A sudden increase in the production of elephant ivory artifacts on the Mediterranean coast of North Africa occurred in the tenth century. Historians explain this increase as the result of an area opening up as a new source of ivory and argue on this basis that the important medieval trade between North Africa and East Africa began at this period.
Each of the following, if true, provides some support for the historians’ account described above EXCEPT?
- In East Africa gold coins from Mediterranean North Africa have been found at a tenth-century but at no earlier sites.
- The many surviving letters of pre-tenth-century North African merchants include no mention of business transactions involving East Africa.
- Excavations in East Africa reveal a tenth-century change in architectural style to reflect North African patterns.
- Documents from Mediterranean Europe and North Africa that date back earlier than the tenth century show knowledge of East African animals.
- East African carvings in a style characteristic of the tenth century depict seagoing vessels very different from those used by local sailors but of a type common in the Mediterranean.
Historians medieval trade 这个时刻在NA和EA之间展开了。然后我们要找一个消弱它的答案。
我选了B,可答案是D。
但是我觉得这两个答案都有点不妥,所以当初我选的时候也非常犹豫。
先讲B ,那些NA商人的信中并没有提到和EA之间的贸易往来。我的想法是,不提不代表不往来,说明他们有可能往来,也有可能不来往。那么如果是来往的话,那就是SUPPORT。 如果是不来往的话,就是WEAKEN, 也就是答案。
而D呢,说了一些NA的文件中有对EA动物的描述。动物的描述有什么用啊?似乎用处不大阿,难道我们非要说因为NA的文件有记载EA的动物,所以他们又贸易上的往来。并不符合逻辑阿。所以觉得这个选项是无关选项。
希望大N,小N,无N,只要有看法的都欢迎过来给个说法。
|