in the court leet the steward was the actual judge of the tenants’. Thus, (C) is clearly the correct answer.
(A) The passage describes a court leet as a body that could, in addition to what a court baron could do, also do a few other things such as punish petty crimes and breaches of contract. Hence, a court leet could do everything that a court baron could do but a court baron could not do everything that a court leet could do.
(B) A court leet may not always have been authorized by the king as implied by the lines ‘authority to hold such a court either actually or supposedly from a grant from the king’.
(D) Same as A.
(E) Again, the passage states that a court leet was usually (and not ‘always’) connected to the concept of a frank pledge.
View all questions of this test
Most Upvoted Answer
Directions: Read the given passage carefully and answer the question a...
The third para states that ‘In the court baron and the customary court it was said by lawyers that the body of attendants were the judges, and the steward, representing the lord of the manor, only a presiding official, while in the court leet the steward was the actual judge of the tenants’. Thus, (C) is clearly the correct answer.
(A) The passage describes a court leet as a body that could, in addition to what a court baron could do, also do a few other things such as punish petty crimes and breaches of contract. Hence, a court leet could do everything that a court baron could do but a court baron could not do everything that a court leet could do.
(B) A court leet may not always have been authorized by the king as implied by the lines ‘authority to hold such a court either actually or supposedly from a grant from the king’.
(D) Same as A.
(E) Again, the passage states that a court leet was usually (and not ‘always’) connected to the concept of a frank pledge.
Explore Courses for GMAT exam

Similar GMAT Doubts

Directions: Read the given passage carefully and answer the question as follow.The manor was the sphere of operations of a manor court. On every manor the tenants gathered at frequent periods for a great amount of petty judicial and regulative work. The most usual period for the meeting of the manor court was once every three weeks, though in some manors no trace of a meeting is found more frequently than three times, or even twice, a year. In these cases, however, it is quite probable that less formal meetings occurred of which no regular record was kept.Different kinds of gatherings of the tenants are usually distinguished according to the authority under which they were held, or the class of tenants of which they were made up. If the court was held by the lord simply because of his feudal rights as a landholder, and was busied only with matters of the inheritance, transfer, or grant of lands, the fining of tenants for the breach of manorial custom, or failure to perform their duties to the lord of the manor, the election of tenants to petty offices on the manor, and such matters, it was described in legal language as a court baron. If a court so occupied was made up of villain tenants only, it was called a customary court. If, on the other hand, the court also punished general offences, petty crimes, breaches of contract, breaches of the assize, that is to say, the established standard of amount, price, or quality of bread or beer, the lord of the manor drawing his authority to hold such a court either actually or supposedly from a grant from the king, such a court was called a court leet. With the court leet was usually connected the so-called view of frank pledge.Frank pledge was an ancient system, according to which all men were obliged to be enrolled in groups, so that if any one committed an offence, the other members of the group would be obliged to produce him for trial. View of frank pledge was the right to punish by fine all who failed to so enrol themselves. In the court baron and the customary court it was said by lawyers that the body of attendants were the judges, and the steward, representing the lord of the manor, only a presiding official, while in the court leet the steward was the actual judge of the tenants. In practice, however, it is probable that not much was made of these distinctions and that the periodic gatherings were made to do duty for all business of any kind that needed attention, while the procedure was that which had become customary on that special manor, irrespective of the particular form of authority for the court.Q.Which of the following can be inferred from the information in the passage?

