GMAT Question of the Day: Daily via email | Daily via Instagram New to GMAT Club? Watch this Video

It is currently 16 Jul 2020, 04:39

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

During the ten years from 1895 to 1905,our conception of the beginning

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Find Similar Topics 
Intern
Intern
avatar
G
Joined: 13 Jan 2018
Posts: 30
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Strategy
GMAT 1: 530 Q46 V17
GMAT 2: 640 Q49 V28
Reviews Badge
During the ten years from 1895 to 1905,our conception of the beginning  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post Updated on: 15 Oct 2019, 23:17
1
2
Question 1
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

based on 109 sessions

72% (03:16) correct 28% (03:53) wrong

HideShow timer Statistics

Question 2
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

based on 118 sessions

39% (01:34) correct 61% (01:41) wrong

HideShow timer Statistics

Question 3
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

based on 109 sessions

74% (00:56) correct 26% (01:11) wrong

HideShow timer Statistics

New Project RC Butler 2019 - Practice 2 RC Passages Everyday
Passage # 377, Date : 08-Oct-2019
This post is a part of New Project RC Butler 2019. Click here for Details


During the ten years from 1895 to 1905, our conception of the beginnings of Egyptian antiquity was profoundly altered. When Prof. Maspero published the first volume of his great Histoire Ancienne des Peuples des l’Orient Classique, in 1895, Egyptian history, properly so called, still began with the Pyramid-builders and the legendary lists of earlier kings preserved at Abydos and Sakkara were still quoted as the only source of knowledge of the time before the IVth Dynasty. Of a prehistoric Egypt nothing was known, beyond a few flint flakes gathered here and there upon the desert plateaus, which might or might not tell of an age when the ancestors of the Pyramid-builders knew only the stone tools and weapons of the primeval savage. By 1905, however, the veil that had hidden the beginnings of Egyptian civilization from us had been lifted, and we could see things, more or less, as they actually were, unobscured by the traditions of a later day. Until the late 1800s, nothing of the real beginnings of history in either Egypt or Mesopotamia had been found; legend supplied the only material for the reconstruction of the earliest history of the oldest civilized nations of the globe. Nor was it seriously supposed that any relics of prehistoric Egypt or Mesopotamia ever would be found. The antiquity of the known history of these countries already appeared so great that nobody took into consideration the possibility of our discovering a prehistoric Egypt or Mesopotamia; further, civilization in these countries had lasted so long that it seemed more than probable that all traces of their prehistoric age had long since been swept away. Yet the possibility, which seemed hardly worth a moment’s consideration in 1895, was in 1905 an assured reality, at least as far as Egypt was concerned. Prehistoric Babylonia had yet to be discovered. It was true, for example, that at Mukay-yar, the site of ancient Ur of the Chaldees, burials in earthenware coffins, had been found, but there was no doubt whatever that these were burials of a much later date, belonging, quite possibly, to the Parthian period. Nothing that may rightfully be termed prehistoric had yet been found in the Euphrates valley either, whereas in Egypt prehistoric antiquities were by then almost as well known and as well represented in museums as were the prehistoric antiquities of Europe and America.

Spoiler: :: OE
Answer: A
Explanation: The author’s main purpose in writing the passage is clear in the opening sentence of the passage itself—‘our awareness of Egyptian prehistoric antiquities changed drastically in the decade 1895-1905’. The rest of the passage simply builds on this thought. Option (A) states this best and should be the correct answer.
(B) While the author does mention Prof Maspero in the first paragraph, this is by no means his main purpose in writing the passage.
(C) Again, this is mentioned in the third paragraph but is not the main purpose of the author in writing the passage
(D) This is not even mentioned in the passage.
(E) In fact, prehistoric antiquities were eventually discovered in Egypt and in great numbers.

1. What is the primary purpose of the author in writing the passage?

(A) To state that the awareness of Egyptian prehistoric antiquities changed drastically in the period from 1895 to 1905
(B) To highlight the contribution of Prof Maspero in altering people’s awareness of Egyptian prehistoric antiquities
(C) To distinguish Egyptian prehistoric antiquities from those discovered in Mukayyar and in the Euphrates valley
(D) To contrast the knowledge of pyramid builders with those of subsequent generations of Egyptians
(E) To provide reasons why no prehistoric antiquities were likely to be discovered in Egypt


Spoiler: :: OE
Answer: E
Explanation: The author states in the passage that nothing prehistoric had been discovered at these two sites until 1905 whereas a lot of prehistoric antiquities had been discovered in Egypt by this time. Thus, the idea is to contrast the two things. (E) states this best and should be the correct answer.
(A) There is no incorrect prediction about these sites mentioned anywhere in the passage
(B) If anything, the origin of these sites is in line with the earlier perception that nothing prehistoric would ever be discovered in Egypt.
(C) The idea is to actually show a contrast and not similarity between Egypt and these two places.
(D) In fact, prehistoric antiquities had already been discovered in Egypt when the author mentions these two sites.

