Read the summary.
Babylon was in the heartland of Mesopotamia, the site of the First Agricultural Revolution (1). Based on cuneiform writings on clay tablets, researchers know that farm products included sesame, barley, and dates, as well as cattle and sheep (2). Farmers invented steel plows for farming (3), and soldiers used steel weapons for protection (4).
Which critiques the factual accuracy of the summary?
a) While parts (1) and (3) are accurate, parts (2) and (4) need revision.
b) While parts (3) and (4) are accurate, parts (1) and (2) need revision.
c) While parts (1) and (4) are accurate, parts (2) and (3) need revision.
d) While parts (1) and (2) are accurate, parts (3) and (4) need revision.
I think it's D
Yes, D.
To determine the factual accuracy of the summary, let's examine each part:
(1) Babylon being in the heartland of Mesopotamia, the site of the First Agricultural Revolution, is accurate. Mesopotamia is widely recognized as the cradle of civilization and the First Agricultural Revolution did take place there.
(2) The mention of farm products like sesame, barley, dates, cattle, and sheep is plausible. However, without further contextual information or specific evidence, it is challenging to determine the accuracy. Therefore, part (2) might need revision.
(3) The statement that farmers invented steel plows for farming is inaccurate. The use of steel plows came much later in history, and during the time of Babylon, they would have used simpler and less advanced tools for farming. Thus, part (3) needs revision.
(4) It is mentioned that soldiers used steel weapons for protection. Given that Babylon was an ancient civilization, it is unlikely that they used steel weapons, as steel was not yet widely available at the time. Therefore, part (4) needs revision.
Based on this analysis, it can be concluded that option (a) is the most accurate critique of the factual accuracy of the summary.