Directions: Read the given passage carefully and answer the question as follow.The manor was the sphere of operations of a manor court. On every manor the tenants gathered at frequent periods for a great amount of petty judicial and regulative work. The most usual period for the meeting of the manor court was once every three weeks, though in some manors no trace of a meeting is found more frequently than three times, or even twice, a year. In these cases, however, it is quite probable that less formal meetings occurred of which no regular record was kept.Different kinds of gatherings of the tenants are usually distinguished according to the authority under which they were held, or the class of tenants of which they were made up. If the court was held by the lord simply because of his feudal rights as a landholder, and was busied only with matters of the inheritance, transfer, or grant of lands, the fining of tenants for the breach of manorial custom, or failure to perform their duties to the lord of the manor, the election of tenants to petty offices on the manor, and such matters, it was described in legal language as a court baron. If a court so occupied was made up of villain tenants only, it was called a customary court. If, on the other hand, the court also punished general offences, petty crimes, breaches of contract, breaches of the assize, that is to say, the established standard of amount, price, or quality of bread or beer, the lord of the manor drawing his authority to hold such a court either actually or supposedly from a grant from the king, such a court was called a court leet. With the court leet was usually connected the so-called view of frank pledge.Frank pledge was an ancient system, according to which all men were obliged to be enrolled in groups, so that if any one committed an offence, the other members of the group would be obliged to produce him for trial. View of frank pledge was the right to punish by fine all who failed to so enrol themselves. In the court baron and the customary court it was said by lawyers that the body of attendants were the judges, and the steward, representing the lord of the manor, only a presiding official, while in the court leet the steward was the actual judge of the tenants. In practice, however, it is probable that not much was made of these distinctions and that the periodic gatherings were made to do duty for all business of any kind that needed attention, while the procedure was that which had become customary on that special manor, irrespective of the particular form of authority for the court.Q.Each of the following is mentioned in the passage as a power of the court baron EXCEPT

Directions: Read the given passage carefully and answer the question as follow.The manor was the sphere of operations of a manor court. On every manor the tenants gathered at frequent periods for a great amount of petty judicial and regulative work. The most usual period for the meeting of the manor court was once every three weeks, though in some manors no trace of a meeting is found more frequently than three times, or even twice, a year. In these cases, however, it is quite probable that less formal meetings occurred of which no regular record was kept.Different kinds of gatherings of the tenants are usually distinguished according to the authority under which they were held, or the class of tenants of which they were made up. If the court was held by the lord simply because of his feudal rights as a landholder, and was busied only with matters of the inheritance, transfer, or grant of lands, the fining of tenants for the breach of manorial custom, or failure to perform their duties to the lord of the manor, the election of tenants to petty offices on the manor, and such matters, it was described in legal language as a court baron. If a court so occupied was made up of villain tenants only, it was called a customary court. If, on the other hand, the court also punished general offences, petty crimes, breaches of contract, breaches of the assize, that is to say, the established standard of amount, price, or quality of bread or beer, the lord of the manor drawing his authority to hold such a court either actually or supposedly from a grant from the king, such a court was called a court leet. With the court leet was usually connected the so-called view of frank pledge.Frank pledge was an ancient system, according to which all men were obliged to be enrolled in groups, so that if any one committed an offence, the other members of the group would be obliged to produce him for trial. View of frank pledge was the right to punish by fine all who failed to so enrol themselves. In the court baron and the customary court it was said by lawyers that the body of attendants were the judges, and the steward, representing the lord of the manor, only a presiding official, while in the court leet the steward was the actual judge of the tenants. In practice, however, it is probable that not much was made of these distinctions and that the periodic gatherings were made to do duty for all business of any kind that needed attention, while the procedure was that which had become customary on that special manor, irrespective of the particular form of authority for the court.Q.According to the information in the first paragraph, the fact that ‘in some manors no trace of a meeting is found more frequently than three times, or even twice, a year ’ does NOT necessarily suggest that

Information is the essence of universe and means distinction between things. It is the very basic principle of physics that distinctions never disappear even though they might get scrambled or mixed away even after a seemingly irreversible change say a magazine gets dissolved into pulp at a recycling plan, the information on the pages of the magazines will be re-organized and not eliminated and in theory the decay can be reversed; the pulp reconstructed into words and photographs. The only exception to this principle in physics is if the magazine were thrown into a black hole, a singular object in this regard, since nothing can emerge out of it after all. Even after Stephen Hawking showed in 1975 that black holes can radiate away matter and energy, the radiation seemed devoid of any structure, indicating that all information is lost in a black hole a conclusion that has been hotly contested by physicists all over the world who argue that the entire structure of theoretical physics will disintegrate once you accept the notion that information can be lost, even if in a black hole.Even though Hawking was not easily convinced, the physicists adopted a new theory called the holograph principle that states that when an object falls inside a black hole the stuff inside it may be lost but the objects information may be imprinted on the surface of black hole and with the right tools you may reconstruct the magazine from the black hole just as you would have reconstructed it from the pulp. This principle which may sound like an accounting trick has some serious implications if true. It implies that all information about 3 dimensional objects is stored in 2 dimensions and that there is a limit to how much information can be stored on a given surface area. While this theory plugs a key gap in Hawkins assertion its corollaries spring some interesting implications that may have a tough time standing up to the scrutiny.Why does the author imply that the holographic principle may sound like an accounting trick?

