Archaeologists have long debated what caused the neolithic revolution-the major changes that occurred when large numbers of prehistoric human beings began to give up the nomadic life in favor of settling in villages and farming. One view, the "marginality hypothesis," maintains that early human beings would have lived in regions where the hunting and gathering were best. As populations increased, however, so would competition for resources, leading some people to move to neighboring regions, where domesticating plants and animals would be necessary for survival.
Which of the following, if true, would present the most serious challenge to the marginality hypothesis?
A. The earliest farmers subsisted on diets that consisted of roughly equal proportions of food gathered through agriculture and hunting-and-gathering activities. --
strengthener, goes in line with: maintains that early human beings would have lived in regions where the hunting and gathering were best, or frameshift , because proportions of food is different to optimal hunnting and gathering regionsB. In the earliest agricultural settlements, the community's crops were often located many miles away from its members' living quarters. --
no effect, potential convolution: many miles ? would many miles be more or less than neighboring regions? we don't knowC. Some of the regions that were optimal for hunting-and-gathering activity would not have been optimal for plant and animal domestication. -- bidirectional
D. Some archaeologists believe that, 3,000 years prior to the advent of agriculture, some humans lived in year-round, permanent settlements but supported themselves by hunting and gathering. -- bidirectional
E. Evidence suggests that, at the beginning of the neolithic revolution, regions where plant and animal domestication began had optimal conditions for hunting and gathering. --
says the people that moved would not be "fighting for their lives" like the marginality hypothesis is implying, because the regios were actually optimal for living