【逻辑题请教】

追梦的Yvonne

The Nile Delta of Egypt was invaded and ruled from 1650 to 1550 B.C. by a people called the Hyksos. Their origin is uncertain, but archaeologists hypothesize that they were Canaanites. In support of this hypothesis, the archaeologists point out that excavations of Avaris, the Hyksos capital in Egypt, have uncovered large numbers of artifacts virtually identical to artifacts produced in Ashkelon, a major city of Canaan at the time of the Hyksos invasion.

In order to evaluate the force of the archaeologists’ evidence, it would be most useful to determine which of the following?

A. Whether there were some artifacts found at Avaris that were unlike those produced in Ashkelon but that date to before 1700 B.C.

B. Whether the Hyksos ruled any other part of Egypt besides the Delta in the period from 1650 to 1550 B.C.

C. Whether Avaris was the nearest Hyksos city in Egypt to Canaan

D. Whether Ashkelon after 1550 B.C. continued to produce artifacts similar to those found at Avaris

E.

Whether many of the artifacts found at Avaris that are similar to artifacts produced in Ashkelon date to well before the Hyksos invasion

（正解）

L.M.

这里说一下我当时做这个题的想法吧。
以及。。。我不懂历史，里面出现的专有名词我就用首字母代替了。。。


argument说了这些有效信息：
1.第一二句给结论，埃及在那段时间被H族占了。H族可能源于C族。
2.后面就在给论据：在AVA城（H族在埃及的首都）发现了特别的工艺品，这些工艺品跟H族占领时期的ASH城（C族重要城市）的工艺品非常一致。

Argument想表达的是，H族从C族来埃及的时候确实把工艺品/技术带到了AVA城。如果要evaluate，我们需要知道AVA城里工艺品的真实来源。因此选项应该要帮助我们作出这个判断。

A：在1700BC以前，AVA城是否有与ASH城不同的工艺品。知道了有不同的工艺品无助于判断相似工艺品的来历。（有不同那不太正常了嘛23333）

B：在那个时期，H族有没有占领其他地方。就算占领了，对我们了解AVA城工艺品的来历也是没有帮助的。

C：AVA城是不是最靠近C族的地方。能否带工艺品/技术到一个地方与距离没有必然关系。

D：在1550BC之后，ASH是否继续生产与AVA发现的工艺品类似的东西。我们需要了解源头，因此知道在这个时间段之后的事是没有帮助的。

E：AVA城发现的那些与ASH城的工艺品很像的东西，在H族来埃及之前是否被制造出来。很明确在讨论AVA城发现的工艺品的来历问题。

综上，选择E。