The role of nurturing in determining one’s behavioral traits has been hotly contested. Historically, geneticists believed that behavioral traits are inherited. After all, many properties of the brain are genetically organized and dont depend on information coming in from the senses. Since active genes are essentially inherited, most traditional geneticists believe that nurturing environment plays little role in shaping one’s behavioral traits. However, a new line of research indicated that methyl groups can activate dormant genes, bringing about a slew of changes much later in a person’s life. The methyl group works like a placeholder in a cookbook, attaching to the DNA within each cell to select only those recipes - er, genes - necessary for that particular cell’s proteins, telling the DNA what kind of cells to form. The first such observation was in which methyl groups activated by causes ranging from exposure to certain chemicals to changes in diet set off a cascade of cellular changes resulting in cancer. Because methyl groups are attached to the genes, residing beside but separate from the double-helix DNA code, their study is dubbed epigenetics - “epi” referring to Greek for outer or above. Behavioral geneticists, encouraged by this discovery proved that traumatic experiences such as child neglect, drug abuse, or other severe stresses also set off epigenetic changes to the DNA inside the neurons of a person’s brain, permanently altering behavior. Similarly, through multivariate analysis, they proved that identical twins, in scenarios where one twin has gone through a life altering event, can have vastly different reaction to a stressful situation. Why does the author state “After all, many properties of the brain are genetically organized, and dont depend on information coming in from the senses”

Top Courses for GMATView all

Top Courses for GMAT

Directions: Read the given passage carefully and answer the question as follow.The manor was the sphere of operations of a manor court. On every manor the tenants gathered at frequent periods for a great amount of petty judicial and regulative work. The most usual period for the meeting of the manor court was once every three weeks, though in some manors no trace of a meeting is found more frequently than three times, or even twice, a year. In these cases, however, it is quite probable that less formal meetings occurred of which no regular record was kept.Different kinds of gatherings of the tenants are usually distinguished according to the authority under which they were held, or the class of tenants of which they were made up. If the court was held by the lord simply because of his feudal rights as a landholder, and was busied only with matters of the inheritance, transfer, or grant of lands, the fining of tenants for the breach of manorial custom, or failure to perform their duties to the lord of the manor, the election of tenants to petty offices on the manor, and such matters, it was described in legal language as a court baron. If a court so occupied was made up of villain tenants only, it was called a customary court. If, on the other hand, the court also punished general offences, petty crimes, breaches of contract, breaches of the assize, that is to say, the established standard of amount, price, or quality of bread or beer, the lord of the manor drawing his authority to hold such a court either actually or supposedly from a grant from the king, such a court was called a court leet. With the court leet was usually connected the so-called view of frank pledge.Frank pledge was an ancient system, according to which all men were obliged to be enrolled in groups, so that if any one committed an offence, the other members of the group would be obliged to produce him for trial. View of frank pledge was the right to punish by fine all who failed to so enrol themselves. In the court baron and the customary court it was said by lawyers that the body of attendants were the judges, and the steward, representing the lord of the manor, only a presiding official, while in the court leet the steward was the actual judge of the tenants. In practice, however, it is probable that not much was made of these distinctions and that the periodic gatherings were made to do duty for all business of any kind that needed attention, while the procedure was that which had become customary on that special manor, irrespective of the particular form of authority for the court.Q.According to the information in the passage, which of the following is a point of difference between a court baron and a court leet?a)A court baron could elect tenants to petty offices whereas a court leet could not.b)A court leet was authorised by the king whereas a court baron was not.c)A court baron treated a steward as a presiding official whereas a court leet treated a steward as a judge.d)A court baron could judge matters related to inheritance whereas a court leet could not.e)A court leet was always connected to the frank pledge whereas a court baron was not.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
