Yes subject of first sentence is "images", and "fashioned" is modifying "images". If there were no comma between "fashioned" and "Empire", "fashioned" would modify "Empire".

this kind of modifier always refer to preceding noun (Kushan Empire here)

2 contradictory opinions

https://www.beatthegmat.com/sc-t80992.html

when COMMA + PARTICIPLE is placed after a whole clause, it generally modifies the whole clause.
the participle should relate most directly to the subject of the clause -- e.g., jack is the one who is "excited" in the example above -- but the participle should in some way modify the entire idea of the clause. this is how the above example works: "excited at the prospect..." doesn't just describe jack, it describes the entire way in which jack jumped into the gym.

when COMMA + PARTICIPLE is placed after just a noun (or noun + modifiers) -- as in the case of the x-ray emission problem -- then it's talking about a noun.

_________________
ron purewal is a manhattangmat instructor. he wears sunglasses at night.

Learn more about ron

But the OG OE is

A Placement of the modifi er fashioned ...
suggests that the Empire (the closest noun),
not the images of the deities, was fashioned
out of these materials; to parallel either from,
the preposition from should also follow or.

GMATMadeEasy wrote:
@Ron: I found this OG12 question that I could relate to the above discussion in this thread: usage/role of past participle at the end of a clause. The past participle used is in non-underlined part but is used in the correct answer choice.

In the question below, past participle separated by comma at the end of the clause is modifying not the subject but the preceding noun. I understand it is a list of participles. But do we really need a comma before based bla bla in the correct sentence.


Building on civilizations that preceded them in coastal Peru, the Mochica developed their own elaborate society, based on cultivating such crops like corn and beans, the harvesting of fish and shellfish, and exploiting other wild and domestic resources.

(A) based on cultivating such crops like corn and beans, the harvesting of fish and shellfish, and
exploiting
(B) based on the cultivation of such crops as corn and beans, the harvesting of fish and seafood,
and the exploitation of
(C) and basing it on the cultivation of crops like corn and beans, harvesting fish and seafood, and the exploiting of
(D) and they based it on their cultivation of crops such as corn and beans, the harvest of fish and
seafood, and exploiting
(E) and they based it on their cultivating such crops like corn and beans, their harvest of fish and
shellfish, and they exploited

OA is B;Source OG 12 Q 28
this is an interesting observation, and one that shows that this particular type of modifier is not used in a way that is entirely consistent. (note that my original post on the topic contained the word "generally", for precisely this reason.)

i can tell you that these modifiers do preferentially apply to the subject of the preceding clause, especially if the modifiers are discussing qualities of people.
for instance, in the following sentence --
john looked at his wife, worried about the situation
-- the "worried" modifier would be attributed to john, not to his wife.

(these are things about which i've never consciously thought before, so it's interesting when you guys point them out.)

taking a wider view of this particular topic, i don't think that this sort of observation has ever been required to solve a problem -- so, if the issue is this annoying and inconsistent in general, it may be better to shelve it for the time being, so that you can concentrate on issues that will actually be required to solve the problems.
but ... excellent powers of observation!

_________________
ron purewal is a manhattangmat instructor. he wears sunglasses at night.

Learn more about ron