A review of Charles Spencer's book on the six-week hunt for Charles II after his defeat at Worcester in 1651. The reviewer loves its close, detailed retelling (hair cut with shears, a day hiding in an oak tree) and its even-handedness, notes how Charles later celebrated the episode, but wishes the book had asked how those weeks shaped him.
The summary (27-31) is all in A. YES / NO / NOT GIVEN (32-35) covers B and C. The multiple choice (36-40) takes one paragraph each, A and C to F.
Summary completion (phrase list A-J)
Questions 27-31
How to attack this block: Translate A's story into the list's abstract phrases. The deal with the Scots is a strategic alliance, the principle he gave up was religious, the battle was a decisive Parliamentarian victory, the 'huge sum' was a large reward, and France offered relative safety.
Question 27
Answer: HParagraph A, third sentence
What kind of arrangement did Charles II make with the Scots?
did a deal with the Scots… in return for being crowned King of Scots
Question says → Passage says
formed a ___ with the Scotsdid a deal with the Scots
in order to become King of Scotsin return for being crowned King of Scots
Why: A deal between two sides, each getting something it wants, is an alliance. It was strategic because Charles gave something up to win a crown. That's H, strategic alliance.
The trap: G (political debate) sounds possible for anything involving Scotland and religion, but nothing in the passage is a debate. They agreed terms.
Question 28
Answer: JParagraph A, third sentence
What important thing did Charles give up that his father had held and died for?
the young Charles II sacrificed one of the very principles his father had died for and did a deal with the Scots, thereby accepting Presbyterianism… as the national religion
Question says → Passage says
abandoned an importantsacrificed one of the very principles
had contributed to his father's deathhis father had died for
Why: The principle he sacrificed was about which religion the nation would follow, since he accepted Presbyterianism to get the crown. A principle about religion is a religious conviction, J.
The trap: G (political debate) and E (new government) both sound political, but the passage ties the principle to 'the national religion'. A debate isn't something you hold and die for.
Question 29
Answer: FParagraph A, first and seventh sentences
What did the Battle of Worcester give the Parliamentarians?
his resounding defeat at the Battle of Worcester… After being comprehensively defeated on the meadows outside the city by the Parliamentarian army, the 21-year-old king found himself the subject of a national manhunt
Question says → Passage says
a ___ for the Parliamentariansresounding defeat / comprehensively defeated… by the Parliamentarian army
Charles had to flee for his lifethe subject of a national manhunt
Why: Charles was 'comprehensively defeated' by the Parliamentarian army, and a 'resounding' defeat for one side is a clear win for the other. Flip it round and you get F, a decisive victory for the Parliamentarians.
The trap: A (military innovation) can tempt because it's about a battle, but nothing is said about new tactics or weapons. The passage only tells you how one-sided it was.
Question 30
Answer: BParagraph A, seventh sentence
What was offered for Charles's capture?
with a huge sum offered for his capture
Question says → Passage says
A ___ was offered for Charles's capturea huge sum offered for his capture
Why: A huge sum of money offered to whoever catches someone is a reward. 'Huge' = 'large', so B, large reward.
The trap: C (widespread conspiracy) fits the idea of a 'national manhunt', but a manhunt is a search, not a secret plot, and it isn't what was offered.
Question 31
Answer: DParagraph A, eighth sentence
What did Charles finally reach in continental Europe?
to evade the Parliamentarians before seeking refuge in France
Question says → Passage says
after six weeks spent in hidingOver the following six weeks
the ___ of continental Europeseeking refuge in France
Why: 'Refuge' is a safe place. France was safe compared with England, where he was being hunted, so D, relative safety. 'Relative' fits because he was still penniless and wandering.
The trap: E (new government) can look right if you think of his later return as king, but that's years later. In France he only found safety.
