Rethinking The Past - IELTS Reading Answers & Explanations
From Cambridge IELTS 21 Academic Reading Test 3 · Part 3 · Questions 27–40
Reading Passage
You should spend about 20 minutes on Questions 27-40, which are based on Reading Passage 3 below.
Rethinking the Past
It is by now a truism that the story of human evolution is being rethought. Discoveries have come thick and fast over the last decade or so, and these have forced us to rethink many crucial points, such as how old our species is - about 300,000 years old as opposed to 200,000 - and what extinct hominins, such as our cousins the Neanderthals, were really like. But because there are so many species and eras involved, it's hard to discern the common threads linking them.
However, I do think it's possible to draw out some overall messages from the blizzard of archaeological finds in recent years. Two things stand out to me. One is the growing evidence that many supposedly 'advanced' behaviours, such as architecture and art, can be traced much further back in time than we thought, often to hominin species that existed before modern humans. And the other is that we have badly misunderstood gender roles in prehistoric societies, imposing patriarchal values onto cultures that had very different ideas about how women should behave.
Let's start with architecture. At Kalambo Falls in Zambia, researchers found buried logs that had been shaped with stone tools so that they interlocked. They seem to have once been part of a larger structure, perhaps a building. This would be unsurprising if they weren't 476,000 years old. That's almost 200,000 years before our species, Homo sapiens, evolved. Extinct hominins also managed to settle in extreme places. For instance, we now know that extinct hominins such as the Denisovans lived on the frozen heights of high-altitude regions 200,000 years ago - upending the old notion that such environments were only settled by modern humans around 3,600 years ago.
Art also seems to have been invented by older hominins. We have had evidence for a long time now that Neanderthals painted on cave walls. Even earlier species, such as Homo erectus, may also have made art, for example by engraving patterns on shells. By far the most contentious claim in this area is that Homo naledi made art. H. naledi lived around 250,000 years ago, making it a contemporary of our species. However, it had quite a small brain, typical of older hominins - and was therefore, according to palaeoanthropological dogma, incapable of complex behaviours. Nevertheless, in the Rising Star cave system in South Africa where the H. naledi remains were found, researchers have found what seem to be etchings - resembling rudimentary artwork - on the cave walls, though these have yet to be firmly dated.
To say these claims about H. naledi are controversial is to understate the situation. Many experts say the evidence presented so far is completely inadequate to support them. The dispute has only been heightened by the way the results were released, in a non-traditional journal that publishes peer reviews publicly alongside the paper. My views on the H. naledi controversy are complicated. I do think more evidence is needed: in particular with regard to the dating of the etchings. At the same time, I think the species' small brains are a distraction. Palaeoanthropologists got fixated on brain size because it was what they could see: if what you have is skeletons, then all you know about brains are their shapes and sizes. But other properties, such as the brain's internal wiring, are surely equally important and may explain how a species like H. naledi might have been capable of complex behaviours, despite their small brains.
In a sense, we shouldn't be surprised that so many of these behaviours had their origins in older, extinct hominins. Evolution usually works by incremental steps and so does technology. The first birds weren't great at flying, and the first mobile phones weren't great at, well, anything really. The idea that there was a sudden explosion of intelligence and creativity at some point in our evolution isn't inherently ridiculous: sometimes a system hits a tipping point and undergoes runaway change. But there was never that much evidence that human evolution worked this way. Instead, it seems the Neanderthals and many others all walked so we could run.
One way or another, the H. naledi story is going to be an example of letting our preconceptions get in the way of the evidence. The same is true for our ideas about gender in prehistory. Archaeology was invented by individuals with now unfashionably patriarchal views about gender, and those notions fed into their research. Today's researchers are trying to unpick this stuff, and there have been some significant steps in recent years.
