Professor Rodriguez: The kingdom of Xincua experienced significant population loss in the 10th century. The best explanation for this is...
GMAT Multi Source Reasoning : (MSR) Questions
Professor Rodriguez: The kingdom of Xincua experienced significant population loss in the 10th century. The best explanation for this is a drier climate that lasted about 100 years. That period included some less dry decades but also at least four extremely dry decades, as attested by tree-ring and sediment data. During these decades, growing crops became harder, especially since the semiarid Xincua territory needed extensive irrigation even in less dry periods. The resulting population loss and unrest-arising from out-migration, increasing mortality due to poorer nutrition, and a lower birth rate-likely made maintenance of irrigation systems more difficult. Some small dams, for example, deteriorated significantly during the dry period.
For each of the following statements about the Table tab, select Yes if the information provided indicates that the statement is true. Otherwise, select No.
OWNING THE DATASET
Understanding Source A: Text Source - Professor Rodriguez's Climate Explanation
| Information from Dataset | Analysis |
|---|---|
| ""The kingdom of Xincua experienced significant population loss in the 10th century. The best explanation for this is a drier climate that lasted about 100 years."" |
|
| ""That period included some less dry decades but also at least four extremely dry decades, as attested by tree-ring and sediment data."" |
|
| ""During these decades, growing crops became harder, especially since the semiarid Xincua territory needed extensive irrigation even in less dry periods."" |
|
| ""The resulting population loss and unrest—arising from out-migration, increasing mortality due to poorer nutrition, and a lower birth rate—likely made maintenance of irrigation systems more difficult."" |
|
| ""Some small dams, for example, deteriorated significantly during the dry period."" |
|
Summary: Rodriguez presents a climate-centered explanation for Xincua's 10th century population decline, emphasizing drought's cascading effects on agriculture, demographics, and infrastructure.
Understanding Source B: Text Source - Professor Ojukwu's Political Explanation
| Information from Dataset | Analysis |
|---|---|
| ""The kingdom of Xincua lost a significant amount of its population in the 10th century, primarily because of political turmoil among royal factions."" |
|
| ""The turmoil is shown by the very short reigns of kings in the 900s, especially in the period 920-959, indicating instability that toppled kings."" |
|
| ""Also, irrigation systems deteriorated; evidence from similar cultures of the time suggests that vandalism against public installations was a form of protest."" |
|
| ""The political situation ultimately led to out-migration, poorer nutrition, and fewer births, resulting in a declining population."" |
|
| ""The population loss would have made the political situation even more unstable, as various factions lost revenue and supporters."" |
|
Summary: Ojukwu presents a politics-centered explanation for the same population decline, with both professors agreeing on the demographic outcomes but disagreeing on root causes—drought versus political instability.
Understanding Source C: Table with Explanatory Text - Reign and Rainfall Data
Text Analysis:
| Information from Dataset | Analysis |
|---|---|
| ""The table provides data about Xincua from 890 to 969."" |
|
| ""baseline data for the period 790–889: (1) mean duration of king's reign: 16.5 years; (2) mean annual rainfall: 380 millimeters"" |
|
| ""Professors Rodriguez and Ojukwu are experts on 9th and 10th century Xincua and familiar with the data given here."" |
|
Table Analysis:
- The table shows reign durations and rainfall data from 890-969
- Key patterns observed:
- Rainfall varies dramatically from 200mm (930s) to 385mm (950s)
- Multiple very short reigns appear in 920s-930s (925-926, 926-929, 930-930, 930-931)
- Some reigns lasted less than a year, contrasting sharply with 16.5 year norm
- Four decades fell well below normal rainfall (900s: 245mm, 920s: 260mm, 930s: 200mm, 960s: 210mm)
- Linkage to Source A: Table confirms Rodriguez's claim of ""at least four extremely dry decades""
- Linkage to Source B: Table confirms Ojukwu's claim of very short reigns, especially in 920-959
- Linkage to Sources A & B: The decades with shortest reigns (920s-930s) overlap significantly with severe drought decades, suggesting both phenomena occurred simultaneously
Summary: The table validates both professors' core factual claims—showing both severe droughts and extreme political instability—with the crisis peaking in the 920s-930s when both phenomena coincided.
Overall Summary
The combined evidence reveals a complex crisis in 10th century Xincua where environmental stress and political instability occurred together and likely reinforced each other. Both professors accurately identify severe population decline with identical demographic effects (out-migration, malnutrition, lower birth rates), and the table confirms both their key claims: at least four drought decades with rainfall dropping to roughly half the norm, and reign lengths plummeting from 16.5 years to often less than 3 years. The peak crisis period (920s-930s) shows both phenomena at their worst, suggesting that drought and political turmoil acted as mutually reinforcing stressors rather than competing explanations.
Question Analysis
Understanding the Question
- In plain terms: For each statement, determine if the data table about Xincua (Source C) validates or supports specific claims made by the two professors.
- Key constraints:
- Must evaluate each statement separately
- Focus specifically on what the Table tab shows
- Distinguish between 'some support' vs 'conclusive proof'
- Answer type needed: Fact verification - matching table data against specific professor assertions
Connecting to Our Passage Analysis
- The cross-source analysis already contains explicit findings about how the table data relates to each professor's claims, particularly in the 'Data Confirmation of Key Claims' section.
- Can answer from analysis alone: YES - Analysis directly addresses table support for both professors' assertions
Relevant Findings
Evaluating each statement against the cross-source analysis findings.
Statement 1 Evaluation
- In plain terms: Does the table support any claim Rodriguez made?
- Table confirms Rodriguez's 'at least four extremely dry decades' - showing 900s, 920s, 930s, and 960s well below 380mm norm.
- Context: Rodriguez claimed drought caused population loss.
- Table shows rainfall data that directly confirms his drought claims.
- YES - Table provides clear support for Rodriguez's drought assertion.
Statement 2 Evaluation
- In plain terms: Does the table support any claim Ojukwu made?
- Table confirms Ojukwu's claim of very short reigns in 920s-930s with multiple reigns under 3 years.
- Context: Ojukwu claimed political instability shown by short reigns.
- Table shows reign data that directly confirms his short reigns claim.
- YES - Table provides clear support for Ojukwu's political instability assertion.
Statement 3 Evaluation
- In plain terms: Does the table conclusively prove Rodriguez wrong about something?
- Analysis shows table actually confirms Rodriguez's claims rather than disproving them.
- Context: Rodriguez's assertions about drought.
- Table supports rather than contradicts Rodriguez.
- NO - Table does not prove Rodriguez incorrect; it actually supports his claims.
Systematic Checking
- The analysis explicitly states the table 'validates both professors' core factual claims.'
- Rodriguez's drought decades claim is confirmed by rainfall data below 380mm norm.
- Ojukwu's short reigns claim is confirmed by multiple reigns under 3 years in 920s-930s.
- No evidence in analysis suggests the table disproves any Rodriguez assertion.
Final Answer
Statement 1: Yes, Statement 2: Yes, Statement 3: No
It provides some support for an assertion made by Rodriguez.
It provides some support for an assertion made by Ojukwu.
It provides conclusive proof that an assertion made by Rodriguez is incorrect.