Questions 11--15
I watched as Dr Ian Stead， the archaeologist in charge of the excavation， begancarefully removing the peat with a clay modelling tool. X-rays taken through the boxwhile it was at the hospital revealed ribs， backbone， arm bones and a skull （apparentlywith fractures）。 However， the bones showed up only faintly because acid in the peat hadremoved minerals from them.
Using the X-rays， Stead started on what he thought might be a leg. By his side wasProfessor Frank Oldfield， of Liverpool University， an expert on peat who could identifyvegetation from stems only a fraction of an inch long. “Similar bodies found in bogs inDenmark show signs of a violent death，” Stead said. “It is essential for us to be able todistinguish between the plant fibres in peat and clothing or a piece of rope which mighthave been used to hang him.”
As Stead continued his gentle probing， a brown leathery limb began to materialiseamidst the peat； but not until most of it was exposed could he and Robert Connolly， aphysical anthropologist at Liverpool University， decide that it was an arm. Beside it wasa small piece of animal fur—perhaps the remains of clothing.
Following the forearm down into the peat， Stead found a brown shiny object andthen， close by， two more. Seen under a magnifying glass， he suddenly realised theywere fingernails—“beautifully manicured and without a scratch on them，” he said.“Most people at this time in the Iron Age were farmers； but with fingernails like that，this person can t have been. He might have been a priest or an aristocrat.”Especially delicate work was required to reveal the head. On the third day， a curlysideburn appeared and， shortly afterwards， a moustache. At first it seemed that the manhad been balding but gradually he was seen to have close-cropped hair， about an inch ortwo long.
“This information about his hairstyle is unique. We have no other informationabout what Britons looked like before the Roman invasion except for three smallplaques showing Celts with drooping moustaches and shaven chins.”
The crucial clue showing how the man died had already been revealed， close to hisneck， but it looked just like another innocent heather root. It was not recognised untiltwo days later， when Margaret McCord， a senior conservation officer， found the sameroot at the back of his neck and， cleaning it carefully， saw its twisted texture. “He sbeen garrotted.” She declared. The ‘root was a length of twisted sinew， the thickness ofstrong string. A slip knot at the back shows how it was tightened round the neck.
“A large discoloration on the left shoulder suggests a bruise and possibly a violentstruggle，” Stead said.
11. The X-rays that were taken showed Stead and Oldfield _____.
(A) a vague picture of the bones
(B) exactly what they were looking for
(C) which deposits were clay and which peat
(D) exactly how the man had died
12. The researchers suspected the man had met a violent death because _____.
(A) he was still wearing clothes
(B) similar bodies had been found elsewhere
(C) there were traces of a hanging rope in the peat
(D) he hadn t been buried in a coffin
13. It was the forearm they uncovered which _____.
(A) required the most delicate work
(B) indicated the age of the man
(C) told them something about the man s clothes
(D) led them to discover the fingernails
14. Why did the researchers think the man was possibly a priest?
(A) He had closely-cropped hair.
(B) His coat was fur-lined
(C) He had a drooping moustache and shaven chin.
(D) His fingernails were well looked after.
15. It was established that the man they dug out of the peat had been _____.
(A) beheaded
(B) strangled
(C) drowned
(D) stabbed in the neck
