The original Hellenistic community was idealized, the Greeks own golden dreama community never achieved but only imagined by the Macedonian Alexander, who was possessed of the true faith of all converts to a larger vision. The evolving system of city-states had produced not only unity with a healthy diversity but also narrow rivalries. No Hellenic empire arose, only scores of squabbling cities pursuing bitter feuds born of ancient wrongs and existing ambitions. It was civil strife made possible by isolation from the great armies and ambitions of Asia. Greek history could arguably begin in July of 776 B.C., the First Olympiad, and end with Theodosuss ban on the games in 393 A.D. Before this there had been a long era of two tribes, the Dorians and Ionians, scarcely distinguishable to the alien eye, but distinctly separate in their own eyes until 776. After Theodosus ban most of the Mediterranean world was Greek-like, in fact, but the central core had been rendered impotent by diffusion. During the eventful Greek millennium, the Olympics reflected not the high ideals of Hellenes but rather the mean reality of the times. Its founders had created a monster, games that twisted the strategists aspirations to unity to fit the unpleasant reality of the Hellenistic world. The games not only mirrored the central practices of the Greek world that reformers would deny but also imposed the flaws of that world. Like the atomic theory of the Greek philosophers, the Greek gamers theories were far removed from reality; they were elegant, consistent, logical, and irrelevant.Part religious ritual, part game rite, in the five-day Olympic Games, various athletes coming together under the banner of their cities; winning became paramount, imposing defeat a delight. As Greek society evolved, so, too, did the games, but rarely as a unifying force. Athletes supposedly competing for the laurel of accomplishment in the name of idealism found that dried olive leaves changed to gold. Each local polis (city-state) sought not to contribute to the grandeur of Greece, but to achieve its own glory. As in the real world, in the games no Greek could trust another, and each envied rivals victories. The Olympic spirit was not one of communal bliss but bitter lasting competition institutionalized in games.Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the followingQ. For which of the following statements does the passage provide some evidence or explanation? I. Alexander united ancient Greece through a series of military conquests. II. The divisions among Greek city-states were reflected in the Olympics. III. The Olympic Games could not have occurred without a city-state system.a)II only b)III only c)I and II d)II and III e)I, II and III Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?

Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity

Open App

Verbal Exam > Verbal Questions > The original Hellenistic community was ideali...

Join the Discussion on the App

Greek history could arguably begin in July of 776 B.C., the First Olympiad, and end with Theodosus‘s ban on the games in 393 A.D. Before this there had been a long era of two tribes, the Dorians and Ionians, scarcely distinguishable to the alien eye, but distinctly separate in their own eyes until 776. After Theodosus' ban most of the Mediterranean world was Greek-like, in fact, but the central core had been rendered impotent by diffusion.

During the eventful Greek millennium, the Olympics reflected not the high ideals of Hellenes but rather the mean reality of the times. Its founders had created a monster, games that twisted the strategists‘ aspirations to unity to fit the unpleasant reality of the Hellenistic world. The games not only mirrored the central practices of the Greek world that reformers would deny but also imposed the flaws of that world. Like the atomic theory of the Greek philosophers, the Greek gamers‘ theories were far removed from reality; they were elegant, consistent, logical, and irrelevant.

Part religious ritual, part game rite, in the five-day Olympic Games, various athletes coming together under the banner of their cities; winning became paramount, imposing defeat a delight. As Greek society evolved, so, too, did the games, but rarely as a unifying force. Athletes supposedly competing for the laurel of accomplishment in the name of idealism found that dried olive leaves changed to gold. Each local polis (city-state) sought not to contribute to the grandeur of Greece, but to achieve its own glory. As in the real world, in the games no Greek could trust another, and each envied rivals' victories. The Olympic spirit was not one of communal bliss but bitter lasting competition institutionalized in games.

Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the following

Q. For which of the following statements does the passage provide some evidence or explanation?
I. Alexander united ancient Greece through a series of military conquests.

II. The divisions among Greek city-states were reflected in the Olympics.

III. The Olympic Games could not have occurred without a city-state system.

a)
II only
b)
III only
c)
I and II
d)
II and III
e)
I, II and III

Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?

FREE This question is part of

Test: Reading Comprehension- 4

Attempt Test

Attempt this Test

Verified Answer

The original Hellenistic community was idealized, the Greeks‘ ow...

Mapping the Passage
¶1 argues that in reality the Hellenic period was tumultuous, not the idealized community that Alexander desired.
¶2 gives a time frame for Greek civilization and the Olympic games.
¶3 argues that the games reflected Greek culture, but not positively as the founders intended.
¶4 argues that the games reinforced disunity instead of promoting the unity originally intended.

Take a moment to remind yourself of the author‘s main point about the Games and look at the layout of the choices before trying to answer. RN II is the most frequent, so hit that first. RN II is basically the author‘s main argument, and the passage itself is explanation and example for this. Eliminate (B). RN I offers a point not made by the passage: the author argues that Alexander never truly unified Greece (and he offers no evidence for this). Eliminate (C). The author never makes the claim in RN III, and therefore (D) can be eliminated. (A) alone is left.