YES / NO / NOT GIVEN
Questions 32-35
How to attack this block: The account was 'in great detail', so the second statement is NO. Charles told Pepys he only began to think about saving himself once the battle was hopelessly lost, so he hadn't planned his escape beforehand (NO). Why he chose Pepys is never explained (NOT GIVEN), and using Charles's own narrative is praised as one of the book's joys (YES).
Question 32
Answer: NOT GIVENParagraph B, second sentence
Did Charles pick Pepys because he thought Pepys could be trusted?
His intention when asking Pepys to commit his story to paper was to ensure that this most extraordinary episode was never forgotten.
Question says → Passage says
chose Pepys for the taskasking Pepys to commit his story to paper
Why: You're told why Charles wanted the story written down: so it would never be forgotten. You're never told why he chose Pepys rather than someone else, and trust isn't mentioned. NOT GIVEN.
The trap: The sentence starts 'His intention…', which looks like a reason. It's the reason for recording the story, not the reason for choosing Pepys.
Question 33
Answer: NOParagraph B, third sentence
Was Charles's own account of the escape short on detail?
Over two three-hour sittings, the king related to him in great detail his personal recollections of the six weeks he had spent as a fugitive.
Question says → Passage says
personal recollection of the escapehis personal recollections of the six weeks he had spent as a fugitive
lacked sufficient detailin great detail
Why: 'In great detail' is the opposite of lacking detail, and two three-hour sittings backs it up. The writer's claim contradicts the statement, so NO.
The trap: Paragraph F criticises the book for something missing, which can make you think 'lacking' is fair. That criticism is about Spencer's book, not Charles's account.
Question 34
Answer: NOParagraph B, last sentence
Did Charles tell Pepys he'd planned his escape before the battle?
Charles commenced his story: “After the battle was so absolutely lost as to be beyond hope of recovery, I began to think of the best way of saving myself.
Question says → Passage says
Charles indicated to PepysCharles commenced his story
planned his escapeI began to think of the best way of saving myself
before the battleAfter the battle was so absolutely lost as to be beyond hope of recovery
Why: Charles's opening words to Pepys put his thinking about escape after the battle, once it was 'beyond hope of recovery'. Only then did he 'begin to think' of saving himself. The statement says he planned it before the battle, which contradicts him: NO.
The trap: The statement and the quote share the same idea (thinking about how to escape), so a quick reader ticks YES. Check the timing words: 'After the battle… I began' is the opposite of 'before'.
Question 35
Answer: YESParagraph C, first sentence
Is using Charles's own account a good thing about the book?
One of the joys of Spencer's book, a result not least of its use of Charles II's own narrative as well as those of his supporters, is just how close the reader gets to the action.
Question says → Passage says
a positive aspect of the bookOne of the joys of Spencer's book
The inclusion of Charles's accountits use of Charles II's own narrative
Why: The reviewer calls the closeness to the action 'one of the joys' of the book and says it comes partly from using Charles's own narrative. A joy is a positive aspect, so YES.
Multiple choice
Questions 36-40
How to attack this block: Each question names its paragraph. A sets up the escape, C's shears and walnut leaves show how the book brings events to life, and D shows Charles celebrating what was really a defeat. E praises Spencer's even-handed sympathy for both sides. F's complaint is that the book never asks if the six weeks changed him.
Question 36
Answer: BParagraph A
What is the first paragraph mainly for?
After his father was executed by the Parliamentarians in 1649, the young Charles II… did a deal with the Scots… the 21-year-old king found himself the subject of a national manhunt
Question says → Passage says
the circumstances leading toAfter his father was executed / did a deal with the Scots / After being comprehensively defeated
Charles II's escapethe subject of a national manhunt / managed… to evade the Parliamentarians
Why: Paragraph A walks you through the chain of events: his father's execution, the deal with the Scots, the invasions, the defeat, and then the manhunt and escape. It's background to the escape, so B.
The trap: A tempts because Worcester is named, but you get one line on the battle (he lost badly), not what happened during it. D is out too: the father is mentioned, but beliefs aren't compared.
