One of the most vexing problems in historiography is
dating an event when the usual sources offer
conflicting chronologies of the event. Historians
should attempt to minimize the number of competing
sources, perhaps by eliminating the less credible
ones. Once this is achieved and several sources are
left, as often happens, historians may try, though on
occasion unsuccessfully, to determine independently
of the usual sources which date is more likely to be
Which one of the following inferences is most
strongly supported by the information above?
(A) We have no plausible chronology of most of
the events for which attempts have been
made by historians to determine the right
(B) Some of the events for which there are
conflicting chronologies and for which
attempts have been made by historians to
determine the right date cannot be dated
reliably by historians.
(C) Attaching a reliable date to any event requires
determining which of several conflicting
chronologies is most likely to be true.
(D) Determining independently of the usual
sources which of several conflicting
chronologies is more likely to be right is an
ineffective way of dating events.
(E) The soundest approach to dating an event for
which the usual sources give conflicting
chronologies is to undermine the credibility
of as many of these sources as possible.
Took so much time for this one...got confused....Help me out with the reasoning...thanks again in advance...