View all questions of this test

Most Upvoted Answer

The original Hellenistic community was idealized, the Greeks‘ ow...

Analysis of the Statements
The passage discusses the nature of ancient Greek society, the Olympics, and their relationship with the city-state system. Let's evaluate the statements in light of the provided text.
Statement I: Alexander united ancient Greece through a series of military conquests.
- The passage mentions Alexander as an idealized figure with a larger vision but does not provide evidence of him uniting Greece through military means. Rather, it notes the absence of a Hellenic empire and the squabbling among city-states. Therefore, this statement lacks support from the text.
Statement II: The divisions among Greek city-states were reflected in the Olympics.
- The passage clearly illustrates that the Olympics mirrored the competition and rivalries among the Greek city-states. It describes how local polises sought their own glory rather than contributing to a collective Greek identity. The intense rivalry and lack of trust among athletes emphasized the divisions, making this statement accurate.
Statement III: The Olympic Games could not have occurred without a city-state system.
- While the passage discusses the city-state system's influence on the Olympics, it does not explicitly state that the games could not exist without it. The relationship is implied rather than directly confirmed, making this statement less certain in terms of evidence.
Conclusion
Considering the analysis:
- Statement II is supported by the passage.
- Statement I lacks evidence.
- Statement III is implied but not definitively proven.
Thus, the correct answer is option 'A': II only.

View all answers Start learning for free

< Previous Question Next Question >

Explore Courses for Verbal exam

Similar Verbal Doubts

The original Hellenistic community was idealized, the Greeks own golden dreama community never achieved but only imagined by the Macedonian Alexander, who was possessed of the true faith of all converts to a larger vision. The evolving system of city-states had produced not only unity with a healthy diversity but also narrow rivalries. No Hellenic empire arose, only scores of squabbling cities pursuing bitter feuds born of ancient wrongs and existing ambitions. It was civil strife made possible by isolation from the great armies and ambitions of Asia. Greek history could arguably begin in July of 776 B.C., the First Olympiad, and end with Theodosuss ban on the games in 393 A.D. Before this there had been a long era of two tribes, the Dorians and Ionians, scarcely distinguishable to the alien eye, but distinctly separate in their own eyes until 776. After Theodosus ban most of the Mediterranean world was Greek-like, in fact, but the central core had been rendered impotent by diffusion. During the eventful Greek millennium, the Olympics reflected not the high ideals of Hellenes but rather the mean reality of the times. Its founders had created a monster, games that twisted the strategists aspirations to unity to fit the unpleasant reality of the Hellenistic world. The games not only mirrored the central practices of the Greek world that reformers would deny but also imposed the flaws of that world. Like the atomic theory of the Greek philosophers, the Greek gamers theories were far removed from reality; they were elegant, consistent, logical, and irrelevant.Part religious ritual, part game rite, in the five-day Olympic Games, various athletes coming together under the banner of their cities; winning became paramount, imposing defeat a delight. As Greek society evolved, so, too, did the games, but rarely as a unifying force. Athletes supposedly competing for the laurel of accomplishment in the name of idealism found that dried olive leaves changed to gold. Each local polis (city-stat e) sought not to contribute to the grandeur of Greece, but to achieve its own glory. As in the real world, in the games no Greek could trust another, and each envied rivals victories. The Olympic spirit was not one of communal bliss but bitter lasting competition institutionalized in games.Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the followingQ. Considering the arguments made in the passage, with which of the following statements would the author be most likely to agree?

View answer

The original Hellenistic community was idealized, the Greeks own golden dreama community never achieved but only imagined by the Macedonian Alexander, who was possessed of the true faith of all converts to a larger vision. The evolving system of city-states had produced not only unity with a healthy diversity but also narrow rivalries. No Hellenic empire arose, only scores of squabbling cities pursuing bitter feuds born of ancient wrongs and existing ambitions. It was civil strife made possible by isolation from the great armies and ambitions of Asia. Greek history could arguably begin in July of 776 B.C., the First Olympiad, and end with Theodosuss ban on the games in 393 A.D. Before this there had been a long era of two tribes, the Dorians and Ionians, scarcely distinguishable to the alien eye, but distinctly separate in their own eyes until 776. After Theodosus ban most of the Mediterranean world was Greek-like, in fact, but the central core had been rendered impotent by diffusion. During the eventful Greek millennium, the Olympics reflected not the high ideals of Hellenes but rather the mean reality of the times. Its founders had created a monster, games that twisted the strategists aspirations to unity to fit the unpleasant reality of the Hellenistic world. The games not only mirrored the central practices of the Greek world that reformers would deny but also imposed the flaws of that world. Like the atomic theory of the Greek philosophers, the Greek gamers theories were far removed from reality; they were elegant, consistent, logical, and irrelevant.Part religious ritual, part game rite, in the five-day Olympic Games, various athletes coming together under the banner of their cities; winning became paramount, imposing defeat a delight. As Greek society evolved, so, too, did the games, but rarely as a unifying force. Athletes supposedly competing for the laurel of accomplishment in the name of idealism found that dried olive leaves changed to gold. Each local polis (city-stat e) sought not to contribute to the grandeur of Greece, but to achieve its own glory. As in the real world, in the games no Greek could trust another, and each envied rivals victories. The Olympic spirit was not one of communal bliss but bitter lasting competition institutionalized in games.Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the followingQ.The statement: The Olympic spirit was not one of communal bliss but bitter lasting competition institutionalized in games indicates that the author believes that

