Question

Which one of the following, if true, would cast the most doubt on Rubinstein's argument concerning wealth and the official governing elite in nineteenth- century Britain? (A) Entry into this elite was more dependent on university attendance than on religious background. (B) Attendance at a prestigious university was probably more crucial than a certain minimum family income in gaining entry into this elite. (C) Bishops as a group were somewhat wealthier, at the point of entry into this elite, than were higher civil servants or chairmen of manufacturing companies. (D) The families of many members of this elite owned few, if any, shares in iron industries and textile industries in the north of England. (F) The composition of this elite included vice-chancellors, many of whom held office because of their wealth.

Short answer

Option (B): It suggests university attendance, not wealth, was crucial, casting doubt on Rubinstein's argument.

Step-by-step solution

Understand the Argument

Rubinstein's argument revolves around the idea of wealth and the official governing elite in 19th century Britain. It likely suggests that wealth was a significant factor for entry into this elite.

Analyze Each Option

We need to find the answer choice that challenges the core of Rubinstein's argument: wealth as a key determinant for joining the elite.

Examine Option (A)

Option (A) suggests university attendance mattered more than religious background. This does not directly challenge the role of wealth, as university attendance likely correlates with wealth.

Examine Option (B)

Option (B) asserts that prestigious university attendance was more crucial than family income. This implies education, not wealth, was crucial, which directly challenges wealth as a primary factor for entry.

Examine Option (C)

Option (C) states bishops were wealthier than civil servants and company chairpersons. This supports, rather than challenges, the emphasis on wealth.

Examine Option (D)

Option (D) mentions that many families owned few shares in key industries. This does not necessarily contradict wealth being the criterion for membership, as wealth can be from other sources.

Examine Option (F)

Option (F) claims vice-chancellors were included because of their wealth. This again supports the idea that wealth was significant, aligning with Rubinstein's argument.

Determine Most Doubt-Casting Option

Based on the analysis, Option (B) suggests factors other than wealth (prestigious university attendance) were key, casting doubt on the primacy of wealth in entry into the elite.

Key concepts

19th century Britain

In the 19th century, Britain was undergoing rapid change. This period marked the height of the Industrial Revolution which brought about significant economic growth, technological innovation, and social change. The Victorian era, named after Queen Victoria, was characterized by strict social stratification and a rigid class system.
Urbanization increased as people moved to cities in search of jobs in factories. This shift altered the traditional rural lifestyle, yet it also highlighted the stark socio-economic divisions between the elite, middle, and working classes. Universal suffrage was still a distant dream for many, with political and economic power predominantly held by the affluent.

• The Industrial Revolution was transforming industries and infrastructure.
• Social mobility was limited, maintaining a distinct separation between classes.
• Technological advances did not immediately lead to societal changes for all.

Understanding Britain's socio-economic landscape in this era is key to analyzing the factors that shaped its elite.

Educational Prerequisites

Education was increasingly seen as a pathway to influence and prestige in 19th century Britain. Attending a prestigious university was not just about acquiring knowledge; it was a key determinant in one's social standing and potential career opportunities.
The entry requirements for these universities were steep, often requiring a foundational education from elite secondary institutions. This prerequisite inherently favored those from wealthy or well-connected families.

• Access to quality preparatory education was crucial.
• Universities like Oxford and Cambridge became symbols of elite status.
• Degree from a prestigious institution often led to positions of power.

Thus, education served both as a marker and a gatekeeper for societal advancement.

Elite Membership Criteria

The criteria for elite membership in 19th century Britain revolved around a mix of wealth, education, and social connections. Traditionally, wealth was seen as the primary gateway; however, components like educational attainment began to gain prominence.
Elite membership often meant having influence in governing bodies, whether through direct involvement in politics or by holding significant roles in industry. Memberships in exclusive clubs and societal groups further solidified one's status.

• Wealth was a significant factor but not the sole criterion.
• Members were typically well-educated, often from prestigious universities.
• Social networks played a crucial role in maintaining elite status.

This multifaceted criteria reflected a society where merit, though acknowledged, was often overshadowed by hereditary privilege and social capital.

University Attendance

University attendance in 19th century Britain was more than just an academic endeavor; it was a stepping stone to elitism and political influence. Prestigious institutions such as Oxford and Cambridge were particularly pivotal, as they served as incubators for future leaders and policymakers.
The rigorous academic environment provided not just a degree but a network of high-born connections. For many, the experience was as much about forging lifelong relationships and alliances as it was about learning.

• Degrees from these universities were highly valued and often a prerequisite for prestigious positions.
• Attendance was limited to the privileged, although scholarships for merit were slowly emerging.
• The alumni networks provided unparalleled advantages in career prospects.

In this era, university attendance was seen as a crucial, often elite-exclusive marker of one's capability and potential to join the echelons of society.