Question 37
Answer: CParagraph C
Why does the reviewer give examples of what the fugitives did in paragraph three?
how close the reader gets to the action… delicious details: the cutting of the king's long hair with agricultural shears, the use of walnut leaves to dye his pale skin
Question says → Passage says
brought to lifehow close the reader gets to the action
examples of the fugitives' behaviourthe cutting of the king's long hair with agricultural shears / the use of walnut leaves to dye his pale skin
Why: The hair cut with shears, the walnut-leaf dye and the day in the oak tree are 'delicious details' that show how close the reader gets to the action. They illustrate how vividly the book tells the story, so C.
The trap: A is tempting because of the soldiers searching below the oak tree. The reviewer picks that example for its vividness, not to measure how near Charles came to death.
Question 38
Answer: AParagraph D, middle
What point does the reviewer make about Charles in paragraph four?
This makes it all the more interesting that Charles II himself loved the story so much ever after.
Question says → Passage says
chose to celebrateloved the story so much ever after / initiatives to memorialise it
what was essentially a defeatCharles's adventures after losing the Battle of Worcester / the lowest point in their life
Why: The story starts with Charles losing a battle and being shut out by the English, yet he loved it, retold it and set up a knightly order and huge paintings to remember it. The reviewer even calls it 'the lowest point' of his life, marked 'so enthusiastically'. He celebrated a defeat, so A.
The trap: B is tempting because D explains why people bolted their doors. But that explains the people's reaction. The reviewer never says Charles misunderstood it.
Question 39
Answer: BParagraph E, third sentence
What does the reviewer say about Spencer in paragraph five?
He has even-handed sympathy for both the fugitive king and the fierce republican regime that hunted him
Question says → Passage says
an unbiased approacheven-handed sympathy for both
Why: 'Even-handed' means treating both sides fairly. Sympathy for both the king and the regime hunting him is an unbiased approach, so B.
The trap: D tempts, but his prose 'steers deftly clear of modern idioms', so he avoids modern language rather than writing in it. C is wrong too: the details are praised, not criticised.
Question 40
Answer: DParagraph F
What does the reviewer mean when she says the book 'doesn't quite hit the mark'?
Would Charles II have been a different king had these six weeks never happened?… This is the one area where the book doesn't quite hit the mark.
Question says → Passage says
a lasting influence on himWould Charles II have been a different king / must have affected him in some way / help form him
fails to addressdoesn't quite hit the mark
Why: 'This is the one area' points back to the questions just asked: did those six weeks change him, did they help form him? The book doesn't answer them, so D.
The trap: C tempts because disguises, trickery and subterfuge are named. But they're named as experiences that might have shaped him. The complaint is that the book doesn't ask what they did to him, not that it leaves them out.
NO, not NOT GIVEN. At the end of paragraph B, Charles says that only after the battle was lost beyond hope did he begin to think of the best way of saving himself. So the escape wasn't planned before the battle.
B. 'Even-handed sympathy' for both the king and the regime means unbiased. D tempts because he avoids modern idioms, but that isn't the same as writing for a modern audience.
J (religious conviction). He accepted Presbyterianism to become King of Scots, giving up a principle his father had died for.
Words from this passage worth keeping
resounding(A)
very clear and complete
pre-emptive(A)
done first to stop the other side acting
evade(A)
escape or avoid being caught
fugitive(B)
a person running away from capture
scoured(C)
searched very thoroughly
memorialise(D)
do something so that an event is remembered
even-handed(E)
fair to all sides
subterfuge(F)
secret tricks used to get what you want
Sit this test on Langujet, then come back
The full Cambridge 17 Test 1 reading paper: all three passages, 60 minutes, marked the second you finish with a review of every answer. Already done it? Take it again and see if the same traps still get you.
Cambridge IELTS 17, Test 1, Reading Passage 3. The passage and questions belong to Cambridge University Press and are not reproduced here. We quote short extracts only as evidence for our own commentary, and the answers are published for self-marking. Get the book for the full text, or sit the test on Langujet.
