Hoards of dirhams — Middle Eastern coins — that were accumulated in the fur trade between Scandinavia and the Middle...

GMAT Critical Reasoning : (CR) Questions

Source: Mock

Critical Reasoning

Logically Completes

MEDIUM

...

Notes

Post a Query

Hoards of dirhams — Middle Eastern coins — that were accumulated in the fur trade between Scandinavia and the Middle East have been found at Swedish sites dating to A.D. 800. Few dirhams have been found at contemporary sites in western Europe, ruled in A.D. 800 by the Emperor Charlemagne. However, this comparative scarcity of dirhams does not necessarily indicate that there was substantially less trade between the Middle East and Charlemagne's territory, since __________.

Which of the following most logically completes the argument?

Charlemagne had his own silver coins minted in large numbers, and in all likelihood foreign coins were melted down to provide the metal for these coins

very few other products from the Middle East have been found at archaeological sites in Charlemagne's time and territory

in addition to the dirhams, coins from regions other than the Middle East have been found in the Swedish hoards

a few artifacts that originated in Charlemagne's territory have also been found at Swedish sites dating to the period of Charlemagne's reign

written records of Charlemagne's reign do not mention international trade, but they do recount diplomatic contacts between Charlemagne and certain Middle Eastern rulers

Solution

Passage Analysis:

Text from Passage	Analysis
Hoards of dirhams — Middle Eastern coins — that were accumulated in the fur trade between Scandinavia and the Middle East have been found at Swedish sites dating to A.D. 800.	What it says: Lots of Middle Eastern coins from fur trading were found in Sweden from around A.D. 800 What it does: Sets up evidence of strong trade connections between Scandinavia and Middle East What it is: Archaeological evidence Visualization: Sweden has many dirham hoards (let's say 50+ sites) from A.D. 800
Few dirhams have been found at contemporary sites in western Europe, ruled in A.D. 800 by the Emperor Charlemagne.	What it says: Not many Middle Eastern coins were found in Charlemagne's territory from the same time period What it does: Creates a contrast with Sweden - shows different patterns of coin distribution What it is: Archaeological evidence Visualization: Charlemagne's territory has few dirhams (let's say 5-10 sites) vs Sweden's 50+ sites
However, this comparative scarcity of dirhams does not necessarily indicate that there was substantially less trade between the Middle East and Charlemagne's territory, since ______.	What it says: Just because fewer coins were found doesn't mean there was less Middle East trade in Charlemagne's area What it does: Challenges the obvious conclusion and signals we need an alternative explanation What it is: Author's claim with incomplete reasoning

Argument Flow:

The argument starts by showing us two pieces of evidence: lots of Middle Eastern coins found in Sweden from A.D. 800, but very few found in Charlemagne's territory from the same time. Then it challenges what seems like the obvious conclusion - that fewer coins means less trade.

Main Conclusion:

The scarcity of dirhams in Charlemagne's territory doesn't necessarily mean there was less trade between the Middle East and that region.

Logical Structure:

This is an incomplete argument that's asking us to provide the missing piece. We have evidence (coin distribution patterns) that could lead to one conclusion (less trade), but the author claims this conclusion isn't necessarily correct. We need to complete the argument with a reason that explains why fewer coins doesn't automatically mean less trade.

Prethinking:

Question type:

Logically Completes - We need to find a statement that provides an alternative explanation for why fewer dirhams were found in Charlemagne's territory despite potentially similar trade levels with the Middle East

Precision of Claims

The key claims are about archaeological evidence (quantity of coins found) and trade activity levels. We need to distinguish between what coins being present/absent tells us versus what actual trade levels were

Strategy

We need to find reasons why similar levels of Middle Eastern trade might not leave similar archaeological evidence of dirhams in Charlemagne's territory compared to Sweden. This means looking for factors that could affect coin preservation, coin usage patterns, or trade payment methods that would explain the discrepancy without assuming less trade occurred

Answer Choices Explained

Charlemagne had his own silver coins minted in large numbers, and in all likelihood foreign coins were melted down to provide the metal for these coins

This provides a perfect explanation for why fewer dirhams would be found in Charlemagne's territory even with similar trade levels. If Charlemagne was minting his own silver coins and melting down foreign coins for the metal, then Middle Eastern dirhams would disappear from the archaeological record regardless of trade volume. The silver from trade would still be present, just transformed into local currency. This directly explains the discrepancy without requiring less trade.

very few other products from the Middle East have been found at archaeological sites in Charlemagne's time and territory

This actually supports the opposite conclusion - that there was less trade. If very few other Middle Eastern products were found in Charlemagne's territory, this would strengthen the argument that there was indeed less trade, not weaken it. This choice doesn't help explain why similar trade levels might leave different archaeological evidence.

in addition to the dirhams, coins from regions other than the Middle East have been found in the Swedish hoards

The presence of other foreign coins in Swedish hoards doesn't explain why Charlemagne's territory has fewer dirhams. This information about Sweden doesn't address the discrepancy we're trying to explain. It's irrelevant to the question of why similar trade levels might produce different coin preservation patterns.

a few artifacts that originated in Charlemagne's territory have also been found at Swedish sites dating to the period of Charlemagne's reign

Finding a few artifacts from Charlemagne's territory in Sweden might suggest some trade connections existed, but this doesn't explain why dirhams are scarce in Charlemagne's territory specifically. This is about trade in the other direction and doesn't address the coin preservation issue that's central to the argument.

written records of Charlemagne's reign do not mention international trade, but they do recount diplomatic contacts between Charlemagne and certain Middle Eastern rulers

Written records mentioning diplomatic contacts but not trade doesn't help explain the coin scarcity pattern. If anything, this might suggest that trade wasn't significant enough to be recorded, which would actually support the conclusion that there was less trade - the opposite of what we need to prove.

Rate this Solution

Tell us what you think about this solution

...

Forum Discussions

Start a new discussion

Post

Previous Attempts

Loading attempts...