Court records from medieval France show that in the years 1300 to 1400 the number of people arrested in the French realm for "violent interpersonal crimes" (not committed in wars) increased by 30 percent over the number of people arrested for such crimes in the years 1200 to 1300. The increase was not the result of false arrests; therefore, medieval France had a higher level of documented interpersonal violence in the years 1300 to 1400 than in the years 1200 to 1300.
Which one of the following statements, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
(A) In the years 1300 to 1400 the French government's category of violent crimes included an increasing variety of interpersonal crimes that are actually nonviolent.
(B) Historical accounts by monastic chroniclers in the years 1300 to 1400 are filled with descriptions of violent attacks committed by people living in the French realm
(C) The number of individual agreements between two people in which they swore oaths not to attack each other increased substantially after 1300.
(D) When English armies tried to conquer parts of France in the mid- to late 1300s. violence in the northern province of Normandy and the south-western province of Gascony increased.
(E) The population of medical France increased substantially during the first five decades of the 1300s until the deadly bubonic plague decimated the population of France after 1348.
Conclusion: More interpersonal crimes were recorded in years 1300-1400 than in years 1200-1300.
some of the weakeners I expected before attempting this question:
-some account testifying that documented crimes in 1200-1300 had been lost( causes:burnt down, flood etc )
-recently recovered documents from 1200-1300 that describe the chronicles of interpersonal violence.
-Increase in general population in 15th century greater than 30%.
what problem I faced with [spoiler]OA(choice A)[/spoiler]is that stimulus mentions false arrests were undocumented in 15th Century while OA states that many non violent crimes were documented under interpersonal crimes. Aren't these analogous ?
Secondly, laws governing interpersonal violence, or any other violence, can change over time. Same laws that are used to judge a crime in 12 or 13th century may not be applicable in the proceedings centuries-either laws became more stringent or they became more lenient.
In this light, OA doesn't seem right to me.
Which one of the following statements, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
(A) In the years 1300 to 1400 the French government's category of violent crimes included an increasing variety of interpersonal crimes that are actually nonviolent.
(B) Historical accounts by monastic chroniclers in the years 1300 to 1400 are filled with descriptions of violent attacks committed by people living in the French realm
(C) The number of individual agreements between two people in which they swore oaths not to attack each other increased substantially after 1300.
(D) When English armies tried to conquer parts of France in the mid- to late 1300s. violence in the northern province of Normandy and the south-western province of Gascony increased.
(E) The population of medical France increased substantially during the first five decades of the 1300s until the deadly bubonic plague decimated the population of France after 1348.
Conclusion: More interpersonal crimes were recorded in years 1300-1400 than in years 1200-1300.
some of the weakeners I expected before attempting this question:
-some account testifying that documented crimes in 1200-1300 had been lost( causes:burnt down, flood etc )
-recently recovered documents from 1200-1300 that describe the chronicles of interpersonal violence.
-Increase in general population in 15th century greater than 30%.
what problem I faced with [spoiler]OA(choice A)[/spoiler]is that stimulus mentions false arrests were undocumented in 15th Century while OA states that many non violent crimes were documented under interpersonal crimes. Aren't these analogous ?
Secondly, laws governing interpersonal violence, or any other violence, can change over time. Same laws that are used to judge a crime in 12 or 13th century may not be applicable in the proceedings centuries-either laws became more stringent or they became more lenient.
In this light, OA doesn't seem right to me.