Perhaps the most dramatic was the demolition of 'Man the Hunter'. This was the idea, promoted for decades, that in most prehistoric societies the men went out to hunt and the women looked after the home. However, a meta-analysis published in June 2023 compiled data on several dozen foraging societies and found women hunted in 80 per cent of them. In line with this, it emerged that an ancient spear-throwing tool called an atlatl enables women to launch projectiles at the same speed as men. We have also seen growing evidence of women occupying positions of authority in ancient societies. The Viking queen Thyra may have helped unify Denmark in the 900s. Going further back, an Iberian leader from around 4000 years ago turned out to be female, not male as many had assumed, when proteins in her teeth were analysed.
It seems that the more we find out about past societies, the more our preconceptions about the ways society 'has to be' turn out to be wrong. Inequality, authoritarianism and patriarchy aren't inevitable. They're choices, and prehistory shows us that we can choose differently.
Questions
Questions 27–30 Multiple Choice (One Answer)
Choose the correct letter, A, B, C or D.
Questions 31–34 Matching Sentence Endings
Complete each sentence with the correct ending, A-F, below.
A. Homo sapiens emerged at an earlier point in time than experts previously believed.
B. previous assumptions about who had power in the prehistoric world were inaccurate.
C. gender roles in extinct hominin species were different from those in Homo sapiens societies.
D. experts may have been mistaken about who looked for food in early human communities.
E. Homo sapiens was probably not the only species capable of sophisticated workmanship.
F. other species managed to survive in harsh environments before the arrival of Homo sapiens.
Questions 35–40 Yes / No / Not Given
Do the following statements agree with the views of the writer in Reading Passage 3?
YES if the statement agrees with the views of the writer
NO if the statement contradicts the views of the writer
NOT GIVEN if it is impossible to say what the writer thinks about this
Answers & Explanations Summary
| # | Answer | Evidence | Explanation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Q27 | A | Two things stand out to me. One is the growing evidence that many supposedly 'advanced' behaviours, such as architecture and art, can be traced much further back in time than we thought, often to hominin species that existed before modern humans. And the other is that we have badly misunderstood gender roles in prehistoric societies, imposing patriarchal values onto cultures that had very different ideas about how women should behave | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage highlights two major points where our old ideas have been updated. It mentions that "advanced" activities like art were done by species older than humans, and it explains that we have "badly misunderstood" how women lived in the past. Answer Explanation: The answer A means the writer is identifying specific and important ways that our knowledge about people in the very distant past has changed because of new information. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is A because the writer uses this paragraph to point out two main "messages" or shifts in our knowledge. First, the writer explains that new evidence shows that building and art are much older than scientists used to believe. Second, the writer mentions that researchers are realizing they were wrong about how women and men behaved in those times. These two points represent "key changes" in our understanding of prehistory. |
| Q28 | A | Evolution usually works by incremental steps and so does technology. The first birds weren't great at flying, and the first mobile phones weren't great at, well, anything really | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage explains that both nature and the tools we build change using small, slow steps. It uses the example of early mobile phones—which did not work very well at first—to show that technology develops gradually over time. Answer Explanation: The answer means that most new things or changes happen slowly, step by step, rather than all at once. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is A because the writer uses the example of mobile phones to show that technology, much like evolution, moves in 'incremental steps.' This means that things change and improve little by little over time. By saying that the first mobile phones 'weren’t great,' the writer is making a point about how progress is usually a slow, gradual process instead of a sudden, perfect explosion of new ideas. |
| Q29 | D | Archaeology was invented by individuals with now unfashionably patriarchal views about gender, and those notions fed into their research. Today's researchers are trying to unpick this stuff, and there have been some significant steps in recent years | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage explains that the first archaeologists had biased ideas about men and women, which changed how they did their research. Today, scientists are trying to take apart and look closely at those old research ideas ('unpick this stuff') to see if they were wrong. Answer Explanation: The answer means looking again at old scientific studies that were influenced by old-fashioned and unfair ideas about how men and women should act in society. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is D because the author explains that the field of archaeology was created by people with 'patriarchal views'—old-fashioned beliefs that men were more important or took on all the main roles. These 'notions' or beliefs affected how they interpreted their findings. To 'unpick this stuff' refers to the work current researchers are doing to re-examine that old research and remove the influence of those biased beliefs. |
| Q30 | A | Inequality, authoritarianism and patriarchy aren't inevitable. They're choices, and prehistory shows us that we can choose differently | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage explains that unfair ways of running a society are not unavoidable; instead, they are decisions people make. It suggests that by looking at how our ancestors lived, we can see that we have the power to make better choices for our own society. Answer Explanation: The answer means that learning about how people lived a long time ago can show us that we are able to build a better and more equal world today. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is A because the final paragraph says that things like unfairness (inequality) and one person or group having too much power (authoritarianism and patriarchy) are not things that "have to be." Use of the word "inevitable" means something is certain to happen, but the author argues these are actually "choices." Therefore, looking at "prehistory" (the time before written records) proves that humans can live in a different way, suggesting we can choose to create a fairer society now. |
| Q31 | E | At Kalambo Falls in Zambia, researchers found buried logs that had been shaped with stone tools so that they interlocked. They seem to have once been part of a larger structure, perhaps a building. This would be unsurprising if they weren't 476,000 years old. That's almost 200,000 years before our species, Homo sapiens, evolved | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage explains that scientists found very old wooden logs that were cut to fit together for a building. These logs are 476,000 years old, which is about 200,000 years before modern humans ever existed. This shows that ancient human relatives were already smart enough to build things. Answer Explanation: The answer means that humans were not the only species capable of creating complex things like buildings through skilled labor. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is E because the passage describes how researchers at Kalambo Falls discovered logs that were 'shaped' and 'interlocked' using tools. This shows 'sophisticated workmanship.' Crucially, these logs are much older than modern humans, arriving 'almost 200,000 years before our species, Homo sapiens, evolved.' This evidence proves that other older, extinct species of humans also had the intelligence and skill to build structures. |
| Q32 | F | For instance, we now know that extinct hominins such as the Denisovans lived on the frozen heights of high-altitude regions 200,000 years ago - upending the old notion that such environments were only settled by modern humans around 3,600 years ago | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage states that early relatives of humans called Denisovans lived in cold, high-up places 200,000 years ago, which is much older than the previous belief that only modern humans lived there starting 3,600 years ago. Answer Explanation: The answer means that other types of early human relatives lived in very difficult and cold places a long time before modern humans ever went there. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is F because the passage explains that Denisovans, who are an extinct group of early human relatives, lived in cold, high-up locations 200,000 years ago. This discovery changed the old idea that only modern humans lived in these cold temperatures starting about 3,600 years ago. This confirms that 'other species' lived in 'harsh environments' long before 'Homo sapiens' (modern humans) did. |
| Q33 | D | This was the idea, promoted for decades, that in most prehistoric societies the men went out to hunt and the women looked after the home. However, a meta-analysis published in June 2023 compiled data on several dozen foraging societies and found women hunted in 80 per cent of them | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage states that for a long time, people believed only men hunted for food, but a study from June 2023 found that in most food-gathering groups, women were also hunters. Answer Explanation: The answer means that a report from June 2023 shows that older ideas about which people in a group searched for food were not correct. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is D because the text refers to a study from June 2023 that looked at "foraging societies" (groups of people who look for food). This study discovered that women hunted in 80 percent of the groups they looked at. This directly contradicts a long-held belief called 'Man the Hunter,' which suggested only men went out to get food through hunting while women stayed home. The phrase "looked for food" in the question is a synonym for the "foraging" and "hunt" mentioned in the text. |
| Q34 | B | Going further back, an Iberian leader from around 4000 years ago turned out to be female, not male as many had assumed, when proteins in her teeth were analysed | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage says that when scientists looked at the teeth of a leader who lived 4000 years ago, they found out the person was a woman. Before this, people guessed or "assumed" the leader must have been a man. This shows that women could be important leaders in the past. Answer Explanation: The answer B means that old ideas about who was in charge in ancient times were not correct. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is B because the passage explains that scientists discovered an Iberian leader from 4000 years ago was actually a woman, even though many people had wrongly believed the leader was a man. This discovery is part of a larger point the author makes about how we have seen "growing evidence of women occupying positions of authority" in ancient times. It proves that previous "assumptions" or beliefs about power—specifically that only men were leaders—were wrong. |
