📘 What’s Inside This CAT RC Practice Post?
📝 Authentic CAT Reading Comprehension Passage: Practice with a real RC passage from a previous CAT exam.
✅ Detailed Questions with Step-by-Step Solutions: Each question is explained thoroughly for better understanding.
🔍 In-Depth Passage Analysis: Gain insights through line-by-line and paragraph-wise analysis, supplemented with a quick summary table for efficient revision.
📚 Vocabulary Enhancement: Get a separate post explaining all tough words from the passage.
RC Passage
Direction for the questions 5 to 8: The passage below is accompanied by a set of four questions. Choose the best answer to each question.
In 2006, the Met [art museum in the US] agreed to return the Euphronios krater, a masterpiece Greek urn that had been a museum draw since 1972. In 2007, the Getty [art museum in the US] agreed to return 40 objects to Italy, including a marble Aphrodite, in the midst of looting scandals. And in December, Sotheby’s and a private owner agreed to return an ancient Khmer statue of a warrior, pulled from auction two years before, to Cambodia.
Cultural property, or patrimony, laws limit the transfer of cultural property outside the source country’s territory, including outright export prohibitions and national ownership laws. Most art historians, archaeologists, museum officials and policymakers portray cultural property laws in general as invaluable tools for counteracting the ugly legacy of Western cultural imperialism.
During the late 19th and early 20th century — an era former Met director Thomas Hoving called “the age of piracy” — American and European art museums acquired antiquities by hook or by crook, from grave robbers or souvenir collectors, bounty from digs and ancient sites in impoverished but art-rich source countries. Patrimony laws were intended to protect future archaeological discoveries against Western imperialist designs....
I surveyed 90 countries with one or more archaeological sites on UNESCO’s World Heritage Site list, and my study shows that in most cases the number of discovered sites diminishes sharply after a country passes a cultural property law. There are 222 archaeological sites listed for those 90 countries. When you look into the history of the sites, you see that all but 21 were discovered before the passage of cultural property laws....
Strict cultural patrimony laws are popular in most countries. But the downside may be that they reduce incentives for foreign governments, nongovernmental organizations and educational institutions to invest in overseas exploration because their efforts will not necessarily be rewarded by opportunities to hold, display and study what is uncovered. To the extent that source countries can fund their own archaeological projects, artifacts and sites may still be discovered.... The survey has far-reaching implications. It suggests that source countries, particularly in the developing world, should narrow their cultural property laws so that they can reap the benefits of new archaeological discoveries, which typically increase tourism and enhance cultural pride. This does not mean these nations should abolish restrictions on foreign excavation and foreign claims to artifacts.
China provides an interesting alternative approach for source nations eager for foreign archaeological investment. From 1935 to 2003, China had a restrictive cultural property law that prohibited foreign ownership of Chinese cultural artifacts. In those years, China’s most significant archaeological discovery occurred by chance, in 1974, when peasant farmers accidentally uncovered ranks of buried terra cotta warriors, which are part of Emperor Qin’s spectacular tomb system.
In 2003, the Chinese government switched course, dropping its cultural property law and embracing collaborative international archaeological research. Since then, China has nominated 11 archaeological sites for inclusion in the World Heritage Site list, including eight in 2013, the most ever for China.
RC Line-wise Explanation
Paragraph 1
Original: In 2006, the Met [art museum in the US] agreed to return the Euphronios krater, a masterpiece Greek urn that had been a museum draw since 1972.
Explanation: In 2006, the Metropolitan Museum of Art decided to give back a valuable Greek urn called the Euphronios krater, which had been a major attraction since 1972.
Original: In 2007, the Getty [art museum in the US] agreed to return 40 objects to Italy, including a marble Aphrodite, in the midst of looting scandals.
Explanation: In 2007, the Getty Museum returned 40 artworks, including a marble statue of Aphrodite, to Italy because of controversies related to illegal looting.
Original: And in December, Sotheby’s and a private owner agreed to return an ancient Khmer statue of a warrior, pulled from auction two years before, to Cambodia.
Explanation: Later that year in December, Sotheby’s and a private collector decided to return a Khmer warrior statue to Cambodia, which had been withdrawn from auction two years earlier.
Paragraph 2
Original: Cultural property, or patrimony, laws limit the transfer of cultural property outside the source country’s territory, including outright export prohibitions and national ownership laws.
Explanation: Patrimony laws are designed to prevent cultural items from being taken out of their country of origin through bans on export and rules claiming national ownership.
Original: Most art historians, archaeologists, museum officials and policymakers portray cultural property laws in general as invaluable tools for counteracting the ugly legacy of Western cultural imperialism.
Explanation: Experts in art and policy view these laws as essential for resisting the historical exploitation of non-Western cultures by Western powers.
Paragraph 3
Original: During the late 19th and early 20th century — an era former Met director Thomas Hoving called “the age of piracy” — American and European art museums acquired antiquities by hook or by crook, from grave robbers or souvenir collectors, bounty from digs and ancient sites in impoverished but art-rich source countries.
Explanation: In the late 1800s and early 1900s, Western museums often acquired ancient artifacts unethically—from grave robbers, collectors, or poorly regulated excavations in poor countries rich in cultural heritage.
Original: Patrimony laws were intended to protect future archaeological discoveries against Western imperialist designs....