Directions: Read the given passage carefully and answer the question as follow.The manor was the sphere of operations of a manor court. On every manor the tenants gathered at frequent periods for a great amount of petty judicial and regulative work. The most usual period for the meeting of the manor court was once every three weeks, though in some manors no trace of a meeting is found more frequently than three times, or even twice, a year. In these cases, however, it is quite probable that less formal meetings occurred of which no regular record was kept.Different kinds of gatherings of the tenants are usually distinguished according to the authority under which they were held, or the class of tenants of which they were made up. If the court was held by the lord simply because of his feudal rights as a landholder, and was busied only with matters of the inheritance, transfer, or grant of lands, the fining of tenants for the breach of manorial custom, or failure to perform their duties to the lord of the manor, the election of tenants to petty offices on the manor, and such matters, it was described in legal language as a court baron. If a court so occupied was made up of villain tenants only, it was called a customary court. If, on the other hand, the court also punished general offences, petty crimes, breaches of contract, breaches of the assize, that is to say, the established standard of amount, price, or quality of bread or beer, the lord of the manor drawing his authority to hold such a court either actually or supposedly from a grant from the king, such a court was called a court leet. With the court leet was usually connected the so-called view of frank pledge.Frank pledge was an ancient system, according to which all men were obliged to be enrolled in groups, so that if any one committed an offence, the other members of the group would be obliged to produce him for trial. View of frank pledge was the right to punish by fine all who failed to so enrol themselves. In the court baron and the customary court it was said by lawyers that the body of attendants were the judges, and the steward, representing the lord of the manor, only a presiding official, while in the court leet the steward was the actual judge of the tenants. In practice, however, it is probable that not much was made of these distinctions and that the periodic gatherings were made to do duty for all business of any kind that needed attention, while the procedure was that which had become customary on that special manor, irrespective of the particular form of authority for the court.Q.According to the information in the passage, which of the following is a point of difference between a court baron and a court leet?a)A court baron could elect tenants to petty offices whereas a court leet could not.b)A court leet was authorised by the king whereas a court baron was not.c)A court baron treated a steward as a presiding official whereas a court leet treated a steward as a judge.d)A court baron could judge matters related to inheritance whereas a court leet could not.e)A court leet was always connected to the frank pledge whereas a court baron was not.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? for GMAT 2025 is part of GMAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the GMAT exam syllabus. Information about Directions: Read the given passage carefully and answer the question as follow.The manor was the sphere of operations of a manor court. On every manor the tenants gathered at frequent periods for a great amount of petty judicial and regulative work. The most usual period for the meeting of the manor court was once every three weeks, though in some manors no trace of a meeting is found more frequently than three times, or even twice, a year. In these cases, however, it is quite probable that less formal meetings occurred of which no regular record was kept.Different kinds of gatherings of the tenants are usually distinguished according to the authority under which they were held, or the class of tenants of which they were made up. If the court was held by the lord simply because of his feudal rights as a landholder, and was busied only with matters of the inheritance, transfer, or grant of lands, the fining of tenants for the breach of manorial custom, or failure to perform their duties to the lord of the manor, the election of tenants to petty offices on the manor, and such matters, it was described in legal language as a court baron. If a court so occupied was made up of villain tenants only, it was called a customary court. If, on the other hand, the court also punished general offences, petty crimes, breaches of contract, breaches of the assize, that is to say, the established standard of amount, price, or quality of bread or beer, the lord of the manor drawing his authority to hold such a court either actually or supposedly from a grant from the king, such a court was called a court leet. With the court leet was usually connected the so-called view of frank pledge.Frank pledge was an ancient system, according to which all men were obliged to be enrolled in groups, so that if any one committed an offence, the other members of the group would be obliged to produce him for trial. View of frank pledge was the right to punish by fine all who failed to so enrol themselves. In the court baron and the customary court it was said by lawyers that the body of attendants were the judges, and the steward, representing the lord of the manor, only a presiding official, while in the court leet the steward was the actual judge of the tenants. In practice, however, it is probable that not much was made of these distinctions and that the periodic gatherings were made to do duty for all business of any kind that needed attention, while the procedure was that which had become customary on that special manor, irrespective of the particular form of authority for the court.Q.According to the information in the passage, which of the following is a point of difference between a court baron and a court leet?a)A court baron could elect tenants to petty offices whereas a court leet could not.b)A court leet was authorised by the king whereas a court baron was not.c)A court baron treated a steward as a presiding official whereas a court leet treated a steward as a judge.d)A court baron could judge matters related to inheritance whereas a court leet could not.e)A court leet was always connected to the frank pledge whereas a court baron was not.