Question 130·Easy·Command of Evidence
Archaeologist Dr. Isabel Morales argues that the coastal settlement of Tarlik, long assumed to have been a small fishing village, actually served as a regional trade hub between 800 BCE and 600 BCE. Her hypothesis is based on the variety of pottery styles and metal objects unearthed at the site.
Which finding, if true, would most directly support Dr. Morales’s claim?
For "Which finding would most support the claim?" questions, first restate the claim in your own words and identify its strongest requirement (here: evidence of regional, long-distance trade, not just local fishing or farming). Then quickly scan the choices and eliminate those that only give background, describe everyday life, or are neutral or unrelated to that key requirement. Choose the option that, if true, most directly and specifically confirms the central idea of the claim rather than one that is merely consistent with it.
Hints
Focus on the exact claim you are supporting
Underline the key words in Dr. Morales’s claim: Tarlik is a regional trade hub, not just a small fishing village. Ask yourself what a trade hub would be doing that a simple fishing village would not.
Think about distance and movement of goods
A trade hub usually connects different areas and involves the movement of goods between them. As you read the choices, look for any sign that items at Tarlik are clearly linked to other locations, especially far away ones.
Separate background details from direct evidence
Some choices may just describe everyday life at Tarlik (like farming or fishing). Which choice instead gives direct evidence that Tarlik was involved in exchanging goods across a wider region?
Step-by-step Explanation
Identify the key claim in the passage
Dr. Morales is arguing against the old idea that Tarlik was just a small fishing village. Her new claim is that Tarlik was a regional trade hub between 800–600 BCE.
A "regional trade hub" means a place where goods from different areas are exchanged, often involving long-distance connections and movement of materials or products from one place to another.
Decide what kind of evidence would best support that claim
To support the idea of a trade hub, the strongest evidence would:
- Show that goods or materials at Tarlik came from distant places (not just the local area), or
- Show that Tarlik was clearly involved in exchanging items across the region.
So as you read the answer choices, ask: Does this clearly show that items or materials were moving between Tarlik and faraway locations? If not, it is probably just background detail about life at Tarlik, not strong support for a trade hub.
Test each option against the idea of long-distance trade
Now compare each answer choice to what we need:
- One choice talks about marine shells that are common all along the coast. That could be local collecting, not trade, so it doesn’t prove Tarlik was a trade hub.
- Another mentions a river with fertile soil, which supports farming, not necessarily trade with other regions.
- A third mentions fishing hooks similar to those in nearby communities over time, which fits the old view of ordinary fishing, not a special trading role.
- The remaining choice describes chemical analysis of clay in Tarlik pots matching clay deposits at inland sites hundreds of kilometers away, which directly shows long-distance connections and movement of goods.
The only option that clearly demonstrates long-distance exchange consistent with a regional trade hub is:
Chemical analysis shows that the clay used in many Tarlik pots matches clay deposits located at several inland sites hundreds of kilometers away.