Civil Service Exam Reviewer · Reading Comprehension · hard
Silver and Silk: The Galleon Trade
For about two and a half centuries, from the late 1500s to the early 1800s, Spanish galleons sailed once or twice a year between Manila and Acapulco in Mexico. They carried Chinese silk, porcelain, and spices eastward across the Pacific and returned laden with Mexican silver. The trade made Manila one of the first truly global ports, a meeting point of Asia and the Americas. Yet historians disagree about how much it benefited the islands themselves. Because the profits of a single successful voyage could be enormous, many Spanish residents of Manila devoted their capital to the galleon rather than to farming, mining, or manufacturing in the colony. Goods passed through Manila without being produced there, and the wealth they generated flowed largely to a small group of merchants and officials. Some scholars therefore describe the colony's economy in this period as "lopsided": brilliant at its center but thin everywhere else. Others reply that the trade brought new crops from the Americas, among them corn, tobacco, and cacao, that eventually transformed Philippine agriculture, and that Manila's role as a hub laid foundations for later commerce. Both views agree on one point: the galleon tied the islands' fortunes to distant markets they did not control.
Which point from the passage supports the view that the trade had lasting benefits?
- Its profits went to a small group of merchants.
- It introduced crops such as corn, tobacco, and cacao.
- Goods passed through Manila without being produced there.
- Ships sailed only once or twice a year.
Answer
B. It introduced crops such as corn, tobacco, and cacao.
Solution
The new American crops "eventually transformed Philippine agriculture." The other choices support the critical view.
More Reading Comprehension questions
- What can be inferred about many Spanish residents of Manila?
- As used in the passage, a "lopsided" economy is one that is
- The passage mainly focuses on
- The final sentence suggests that
- What can be inferred about frequent task-switchers?
- Which pairing would the author consider LEAST harmful?
- The phrase "every switch carries a cost" refers to
- Which statement best expresses the central idea?
- Which policy is most consistent with the author's suggestion?
- How does the author regard the two views?