Prac Exam #2 Roman City of Sepphoris

This topic has expert replies
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 273
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2011 6:50 am
Thanked: 5 times
Followed by:3 members

Prac Exam #2 Roman City of Sepphoris

by fangtray » Sun Apr 22, 2012 4:59 am
Excavations of the Roman city of Sepphoris have uncovered numerous detailed mosaics depicting several readily identifiable animal species: a hare, a partridge, and various Mediterranean fish. Oddly, most of the species represented did not live in the Sepphoris region when these mosaics were created. Since identical motifs appear in mosaics found in othe rRoman cities, however, the mosaics of Sepphoris were very likely created by traveling artisans from some other part of the Roman Empire.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

a. The Sepphoris mosaics are not composed exclusively of types of stones found naturally in the Sepphoris area.
b. There is no single region to which all the species depicted in the Sepphoris mosaics are native.
c. No Motifs appear in the Sepphoris mosaics that do not also appear in the mosaics of some other Roman city.
d. All of the animal figures in the Sepphoris mosaics are readily identifiable as representations of known species.
e. there was not a common reepertory of mosaic designs with which artisans who lived in various parts of the Roaman Empire were familiar.
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 74
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 3:11 pm
Thanked: 3 times

by klmehta03 » Sun Apr 22, 2012 5:34 am
IMO B OA pls?

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 273
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2011 6:50 am
Thanked: 5 times
Followed by:3 members

by fangtray » Sun Apr 22, 2012 7:53 am
klmehta03 wrote:IMO B OA pls?
OA = E

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1239
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 6:25 am
Thanked: 233 times
Followed by:26 members
GMAT Score:680

by sam2304 » Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:01 am
B and E both seem to be reasonable assumptions but on negation only E makes the argument fall apart. B has no effect on the argument when we negate it.

E - there was not a common reepertory of mosaic designs with which artisans who lived in various parts of the Roaman Empire were familiar. - If this were true then there are no traveling artisans involved in designing the mosaic and the argument falls apart.

b. There is no a single region to which all the species depicted in the Sepphoris mosaics are native. - This doesn't have any effect on the argument.

IMO E.

Hope this helps !!
Getting defeated is just a temporary notion, giving it up is what makes it permanent.
https://gmatandbeyond.blogspot.in/

Legendary Member
Posts: 1084
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 2:33 pm
Thanked: 158 times
Followed by:21 members

by pemdas » Sun Apr 22, 2012 9:15 am
fangtray wrote:Since identical motifs appear in mosaics found in othe rRoman cities, however, the mosaics of Sepphoris were very likely created by traveling artisans from some other part of the Roman Empire.
this argument is so tortuous in its reasoning selected in bold
what's the source?
Success doesn't come overnight!

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1239
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 6:25 am
Thanked: 233 times
Followed by:26 members
GMAT Score:680

by sam2304 » Sun Apr 22, 2012 9:50 am
pemdas wrote: this argument is so tortuous in its reasoning selected in bold
what's the source?
I have seen this in GMAT prep :)
Getting defeated is just a temporary notion, giving it up is what makes it permanent.
https://gmatandbeyond.blogspot.in/

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 273
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2011 6:50 am
Thanked: 5 times
Followed by:3 members

by fangtray » Sun Apr 22, 2012 3:32 pm
sam2304 wrote:B and E both seem to be reasonable assumptions but on negation only E makes the argument fall apart. B has no effect on the argument when we negate it.

E - there was not a common reepertory of mosaic designs with which artisans who lived in various parts of the Roaman Empire were familiar. - If this were true then there are no traveling artisans involved in designing the mosaic and the argument falls apart.

b. There is no a single region to which all the species depicted in the Sepphoris mosaics are native. - This doesn't have any effect on the argument.

IMO E.


Hope this helps !!
thanks so much for helping Sam. I suppose part of my issue was that I did not know what Motif and Repertory meant. While doing the exam, I can spot from the passage that motif may mean..some sort of subject of theme of the mosaic..

So while trying to understand the passage, the last sentence was difficult to grasp. Because the same subject of mosaics were found in other Roman cities (does this mean the hare, a partridge, and a fish? or could it mean OTHER motifs? perhaps, a band wagon, or corn or whatever?)

When doing this problem, I eliminated A and D immediately.

but I didn't know what the implication of B, C or E meant. So after looking at a dictionary, if E is true, why can there be no traveling artisan? Perhaps there is a mosaic convention held every Sunday when all artisans attend, couldn't an artisan from some roman city on other days still travel to sepphoris to sell a fish or hare mosaic?

I chose C, only through a guess, but upon re-reading it, it doesn't seem to do anything. I think the challenge with a lot of these critical reasoning or RC questions is that answers have a lot of negatives appear in the answer. .. ie. no motifs....not also.. makes me have to re-read things so carefully and i believe i still dont know what it truly means.

as for B, why do you guys say that is a reasonable assumption? It seems like it is the opposite of what we are looking for. For example, if B said... there is a single region or there are regions to which all the species depicted in the mosaics are native...that would be the right answer... no?

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 341
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 6:59 pm
Thanked: 17 times
Followed by:4 members
GMAT Score:720

by ice_rush » Sun Apr 22, 2012 4:21 pm
Negation of (B) is in line with what we are told in the argument and therefore the argument does not fall apart. Matter of fact it reinforces what we are already told...There is a single region to which all the species depicted in the Sepphoris mosaics are native...basically it means that traveling artisans are from that single region.

hope this helps!

Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2012 3:58 pm
Thanked: 1 times

by lamania » Sun May 06, 2012 7:03 pm
Could anyone kindly help me understand why a is false? The conclusion is that the mosaics were likely created by traveling artisans. A indicates that these mosaics are not composed of stones that can only be found in the Sepphoris area. If a were true, doesn't that mean these mosaics could be made in Sepphoris so no need for traveling artisans to bring them in?
thanks in advance

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 273
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2011 6:50 am
Thanked: 5 times
Followed by:3 members

by fangtray » Sun May 06, 2012 9:19 pm
lamania wrote:Could anyone kindly help me understand why a is false? The conclusion is that the mosaics were likely created by traveling artisans. A indicates that these mosaics are not composed of stones that can only be found in the Sepphoris area. If a were true, doesn't that mean these mosaics could be made in Sepphoris so no need for traveling artisans to bring them in?
thanks in advance
if we negate A, meaning that sepphoris mosaics are composed ONLY by the types of stones found naturally in the Sepphoris area, would it make the conclusion that the mosaics were made by traveling artisans false? The traveling artisans could come to Sepphoris and make these mosaics, after all...we know that the animals did not exist in Sepphoris. Perhaps these artisans made them in some other Roman city where the animals live, but they use the stones in Sepphoris.

Also, no where in the passage does it say traveling artisans need to bring the mosaics in, maybe they travel to Sepphoris, and make them there, with Sepphoris stones. but the artisans are still getting the idea of the mosaics, the theme, from animals from some other part of the roman empire.