Scholars investigating ancient Mesopotamian society identify numerous locations as proof of primitive metropolitan growth. Nevertheless, these researc...
GMAT Information and Ideas : (Ideas) Questions
Scholars investigating ancient Mesopotamian society identify numerous locations as proof of primitive metropolitan growth. Nevertheless, these researchers draw crucial boundaries between well-documented areas such as Uruk, which possesses comprehensive archaeological evidence including temple platform remnants and written clay records from 3200 BCE, and more challenging locations such as Dilmun, which is referenced in historical Sumerian documents yet lacks a definitively established geographical position. Although Sumerian chronicles portray Dilmun as a flourishing commercial hub, research teams remain divided regarding the actual whereabouts of this ancient society, contrasting sharply with their unified stance on Uruk's confirmed location and historical importance.
According to the text, what is a difference between how archaeologists view Uruk and how they view Dilmun?
Archaeologists believe that Sumerian texts provide more evidence for Uruk's existence than they do for Dilmun's existence.
Archaeologists agree that Uruk existed, but disagree about whether Dilmun can be located.
Archaeologists agree that Dilmun was established much earlier than Uruk.
Archaeologists find the physical evidence supporting Dilmun's location to be more convincing than similar evidence for Uruk.
Step 1: Decode and Map the Passage
Part A: Passage Analysis Table
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
|---|---|
| "Scholars investigating ancient Mesopotamian society identify numerous locations as proof of primitive metropolitan growth." |
|
| "Nevertheless, these researchers draw crucial boundaries between well-documented areas such as Uruk, which possesses comprehensive archaeological evidence including temple platform remnants and written clay records from 3200 BCE," |
|
| "and more challenging locations such as Dilmun, which is referenced in historical Sumerian documents yet lacks a definitively established geographical position." |
|
| "Although Sumerian chronicles portray Dilmun as a flourishing commercial hub," |
|
| "research teams remain divided regarding the actual whereabouts of this ancient society, contrasting sharply with their unified stance on Uruk's confirmed location and historical importance." |
|
Part B: Passage Architecture & Core Elements
Main Point: Scholars make important distinctions between ancient Mesopotamian locations based on the quality of evidence available, leading to consensus on some sites but ongoing debate about others.
Argument Flow: The passage establishes that researchers studying ancient Mesopotamian cities categorize locations differently based on available evidence. It contrasts well-documented sites like Uruk, which have both physical and written evidence leading to scholarly consensus, with problematic sites like Dilmun, which appear only in written records and generate ongoing disagreement about their actual locations.
Step 2: Interpret the Question Precisely
What's being asked? The question wants us to identify a difference in how archaeologists/scholars view these two ancient locations.
What type of answer do we need? A specific contrast between the scholarly treatment or consensus regarding Uruk versus Dilmun.
Any limiting keywords? None specified.
Step 3: Prethink the Answer
- The correct answer should capture the key difference: scholars have a unified, agreed-upon view of Uruk because of its strong evidence, while they remain divided and uncertain about Dilmun because of its weaker evidence base
- The contrast is about how modern researchers view and treat them differently
Archaeologists believe that Sumerian texts provide more evidence for Uruk's existence than they do for Dilmun's existence.
- Claims Sumerian texts provide more evidence for Uruk than Dilmun
- This misrepresents the passage - the difference is not about quantity of textual evidence but types of evidence and resulting scholarly consensus
Archaeologists agree that Uruk existed, but disagree about whether Dilmun can be located.
- Captures exactly what we identified: agreement about Uruk vs. disagreement about Dilmun
- Matches our analysis showing unified stance on Uruk versus divided opinions on Dilmun
Archaeologists agree that Dilmun was established much earlier than Uruk.
- Claims archaeologists agree Dilmun was established earlier than Uruk
- The passage provides no information about when either location was established
Archaeologists find the physical evidence supporting Dilmun's location to be more convincing than similar evidence for Uruk.
- States physical evidence for Dilmun is more convincing than for Uruk
- This is the opposite of what the passage says - Uruk has comprehensive archaeological evidence while Dilmun lacks a definitively established geographical position