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for GMAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Directions: Read the given passage carefully and answer the question as follow.The manor was the sphere of operations of a manor court. On every manor the tenants gathered at frequent periods for a great amount of petty judicial and regulative work. The most usual period for the meeting of the manor court was once every three weeks, though in some manors no trace of a meeting is found more frequently than three times, or even twice, a year. In these cases, however, it is quite probable that less formal meetings occurred of which no regular record was kept.Different kinds of gatherings of the tenants are usually distinguished according to the authority under which they were held, or the class of tenants of which they were made up. If the court was held by the lord simply because of his feudal rights as a landholder, and was busied only with matters of the inheritance, transfer, or grant of lands, the fining of tenants for the breach of manorial custom, or failure to perform their duties to the lord of the manor, the election of tenants to petty offices on the manor, and such matters, it was described in legal language as a court baron. If a court so occupied was made up of villain tenants only, it was called a customary court. If, on the other hand, the court also punished general offences, petty crimes, breaches of contract, breaches of the assize, that is to say, the established standard of amount, price, or quality of bread or beer, the lord of the manor drawing his authority to hold such a court either actually or supposedly from a grant from the king, such a court was called a court leet. With the court leet was usually connected the so-called view of frank pledge.Frank pledge was an ancient system, according to which all men were obliged to be enrolled in groups, so that if any one committed an offence, the other members of the group would be obliged to produce him for trial. View of frank pledge was the right to punish by fine all who failed to so enrol themselves. In the court baron and the customary court it was said by lawyers that the body of attendants were the judges, and the steward, representing the lord of the manor, only a presiding official, while in the court leet the steward was the actual judge of the tenants. In practice, however, it is probable that not much was made of these distinctions and that the periodic gatherings were made to do duty for all business of any kind that needed attention, while the procedure was that which had become customary on that special manor, irrespective of the particular form of authority for the court.Q.According to the information in the passage, which of the following is a point of difference between a court baron and a court leet?a)A court baron could elect tenants to petty offices whereas a court leet could not.b)A court leet was authorised by the king whereas a court baron was not.c)A court baron treated a steward as a presiding official whereas a court leet treated a steward as a judge.d)A court baron could judge matters related to inheritance whereas a court leet could not.e)A court leet was always connected to the frank pledge whereas a court baron was not.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for Directions: Read the given passage carefully and answer the question as follow.The manor was the sphere of operations of a manor court. On every manor the tenants gathered at frequent periods for a great amount of petty judicial and regulative work. The most usual period for the meeting of the manor court was once every three weeks, though in some manors no trace of a meeting is found more frequently than three times, or even twice, a year. In these cases, however, it is quite probable that less formal meetings occurred of which no regular record was kept.Different kinds of gatherings of the tenants are usually distinguished according to the authority under which they were held, or the class of tenants of which they were made up. If the court was held by the lord simply because of his feudal rights as a landholder, and was busied only with matters of the inheritance, transfer, or grant of lands, the fining of tenants for the breach of manorial custom, or failure to perform their duties to the lord of the manor, the election of tenants to petty offices on the manor, and such matters, it was described in legal language as a court baron. If a court so occupied was made up of villain tenants only, it was called a customary court. If, on the other hand, the court also punished general offences, petty crimes, breaches of contract, breaches of the assize, that is to say, the established standard of amount, price, or quality of bread or beer, the lord of the manor drawing his authority to hold such a court either actually or supposedly from a grant from the king, such a court was called a court leet. With the court leet was usually connected the so-called view of frank pledge.Frank pledge was an ancient system, according to which all men were obliged to be enrolled in groups, so that if any one committed an offence, the other members of the group would be obliged to produce him for trial. View of frank pledge was the right to punish by fine all who failed to so enrol themselves. In the court baron and the customary court it was said by lawyers that the body of attendants were the judges, and the steward, representing the lord of the manor, only a presiding official, while in the court leet the steward was the actual judge of the tenants. In practice, however, it is probable that not much was made of these distinctions and that the periodic gatherings were made to do duty for all business of any kind that needed attention, while the procedure was that which had become customary on that special manor, irrespective of the particular form of authority for the court.Q.According to the information in the passage, which of the following is a point of difference between a court baron and a court leet?a)A court baron could elect tenants to petty offices whereas a court leet could not.b)A court leet was authorised by the king whereas a court baron was not.c)A court baron treated a steward as a presiding official whereas a court leet treated a steward as a judge.d)A court baron could judge matters related to inheritance whereas a court leet could not.e)A court leet was always connected to the frank pledge whereas a court baron was not.