2. Why does the author mention sites at Mukayyar and in the Euphrates valley in the passage?

(A) To provide an example of an incorrect prediction that had been made about these two places
(B) To identify the origin of these sites and how the same was contrary to earlier perception
(C) To draw similarities between the discoveries made in Egypt and those made in these two places
(D) To explain why it was impossible for prehistoric antiquities to be ever discovered in Egypt
(E) To state that what was true for Egypt in 1905 was not necessarily true for these two places


Spoiler: :: OE
Answer: B
Explanation:The two reasons given by the author are mentioned in the lines—The antiquity of the known history…had long since been swept away. (B) mentions one of these reasons and should be the correct answer.
(A) This is not mentioned in the passage.
(C) This is not mentioned in the passage.
(D) This is not mentioned in the passage. Pyramid builders and early kings are mentioned in the first paragraph but in a different context.
(E) This is not mentioned in the passage.

3. According to the passage, one reason why it was believed that no relics of prehistoric Egypt would ever be found was that:

(A) There wasn’t enough information available about the antiquities of known history of Egypt.
(B) Civilizations in Egypt had lasted for a very long time, thus most likely wiping out any trace of older civilizations.
(C) Archaeologists had more pressing concerns at hand than to focus on searching for prehistoric antiquities in Egypt.
(D) The pyramid builders and early kings had left no accounts of the period before their time.
(E) Not enough scholars were paying attention to this field.


Originally posted by srij13 on 06 Oct 2019, 00:34.
Last edited by SajjadAhmad on 15 Oct 2019, 23:17, edited 2 times in total.
Updated - Complete topic (1028).
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 03 Jul 2018
Posts: 7
Re: During the ten years from 1895 to 1905,our conception of the beginning  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Oct 2019, 11:55
in question 2 acc to passage
Yet the possibility, which seemed hardly worth a moment’s consideration in 1895, was in 1905 an assured reality, at least as far as Egypt was concerned. Prehistoric Babylonia had yet to be discovered. It was true, for example, that at Mukay-yar, the site of ancient Ur of the Chaldees, burials in earthenware coffins, had been found, but there was no doubt whatever that these were burials of a much later date, belonging, quite possibly, to the Parthian period. Nothing that may rightfully be termed prehistoric had yet been found in the Euphrates valley either, whereas in Egypt prehistoric antiquities were by then almost as well known and as well represented in museums as were the prehistoric antiquities of Europe and America.

acc to the bold hightlighted text, should 'a' be the right answer?
GMAT Club team member
User avatar
V
Status: GMAT Club Team Member
Affiliations: GMAT Club
Joined: 02 Nov 2016
Posts: 6299
GPA: 3.62
Re: During the ten years from 1895 to 1905,our conception of the beginning  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Oct 2019, 19:58
vp680 wrote:
in question 2 acc to passage
Yet the possibility, which seemed hardly worth a moment’s consideration in 1895, was in 1905 an assured reality, at least as far as Egypt was concerned. Prehistoric Babylonia had yet to be discovered. It was true, for example, that at Mukay-yar, the site of ancient Ur of the Chaldees, burials in earthenware coffins, had been found, but there was no doubt whatever that these were burials of a much later date, belonging, quite possibly, to the Parthian period. Nothing that may rightfully be termed prehistoric had yet been found in the Euphrates valley either, whereas in Egypt prehistoric antiquities were by then almost as well known and as well represented in museums as were the prehistoric antiquities of Europe and America.

acc to the bold hightlighted text, should 'a' be the right answer?


Official Explanation


2. Why does the author mention sites at Mukayyar and in the Euphrates valley in the passage?

Explanation

The author states in the passage that nothing prehistoric had been discovered at these two sites until 1905 whereas a lot of prehistoric antiquities had been discovered in Egypt by this time. Thus, the idea is to contrast the two things. (E) states this best and should be the correct answer.

(A) There is no incorrect prediction about these sites mentioned anywhere in the passage

(B) If anything, the origin of these sites is in line with the earlier perception that nothing prehistoric would ever be discovered in Egypt.

(C) The idea is to actually show a contrast and not similarity between Egypt and these two places.

(D) In fact, prehistoric antiquities had already been discovered in Egypt when the author mentions these two sites.

Answer: E


Hope it helps
_________________
GMAT Club team member
User avatar
V
Status: GMAT Club Team Member
Affiliations: GMAT Club
Joined: 02 Nov 2016
Posts: 6299
GPA: 3.62
Re: During the ten years from 1895 to 1905,our conception of the beginning  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Mar 2020, 05:07
+1 Kudos to posts containing answer explanation of all questions
_________________
GMAT Club Bot
Re: During the ten years from 1895 to 1905,our conception of the beginning   [#permalink] 11 Mar 2020, 05:07

During the ten years from 1895 to 1905,our conception of the beginning

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





cron

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