|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
Posts: 258
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
1
[0], given: 0
|
Archaeologists seeking the location of a legendary siege and [#permalink]
 26 Jul 2004, 08:15
Question Stats:
0% (00:00) correct
 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions
Archaeologists seeking the location of a legendary siege and destruction of a city are excavating in several possible places, including a middle and a lower layer of a large mound. The bottom of the middle layer contains some pieces of pottery of type 3, known to be from a later period than the time of the destruction of the city, but the lower layer does not.
The force of the evidence cited above is most seriously weakened if which of the following is true?
(A) Gerbils, small animals long native to the area, dig large burrows into which objects can fall when the burrows collapse.
(B) Pottery of types 1 and 2, found in the lower level, was used in the cities from which, according to the legend, the besieging forces came.
(C) Several pieces of stone from a lower-layer wall have been found incorporated into the remains of a building in the middle layer.
(D) Both the middle and the lower layer show evidence of large-scale destruction of habitations by fire.
(E) Bronze axheads of a type used at the time of the siege were found in the lower level of excavation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 16 Oct 2003
Posts: 1957
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
15
[0], given: 0
|
The pottery is beleived to comes from the upper layer so we have to show it that it came from lower layer, C is best according to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Posts: 428
Location: India
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 0
|
C looks fine to me
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 22 Jun 2004
Posts: 399
Location: Bangalore, India
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
1
[0], given: 0
|
Re: CR: legendary siege [#permalink]
27 Jul 2004, 04:43
I think that it is C.
If C were true, the statement "The bottom of the middle layer contains some pieces of pottery of type 3, known to be from a later period than the time of the destruction of the city, but the lower layer does not." would not hold true. Because, the middle layer contains the remains of the lower layer. those some pieces may not belong to later period but belong to the early period itself.
OlegC wrote: Archaeologists seeking the location of a legendary siege and destruction of a city are excavating in several possible places, including a middle and a lower layer of a large mound. The bottom of the middle layer contains some pieces of pottery of type 3, known to be from a later period than the time of the destruction of the city, but the lower layer does not.
The force of the evidence cited above is most seriously weakened if which of the following is true?
(A) Gerbils, small animals long native to the area, dig large burrows into which objects can fall when the burrows collapse.
(B) Pottery of types 1 and 2, found in the lower level, was used in the cities from which, according to the legend, the besieging forces came.
(C) Several pieces of stone from a lower-layer wall have been found incorporated into the remains of a building in the middle layer.
(D) Both the middle and the lower layer show evidence of large-scale destruction of habitations by fire.
(E) Bronze axheads of a type used at the time of the siege were found in the lower level of excavation.
_________________
Awaiting response,
Thnx & Rgds,
Chandra
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
Posts: 258
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
1
[0], given: 0
|
OA is A
My explanations:
the evidence cited in the passage supposedly indicates that the middle layer of the mound represents a later period than that in which the seige took place. To discredit the evicence we have to show that the middle layer may not represent a later period
B and D are out of scope. E reinforces the evidence by showing that the LOWER LEVEL represents the period of the seige, not the middle level
C does little harm to the argument because it it still possible that the house in the middle layer was built long after the seige with the use of some of the stones from the ancient wall
A weakens the force of the evidence for it shows that articles found in the middle layer DO NOT BELONG TO THE PERIOD THIS LAYER REPRESENTS but might have fallen there FROM THE UPPER LEVEL. Therefore, the findings are of no value to the scientists; the scientists could have found anything in the middle layer (even a pack of Marlboro)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 21 Mar 2004
Posts: 447
Location: Cary,NC
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
2
[0], given: 0
|
I liked the answer A at first sight, but seeing others answers got influenced and thought C was better 
_________________
ash
________________________
I'm crossing the bridge.........
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 16 Oct 2003
Posts: 1957
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
15
[0], given: 0
|
I also had an inclination for A. My reasoning behind eliminating A is because the argument says that the pottery is from the later period and A seems to corroborate this. So none of the components of the evidence is used to weaken the argument.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Affiliations: CFA Level 2
Joined: 05 May 2004
Posts: 323
Location: Hanoi
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
5
[0], given: 0
|
I didn't understand clearly this question. After 2 mins, I picked C.
_________________
"Life is like a box of chocolates, you never know what you'r gonna get"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Vercules, Legendaddy, noboru, Marcab, metallicafan, rajeevrks27, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, souvik101990, doe007, MacFauz, PTK, carcass, kissthegmat, Narenn
|
close
