GRE Prep Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
It was the English judge Thatcher who heralded an important turning po
[#permalink]
25 Nov 2025, 23:51
25 Nov 2025, 23:51
1
Expert Reply
Question 1
00:00
Question Stats:
13% (01:35) correct
88% (01:50) wrong based on 8 sessions
Hide Show timer Statistics
It was the English judge Thatcher who heralded an important turning point in legal reasoning by identifying himself as an independent legal authority, by virtue of his own self-created legal ability. Yet it was left to the later Judge Edward Coke to define the mode of reasoning that would dominate the common law for more than three centuries. As he prepared to rule on a legal case, King James I was doubtless surprised by his Judge Edward Coke's sudden pronouncement that he could no longer do so, because Coke had perfected a kind of logic which was so unique as to make him and his fellow judges the sole proper interpreters of the law. The exact nature of this new method was not immediately discernable. What was discernable, however, was that this method was so esoteric and exclusive that only professional lawyers could comprehend it. It was actually later legalists who would invent its processes, but for now, Coke had claimed for the legal profession an exclusive monopoly over it.
Consider all that apply
Which of the following is the most reasonable conclusion that can be drawn from the information in the passage with reference to the 'surprise' displayed by King James I?
A. From this point onwards, King James ceased to be the sole interpreter of the law
B. From this point onward, King James and his judges could both act as interpreters of the law
C. Prior to this point, King James' judges had not been the only interpreters of the law
Which of the following is the most reasonable conclusion that can be drawn from the information in the passage with reference to the 'surprise' displayed by King James I?
A. From this point onwards, King James ceased to be the sole interpreter of the law
B. From this point onward, King James and his judges could both act as interpreters of the law
C. Prior to this point, King James' judges had not been the only interpreters of the law
- Part of the project: GRE Hard and Tricky Verbal Practice: NEW Questions Daily - Gain 20 Kudos & Get FREE Access to GRE Prep Club TESTS
- Also replying to the unanswered questions
Re: It was the English judge Thatcher who heralded an important turning po
[#permalink]
13 Dec 2025, 13:11
13 Dec 2025, 13:11
Expert Reply
Analysis of the Passage Section
The key event is described here:
"As he prepared to rule on a legal case, King James I was doubtless surprised by his Judge Edward Coke's sudden pronouncement that he could no longer do so, because Coke had perfected a kind of logic which was so unique as to make him and his fellow judges the sole proper interpreters of the law."
The Surprise: King James I was surprised when Coke told him the King could no longer rule on the case because the judges now claimed an exclusive right to interpret the law.
The Implication: If King James I was surprised by the declaration that only the judges could interpret the law, it implies that, prior to this pronouncement, the King did believe he had the authority to rule (or interpret) the law.
Evaluation of Options
- A. From this point onwards, King James ceased to be the sole interpreter of the law.
- The passage states that Coke's logic made the judges the sole proper interpreters of the law. This would mean King James I ceased to be an interpreter, let alone the sole one. This conclusion is likely true, but it doesn't directly explain the surprise.
- B. From this point onward, King James and his judges could both act as interpreters of the law.
- This contradicts Coke's pronouncement, which claimed sole authority for the judges. This statement is likely false.
- C. Prior to this point, King James' judges had not been the only interpreters of the law.
- If Coke claimed that judges were now the sole interpreters, and this surprised the King, the King must have previously believed that others (specifically, himself) also had the right to interpret or rule on the law. This implies that, prior to this moment, the judges were not the only ones with that authority. This conclusion directly explains the King's surprise at being told he could no longer rule.
The most reasonable conclusion that explains the surprise is that the King was attempting to rule, but Coke blocked him by claiming exclusive authority for the judiciary, meaning that before that point, the King (or others) shared that authority.
The correct choice is $\(\mathbf{C}\)$.
The key event is described here:
"As he prepared to rule on a legal case, King James I was doubtless surprised by his Judge Edward Coke's sudden pronouncement that he could no longer do so, because Coke had perfected a kind of logic which was so unique as to make him and his fellow judges the sole proper interpreters of the law."
The Surprise: King James I was surprised when Coke told him the King could no longer rule on the case because the judges now claimed an exclusive right to interpret the law.
The Implication: If King James I was surprised by the declaration that only the judges could interpret the law, it implies that, prior to this pronouncement, the King did believe he had the authority to rule (or interpret) the law.
Evaluation of Options
- A. From this point onwards, King James ceased to be the sole interpreter of the law.
- The passage states that Coke's logic made the judges the sole proper interpreters of the law. This would mean King James I ceased to be an interpreter, let alone the sole one. This conclusion is likely true, but it doesn't directly explain the surprise.
- B. From this point onward, King James and his judges could both act as interpreters of the law.
- This contradicts Coke's pronouncement, which claimed sole authority for the judges. This statement is likely false.
- C. Prior to this point, King James' judges had not been the only interpreters of the law.
- If Coke claimed that judges were now the sole interpreters, and this surprised the King, the King must have previously believed that others (specifically, himself) also had the right to interpret or rule on the law. This implies that, prior to this moment, the judges were not the only ones with that authority. This conclusion directly explains the King's surprise at being told he could no longer rule.
The most reasonable conclusion that explains the surprise is that the King was attempting to rule, but Coke blocked him by claiming exclusive authority for the judiciary, meaning that before that point, the King (or others) shared that authority.
The correct choice is $\(\mathbf{C}\)$.
gmatclubot
Re: It was the English judge Thatcher who heralded an important turning po [#permalink]
13 Dec 2025, 13:11
Moderators:
