PrepTest 103, Section 1, Question 7
The cumbersome spears that were the principal weapons(77 more words not shown)
Which one of the following,(7 more words not shown)
- AA royal tomb(16 more words not shown)
- BThere is evidence(21 more words not shown)
- CScenes of violent(21 more words not shown)
- DSome tombs of(21 more words not shown)
- EThe marks on(32 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
More warrior tombs suggest more deaths. But what caused those deaths?
The archaeologists think warfare changed. That could make sense: the earlier spears were cumbersome and prevented widespread casualties, so new weapons or new fighting methods might explain a higher casualty rate later. Perhaps the tribes developed better spears, started using swords, or changed how they fought.
Still, a tomb by itself doesn't tell us how someone died. What if a disease spread through the warriors' camps? We would want evidence connecting the deaths to a new way of fighting, rather than simply counting more graves.
What we’re looking for
The question asks us to support the archaeologists' claim. My prediction is evidence of the new method itself: some sign that the later warriors used a different weapon or strategy capable of producing the casualties.
Working the answers
- A
This concerns the early Bronze Age, when we already know warriors used spears. A picture of them doing so fits the existing account. It doesn't reveal a later change in weapons or fighting methods.
- B
Taking prisoners and making them build things shows one consequence of warfare. But it doesn't show that the tribes had developed a new way to inflict many casualties. We don't know that taking prisoners was new, and the existence of captured survivors doesn't explain the higher number of dead warriors.
- C
Violent battle scenes in early tombs tell us that warfare was depicted during the earlier period. The argument already acknowledges early conflicts. We need evidence of what changed later. The brightness of the paint doesn't tell us anything about how many casualties the fighting produced.
- D
Weapons and armor taken as trophies could show that the warriors fought enemies and kept some of their equipment. But D doesn't identify a new weapon or method. The trophies could be the same sort of equipment used before. We can't turn “weapons were taken” into “a new method caused more casualties.”
- ECorrect
Now we have evidence connecting later warriors' injuries to a particular weapon: arrowheads. The bones have marks consistent with wounds from arrowheads found in late Bronze Age settlements. That helps explain the deaths through warfare involving something other than the cumbersome spears emphasized in the early period.
This doesn't prove that no arrows existed earlier, or that every warrior died from an arrow wound. It supports the claim by giving us physical evidence of a method that could account for the later casualties. That is much more useful than another indication that these tribes fought wars.
More Strengthen questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Strengthen questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.