View answer

Of course, in his attempts at field investigation, the historian is at the disadvantage that the countryside has changed in many respects since the period which he is studying. He is not permitted to use H.G. Wellss time machine, to enable him to see it as it actually was. Inevitably he is concerned in the main, if not exclusively, with literary and other materials, which have survived from that stretch of the past which interests him. Old maps may be plans of cities, charts of sea coasts and estuaries, cartularies of landed estates, or topographic delineations of land areas. These clearly engage the interest of historians and geographers alike, and they call for a combination of the methods and viewpoints of each. Maps can be conceived of and considered in several quite different ways, being properly regarded, and so assessed, as works of artat best as objects of colour, skill, form, and beauty. They may alternatively be regarded purely for their cartographic aesthetic. The main queries which then arise are the following: how is it that the map-maker has carried out his task and with skill of what echelon and with what degree of success has he done so? Such an inquiry falls to the specialist field of historical cartography. An antiquarian map may also be approached in a means akin to that of the student who conceives it as a font contemporaneous with the time of its production. Thus, the historical cartographer may seek to bring grist to his mill and to consider the maps reliability as a satisfactory source of empirical evidence. By such means also the regional historian, in his search for essentials about such past matters as the availability of roads, the extent of enclosed farmland, or the number and location of mines and quarries, is no less an interested party.The value of old maps as documents useful for historicity depends necessarily on to what degree they depict and on how accurately. For virtually all periods of pre-modern history some maps have survived to serve as historiography, depicting, however imperfectly, certain features of past geography. The work of Claudius Ptolemywho lived in the 2nd century A.D.for centuries provided the basis for maps of the known world and its major regions. Although many were drawn on the scientific basis which he provided, they nevertheless embodied many errorsof location, distance, and the shape of areas of land and sea. The medieval portolan charts of the Mediterranean Sea and the later charts which provided sailing directions, produced in Holland, were accurate enough to be useful in practical navigation. Plans of important cities of Europe, so well-drawn as to yield evidence of their earlier form and extent, are notably offered in Braun and Hogenbergs Civitates Orbis Terrarum, published at Cologne and, in England, in John Speeds plans of cities. Similarly, John Ogilbys Britannia, Volume the First, appearing in 1675, gives detailed information of Englands road system as it existed nearly three centuries ago. However, few of the early maps approach modern standards, which require accurate representation of distances and of heights above mean sea-level and the use of carefullydistinguished symbols. This is because it was not until the 18th century that cartography, as an exact science, was born. Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the following:Q. According to the passage, which of the following statements is/are NOT true? I. Most maps produced before the 18th century are not as accurate as maps produced after the 18th century. II. The maps of Claudius Ptolemy were not used as a model by later mapmakers.III. Historians have generally been uninterested in using maps as a tool to learn about the past.

View answer

Of course, in his attempts at field investigation, the historian is at the disadvantage that the countryside has changed in many respects since the period which he is studying. He is not permitted to use H.G. Wellss time machine, to enable him to see it as it actually was. Inevitably he is concerned in the main, if not exclusively, with literary and other materials, which have survived from that stretch of the past which interests him.Old maps may be plans of cities, charts of sea coasts and estuaries, cartularies of landed estates, or topographic delineations of land areas. These clearly engage the interest of historians and geographers alike, and they call for a combination of the methods and viewpoints of each. Maps can be conceived of and considered in several quite different ways, being properly regarded, and so assessed, as works of artat best as objects of colour, skill, form, and beauty. They may alternatively be regarded purely for their cartographic aesthetic. The main queries which then arise are the following: how is it that the map-maker has carried out his task and with skill of what echelon and with what degree of success has he done so? Such an inquiry falls to the specialist field of historical cartography. An antiquarian map may also be approached in a means akin to that of the student who conceives it as a font contemporaneous with the time of its production. Thus, the historical cartographer may seek to bring grist to his mill and to consider the maps reliability as a satisfactory source of empirical evidence. By such means also the regional historian, in his search for essentials about such past matters as the availability of roads, the extent of enclosed farmland, or the number and location of mines and quarries, is no less an interested party.The value of old maps as documents useful for historicity depends necessarily on to what degree they depict and on how accurately. For virtually all periods of pre-modern history some maps have survived to serve as historiography, depicting, however imperfectly, certain features of past geography. The work of Claudius Ptolemywho lived in the 2nd century A.D.for centuries provided the basis for maps of the known world and its major regions. Although many were drawn on the scientific basis which he provided, they nevertheless embodied many errorsof location, distance, and the shape of areas of land and sea. The medieval portolan charts of the Mediterranean Sea and the later charts which provided sailing directions, produced in Holland, were accurate enough to be useful in practical navigation. Plans of important cities of Europe, so well-drawn as to yield evidence of their earlier form and extent, are notably offered in Braun and Hogenbergs Civitates Orbis Terrarum, published at Cologne and, in England, in John Speeds plans of cities. Similarly, John Ogilbys Britannia, Volume the First, appearing in 1675, gives detailed information of Englands road system as it existed nearly three centuries ago. However, few of the early maps approach modern standards, which require accurate representation of distances and of heights above mean sea-level and the use of carefullydistinguished symbols. This is because it was not until the 18th century that cartography, as an exact science, was born. Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the following:Q.With which of the following statements would the author be most likely to agree?