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for GMAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for GMAT Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of Directions: Read the given passage carefully and answer the question as follow.The manor was the sphere of operations of a manor court. On every manor the tenants gathered at frequent periods for a great amount of petty judicial and regulative work. The most usual period for the meeting of the manor court was once every three weeks, though in some manors no trace of a meeting is found more frequently than three times, or even twice, a year. In these cases, however, it is quite probable that less formal meetings occurred of which no regular record was kept.Different kinds of gatherings of the tenants are usually distinguished according to the authority under which they were held, or the class of tenants of which they were made up. If the court was held by the lord simply because of his feudal rights as a landholder, and was busied only with matters of the inheritance, transfer, or grant of lands, the fining of tenants for the breach of manorial custom, or failure to perform their duties to the lord of the manor, the election of tenants to petty offices on the manor, and such matters, it was described in legal language as a court baron. If a court so occupied was made up of villain tenants only, it was called a customary court. If, on the other hand, the court also punished general offences, petty crimes, breaches of contract, breaches of the assize, that is to say, the established standard of amount, price, or quality of bread or beer, the lord of the manor drawing his authority to hold such a court either actually or supposedly from a grant from the king, such a court was called a court leet. With the court leet was usually connected the so-called view of frank pledge.Frank pledge was an ancient system, according to which all men were obliged to be enrolled in groups, so that if any one committed an offence, the other members of the group would be obliged to produce him for trial. View of frank pledge was the right to punish by fine all who failed to so enrol themselves. In the court baron and the customary court it was said by lawyers that the body of attendants were the judges, and the steward, representing the lord of the manor, only a presiding official, while in the court leet the steward was the actual judge of the tenants. In practice, however, it is probable that not much was made of these distinctions and that the periodic gatherings were made to do duty for all business of any kind that needed attention, while the procedure was that which had become customary on that special manor, irrespective of the particular form of authority for the court.Q.According to the information in the passage, which of the following is a point of difference between a court baron and a court leet?a)A court baron could elect tenants to petty offices whereas a court leet could not.b)A court leet was authorised by the king whereas a court baron was not.c)A court baron treated a steward as a presiding official whereas a court leet treated a steward as a judge.d)A court baron could judge matters related to inheritance whereas a court leet could not.e)A court leet was always connected to the frank pledge whereas a court baron was not.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Directions: Read the given passage carefully and answer the question as follow.The manor was the sphere of operations of a manor court. On every manor the tenants gathered at frequent periods for a great amount of petty judicial and regulative work. The most usual period for the meeting of the manor court was once every three weeks, though in some manors no trace of a meeting is found more frequently than three times, or even twice, a year. In these cases, however, it is quite probable that less formal meetings occurred of which no regular record was kept.Different kinds of gatherings of the tenants are usually distinguished according to the authority under which they were held, or the class of tenants of which they were made up. If the court was held by the lord simply because of his feudal rights as a landholder, and was busied only with matters of the inheritance, transfer, or grant of lands, the fining of tenants for the breach of manorial custom, or failure to perform their duties to the lord of the manor, the election of tenants to petty offices on the manor, and such matters, it was described in legal language as a court baron. If a court so occupied was made up of villain tenants only, it was called a customary court. If, on the other hand, the court also punished general offences, petty crimes, breaches of contract, breaches of the assize, that is to say, the established standard of amount, price, or quality of bread or beer, the lord of the manor drawing his authority to hold such a court either actually or supposedly from a grant from the king, such a court was called a court leet. With the court leet was usually