PT101.S3.Q9 > Question

SECTION 1 · rc

PASSAGE 1

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6

PASSAGE 2

Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13

PASSAGE 3

Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20

PASSAGE 4

Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26 Question 27

SECTION 2 · lr

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25

SECTION 3 · lr

SECTION 4 · rc

PASSAGE 1

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7 Question 8

PASSAGE 2

Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14

PASSAGE 3

Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20

PASSAGE 4

Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26 Question 27

The author concludes that a play called Mankind must have been written between 1431 and 1471. This is because a certain coin referenced in the play wasn’t in circulation until 1431, and what's more, a certain king referenced in the play's dedication as a living monarch died in 1471.

The author assumes that the rose noble coin didn’t exist before it went into circulation, and that there wasn't another, earlier coin by the same name.

The author also assumes that Henry VI could only have been mentioned as living in the play's dedication were he truly alive. This means the author assumes that the dedication is historically accurate and representative of the time the play was written, rather than tacked on by a later playwright or compiler.

We’re not interested in later dates the play was performed. We only care about when it was written, and this doesn't give us any new information about its writing.

Even if that coin was first minted in 1422, it could well have been in circulation later. The reason the rose noble is so important is because it wasn’t in circulation until 1431. Another coin being minted earlier is irrelevant.

Even if the coin was out of circulation by 1468, it still could’ve been mentioned in the play. This doesn’t weaken the claim that Mankind was written between 1431 and 1471.

At best, this simply means Mankind was written between 1431 and 1461, or between 1470 and 1471, which doesn’t weaken the argument. And even if Henry VI was deposed in the 1460s, he was still a “living monarch” at the time—just one not currently ruling the country.

Even if the rose noble wasn’t yet in circulation, there was a chance the playwright had heard of it as early as 1428. This pushes the possible date for Mankind to have been written back three years, weakening the author's argument.

PrepTest 101 - Section 3 - Question 9

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action