Explanation: These laws were created to safeguard future archaeological finds from being taken by Western institutions, protecting cultural heritage from exploitation.
Paragraph 4
Original: I surveyed 90 countries with one or more archaeological sites on UNESCO’s World Heritage Site list, and my study shows that in most cases the number of discovered sites diminishes sharply after a country passes a cultural property law.
Explanation: The author conducted a study of 90 countries with UNESCO-listed archaeological sites and found that the number of new discoveries drops significantly after cultural property laws are enacted.
Original: There are 222 archaeological sites listed for those 90 countries. When you look into the history of the sites, you see that all but 21 were discovered before the passage of cultural property laws....
Explanation: Out of 222 listed sites in those countries, only 21 were discovered after cultural property laws were enforced, indicating a notable decline in new discoveries.
Paragraph 5
Original: Strict cultural patrimony laws are popular in most countries.
Explanation: Many countries favor having strict cultural heritage protection laws.
Original: But the downside may be that they reduce incentives for foreign governments, nongovernmental organizations and educational institutions to invest in overseas exploration because their efforts will not necessarily be rewarded by opportunities to hold, display and study what is uncovered.
Explanation: However, a negative effect is that foreign institutions may not want to fund or conduct archaeological work if they can’t keep, exhibit, or study the artifacts they help uncover.
Original: To the extent that source countries can fund their own archaeological projects, artifacts and sites may still be discovered....
Explanation: If the countries themselves have enough resources, they can continue discovering artifacts and sites without outside help.
Original: The survey has far-reaching implications. It suggests that source countries, particularly in the developing world, should narrow their cultural property laws so that they can reap the benefits of new archaeological discoveries, which typically increase tourism and enhance cultural pride.
Explanation: The study implies that developing countries should consider easing some legal restrictions to encourage more discoveries, which can boost tourism and national pride.
Original: This does not mean these nations should abolish restrictions on foreign excavation and foreign claims to artifacts.
Explanation: The author clarifies that he's not suggesting a complete removal of restrictions on foreign excavation or ownership of artifacts.
Paragraph 6
Original: China provides an interesting alternative approach for source nations eager for foreign archaeological investment.
Explanation: China serves as a noteworthy example for countries wanting to attract international archaeological funding.
Original: From 1935 to 2003, China had a restrictive cultural property law that prohibited foreign ownership of Chinese cultural artifacts.
Explanation: Between 1935 and 2003, China had a strict law preventing foreigners from owning Chinese heritage items.
Original: In those years, China’s most significant archaeological discovery occurred by chance, in 1974, when peasant farmers accidentally uncovered ranks of buried terra cotta warriors, which are part of Emperor Qin’s spectacular tomb system.
Explanation: During that restrictive period, China’s biggest archaeological find—the terra cotta warriors—was discovered accidentally by farmers in 1974.
Original: In 2003, the Chinese government switched course, dropping its cultural property law and embracing collaborative international archaeological research.
Explanation: In 2003, China changed its approach by lifting the strict law and supporting joint research with foreign partners.
Original: Since then, China has nominated 11 archaeological sites for inclusion in the World Heritage Site list, including eight in 2013, the most ever for China.
Explanation: Following the policy shift, China nominated 11 sites for UNESCO recognition, including a record-breaking 8 in 2013 alone.
RC Paragraph Explanation
Paragraph 1 Summary
Several U.S. museums and auction houses have recently returned stolen or looted cultural artifacts to countries like Italy and Cambodia, highlighting the global issue of repatriation.
Paragraph 2 Summary
Patrimony laws, which aim to keep cultural property within its country of origin, are widely supported for countering Western cultural imperialism and protecting heritage.
Paragraph 3 Summary
Historically, Western museums obtained cultural treasures through exploitative means during what was called “the age of piracy.” Patrimony laws were introduced to stop such practices and safeguard future finds.
Paragraph 4 Summary
A survey of 90 countries reveals a sharp decline in archaeological discoveries after the implementation of patrimony laws, suggesting these laws may unintentionally stifle new findings.
Paragraph 5 Summary
While widely supported, strict patrimony laws may discourage foreign investment in archaeology. The study proposes modifying these laws—not eliminating them—to encourage exploration and reap cultural and economic benefits.
Paragraph 6 Summary
China illustrates an alternative path by first restricting and later relaxing its laws, leading to more discoveries and global recognition through international partnerships.
RC Quick Table Summary
| Paragraph Number | Main Idea |
|---|---|
| Paragraph 1 | U.S. institutions returned major artifacts to source countries amid controversy. |
| Paragraph 2 | Patrimony laws protect cultural heritage and fight past Western exploitation. |
| Paragraph 3 | Western museums acquired many artifacts during a period of cultural looting. |
| Paragraph 4 | Fewer archaeological sites are discovered after patrimony laws are passed. |
| Paragraph 5 | Strict laws may reduce foreign exploration; loosening them can have benefits. |
| Paragraph 6 | China’s shift to collaborative archaeology increased its global site recognition. |
RC Questions
Ques 5. From the passage we can infer that the author is likely to advise poor, but archaeologically-rich source countries to do all of the following, EXCEPT:
Ques 6. Which one of the following statements best expresses the paradox of patrimony laws?
Ques 7. Which one of the following statements, if true, would undermine the central idea of the passage?
Ques 8. It can be inferred from the passage that archaeological sites are considered important by some source countries because they:
