Question 1·200 Super-Hard SAT Reading Questions·Craft and Structure
Text 1
In a fifteenth-century manuscript, a marginal correction was written with ink whose trace-metal ratios are nearly identical to those of the ink in the adjacent main-text lines. Historian Anika Mehta notes that individual copyists commonly prepared ink according to their own recipes. She therefore treats the chemical match as evidence that the correction was entered by the copyist who wrote the adjacent lines and during the same work session, rather than by a later reader.
Text 2
Conservation scientist Luis Bell and colleagues analyzed workshop account books whose dated logs identified separate work sessions and whose handwriting changes showed when copyists alternated. Fresh batches of ink generally had distinguishable trace-metal ratios, while the ratios remained stable within a batch. However, several copyists sometimes drew from one shared batch during a session, and unfinished batches were occasionally sealed and reused in a later session. Conversely, a copyist continuing the same book frequently used a newly prepared batch on the following day.
Based on the texts, how would Bell and colleagues most likely respond to Mehta’s interpretation of the chemical match?
For cross-text questions, break the first text’s conclusion into its separate claims and test each one against the second text. When several choices preserve different parts of an argument, verify whether each choice accounts for every relevant qualification rather than merely one of them.
Hints
Separate the conclusions
Identify the two distinct claims Mehta draws from the chemical match: one about who wrote the correction and one about when it was written.
Track what remains constant
Determine whether Text 2 links a stable chemical profile most directly to a copyist, a work session, or a prepared batch.
Test each inference independently
Consider the implications of multiple copyists sharing ink and of unfinished ink being used again later.
Step-by-step Explanation
Identify Mehta’s two inferences
Mehta uses the chemical match to infer both that the same copyist wrote the correction and that the correction was made during the same work session as the adjacent lines.
Determine what the chemistry can indicate
Text 2 states that fresh batches generally had distinguishable trace-metal ratios and that a batch’s ratios remained stable. A close chemical match can therefore provide evidence that the inks came from the same prepared batch.
Test the authorship inference
Several copyists could draw from one shared batch. Thus, using the same batch does not necessarily mean that the same copyist produced both pieces of writing.
Test the timing inference
An unfinished batch could be sealed and reused in a later session. Therefore, use of the same batch does not necessarily mean that the correction and adjacent lines were written during the same session.
Select the complete response
The best response preserves the limited inference about access to a common batch while rejecting both the same-copyist and same-session conclusions as unsupported by the chemical match alone.