View answer

Of course, in his attempts at field investigation, the historian is at the disadvantage that the countryside has changed in many respects since the period which he is studying. He is not permitted to use H.G. Wellss time machine, to enable him to see it as it actually was. Inevitably he is concerned in the main, if not exclusively, with literary and other materials, which have survived from that stretch of the past which interests him.Old maps may be plans of cities, charts of sea coasts and estuaries, cartularies of landed estates, or topographic delineations of land areas. These clearly engage the interest of historians and geographers alike, and they call for a combination of the methods and viewpoints of each. Maps can be conceived of and considered in several quite different ways, being properly regarded, and so assessed, as works of artat best as objects of colour, skill, form, and beauty. They may alternatively be regarded purely for their cartographic aesthetic. The main queries which then arise are the following: how is it that the map-maker has carried out his task and with skill of what echelon and with what degree of success has he done so? Such an inquiry falls to the specialist field of historical cartography. An antiquarian map may also be approached in a means akin to that of the student who conceives it as a font contemporaneous with the time of its production. Thus, the historical cartographer may seek to bring grist to his mill and to consider the maps reliability as a satisfactory source of empirical evidence. By such means also the regional historian, in his search for essentials about such past matters as the availability of roads, the extent of enclosed farmland, or the number and location of mines and quarries, is no less an interested party.The value of old maps as documents useful for historicity depends necessarily on to what degree they depict and on how accurately. For virtually all periods of pre-modern history some maps have survived to serve as historiography, depicting, however imperfectly, certain features of past geography. The work of Claudius Ptolemywho lived in the 2nd century A.D.for centuries provided the basis for maps of the known world and its major regions. Although many were drawn on the scientific basis which he provided, they nevertheless embodied many errorsof location, distance, and the shape of areas of land and sea. The medieval portolan charts of the Mediterranean Sea and the later charts which provided sailing directions, produced in Holland, were accurate enough to be useful in practical navigation. Plans of important cities of Europe, so well-drawn as to yield evidence of their earlier form and extent, are notably offered in Braun and Hogenbergs Civitates Orbis Terrarum, published at Cologne and, in England, in John Speeds plans of cities. Similarly, John Ogilbys Britannia, Volume the First, appearing in 1675, gives detailed information of Englands road system as it existed nearly three centuries ago. However, few of the early maps approach modern standards, which require accurate representation of distances and of heights above mean sea-level and the use of carefullydistinguished symbols. This is because it was not until the 18th century that cartography, as an exact science, was born. Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the following:Q.According to the passage, all of the following would be considered maps EXCEPT

View answer

The original Hellenistic community was idealized, the Greeks‘ own golden dream—a community never achieved but only imagined by the Macedonian Alexander, who was possessed of the true faith of all converts to a larger vision. The evolving system of city-states had produced not only unity with a healthy diversity but also narrow rivalries. No Hellenic empire arose, only scores of squabbling cities pursuing bitter feuds born of ancient wrongs and existing ambitions. It was civil strife made possible by isolation from the great armies and ambitions of Asia. Greek history could arguably begin in July of 776 B.C., the First Olympiad, and end with Theodosus‘s ban on the games in 393 A.D. Before this there had been a long era of two tribes, the Dorians and Ionians, scarcely distinguishable to the alien eye, but distinctly separate in their own eyes until 776. After Theodosus' ban most of the Mediterranean world was Greek-like, in fact, but the central core had been rendered impotent by diffusion. During the eventful Greek millennium, the Olympics reflected not the high ideals of Hellenes but rather the mean reality of the times. Its founders had created a monster, games that twisted the strategists‘ aspirations to unity to fit the unpleasant reality of the Hellenistic world. The games not only mirrored the central practices of the Greek world that reformers would deny but also imposed the flaws of that world. Like the atomic theory of the Greek philosophers, the Greek gamers‘ theories were far removed from reality; they were elegant, consistent, logical, and irrelevant.Part religious ritual, part game rite, in the five-day Olympic Games, various athletes coming together under the banner of their cities; winning became paramount, imposing defeat a delight. As Greek society evolved, so, too, did the games, but rarely as a unifying force. Athletes supposedly competing for the laurel of accomplishment in the name of idealism found that dried olive leaves changed to gold. Each local polis (city-state) sought not to contribute to the grandeur of Greece, but to achieve its own glory. As in the real world, in the games no Greek could trust another, and each envied rivals' victories. The Olympic spirit was not one of communal bliss but bitter lasting competition institutionalized in games.Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the followingQ. For which of the following statements does the passage provide some evidence or explanation? I. Alexander united ancient Greece through a series of military conquests. II. The divisions among Greek city-states were reflected in the Olympics. III. The Olympic Games could not have occurred without a city-state system.a)II only b)III only c)I and II d)II and III e)I, II and III Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?

