In the course of her researches, a historian recently found : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club App Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 04 Dec 2016, 17:38

### GMAT 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

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# In the course of her researches, a historian recently found

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 09 Jul 2007
Posts: 242
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 216 [0], given: 0

In the course of her researches, a historian recently found [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Aug 2008, 05:14
5
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

71% (02:17) correct 29% (01:32) wrong based on 212 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

In the course of her researches, a historian recently found two documents mentioning the same person, Erich Schnitzler. One, dated May 3, 1739, is a record of Schnitzler’s arrest for peddling without a license. The second, undated, is a statement by Schnitzler asserting that he has been peddling off and on for 20 years.

The facts above best support which of the following conclusions?
(A) Schnitzler started peddling around 1719.
(B) Schnitzler was arrested repeatedly for peddling.
(C) The undated document was written before 1765.
(D) The arrest record was written after the undated document.
(E) The arrest record provides better evidence that Schnitzler peddled than does the undated document.
If you have any questions
New!
Intern
Joined: 31 Jul 2008
Posts: 33
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0

Re: CR In the course of her researches, a historian [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Aug 2008, 05:26
The best option i guess is E.Though still sceptical.
VP
Joined: 17 Jun 2008
Posts: 1397
Followers: 8

Kudos [?]: 286 [0], given: 0

Re: CR In the course of her researches, a historian [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Aug 2008, 05:28
ssandeepan wrote:
In the course of her researches, a historian recently found two documents mentioning the same person, Erich Schnitzler. One, dated May 3, 1739, is a record of Schnitzler’s arrest for peddling without a license. The second, undated, is a statement by Schnitzler asserting that he has been peddling off and on for 20 years.

The facts above best support which of the following conclusions?
(A) Schnitzler started peddling around 1719. -> this is wrong since he has been peddling for of and on for 20 years hence if he were to begin peddling in 1719 then he would have got arrested in 1739 exaclty 20 years
(B) Schnitzler was arrested repeatedly for peddling. -> this is wrong since he got arrested for only once
(C) The undated document was written before 1765. -> this is illogical and irrelevant
(D) The arrest record was written after the undated document. -> THIS IS IMO answer since second premise says that he has been peddling off and on for 20 years hence till now he is not arrested and is still peddling according to this second record
(E) The arrest record provides better evidence that Schnitzler peddled than does the undated document. -> this is not a correct conclution since author mentions about the time when the document is written

_________________

cheers
Its Now Or Never

Senior Manager
Joined: 06 Apr 2008
Posts: 449
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 137 [0], given: 1

Re: CR In the course of her researches, a historian [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Aug 2008, 07:22
ssandeepan wrote:
In the course of her researches, a historian recently found two documents mentioning the same person, Erich Schnitzler. One, dated May 3, 1739, is a record of Schnitzler’s arrest for peddling without a license. The second, undated, is a statement by Schnitzler asserting that he has been peddling off and on for 20 years.

The facts above best support which of the following conclusions?
(A) Schnitzler started peddling around 1719.
(B) Schnitzler was arrested repeatedly for peddling.
(C) The undated document was written before 1765.
(D) The arrest record was written after the undated document.
(E) The arrest record provides better evidence that Schnitzler peddled than does the undated document.

IMO C).
Director
Joined: 30 Jun 2007
Posts: 793
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 156 [0], given: 0

Re: CR In the course of her researches, a historian [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Aug 2008, 10:41
Good one!

The record provides better evidence than the statement.

Manager
Joined: 25 May 2008
Posts: 196
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 0

Re: CR In the course of her researches, a historian [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Aug 2008, 11:01
E. Since the second document is undated, we don't know when he started peddling or when was written the undated document. So, A,C and D are out. B is out of date because because we know only that he has been peddling off and on for 20 years. So, the best answer is E, since an official record is more credible than an unofficial one.
Director
Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 947
Followers: 8

Kudos [?]: 283 [0], given: 0

Re: CR In the course of her researches, a historian [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Aug 2008, 13:58
Premise1: H found 2 documents about E.
Premise2: 1st document, dated May 3, 1739, is a record of E arrest for peddling without a license.
Premise3: 2nd document, undated, is a statement by E asserting that he has been peddling off and on for 20 years.

(A) Schnitzler started peddling around 1719.
May be E got started first and that pushed him for further peddling. So no proof for this one.

(B) Schnitzler was arrested repeatedly for peddling.
There is only 1 instance of documented arrest so cannot be concluded about other arrest.

