hard · LSAT Logical Reasoning
Excavators at an inland settlement found amphora fragments whose clay inclusions match a kiln district only twenty kilometers away. Several fragments retain a pine-resin lining chemically characteristic of a distant coastal region, and absorbed residues indicate that the vessels last held wine. Records from a later period show that merchants sometimes shipped resin in bulk to inland workshops and that amphorae were often relined between uses. No workshop from the settlement's period has yet been found nearby, but only a small portion of the kiln district has been surveyed.
The statements above most strongly support which one of the following?
- The matching clay inclusions uniquely establish that the amphorae were made in the nearby kiln district.
- The wine in the vessels must have been produced in the same coastal region as the resin.
- The absence of an excavated local workshop proves that the clay was transported to the coast for manufacture.
- Every amphora lined with coastal resin was used only once.
- The vessels could have been made locally and lined or relined with imported coastal resin.
Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →
More LSAT Logical Reasoning practice
- Which one of the following is an assumption required by the argument?
- Which one of the following can be properly inferred from these statements?
- The question type just described is best identified as which one of the following?
- The reasoning in the argument is flawed in that the argument
- The reasoning in the argument is flawed because the argument
- Which one of the following most accurately describes the relationship the statement establ
- Which one of the following can be validly inferred from the two conditionals above?
- Which one of the following must be true given the statement above?