Mysterious ancient tracks cut into limestone have recently been found on the island of Malta. The tracks wander, sometimes disappearing under modern structures. Their origin and purpose are unknown, but evidence indicates that they could have connected settlements or water sources. One archaeologist hypothesizes, based on the tracks' physical appearance and surroundings, that they were made in about 1000 B.C. by animal-drawn carts.
Which one of the following, if true, most helps to support the archaeologist's hypothesis mentioned above?The archaeologist’s hypothesis has two parts: the tracks were made around 1000 B.C., and they were made by animal-drawn carts. So the best support should connect the tracks to
animals near that time period.
(A) Areas near the tracks have yielded relatively large amounts of fossilized animal excrement dating from approximately 1000 B.C.
Correct. This supports both timing and animal involvement. If many animals were near the tracks around 1000 B.C., that fits the idea that animal-drawn carts could have made the tracks at that time.
(B) Some of the tracks connect areas that are sources of fresh water on Malta today.
Wrong. This may support the idea that the tracks connected useful places, but it does not support the claim that they were made by animal-drawn carts around 1000 B.C.
(C) Some terrain on the island of Malta is more easily traversed on foot than are certain other types of terrain there.
Wrong. This says nothing about carts, animals, or the date of the tracks.
(D) Historically, inhabitants of the island of Malta have not been innovative users of transportation technology.
Wrong. This does not support the specific cart hypothesis. If anything, it may make a transportation-based explanation less likely.
(E) Around 1000 B.C., some settlements were abandoned in parts of Malta.
Wrong. This gives a date-related fact about settlements, but it does not connect the tracks to
animal-drawn carts.
Answer: (A)