Critical Reasoning

64. Excavation of the ancient city of Kourion on the island of Cyprus revealed a pattern of debris and collapsed
buildings typical of towns devastated by earthquakes. Archaeologists have hypothesized that the destruction
was due to a major earthquake known to have occurred near the island in A.D. 365.
Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the archaeologists' hypothesis?
(A) Bronze ceremonial drinking vessels that are often found in graves dating from years preceding and
following A.D. 365 were also found in several graves near Kourion.
(B) No coins minted after A.D. 365 were found in Kourion, but coins minted before that year were found in
abundance.
(C) Most modern histories of Cyprus mention that an earthquake occurred near the island in A.D. 365.
(D) Several small statues carved in styles current in Cyprus in the century between A.D. 300 and A.D. 400
were found in Kourion.
(E) Stone inscriptions in a form of the Greek alphabet that was de.nitely used in Cyprus after A.D. 365 were
found in Kourion.

My answer was C ..Correct answer is B .I do not understand why C would be wrong.PLease explain any trick here.

The "trick" has multiple aspects.

For one thing, the earthquake was already described in the prompt as "known to have occurred near the island in A.D. 365".

So C adds no new information. It is already accepted that there was an earthquake near Cyprus at that time.

So the real question is not whether there was an earthquake but rather whether that earthquake caused the observed destruction.

So to strengthen the argument we need something that somehow connects the earthquake to the destruction.

B supports the hypothesis that the A.D. 365 earthquake caused the destruction, because the absence of coins produced after A.D. 365 seems to indicate that a major change occurred that year, a significant change that caused all commerce in Kourion to cease. That this significant change occurred around the same time as the earthquake connects the earthquake and the destruction chronologically.

Hi Marty,

I see what you're saying. I gotta be technical here though. The earthquake is not KNOWN to have occurred. It is hypothesized. C just merely echoes that hypothesis, so it adds no new information helping to prove that the earthquake caused the destruction.

B is the only option that provides some new evidence rather than just recycling the theory.

Another thing with C, src_saurav, it's too direct. Real GMAT correct answers are always more sly than that.

AdamMac, technical??

"known to have occurred" is a quote taken right from the prompt.

Read the prompt again.

Hi Marty,

Yeah, I see what you're saying. The theorists are speculating that the 365 earthquake caused the collapse, that's the part that isn't certain. I think I was conflating the two.

Thanks!