| Q35 | NO | Even earlier species, such as Homo erectus, may also have made art, for example by engraving patterns on shells | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage says that different types of early humans who lived before the Neanderthals might have also made art, such as by carving designs onto shells. Answer Explanation: The answer NO means the writer does not agree that Neanderthals were the first ones to create art. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is NO because the writer says that species even older than Neanderthals, like Homo erectus, might have made art first. Since Homo erectus lived before Neanderthals and may have made art by marking shells, it is not likely that Neanderthals made the very first art. |
| Q36 | NOT GIVEN | Even earlier species, such as Homo erectus, may also have made art, for example by engraving patterns on shells | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage says that very old human relatives might have carved designs into shells to make art, but it does not mention if we find these shells often or only once in a while. Answer Explanation: The answer is NOT GIVEN because the passage does not say how easy or hard it is to find artwork carved into shells from long ago. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is NOT GIVEN because the text only mentions that an early species called *Homo erectus* might have made art by "engraving patterns on shells." It uses this as an example of art-making behavior, but the author never provides information about the frequency or rarity of these discoveries. Without words like "rare," "uncommon," or "frequent," we cannot know if the writer thinks finding these shells is a rare event. |
| Q37 | NOT GIVEN | The dispute has only been heightened by the way the results were released, in a non-traditional journal that publishes peer reviews publicly alongside the paper | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage states that the scientists used an unusual way to share their news with others, but it says nothing about the ways they actually worked inside the cave to find their evidence. Answer Explanation: The answer means that the text does not provide enough information to know if the writer believes the way the researchers studied the cave was unusual or normal. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is NOT GIVEN because while the text mentions that the 'way the results were released' was 'non-traditional' (unconventional), it does not mention the 'methods' (the specific tools or steps) that were used to 'examine' (search or study) the Rising Star cave system. Because the passage only discusses how the news was shared with the public, and not the actual scientific work done inside the cave, we cannot determine the writer's view on this point. |
| Q38 | YES | Nevertheless, in the Rising Star cave system in South Africa where the H. naledi remains were found, researchers have found what seem to be etchings - resembling rudimentary artwork - on the cave walls, though these have yet to be firmly dated | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage mentions that while researchers found markings on the walls of the Rising Star cave, they have not yet given them a specific or certain age. Answer Explanation: The answer YES means the writer agrees that we do not know the exact age of the markings (etchings) found in the Rising Star cave yet. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is YES because the text states that the markings in the cave 'have yet to be firmly dated.' In English, if something has not been 'firmly dated,' it means scientists have not yet found enough proof to say exactly when it was created. Because there is no certain date, the age of these objects is currently 'unclear,' which matches the statement in the question. |
| Q39 | YES | The dispute has only been heightened by the way the results were released, in a non-traditional journal that publishes peer reviews publicly alongside the paper | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage explains that the argument about the discovery became worse because of the specific way the scientists chose to publish their news in a magazine that does not follow the usual rules. Answer Explanation: The answer means that the method used to share the discovery at the Rising Star cave system with the public made the disagreement among scientists even bigger. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is YES because the author explicitly states that the 'dispute' (meaning the controversy or argument) was 'heightened' (meaning it became stronger or was added to) by how the results were shared ('the way the results were released'). The passage identifies that the specific 'means used' was a 'non-traditional journal,' and this choice of publication increased the tension surrounding the findings. |
| Q40 | NO | At the same time, I think the species' small brains are a distraction | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage shows that the writer believes it is a mistake to focus too much on how big or small the H. naledi brains were when trying to understand their skills. Answer Explanation: The answer NO means the writer’s opinion is different from the statement; the writer doesn't believe brain size is a main reason for deciding if H. naledi could make art. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is NO because the author describes the focus on the small brains of H. naledi as a 'distraction.' A distraction is something that takes your attention away from what is actually important. The writer thinks that simply looking at the size of the brain is not a 'key factor' or a helpful way to judge if a species was smart enough to make art. Instead, the author suggests that the 'internal wiring' (how the brain works inside) is more important than the size. |