A writer pulls two lessons from recent archaeology. Building and art go back to species older than us, including the small-brained Homo naledi. And old assumptions about gender, like 'Man the Hunter', say more about the archaeologists than about prehistory.
The multiple choice (27-30) points to paragraphs B, F, G and I. The sentence endings (31-34) use C for the first two and H for the last two. YES / NO / NOT GIVEN (35-40) covers D and E.
Multiple choice
Questions 27-30
How to attack this block: Each question names a paragraph, and three of the four ask what the writer means rather than what happened. Question 29 quotes a phrase, so read the sentence before it: 'this stuff' points back to research shaped by old patriarchal views.
Question 27
Answer: AParagraph B
What is the writer doing in paragraph B?
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.
Question says → Passage says
pinpointingdraw out / Two things stand out
key changes in our understandingoverall messages / we have badly misunderstood
Why: The writer picks out two big lessons from recent finds: 'advanced' behaviours are older than we thought, and we got prehistoric gender roles wrong. Both are changes in how we understand prehistory, so A.
The trap: B is tempting because the writer says 'we have badly misunderstood'. But that's about past mistakes now being corrected, not things that are still unknown. D belongs to later paragraphs, where the H. naledi dispute comes up.
Question 28
Answer: AParagraph F, second and third sentences
Why does the writer bring up mobile phones in paragraph F?
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.
Question says → Passage says
in a gradual wayby incremental steps
most developmentsEvolution usually works… and so does technology
Why: The phones are an example supporting the sentence before: evolution and technology both move in small steps. The first phones were poor and then improved gradually, so A.
The trap: C picks up the joke that early phones weren't great at anything, but the point isn't that technology is bad. It's that first versions are rough and get better step by step. D is the opposite of the paragraph, which argues against sudden, surprising leaps.
Question 29
Answer: DParagraph G, last two sentences
What does 'unpick this stuff' mean in paragraph G?
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
Question says → Passage says
outdated beliefs about societynow unfashionably patriarchal views about gender
research influenced bythose notions fed into their research
reevaluatingtrying to unpick
Why: 'This stuff' points back to old research shaped by patriarchal views that are now 'unfashionable'. To unpick it is to take it apart and look again, which is reevaluating. D.
The trap: B is close, but the problem isn't fake or unreliable evidence. It's the biased beliefs researchers brought to it. C describes research in general, without the idea of correcting old work.
Question 30
Answer: AParagraph I, last two sentences
What does the writer suggest in the last paragraph?
Inequality, authoritarianism and patriarchy aren't inevitable. They're choices, and prehistory shows us that we can choose differently.
Question says → Passage says
studying past societiesprehistory shows us
help us create a fairer society todaywe can choose differently
Why: If inequality and patriarchy are choices, and prehistory shows other choices are possible, then learning about the past can help us build a fairer society. A.
The trap: C sounds reasonable ('the more we find out'), but the paragraph isn't saying there's a lot left to learn. It's saying what the findings mean for us now. B is never discussed.
Matching sentence endings (A-F)
Questions 31-34
How to attack this block: Six endings, four sentences. Each sentence start names a specific finding, so find that finding and ask what it proves. Two endings are decoys. One talks about when Homo sapiens emerged, which comes from paragraph A, not from any of the four findings.
Question 31
Answer: EParagraph C, first four sentences
What did the finds at Kalambo Falls show?
researchers found buried logs that had been shaped with stone tools so that they interlocked… That's almost 200,000 years before our species, Homo sapiens, evolved.
Question says → Passage says
sophisticated workmanshipshaped with stone tools so that they interlocked / part of a larger structure, perhaps a building
Homo sapiens was probably not the only speciesalmost 200,000 years before our species, Homo sapiens, evolved
Why: Logs carefully shaped to lock together, maybe for a building, are skilled work. They're 476,000 years old, long before Homo sapiens existed, so another species made them. E.
The trap: A is tempting because paragraph A says our species is older than we thought (300,000 years, not 200,000). That finding isn't linked to Kalambo Falls, and the Kalambo logs are older than Homo sapiens altogether.
Question 32
Answer: FParagraph C, last two sentences
What does evidence from high-altitude places suggest?
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
Question says → Passage says
other speciesextinct hominins such as the Denisovans
survive in harsh environmentssettle in extreme places / lived on the frozen heights
before the arrival of Homo sapiensonly settled by modern humans around 3,600 years ago
Why: 'Frozen heights' and 'extreme places' are harsh environments, and the Denisovans were living there 200,000 years ago, long before modern humans settled them. F.
The trap: E is also about non-human species doing something impressive, but it's about making things. The high-altitude evidence is about surviving somewhere hard, not about craftsmanship.
Question 33
Answer: DParagraph H, first three sentences
What does the June 2023 publication show?
a meta-analysis published in June 2023 compiled data on several dozen foraging societies and found women hunted in 80 per cent of them
Question says → Passage says
an academic publicationa meta-analysis published
who looked for foodwomen hunted / foraging societies
experts may have been mistakenthe demolition of 'Man the Hunter'
Why: The old 'Man the Hunter' idea said men hunted and women stayed home. Finding that women hunted in 80% of foraging societies shows experts were wrong about who got the food. D.
The trap: C mentions gender roles too, but the study is about foraging societies of humans, not extinct hominin species, and it doesn't compare species.
Question 34
Answer: BParagraph H, last sentence
What does the analysis of the Iberian leader show?