Share with a Friend

Answer this doubt

Question Description
The original Hellenistic community was idealized, the Greeks‘ own golden dream—a community never achieved but only imagined by the Macedonian Alexander, who was possessed of the true faith of all converts to a larger vision. The evolving system of city-states had produced not only unity with a healthy diversity but also narrow rivalries. No Hellenic empire arose, only scores of squabbling cities pursuing bitter feuds born of ancient wrongs and existing ambitions. It was civil strife made possible by isolation from the great armies and ambitions of Asia. Greek history could arguably begin in July of 776 B.C., the First Olympiad, and end with Theodosus‘s ban on the games in 393 A.D. Before this there had been a long era of two tribes, the Dorians and Ionians, scarcely distinguishable to the alien eye, but distinctly separate in their own eyes until 776. After Theodosus' ban most of the Mediterranean world was Greek-like, in fact, but the central core had been rendered impotent by diffusion. During the eventful Greek millennium, the Olympics reflected not the high ideals of Hellenes but rather the mean reality of the times. Its founders had created a monster, games that twisted the strategists‘ aspirations to unity to fit the unpleasant reality of the Hellenistic world. The games not only mirrored the central practices of the Greek world that reformers would deny but also imposed the flaws of that world. Like the atomic theory of the Greek philosophers, the Greek gamers‘ theories were far removed from reality; they were elegant, consistent, logical, and irrelevant.Part religious ritual, part game rite, in the five-day Olympic Games, various athletes coming together under the banner of their cities; winning became paramount, imposing defeat a delight. As Greek society evolved, so, too, did the games, but rarely as a unifying force. Athletes supposedly competing for the laurel of accomplishment in the name of idealism found that dried olive leaves changed to gold. Each local polis (city-state) sought not to contribute to the grandeur of Greece, but to achieve its own glory. As in the real world, in the games no Greek could trust another, and each envied rivals' victories. The Olympic spirit was not one of communal bliss but bitter lasting competition institutionalized in games.Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the followingQ. For which of the following statements does the passage provide some evidence or explanation? I. Alexander united ancient Greece through a series of military conquests. II. The divisions among Greek city-states were reflected in the Olympics. III. The Olympic Games could not have occurred without a city-state system.a)II only b)III only c)I and II d)II and III e)I, II and III Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? for Verbal 2024 is part of Verbal preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the Verbal exam syllabus. Information about The original Hellenistic community was idealized, the Greeks‘ own golden dream—a community never achieved but only imagined by the Macedonian Alexander, who was possessed of the true faith of all converts to a larger vision. The evolving system of city-states had produced not only unity with a healthy diversity but also narrow rivalries. No Hellenic empire arose, only scores of squabbling cities pursuing bitter feuds born of ancient wrongs and existing ambitions. It was civil strife made possible by isolation from the great armies and ambitions of Asia. Greek history could arguably begin in July of 776 B.C., the First Olympiad, and end with Theodosus‘s ban on the games in 393 A.D. Before this there had been a long era of two tribes, the Dorians and Ionians, scarcely distinguishable to the alien eye, but distinctly separate in their own eyes until 776. After Theodosus' ban most of the Mediterranean world was Greek-like, in fact, but the central core had been rendered impotent by diffusion. During the eventful Greek millennium, the Olympics reflected not the high ideals of Hellenes but rather the mean reality of the times. Its founders had created a monster, games that twisted the strategists‘ aspirations to unity to fit the unpleasant reality of the Hellenistic world. The games not only mirrored the central practices of the Greek world that reformers would deny but also imposed the flaws of that world. Like the atomic theory of the Greek philosophers, the Greek gamers‘ theories were far removed from reality; they were elegant, consistent, logical, and irrelevant.Part religious ritual, part game rite, in the five-day Olympic Games, various athletes coming together under the banner of their cities; winning became paramount, imposing defeat a delight. As Greek society evolved, so, too, did the games, but rarely as a unifying force. Athletes supposedly competing for the laurel of accomplishment in the name of idealism found that dried olive leaves changed to gold. Each local polis (city-state) sought not to contribute to the grandeur of Greece, but to achieve its own glory. As in the real world, in the games no Greek could trust another, and each envied rivals' victories. The Olympic spirit was not one of communal bliss but bitter lasting competition institutionalized in games.Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the followingQ. For which of the following statements does the passage provide some evidence or explanation? I. Alexander united ancient Greece through a series of military conquests. II. The divisions among Greek city-states were reflected in the Olympics. III. The Olympic Games could not have occurred without a city-state system.a)II only b)III only c)I and II d)II and III e)I, II and III Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for Verbal 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for The original Hellenistic community was idealized, the Greeks‘ own golden dream—a community never achieved but only imagined by the Macedonian Alexander, who was possessed of the true faith of all converts to a larger vision. The evolving system of city-states had produced not only unity with a healthy diversity but also narrow rivalries. No Hellenic empire arose, only scores of squabbling cities pursuing bitter feuds born of ancient wrongs and existing ambitions. It was civil strife made possible by isolation from the great armies and ambitions of