(C) The undated document was written before 1765.
E's age is not given. E might have written the undated document anytime. So no proof that he wrote it before 1765.

(D) The arrest record was written after the undated document.
Again no proof for this one.

(E) The arrest record provides better evidence that Schnitzler peddled than does the undated document.
This one is quite plausible. If I say I am a great soccer player, nobody might belive it or few might belive, however, it same thing is told by some authoritative sports magazine, then many people will beleive it. In that the second is more authoritative source.

IMO E.
Manager
Joined: 09 Jul 2007
Posts: 242
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 216 [0], given: 0

Re: CR In the course of her researches, a historian [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Aug 2008, 15:19
OA is C .

As you have mentioned :
Premise1: H found 2 documents about E.
Premise2: 1st document, dated May 3, 1739, is a record of E arrest for peddling without a license.
Premise3: 2nd document, undated, is a statement by E asserting that he has been peddling off and on for 20 years.

so , if 1739 was the 1st time Erich Schnitzler was cycling, the the second document would be from 1759, which is before 1765. And if 1739 was not the 1st time Erich Schnitzler was cycling , then definately the the second document would be before 1759.
Manager
Joined: 12 May 2006
Posts: 185
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 55 [0], given: 0

Re: CR In the course of her researches, a historian [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Aug 2008, 15:31
OA has to be C as its true in any case.
Senior Manager
Joined: 31 Jul 2008
Posts: 306
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 46 [0], given: 0

Re: CR In the course of her researches, a historian [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Aug 2008, 16:30
how about 1959 - 1964 ; makes C wrong

E is obv not very strong but here other options are quite weak
VP
Joined: 17 Jun 2008
Posts: 1397
Followers: 8

Kudos [?]: 286 [0], given: 0

Re: CR In the course of her researches, a historian [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Aug 2008, 23:21
ssandeepan wrote:
OA is C .

As you have mentioned :
Premise1: H found 2 documents about E.
Premise2: 1st document, dated May 3, 1739, is a record of E arrest for peddling without a license.
Premise3: 2nd document, undated, is a statement by E asserting that he has been peddling off and on for 20 years.

so , if 1739 was the 1st time Erich Schnitzler was cycling, the the second document would be from 1759, which is before 1765. And if 1739 was not the 1st time Erich Schnitzler was cycling , then definately the the second document would be before 1759.

This one is good
i messed up
_________________

cheers
Its Now Or Never

Manager
Joined: 24 Sep 2008
Posts: 191
Schools: MIT / INSEAD / IIM - ABC
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 103 [0], given: 7

Re: CR In the course of her researches, a historian [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Nov 2008, 01:38
ssandeepan wrote:
OA is C .

As you have mentioned :
Premise1: H found 2 documents about E.
Premise2: 1st document, dated May 3, 1739, is a record of E arrest for peddling without a license.
Premise3: 2nd document, undated, is a statement by E asserting that he has been peddling off and on for 20 years.

so , if 1739 was the 1st time Erich Schnitzler was cycling, the the second document would be from 1759, which is before 1765. And if 1739 was not the 1st time Erich Schnitzler was cycling , then definately the the second document would be before 1759.

Just browing thru the forum...this is a real good one!
VP
Joined: 05 Jul 2008
Posts: 1430
Followers: 39

Kudos [?]: 351 [0], given: 1

Re: CR In the course of her researches, a historian [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Nov 2008, 11:59
stallone wrote:
how about 1959 - 1964 ; makes C wrong

E is obv not very strong but here other options are quite weak

I initially picked C, but ruled it out because it would be more than 20 years if the undated document is from 1759-1764. The conclusion does not follow. Does it? Where is this Q from?

E, IMO does not offer any more strength because both documents are saying that he was peddling. the only thing different was he did not have license and arrested. peddling is not questioned. So one doc does not support peddling strongly over the other.

I looked at D but the undated document can clearly be written after the arrest document.

Example: arrest in 1739 and undated document in 1740 about his peddling from 1720 to 1740
Manager
Joined: 24 Sep 2008
Posts: 106
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

Re: CR In the course of her researches, a historian [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Nov 2008, 17:35
ssandeepan wrote:
OA is C .

As you have mentioned :
Premise1: H found 2 documents about E.
Premise2: 1st document, dated May 3, 1739, is a record of E arrest for peddling without a license.
Premise3: 2nd document, undated, is a statement by E asserting that he has been peddling off and on for 20 years.

so , if 1739 was the 1st time Erich Schnitzler was cycling, the the second document would be from 1759, which is before 1765. And if 1739 was not the 1st time Erich Schnitzler was cycling , then definately the the second document would be before 1759.

