This question is incomplete, here´s the complete question
.
Excavations of the Roman city of Sepphoris have uncovered numerous detailed mosaics depicting several readily identifiable animal species : a hare, a partridge, and various Mediterranean fish. Oddly, most of the species represented did not live in the Sepphoris region when these mosaics were created. Since identical motifs appear in mosaics found in other Roman cities, however, the mosaics of Sepphoris were very likely created by traveling artisans from some other part of the Roman Empire.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
(A) The Sepphoris mosaics are not composed exclusively of types of stones found naturally in the Sepphoris area.
(B) There is no single region to which all the species depicted in the Sepphoris mosaics are native.
(C) No motifs appear in the Sepphoris mosaics that do not also appear in the mosaics of some other Roman city.
(D) All of the animal figures in the Sepphoris mosaics are readily identifiable as representations of known species.
(E) There was not a common repertory of mosaic designs with which artisans who lived in various parts of the Roman Empire were familiar.
Answer: (E) There was not a common repertory of mosaic designs with which artisans who lived in various parts of the Roman Empire were familiar.
Explanation:
An assumption is a premise that is not directly adressed in an argument. The argument´s validity depends on the validity of its assumptions. In this example, the conclusion is that the mosaics were designed by traveling artisans from different areas of the Roman Empire. For the conclusion to be true, an assumption has been made: those artisans didn´t design the mosaics based on a common repertory known in different of the Roman empire. If there were, the conclusion wouldn´t be valid.