Asia. Greek history could arguably begin in July of 776 B.C., the First Olympiad, and end with Theodosus‘s ban on the games in 393 A.D. Before this there had been a long era of two tribes, the Dorians and Ionians, scarcely distinguishable to the alien eye, but distinctly separate in their own eyes until 776. After Theodosus' ban most of the Mediterranean world was Greek-like, in fact, but the central core had been rendered impotent by diffusion. During the eventful Greek millennium, the Olympics reflected not the high ideals of Hellenes but rather the mean reality of the times. Its founders had created a monster, games that twisted the strategists‘ aspirations to unity to fit the unpleasant reality of the Hellenistic world. The games not only mirrored the central practices of the Greek world that reformers would deny but also imposed the flaws of that world. Like the atomic theory of the Greek philosophers, the Greek gamers‘ theories were far removed from reality; they were elegant, consistent, logical, and irrelevant.Part religious ritual, part game rite, in the five-day Olympic Games, various athletes coming together under the banner of their cities; winning became paramount, imposing defeat a delight. As Greek society evolved, so, too, did the games, but rarely as a unifying force. Athletes supposedly competing for the laurel of accomplishment in the name of idealism found that dried olive leaves changed to gold. Each local polis (city-state) sought not to contribute to the grandeur of Greece, but to achieve its own glory. As in the real world, in the games no Greek could trust another, and each envied rivals' victories. The Olympic spirit was not one of communal bliss but bitter lasting competition institutionalized in games.Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the followingQ. For which of the following statements does the passage provide some evidence or explanation? I. Alexander united ancient Greece through a series of military conquests. II. The divisions among Greek city-states were reflected in the Olympics. III. The Olympic Games could not have occurred without a city-state system.a)II only b)III only c)I and II d)II and III e)I, II and III Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for The original Hellenistic community was idealized, the Greeks‘ own golden dream—a community never achieved but only imagined by the Macedonian Alexander, who was possessed of the true faith of all converts to a larger vision. The evolving system of city-states had produced not only unity with a healthy diversity but also narrow rivalries. No Hellenic empire arose, only scores of squabbling cities pursuing bitter feuds born of ancient wrongs and existing ambitions. It was civil strife made possible by isolation from the great armies and ambitions of Asia. Greek history could arguably begin in July of 776 B.C., the First Olympiad, and end with Theodosus‘s ban on the games in 393 A.D. Before this there had been a long era of two tribes, the Dorians and Ionians, scarcely distinguishable to the alien eye, but distinctly separate in their own eyes until 776. After Theodosus' ban most of the Mediterranean world was Greek-like, in fact, but the central core had been rendered impotent by diffusion. During the eventful Greek millennium, the Olympics reflected not the high ideals of Hellenes but rather the mean reality of the times. Its founders had created a monster, games that twisted the strategists‘ aspirations to unity to fit the unpleasant reality of the Hellenistic world. The games not only mirrored the central practices of the Greek world that reformers would deny but also imposed the flaws of that world. Like the atomic theory of the Greek philosophers, the Greek gamers‘ theories were far removed from reality; they were elegant, consistent, logical, and irrelevant.Part religious ritual, part game rite, in the five-day Olympic Games, various athletes coming together under the banner of their cities; winning became paramount, imposing defeat a delight. As Greek society evolved, so, too, did the games, but rarely as a unifying force. Athletes supposedly competing for the laurel of accomplishment in the name of idealism found that dried olive leaves changed to gold. Each local polis (city-state) sought not to contribute to the grandeur of Greece, but to achieve its own glory. As in the real world, in the games no Greek could trust another, and each envied rivals' victories. The Olympic spirit was not one of communal bliss but bitter lasting competition institutionalized in games.Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the followingQ. For which of the following statements does the passage provide some evidence or explanation? I. Alexander united ancient Greece through a series of military conquests. II. The divisions among Greek city-states were reflected in the Olympics. III. The Olympic Games could not have occurred without a city-state system.a)II only b)III only c)I and II d)II and III e)I, II and III Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for Verbal. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for Verbal Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of The original Hellenistic community was idealized, the Greeks‘ own golden dream—a community never achieved but only imagined by the Macedonian Alexander, who was possessed of the true faith of all converts to a larger vision. The evolving system of city-states had produced not only unity with a healthy diversity but also narrow rivalries. No Hellenic empire arose, only scores of squabbling cities pursuing bitter feuds born of ancient wrongs and existing ambitions. It was civil strife made possible by isolation from the great armies and ambitions of Asia. Greek history could arguably begin in July of 776 B.C., the First Olympiad, and end with Theodosus‘s ban on the games in 393 A.D. Before this there had been a long era of two tribes, the Dorians and Ionians, scarcely distinguishable to the alien eye, but distinctly separate in their own eyes until 776. After Theodosus' ban most of the Mediterranean world was Greek-like, in fact, but the central core had been rendered impotent by diffusion. During the eventful Greek millennium, the Olympics reflected not the high ideals of Hellenes but rather the mean reality of the times. Its founders had created a monster, games that twisted the strategists‘ aspirations to unity to fit