BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
Vote for Target Test Prep, Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE 2026

BIG NEWS! Target Test Prep has been nominated, and they’d love your vote!

TTP has worked incredibly hard to build the best test prep experience possible, and winning Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep would mean a lot to them. If TTP has helped you, they’d be incredibly grateful for your vote. You can vote once each day through September 9.

Vote for TTP
GMATLiveTeach 7 seats left
Chris Peckover
NEXT LIVE COHORT

Oct 13 to Jan 7, 2027

with Chris Peckover

Schedule
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
40 live hours + 6 months of GMAT OnDemand
  • Live instruction and real-time questions
  • Class recordings and assigned practice
View class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

Kaplan: John Garstang's theory

Expert replies
by shubhamkumar » Thu Apr 12, 2012 11:03 am
An ongoing archeological controversy surrounds the question of the date of the abandonment of the old city of Jericho. In the 1930s the site was excavated by the archaeologist John Garstang, who discovered the remains of a network of collapsed walls, which he dated at about 1400 BC, the time he believed the Israelites were on their conquest, leading him to conclude that the city had fallen in war. In 1950, another archeologist, Kathleen Kenyon, dated the most recent of Jericho's walls at 2300 BC. Kenyon found no evidence of defensive structures that could confirm Garstang's claims that Jericho had been destroyed by the Israelites in the 15th century BC. In fact, she concluded that Jericho had lain in ruins for centuries before the Israelites arrived.

Which of the following, if true, provides the best additional support for Garstang's theory about the date of the abandonment of Jericho?

A.The oldest walls found at the site, along with a number of houses and courtyards, had been constructed over 10,000 years ago, during the Neolithic age.
B.An abundance of pottery located at the site coincides with other local pottery common to the 15 th century BC.
C.The walls of Jericho had been repaired and rebuilt at least seventeen times, probably following damage caused by earthquakes.
D.Carbon-14 testing of a sample of charcoal found on the site indicated a date of 1800 BC.
E.Earlier archeologists who hoped to confirm the biblical story of the Israelites' conquest of Jericho concluded that the city had been unoccupied at the time such conquest would have occurred.

OA B :shock:
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by Bill@VeritasPrep » Thu Apr 12, 2012 2:08 pm
Garstang's theory is that Jericho was abandoned in the 15th century BC, while Kenyon says that Jericho was abandoned long before that. We're looking for something that supports Garstang.

A--we don't particularly care when the walls were constructed

B--if there is pottery dating to the 15th century BC, that would be evidence that Jericho was still inhabited at that point, which contradicts Kenyon's conclusion and somewhat bolsters Garstang's.

C--we don't really care about repairs of the walls

D--The charcoal dating neither strengthen nor weakens Garstang's theory.

E--This could weaken Garstang's theory.
Join Veritas Prep's 2010 Instructor of the Year, Matt Douglas for GMATT Mondays

Visit the Veritas Prep Blog

Try the FREE Veritas Prep Practice Test
Join the discussion

by shubhamkumar » Thu Apr 12, 2012 9:51 pm
Bill@VeritasPrep wrote:Garstang's theory is that Jericho was abandoned in the 15th century BC, while Kenyon says that Jericho was abandoned long before that. We're looking for something that supports Garstang.

A--we don't particularly care when the walls were constructed

B--if there is pottery dating to the 15th century BC, that would be evidence that Jericho was still inhabited at that point, which contradicts Kenyon's conclusion and somewhat bolsters Garstang's.

C--we don't really care about repairs of the walls

D--The charcoal dating neither strengthen nor weakens Garstang's theory.

E--This could weaken Garstang's theory.
Bill,
Thank you for your help!
The point which confuses me is that Garstang's theory's conclusion was that the cause of the walls falling were Israelites and War.B implies that Jericho was inhabited during the 1500BC it does not imply that it was destroyed in a war.I feel that B does more to refute Kenyon's findings,as her conclusion was that Jericho existed only after 2300 BC.
How does B strengthen Garstang?
Join the discussion

by vikram4689 » Thu Apr 12, 2012 10:36 pm
You have correctly identified that B does more to refute Kenyon's findings,as her conclusion was that Jericho existed only after 2300 BC

But you have misinterpreted The point which confuses me is that Garstang's theory's conclusion was that the cause of the walls falling were Israelites and War. These points are made INDEPENDENT to each other but you mistakenly concluded that destroyed walls were cause of war.
Premise: If you like my post
Conclusion : Press the Thanks Button ;)
Join the discussion

by Bill@VeritasPrep » Fri Apr 13, 2012 7:01 am
shubhamkumar wrote:
Bill@VeritasPrep wrote:Garstang's theory is that Jericho was abandoned in the 15th century BC, while Kenyon says that Jericho was abandoned long before that. We're looking for something that supports Garstang.

A--we don't particularly care when the walls were constructed

B--if there is pottery dating to the 15th century BC, that would be evidence that Jericho was still inhabited at that point, which contradicts Kenyon's conclusion and somewhat bolsters Garstang's.

C--we don't really care about repairs of the walls

D--The charcoal dating neither strengthen nor weakens Garstang's theory.

E--This could weaken Garstang's theory.
Bill,
Thank you for your help!
The point which confuses me is that Garstang's theory's conclusion was that the cause of the walls falling were Israelites and War.B implies that Jericho was inhabited during the 1500BC it does not imply that it was destroyed in a war.I feel that B does more to refute Kenyon's findings,as her conclusion was that Jericho existed only after 2300 BC.
How does B strengthen Garstang?
Well, for the city to be abandoned in the 15th century BC, it must have been occupied at that point. B goes some way to proving this. As you said, the other part of Garstang's theory is that Jericho fell in war. Remember, though, that on a Strengthen question, we're not trying to prove the conclusion definitively; we're simply trying to make it more likely to be true. Often, simply strengthening a part of the existing argument will be enough.
Join Veritas Prep's 2010 Instructor of the Year, Matt Douglas for GMATT Mondays

Visit the Veritas Prep Blog

Try the FREE Veritas Prep Practice Test
Join the discussion