What if the undated confession is written 30 years after he was arrested ?
_________________

Kick GMAT ass

Director
Joined: 12 Oct 2008
Posts: 554
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 409 [0], given: 2

Re: CR In the course of her researches, a historian [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Nov 2008, 19:38
E looks good to me.....but OE is also making sense.....any idea what would be the difficulty level of this CR?
Manager
Joined: 24 Sep 2008
Posts: 191
Schools: MIT / INSEAD / IIM - ABC
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 103 [0], given: 7

Re: CR In the course of her researches, a historian [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Nov 2008, 19:46
E looks good to me.....but OE is also making sense.....any idea what would be the difficulty level of this CR?

My two cents:

This is a OG 10E problem, you will also find this in retired GMAT Tests. Diffcultywise, appears in the end, so 700+mark.

I hope this will help!
Director
Joined: 14 Aug 2007
Posts: 733
Followers: 10

Kudos [?]: 180 [0], given: 0

Re: CR In the course of her researches, a historian [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Nov 2008, 21:16
Bidisha wrote:
ssandeepan wrote:
OA is C .

As you have mentioned :
Premise1: H found 2 documents about E.
Premise2: 1st document, dated May 3, 1739, is a record of E arrest for peddling without a license.
Premise3: 2nd document, undated, is a statement by E asserting that he has been peddling off and on for 20 years.

so , if 1739 was the 1st time Erich Schnitzler was cycling, the the second document would be from 1759, which is before 1765. And if 1739 was not the 1st time Erich Schnitzler was cycling , then definately the the second document would be before 1759.

What if the undated confession is written 30 years after he was arrested ?

Why do you want to doubt Erich Schnitzler ?
Erich asserted that he had been peddling off and on for 20 years.
and as the question suggests we have to consider Erich's assertion as a "fact"
Director
Joined: 14 Aug 2007
Posts: 733
Followers: 10

Kudos [?]: 180 [0], given: 0

Re: CR In the course of her researches, a historian [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Nov 2008, 21:20
E looks good to me.....but OE is also making sense.....any idea what would be the difficulty level of this CR?

E is tempting,
the second document was "undated" not "unreliable"; so it is not correct to say that the first document provides better evidence than second as long as the passage mentions it.
Manager
Joined: 16 Oct 2011
Posts: 135
Location: United States
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 5

Re: CR In the course of her researches, a historian [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Nov 2011, 05:49
alpha_plus_gamma wrote:
E looks good to me.....but OE is also making sense.....any idea what would be the difficulty level of this CR?

E is tempting,
the second document was "undated" not "unreliable"; so it is not correct to say that the first document provides better evidence than second as long as the passage mentions it.

Hi
As lot of people mentioned, what about 1759-64.
Also, what if the undated document was written in in 1766. I want to clarify one thing that, peddling without a license doesn't mean that the person has started to peddle. He might have forgotten his license on that day.
Also, when you say C is right, you assume D, isn't it? => You say D is also right.
Unclear answer. Dated documents and the arrest provides an evidence for peddling than an "off and on" mention.
Thanks!
BSchool Forum Moderator
Status: Flying over the cloud!
Joined: 16 Aug 2011
Posts: 912
Location: Viet Nam
GMAT Date: 06-06-2014
GPA: 3.07
Followers: 72

Kudos [?]: 587 [0], given: 44

Re: In the course of her researches, a historian recently found [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Nov 2011, 02:01
E is wrong because: one record arrest, another is the statement was written by this man. So, we cannot conclude that which is better evidence than other.

C is correct because. Undated document stated that "He has been peddling off and on for 20 years". The tense in this sentence is the key for me to choose C.

Hope that helps
_________________

Rules for posting in verbal gmat forum, read it before posting anything in verbal forum
Giving me + 1 kudos if my post is valuable with you

The more you like my post, the more you share to other's need

CR: Focus of the Week: Must be True Question

Re: In the course of her researches, a historian recently found   [#permalink] 18 Nov 2011, 02:01

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 28 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
1 A researcher studying corporate executives found that they 5 28 Apr 2012, 20:09
8 In the course of her researches, a historian recently found 11 02 Jan 2011, 15:41
4 In the course of her researches, a historian recently found 10 01 Aug 2010, 00:21
In the course of her researches, a historian recently found 4 01 Apr 2010, 23:44
1 In the course of her researches, a historian recently found 8 30 Jul 2009, 03:08
Display posts from previous: Sort by