#20 - One of the most vexing problems in historiography

[Dave Killoran]

Complete Question Explanation

Must be true. The correct answer choice is (B)

This is a very challenging problem, and only about a quarter of students answer this problem
correctly. The stimulus is a fact set and offers a solution for dating an event when the usual sources
offer conflicting chronologies:

1. Minimize the number of competing sources, possibly by eliminating the less credible ones.

2. Independent of the usual sources, determine which date is more likely to be right.

Notice how the test makers throw in the word “historiography” in order to be intimidating. As usual,
you do not need to know the meaning of this word (or any unusual word) in order to continue
with the problem. The remainder of the sentence makes clear that dating an event is the point
of discussion, and you can comfortably connect the “historio” word root to “date an event” and
“historians” and confidently move on with a good idea that historiography is connected to history in
some way. By actual definition, historiography is the writing of history.

Answer choice (A): The stimulus discusses events where there is conflict in dating among different
sources. In no way does the stimulus support answer choice (A).

Answer choice (B): This is the correct answer. As stated in the last sentence, historians are on
occasion unsuccessful in determining independently the date of an event. If the usual sources offered
are in conflict about the date of a particular event and an analysis independent of the usual sources
fails to confirm a date, then a date cannot be reliably determined for the event.

Answer choice (C): About one-third of all test takers choose this answer. The stimulus speaks
specifically of dating an event when the usual sources offer conflicting chronologies. The stimulus
does not discuss dating an event when there is no conflict of chronologies, and most likely many
dates could be set with certainty in the absence of any conflict. With this in mind, the language of
the answer choice becomes problematic because “attaching a reliable date to any event” would not
“require determining which of several conflicting chronologies is most likely to be true.”

Answer choice (D): The language of the answer choice is too strong in saying that an independent
determination is an ineffective way of dating events. There is simply not enough information about
what constitutes a “determination independent of the usual sources” to say it is ineffective.

Answer choice (E): This is another tricky answer, and just under a quarter of test takers incorrectly
select this answer. The answer claims that the soundest approach to dating an event is to undermine
the credibility of as many of the competing sources as possible. First, the stimulus suggests that
the historian should, perhaps, eliminate the less credible ones. No mention is made of eliminating
as many as possible, and the stimulus indicates that several remaining sources are to be expected.
Second, that same section discusses eliminating less credible sources, not undermining the
credibility of those sources.

[kwcflynn]

Hi,

I was stuck between (B) and (C) but chose (C). Is "any event" the reason why (C) is incorrect because the stimuls only cares about events only "when the usual sources offer conflicting chronologies of the event"?

Is it possible that (B) is worded a little too strong? Cannot be dated reliably by historians.

THANK YOU!

[Brook Miscoski]

kwcflynn,

(C) is incorrect because the stimulus states that the credible date should be determined independently of any of the sources. It is also incorrect because the stimulus does not indicate that there is always a conflicting chronology, as you note.

(B) starts with the word "some." You have only to determine whether "some...cannot" is supported by the stimulus. The stimulus states that occasionally the historians are unsuccessful at determining the date, so (B) is well supported by the stimulus. The only question in a wording of any strength is whether it is supported by the stimulus. (B) is not particularly strong--note the "some"--and it matches the stimulus.

[kevin.hussain24]

hello,
Is C wrong because it's paraphrasing the first sentence in an opposite direction? and because it's using any?
because the first sentence says dating an event when the usual sources offer conflicting chronologies of event and choice C says attaching reliable date to any event requires determining which of several conflicting chronologies is true. Is it similar to being opposite? Im a little confused.
Thank You
Kevin H

[Claire Horan]

Hi Kevin,

The stimulus says that dating an event is difficult when the usual sources offer conflicting chronologies. The author proposes solving this problem by eliminating the less credible sources. Then, of the sources that are left, historians should other evidence to figure out which of them is more likely.

We are looking for the answer that must be true based on the information in the stimulus.

(C) is incorrect because it's too broad. To paraphrase C, it says that dating an event "requires" (meaning: can only be done) by determining which chronology is most likely.

But the stimulus, in using "should" and "may" does not state that the proposed method of dating is the only way to reliably date an event.

[Loyd_Xmas]

Will someone please explain why my interpretations of the stimulus and choice (b) are wrong?

The stimulus that
1. Historians should minimize number of competing sources 2. Once ^happens, sometimes historians try to pick the best source. 3. When historians try to pick the best source independently.

Answer choice (b) states that some of the events CANNOT be dated reliably. This would mean that it is IMPOSSIBLE for ANY historian who has ever lived or ever will live to reliably date an event that has conflicting chronologies and that SOME historians have attempted.

The stimulus does not state or indicate indicate that there are any events that are impossible to date.

What do you think is the flaw in my understanding of this question? I would INCREDIBLY appreciate your help. I was very confused by this in the book

[Loyd_Xmas]

* 3. When historians try to pick the best sourced date independently, sometimes they choose the wrong date.

[Rachael Wilkenfeld]

Hi Cnyberg,

It's because of the "though on occasion unsuccessfully" language in the stimulus. We know that some times, even after less credible sources are removed from consideration, historians still have to determine which is accurate from multiple sources. The stimulus tells us that the attempt to decide between multiple sources is sometimes unsuccessful. So we can conclude from the stimulus that sometimes these events cannot be reliably dated by historians.

Hope this helps!

[Loyd_Xmas]

Rachael,

Thank you for taking time to respond to my question. I respectfully feel that your response does not answer my question. The meaning of the last sentence of the stimulus, which contains the "though on occasion unsuccessfully" language that you referred to, is that historians sometimes try (whether successfully or unsuccessfully) to determine independently of the usual sources which date...

Answer choice (b) states that there are some events that are IMPOSSIBLE for historians to reliably date. This answer choice overlooks the possibility that, despite the past feudal attempts of SOME historians. What if the two historians that examined the evidence were Inspector Jacques Clouseau and Gomer Pyle? If those two fools were the only historians that attempted to date the events, would it be reasonable to believe that no other historian alive could possibly do a better job?

Even if you disagree with my subjective argument, there is also an objective objection to attack answer choice B: what if a ton of new evidence is dug up by an archaeologist the year after the historians' analyses? Maybe new evidence could allow even a fool like Jacques Clouseau to accurately date the events?

There is no evidence anywhere in the stimulus that there are any events that have ever happened that are impossible to date. How would you know if something is impossible to date? You don't know what you don't know, and it is impossible for someone who did not live during the time of the event to definitively say whether a past event is impossible to date because anyone who did not live through the event does not definitively know that there is no evidence that will emerge in the future that will allow someone to date the event.

OR, what if new technology emerges that allows humans to go back into time to properly date events?

I would agree that answer choice B is supported if it purported that Some events cannot CURRENTLY be dated reliably by historians. Why should one assume that "currently" is implied in the verbiage of choice B?

I am trying hard to play devil's advocate right now with the hope that someone proves that I am wrong so that I can finally understand why this answer choice is correct.

[Abe_Lincoln]

I am Cnyberg's study partner and am also perplexed by why answer choice (b) is acceptable.