Question 75·Hard·Command of Evidence
Historian Laila Ahmed challenges the conventional view that the Sahara Desert was a formidable barrier to commerce in the early Middle Ages. Instead, she claims that trans-Saharan trade supplied so much West African gold to Europe between the eighth and tenth centuries that the metal became the linchpin of Europe’s emerging monetary system.
Which finding, if true, would most directly support Ahmed’s claim?
For “Which finding, if true, would most directly support the claim?” questions, restate the claim and identify its required components (who/what, where, when, and the specific conclusion). Then choose the option that provides the most direct bridge to that conclusion—ideally evidence that connects all key elements (here: West African gold → Europe → coinage/monetary system during the 8th–10th centuries) rather than evidence that supports only one piece of the chain.
Hints
Focus on the core of Ahmed’s claim
Underline or note the key elements: trans-Saharan trade, West African gold, Europe between the eighth and tenth centuries, and Europe’s emerging monetary system. Any strong supporting evidence should touch most of these ideas, not just one of them.
Think about what “most directly support” means
You’re not looking for something loosely related to trade or the Sahara. You want evidence that directly shows a connection between West African gold and European money during the period Ahmed mentions.
Scan each option for gold, Europe, and time period
Check each answer: Does it mention gold specifically? Does it connect West Africa to Europe (not just to North Africa)? Does it fit the 8th–10th century time frame and relate to money or coins?
Step-by-step Explanation
Clarify what the claim is saying
Break Ahmed’s claim into its key parts:
- The Sahara was not an effective barrier to commerce in the early Middle Ages.
- Trans-Saharan trade carried West African gold to Europe.
- This happened between the eighth and tenth centuries.
- So much gold arrived that it became the linchpin (central element) of Europe’s emerging monetary system.
We need evidence that specifically connects West African gold, trans-Saharan trade, and European money in that time period.
Imagine the strongest possible supporting evidence
Ask yourself: If Ahmed is right, what kind of finding would prove it most directly?
It would be something like:
- Showing that European coins from the 8th–10th centuries were actually made from West African gold.
- Or clearly documenting large-scale movement of West African gold across the Sahara into Europe during that period.
So look for an option that:
- Involves gold (not just trade in general),
- Links West Africa and Europe,
- Fits the 8th–10th century time frame,
- And relates to Europe’s monetary system (coins, money, currency).
Test each answer choice against the claim
Compare each option to what the claim needs:
- Some evidence may show gold moving from West Africa into North Africa but not show it reaching Europe or affecting European money.
- Some evidence may show gold being used more in Europe, but not show the gold’s West African origin.
- The best evidence will directly connect West African gold to European coins/currency during the relevant centuries.
Select the choice that directly links West African gold to European coins
The option describing chemical analyses of coins minted in ninth-century Europe that reveal gold isotopic signatures identical to those found in West African ore deposits most directly supports Ahmed’s claim.
It:
- Focuses on gold,
- Directly connects West African ore to European coins,
- Fits the time period (ninth century is within the 8th–10th centuries),
- Ties the gold to Europe’s monetary system (coinage).
Therefore, the correct answer is: Chemical analyses of coins minted in ninth-century Europe reveal gold isotopic signatures identical to those found in West African ore deposits.