gmatbull wrote:
Many Egyptian tablets dating after 1300 B.C. list more than forty constellations. But a text from 1900 B.C.
mentions just ten constellations. Some historians have inferred from this that in 1900 B.C., the Egyptians had
not yet named most of their later constellations.
Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the historians’ reasoning?
A. The ten constellations named in the text from 1900 B.C. were among those named in the tablets dating after 1300 B.C.
B. Several Egyptians texts dating between 1900 and 1300 B.C. list more than ten constellations.
C. Historians know of no Egyptians texts from 1900 B.C. that claim to be a comprehensive list of constellations.
D. Another Egyptians text dating from before 1900 B.C. mentions constellations other than those mentioned in the text
from 1900 B.C.
E. The text from 1900 B.C. describes itself as a comprehensive list of all the constellations.
Is it E?
We need to strengthen the idea that "the Egyptians had not yet named most of their later constellations, ie after 1900"
Support for this is "historians have found text in 1990 that names only 10"
What if more existed that named the remaing constellations and historians just didn't find any? I think this is take care by E....
What does the source say? and What is the source?
A. The ten constellations named in the text from 1900 B.C. were among those named in the tablets dating after 1300 B.C.
Weakens B. Several Egyptians texts dating between 1900 and 1300 B.C. list more than ten constellations.
We are only interested in things that in 1900 not in between C. Historians know of no Egyptians texts from 1900 B.C. that claim to be a comprehensive list of constellations.
Oppostie of what we wantD. Another Egyptians text dating from before 1900 B.C. mentions constellations other than those mentioned in the text
from 1900 B.C.
again before 1900, not interested. E. The text from 1900 B.C. describes itself as a comprehensive list of all the constellations.
OK.Cheers