Question 131·200 Super-Hard SAT Reading Questions·Information and Ideas
During excavations at a Neolithic settlement on the Aegean island of Serifos, researchers uncovered several clay tablets, each bearing a sequence of twenty-nine short incisions followed by one longer incision. Archaeologist Dana Kim argues that the sequence functioned as a lunar calendar that local farmers consulted to time planting and harvesting.
Which finding, if true, would most directly support Kim’s argument?
For command-of-evidence support questions, break the claim into required parts and prioritize evidence that directly demonstrates the claimed mechanism. Here, the key mechanism is time-tracking across a lunar month, so the best support is evidence the marks were added gradually over time, rather than evidence that merely places the object near farming tools or in an agricultural setting.
Hints
Restate the claim in your own words
Identify both parts of Kim’s claim: what the tablets were for and who used them.
Prefer evidence of use over background facts
The best support will show how the tablets were used (especially in a time-tracking way), not just where else they were found.
Rank choices by directness
If multiple options seem supportive, choose the one that most concretely shows the marks were made/used over time in a way consistent with a lunar month.
Step-by-step Explanation
Identify exactly what needs support
Kim’s argument is that the tablets’ marks weren’t just decorative: the sequence of twenty-nine short incisions (plus a longer one) functioned as a lunar calendar that farmers could consult for agricultural timing.
So the best supporting finding should make it more likely that the marks were used to track days over time (as a calendar would).
Decide what counts as “most direct” evidence
The most direct support will connect the physical marks on the tablets to repeated, time-spaced use (for example, showing the incisions were added in stages).
By contrast, evidence that the tablets were merely found near farming tools or in agricultural spaces may suggest an agricultural context, but it doesn’t by itself show the marks were used as a lunar calendar.
Check each choice for direct support of the calendar function
- Choice A suggests the tablets appear in agricultural storage contexts at other sites, which is relevant, but it still doesn’t show the incisions tracked a lunar cycle.
- Choice B links tablets to harvesting sickles, implying an agricultural association, but it does not show the marks were used to measure lunar time.
- Choice D suggests farming may have involved roughly monthly cycles, but it doesn’t connect those cycles to the tablets or demonstrate that the tablets tracked lunar time.
Select the finding that most directly supports the lunar-calendar interpretation
Choice C indicates the twenty-nine short incisions were carved at different times, consistent with being added gradually. That pattern is exactly what you’d expect if someone was using the tablet to mark off days across a lunar month.
Correct answer: “Microscopic analysis suggests that the twenty-nine short incisions on several tablets were carved at different times, consistent with being added gradually rather than all at once.”