It is currently 20 Oct 2017, 15:16

Close

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
Your Progress

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

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Archaeologists seeking the location of a legendary siege and

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 255

Kudos [?]: 93 [0], given: 1

Archaeologists seeking the location of a legendary siege and [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Jun 2009, 08:09
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

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.
Which of the following hypotheses is best supported by the evidence above?
(A) The lower layer contains the remains of the city where the siege took place.
(B) The legend confuses stories from two different historical periods.
(C) The middle layer does not represent the period of the siege.
(D) The siege lasted for a long time before the city was destroyed.
(E) The pottery of type 3 was imported to the city by traders.
_________________

Choose Life

Kudos [?]: 93 [0], given: 1

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 14 May 2009
Posts: 141

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 29

Schools: AGSM '16
Re: Seige [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Jun 2009, 08:55
IMO C

The pieces of pottery of type 3 excavated from the middle layer support the argument that it represents a time period other than when the siege and destruction took place.

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 29

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 30 Dec 2006
Posts: 23

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

Re: Seige [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Jun 2009, 10:12
The answer is "C"

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

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 15 May 2009
Posts: 168

Kudos [?]: 29 [0], given: 3

Re: Seige [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Jun 2009, 13:00
trainspotting 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.
Which of the following hypotheses is best supported by the evidence above?
(A) The lower layer contains the remains of the city where the siege took place.
(B) The legend confuses stories from two different historical periods.
(C) The middle layer does not represent the period of the siege.
(D) The siege lasted for a long time before the city was destroyed.
(E) The pottery of type 3 was imported to the city by traders.


I would go with (C) based on the given info & no external assumptions. If the middle layer contains artifacts which belonged to a later period of time, then that layer probably does not represent siege.

A - We don't know this, since we're not given any info on what was found on the bottom layer.
B - We don't know this either, we're not given any info on the accuracy of the legend.
D - The info does not discuss how long the siege lasted. Besides, the artifact found was known to be from a period AFTER the siege, so it doesn't matter how long the siege itself lasted.
E - Again, we don't know this from the given info.

So (C) is my best guess.

Kudos [?]: 29 [0], given: 3

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 24 May 2009
Posts: 103

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

Re: Seige [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Jun 2009, 16:34
I'm with C too.

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

Re: Seige   [#permalink] 27 Jun 2009, 16:34
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Archaeologists seeking the location of a legendary siege and

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.