the unpleasant reality of the Hellenistic world. The games not only mirrored the central practices of the Greek world that reformers would deny but also imposed the flaws of that world. Like the atomic theory of the Greek philosophers, the Greek gamers‘ theories were far removed from reality; they were elegant, consistent, logical, and irrelevant.Part religious ritual, part game rite, in the five-day Olympic Games, various athletes coming together under the banner of their cities; winning became paramount, imposing defeat a delight. As Greek society evolved, so, too, did the games, but rarely as a unifying force. Athletes supposedly competing for the laurel of accomplishment in the name of idealism found that dried olive leaves changed to gold. Each local polis (city-state) sought not to contribute to the grandeur of Greece, but to achieve its own glory. As in the real world, in the games no Greek could trust another, and each envied rivals' victories. The Olympic spirit was not one of communal bliss but bitter lasting competition institutionalized in games.Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the followingQ. For which of the following statements does the passage provide some evidence or explanation? I. Alexander united ancient Greece through a series of military conquests. II. The divisions among Greek city-states were reflected in the Olympics. III. The Olympic Games could not have occurred without a city-state system.a)II only b)III only c)I and II d)II and III e)I, II and III Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of The original Hellenistic community was idealized, the Greeks‘ own golden dream—a community never achieved but only imagined by the Macedonian Alexander, who was possessed of the true faith of all converts to a larger vision. The evolving system of city-states had produced not only unity with a healthy diversity but also narrow rivalries. No Hellenic empire arose, only scores of squabbling cities pursuing bitter feuds born of ancient wrongs and existing ambitions. It was civil strife made possible by isolation from the great armies and ambitions of Asia. Greek history could arguably begin in July of 776 B.C., the First Olympiad, and end with Theodosus‘s ban on the games in 393 A.D. Before this there had been a long era of two tribes, the Dorians and Ionians, scarcely distinguishable to the alien eye, but distinctly separate in their own eyes until 776. After Theodosus' ban most of the Mediterranean world was Greek-like, in fact, but the central core had been rendered impotent by diffusion. During the eventful Greek millennium, the Olympics reflected not the high ideals of Hellenes but rather the mean reality of the times. Its founders had created a monster, games that twisted the strategists‘ aspirations to unity to fit the unpleasant reality of the Hellenistic world. The games not only mirrored the central practices of the Greek world that reformers would deny but also imposed the flaws of that world. Like the atomic theory of the Greek philosophers, the Greek gamers‘ theories were far removed from reality; they were elegant, consistent, logical, and irrelevant.Part religious ritual, part game rite, in the five-day Olympic Games, various athletes coming together under the banner of their cities; winning became paramount, imposing defeat a delight. As Greek society evolved, so, too, did the games, but rarely as a unifying force. Athletes supposedly competing for the laurel of accomplishment in the name of idealism found that dried olive leaves changed to gold. Each local polis (city-state) sought not to contribute to the grandeur of Greece, but to achieve its own glory. As in the real world, in the games no Greek could trust another, and each envied rivals' victories. The Olympic spirit was not one of communal bliss but bitter lasting competition institutionalized in games.Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the followingQ. For which of the following statements does the passage provide some evidence or explanation? I. Alexander united ancient Greece through a series of military conquests. II. The divisions among Greek city-states were reflected in the Olympics. III. The Olympic Games could not have occurred without a city-state system.a)II only b)III only c)I and II d)II and III e)I, II and III Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for The original Hellenistic community was idealized, the Greeks‘ own golden dream—a community never achieved but only imagined by the Macedonian Alexander, who was possessed of the true faith of all converts to a larger vision. The evolving system of city-states had produced not only unity with a healthy diversity but also narrow rivalries. No Hellenic empire arose, only scores of squabbling cities pursuing bitter feuds born of ancient wrongs and existing ambitions. It was civil strife made possible by isolation from the great armies and ambitions of Asia. Greek history could arguably begin in July of 776 B.C., the First Olympiad, and end with Theodosus‘s ban on the games in 393 A.D. Before this there had been a long era of two tribes, the Dorians and Ionians, scarcely distinguishable to the alien eye, but distinctly separate in their own eyes until 776. After Theodosus' ban most of the Mediterranean world was Greek-like, in fact, but the central core had been rendered impotent by diffusion. During the eventful Greek millennium, the Olympics reflected not the high ideals of Hellenes but rather the mean reality of the times. Its founders had created a monster, games that twisted the strategists‘ aspirations to unity to fit the unpleasant reality of the Hellenistic world. The games not only mirrored the central practices of the Greek world that reformers would deny but also imposed the flaws of that world. Like the atomic theory of the Greek philosophers, the Greek gamers‘ theories were far removed from reality; they were elegant, consistent, logical, and irrelevant.Part religious ritual, part game rite, in the five-day Olympic Games, various athletes coming together under the banner of their cities; winning became paramount, imposing defeat a delight. As Greek society evolved, so, too, did the games, but rarely as a unifying force. Athletes supposedly competing for the laurel of accomplishment in the name of idealism found that dried olive leaves changed to gold. Each local polis (city-state) sought not to contribute to the grandeur of Greece, but to achieve its own glory. As in the real world, in the games no Greek could trust another, and each envied rivals' victories. The Olympic spirit was not one of communal bliss but bitter lasting competition institutionalized in games.Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the followingQ. For which of the following statements does the passage provide some evidence or explanation? I. Alexander united ancient Greece through a series of military conquests. II. The divisions among Greek city-states were reflected in the Olympics. III. The Olympic Games could not have occurred without a city-state system.a)II only b)III only c)I and II d)II and III e)I, II and III Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of The original Hellenistic community was idealized, the Greeks‘ own golden dream—a community never achieved but only imagined by the Macedonian Alexander, who was possessed of the true faith of all converts to a larger vision. The evolving system of city-states had produced not only unity with a healthy diversity but also narrow rivalries. No Hellenic empire arose, only scores of squabbling cities pursuing bitter feuds born of ancient wrongs and existing ambitions. It was civil strife made possible by isolation from the great armies and ambitions of Asia. Greek history could arguably begin in July of 776 B.C., the First Olympiad, and end with Theodosus‘s ban on the games in 393 A.D. Before this there had been a long era of two tribes, the Dorians and Ionians, scarcely distinguishable to the alien eye, but distinctly separate in their own eyes until 776. After Theodosus' ban most of the Mediterranean world was Greek-like, in fact, but the central core had been rendered impotent by diffusion. During the eventful Greek millennium, the Olympics reflected not the high ideals of Hellenes but rather the mean reality of the times. Its founders had created a monster, games that twisted the strategists‘ aspirations to unity to fit the unpleasant reality of the Hellenistic world. The games not only mirrored the central practices of the Greek world that reformers would deny but also imposed the flaws of that world. Like the atomic theory of the Greek philosophers, the Greek gamers‘ theories were far removed from reality; they were elegant, consistent, logical, and irrelevant.Part religious ritual, part game rite, in the five-day Olympic Games, various athletes coming together under the banner of their cities; winning became paramount, imposing defeat a delight. As Greek society evolved, so, too, did the games, but rarely as a unifying force. Athletes supposedly competing for the laurel of accomplishment in the name of idealism found that dried olive leaves changed to gold. Each local polis (city-state) sought not to contribute to the grandeur of Greece, but to achieve its own glory. As in the real world, in the games no Greek could trust another, and each envied rivals' victories. The Olympic spirit was not one of communal bliss but bitter lasting competition institutionalized in games.Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the followingQ. For which of the following statements does the passage provide some evidence or explanation? I. Alexander united ancient Greece through a series of military conquests. II. The divisions among Greek city-states were reflected in the Olympics. III. The Olympic Games could not have occurred without a city-state system.a)II only b)III only c)I and II d)II and III e)I, II and III Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice The original Hellenistic community was idealized, the Greeks‘ own golden dream—a community never achieved but only imagined by the Macedonian Alexander, who was possessed of the true faith of all converts to a larger vision. The evolving system of city-states had produced not only unity with a healthy diversity but also narrow rivalries. No Hellenic empire arose, only scores of squabbling cities pursuing bitter feuds born of ancient wrongs and existing ambitions. It was civil strife made possible by isolation from the great armies and ambitions of Asia. Greek history could arguably begin in July of 776 B.C., the First Olympiad, and end with Theodosus‘s ban on the games in 393 A.D. Before this there had been a long era of two tribes, the Dorians and Ionians, scarcely distinguishable to the alien eye, but distinctly separate in their own eyes until 776. After Theodosus' ban most of the Mediterranean world was Greek-like, in fact, but the central core had been rendered impotent by diffusion. During the eventful Greek millennium, the Olympics reflected not the high ideals of Hellenes but rather the mean reality of the times. Its founders had created a monster, games that twisted the strategists‘ aspirations to unity to fit the unpleasant reality of the Hellenistic world. The games not only mirrored the central practices of the Greek world that reformers would deny but also imposed the flaws of that world. Like the atomic theory of the Greek philosophers, the Greek gamers‘ theories were far removed from reality; they were elegant, consistent, logical, and irrelevant.Part religious ritual, part game rite, in the five-day Olympic Games, various athletes coming together under the banner of their cities; winning became paramount, imposing defeat a delight. As Greek society evolved, so, too, did the games, but rarely as a unifying force. Athletes supposedly competing for the laurel of accomplishment in the name of idealism found that dried olive leaves changed to gold. Each local polis (city-state) sought not to contribute to the grandeur of Greece, but to achieve its own glory. As in the real world, in the games no Greek could trust another, and each envied rivals' victories. The Olympic spirit was not one of communal bliss but bitter lasting competition institutionalized in games.Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the followingQ. For which of the following statements does the passage provide some evidence or explanation? I. Alexander united ancient Greece through a series of military conquests. II. The divisions among Greek city-states were reflected in the Olympics. III. The Olympic Games could not have occurred without a city-state system.a)II only b)III only c)I and II d)II and III e)I, II and III Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice Verbal tests.

Explore Courses for Verbal exam