Based on the passage, the relationship of Great Zimbabwe's cattle economy to the size of Great Zimbabwe's population ...

shunhe on July 6, 2020

Hi @YulissaCardoza,

Thanks for the question! So this question is asking us to make an analogy that’s close to the relationship of Great Zimbabwe’s cattle economy to the size of the Great Zimbabwe’s population. Well, this is discussed near the beginning of the second paragraph. We’re told that the population of Great Zimbabwe was probably over 10,000, which was huge for a city in that kind of environment. What allowed that many people to live in that kind of environment? Well, it was the cattle economy of Great Zimbabwe. So we’re looking for an answer choice that presents an analogy where the second thing, which might seem surprising at first, makes more sense because it depends on the first thing.

Now take a look at (B), which discusses irrigation and farm in a desert. At first, it might be surprising to hear about a farm in a desert. How is that possible? Well, the answer is irrigation. Irrigation lets the farm survive in the desert just like the cattle economy lets the size of Great Zimbabwe’s population stay so large. Because these two are analogous in this way, (B) is the correct answer.

Hope this helps! Feel free to ask any other questions that you might have.

YulissaCardoza on July 7, 2020

Thank you

shunhe on July 7, 2020

Glad to have helped!

KatyMiller on June 10, 2021

Why not E? If we are approaching it as "Irrigation lets the farm survive" couldn't it also be "Individual stones allows there to be a stone wall?"

hoshman on July 29, 2021

I see it like this: something that seems improbable (farm in desert, or 10k population in African savannah) is made possible because of factor X (irrigation, or cattle economy, respectively)
So, for (e), a stone wall isn't really an improbable thing that is now explained by factor x (individual stones)

Emil-Kunkin on September 29, 2022

I would echo this, and add in the idea that the cattle economy and population are two different things, the former of which enables the latter to exist, while remaining an independent phenomenon. A stone is simply a part of a stone wall, it is subsumed into the whole.