connected the so-called view of frank pledge.Frank pledge was an ancient system, according to which all men were obliged to be enrolled in groups, so that if any one committed an offence, the other members of the group would be obliged to produce him for trial. View of frank pledge was the right to punish by fine all who failed to so enrol themselves. In the court baron and the customary court it was said by lawyers that the body of attendants were the judges, and the steward, representing the lord of the manor, only a presiding official, while in the court leet the steward was the actual judge of the tenants. In practice, however, it is probable that not much was made of these distinctions and that the periodic gatherings were made to do duty for all business of any kind that needed attention, while the procedure was that which had become customary on that special manor, irrespective of the particular form of authority for the court.Q.According to the information in the passage, which of the following is a point of difference between a court baron and a court leet?a)A court baron could elect tenants to petty offices whereas a court leet could not.b)A court leet was authorised by the king whereas a court baron was not.c)A court baron treated a steward as a presiding official whereas a court leet treated a steward as a judge.d)A court baron could judge matters related to inheritance whereas a court leet could not.e)A court leet was always connected to the frank pledge whereas a court baron was not.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Directions: Read the given passage carefully and answer the question as follow.The manor was the sphere of operations of a manor court. On every manor the tenants gathered at frequent periods for a great amount of petty judicial and regulative work. The most usual period for the meeting of the manor court was once every three weeks, though in some manors no trace of a meeting is found more frequently than three times, or even twice, a year. In these cases, however, it is quite probable that less formal meetings occurred of which no regular record was kept.Different kinds of gatherings of the tenants are usually distinguished according to the authority under which they were held, or the class of tenants of which they were made up. If the court was held by the lord simply because of his feudal rights as a landholder, and was busied only with matters of the inheritance, transfer, or grant of lands, the fining of tenants for the breach of manorial custom, or failure to perform their duties to the lord of the manor, the election of tenants to petty offices on the manor, and such matters, it was described in legal language as a court baron. If a court so occupied was made up of villain tenants only, it was called a customary court. If, on the other hand, the court also punished general offences, petty crimes, breaches of contract, breaches of the assize, that is to say, the established standard of amount, price, or quality of bread or beer, the lord of the manor drawing his authority to hold such a court either actually or supposedly from a grant from the king, such a court was called a court leet. With the court leet was usually connected the so-called view of frank pledge.Frank pledge was an ancient system, according to which all men were obliged to be enrolled in groups, so that if any one committed an offence, the other members of the group would be obliged to produce him for trial. View of frank pledge was the right to punish by fine all who failed to so enrol themselves. In the court baron and the customary court it was said by lawyers that the body of attendants were the judges, and the steward, representing the lord of the manor, only a presiding official, while in the court leet the steward was the actual judge of the tenants. In practice, however, it is probable that not much was made of these distinctions and that the periodic gatherings were made to do duty for all business of any kind that needed attention, while the procedure was that which had become customary on that special manor, irrespective of the particular form of authority for the court.Q.According to the information in the passage, which of the following is a point of difference between a court baron and a court leet?a)A court baron could elect tenants to petty offices whereas a court leet could not.b)A court leet was authorised by the king whereas a court baron was not.c)A court baron treated a steward as a presiding official whereas a court leet treated a steward as a judge.d)A court baron could judge matters related to inheritance whereas a court leet could not.e)A court leet was always connected to the frank pledge whereas a court baron was not.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Directions: Read the given passage carefully and answer the question as follow.The manor was the sphere of operations of a manor court. On every manor the tenants gathered at frequent periods for a great amount of petty judicial and regulative work. The most usual period for the meeting of the manor court was once every three weeks, though in some manors no trace of a meeting is found more frequently than three times, or even twice, a year. In these cases, however, it is quite probable that less formal meetings occurred of which no regular record was kept.Different kinds of gatherings of the tenants are usually distinguished according to the authority under which they were held, or the class of tenants of which they were made up. If the court was held by the lord simply because of his feudal rights as a landholder, and was busied only with matters of the inheritance, transfer, or grant of lands, the fining of tenants for the breach of manorial custom, or failure to perform their duties to the