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
Question says → Passage says
previous assumptionsas many had assumed
were inaccurateturned out to be female, not male
who had powerwomen occupying positions of authority / an Iberian leader
Why: People assumed the leader was a man; the teeth showed she was a woman. So the old assumption about who held power was wrong. B.
The trap: D also says experts were mistaken, but about hunting and food. The Iberian example is in the part about 'positions of authority', which is power.
YES / NO / NOT GIVEN (writer's views)
Questions 35-40
How to attack this block: All six are about art and the Homo naledi debate in D and E. The writer is careful: more evidence is needed on dating, and brain size is a distraction. Hold every statement against those two positions.
Question 35
Answer: NOParagraph D, second and third sentences
Does the writer think Neanderthal cave paintings were probably the first art ever?
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
Question says → Passage says
the first examples of artwork ever createdEven earlier species… may also have made art
Why: Straight after the Neanderthals, the writer says 'even earlier species' like Homo erectus may have made art. If older species made art, the Neanderthals' paintings weren't the first. NO.
The trap: NOT GIVEN tempts people because Homo erectus 'may' have made art, so it isn't certain. But the statement says Neanderthal art 'seems likely' to be first, and the writer is clearly pointing the other way.
Question 36
Answer: NOT GIVENParagraph D, third sentence
Is prehistoric art carved on shells very rare?
Even earlier species, such as Homo erectus, may also have made art, for example by engraving patterns on shells.
Question says → Passage says
artwork carved onto shellsengraving patterns on shells
Why: Shell engravings are given as one example of possible Homo erectus art. The writer never says how common or rare such finds are, so NOT GIVEN.
The trap: 'Even earlier species… may' makes the shells feel special and unusual. Being an early example isn't the same as being rare.
Question 37
Answer: NOT GIVENParagraph E, third sentence
Did the researchers use unusual methods to study the Rising Star caves?
The dispute has only been heightened by the way the results were released, in a non-traditional journal
Question says → Passage says
rather unconventionalnon-traditional
Why: The only 'non-traditional' thing in the passage is the journal where the results were published, not the way the cave was studied. The research methods are never described, so NOT GIVEN.
The trap: 'Non-traditional' is a near-synonym of 'unconventional', so YES looks right. Check what it describes: the publication, not the methods. That's question 39.
Question 38
Answer: YESParagraph D, last sentence; Paragraph E
Is the age of the Rising Star etchings uncertain?
though these have yet to be firmly dated… I do think more evidence is needed: in particular with regard to the dating of the etchings.
Question says → Passage says
it is unclear how oldhave yet to be firmly dated
the etchings in the Rising Star cave systemresearchers have found what seem to be etchings
Why: 'Yet to be firmly dated' means nobody knows for sure how old they are, and the writer adds that more evidence is needed on the dating. YES.
The trap: H. naledi lived 'around 250,000 years ago', which can make you think the etchings have a date too. That's the age of the species, not of the etchings.
Question 39
Answer: YESParagraph E, third sentence
Did the way the findings were published add to the controversy?
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.
Question says → Passage says
the means used to publicise the findingsthe way the results were released
added to the controversyThe dispute has only been heightened
Why: 'Heightened' means increased, and 'the way the results were released' is the means used to publicise them. The writer says this made the dispute bigger. YES.
Question 40
Answer: NOParagraph E, second half
Is H. naledi's brain size central to whether it could make art?
At the same time, I think the species' small brains are a distraction.
Question says → Passage says
a key factora distraction
able to produce artcapable of complex behaviours, despite their small brains
Why: The writer calls brain size 'a distraction' and says other features, like internal wiring, are just as important. A distraction is the opposite of a key factor, so NO.
The trap: Paragraph D says palaeoanthropological dogma treats small brains as ruling out complex behaviour, so YES can look right. That's the experts' view, which the writer rejects.
What was unconventional was the journal the results were published in (E), not the methods used to study the cave. NOT GIVEN, and the most common wrong answer is YES.
The Kalambo Falls logs are older than our species, so someone else was doing skilled woodwork (E). Ending A is about when Homo sapiens emerged, which the passage dates in paragraph A.
The writer says the species' small brains are a distraction. Calling brain size a key factor contradicts that, so NO.
Words from this passage worth keeping
truism(A)
a statement so obviously true it hardly needs saying
discern(A)
notice or recognise something that isn't obvious
upend(C)
turn something completely upside down
contentious(D)
likely to cause disagreement
dogma(D)
beliefs accepted as true without question
rudimentary(D)
basic, at an early stage of development
incremental(F)
happening in small steps
preconception(G)
an opinion formed before you have the facts
Sit this test on Langujet, then come back
The full Cambridge 21 Test 3 reading paper: all three passages, 60 minutes, marked the second you finish with a review of every answer. Already done it? Take it again and see if the same traps still get you.
Cambridge IELTS 21, Test 3, Reading Passage 3. The passage and questions belong to Cambridge University Press and are not reproduced here. We quote short extracts only as evidence for our own commentary, and the answers are published for self-marking. Get the book for the full text, or sit the test on Langujet.
FAQ
Rethinking the Past: quick answers
"Rethinking the Past" is Reading Passage 3 of Cambridge IELTS 21, Test 3. It covers questions 27-40 (14 marks).
Questions 27-30: Multiple choice, questions 31-34: Matching sentence endings and questions 35-40: YES / NO / NOT GIVEN.
2 YES, 2 NO and 2 NOT GIVEN.
Our review highlights questions 37, 31 and 40. Each one is explained in "Questions worth a second look" above.