lord of the manor, the election of tenants to petty offices on the manor, and such matters, it was described in legal language as a court baron. If a court so occupied was made up of villain tenants only, it was called a customary court. If, on the other hand, the court also punished general offences, petty crimes, breaches of contract, breaches of the assize, that is to say, the established standard of amount, price, or quality of bread or beer, the lord of the manor drawing his authority to hold such a court either actually or supposedly from a grant from the king, such a court was called a court leet. With the court leet was usually connected the so-called view of frank pledge.Frank pledge was an ancient system, according to which all men were obliged to be enrolled in groups, so that if any one committed an offence, the other members of the group would be obliged to produce him for trial. View of frank pledge was the right to punish by fine all who failed to so enrol themselves. In the court baron and the customary court it was said by lawyers that the body of attendants were the judges, and the steward, representing the lord of the manor, only a presiding official, while in the court leet the steward was the actual judge of the tenants. In practice, however, it is probable that not much was made of these distinctions and that the periodic gatherings were made to do duty for all business of any kind that needed attention, while the procedure was that which had become customary on that special manor, irrespective of the particular form of authority for the court.Q.According to the information in the passage, which of the following is a point of difference between a court baron and a court leet?a)A court baron could elect tenants to petty offices whereas a court leet could not.b)A court leet was authorised by the king whereas a court baron was not.c)A court baron treated a steward as a presiding official whereas a court leet treated a steward as a judge.d)A court baron could judge matters related to inheritance whereas a court leet could not.e)A court leet was always connected to the frank pledge whereas a court baron was not.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Directions: Read the given passage carefully and answer the question as follow.The manor was the sphere of operations of a manor court. On every manor the tenants gathered at frequent periods for a great amount of petty judicial and regulative work. The most usual period for the meeting of the manor court was once every three weeks, though in some manors no trace of a meeting is found more frequently than three times, or even twice, a year. In these cases, however, it is quite probable that less formal meetings occurred of which no regular record was kept.Different kinds of gatherings of the tenants are usually distinguished according to the authority under which they were held, or the class of tenants of which they were made up. If the court was held by the lord simply because of his feudal rights as a landholder, and was busied only with matters of the inheritance, transfer, or grant of lands, the fining of tenants for the breach of manorial custom, or failure to perform their duties to the lord of the manor, the election of tenants to petty offices on the manor, and such matters, it was described in legal language as a court baron. If a court so occupied was made up of villain tenants only, it was called a customary court. If, on the other hand, the court also punished general offences, petty crimes, breaches of contract, breaches of the assize, that is to say, the established standard of amount, price, or quality of bread or beer, the lord of the manor drawing his authority to hold such a court either actually or supposedly from a grant from the king, such a court was called a court leet. With the court leet was usually connected the so-called view of frank pledge.Frank pledge was an ancient system, according to which all men were obliged to be enrolled in groups, so that if any one committed an offence, the other members of the group would be obliged to produce him for trial. View of frank pledge was the right to punish by fine all who failed to so enrol themselves. In the court baron and the customary court it was said by lawyers that the body of attendants were the judges, and the steward, representing the lord of the manor, only a presiding official, while in the court leet the steward was the actual judge of the tenants. In practice, however, it is probable that not much was made of these distinctions and that the periodic gatherings were made to do duty for all business of any kind that needed attention, while the procedure was that which had become customary on that special manor, irrespective of the particular form of authority for the court.Q.According to the information in the passage, which of the following is a point of difference between a court baron and a court leet?a)A court baron could elect tenants to petty offices whereas a court leet could not.b)A court leet was authorised by the king whereas a court baron was not.c)A court baron treated a steward as a presiding official whereas a court leet treated a steward as a judge.d)A court baron could judge matters related to inheritance whereas a court leet could not.e)A court leet was always connected to the frank pledge whereas a court baron was not.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice GMAT tests.
Explore Courses for GMAT exam

Top Courses for GMAT

Explore Courses
SaveJoin the Discussion on the App for FREE
Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev
Get App
© EduRev
Education Revolution
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days!
Access 1000+ FREE Docs, Videos and Tests
Takes less than 10 seconds to signup