PART A: Which statement identifies the central idea of the text? A)If it weren’t for Francis Pizarro’s, the Inca Empire would have continued to expand and prosper.

B)Despite the riches they possessed, the Incas lived simple lives.

C)The Incas were a highly advanced civilization that were able to expand their net of influence far and wide.

D)Warfare was the most common and successful way in which the Incas were able to expand their empire.

PART B: Which detail from the text best supports the answer to Part A?

A)"The Inca controlled perhaps 10 million people, speaking a hundred different tongues. It was the largest empire on earth at the time."

B)"Members of a community supported one another. The Inca tailored this practice of reciprocity — give-and-take — to their own needs."

C)"All were required to pay taxes as tribute. The Mit’a was a labor tax, which required the head of every household to work for the state fo

A) If it weren’t for Francis Pizarro’s, the Inca Empire would have continued to expand and prosper.

Explanation:

Consider, for example, we are told at the outset, "When Spanish conquistador Francisco Pizarro landed in Peru in 1532, he found unimaginable riches. The Inca Empire was in full bloom."

However, we were told that Pizarro captured and requested ransom from the last Inca emperor Atahualpa. What was the outcome? The text tells us, "Once Pizarro had executed the last emperor, the empire  rapidly collapsed." This detail brings out the central idea of the text, that is, "If it weren’t for Francis Pizarro’s, the Inca Empire would have continued to expand and prosper."

with my recent question

paul willis (born 1950) is a british social scientist known for his work in sociology and cultural studies. paul willis' work is widely read in the fields of sociology, anthropology, and education, his work emphasizing consumer culture, socialization, music, and popular culture. he was born in wolverhampton[1] and received his education at the university of cambridge and at the university of birmingham. he worked at centre for contemporary cultural studies and subsequently at the university of wolverhampton. he was a professor of social/cultural ethnography at keele university. in the autumn of 2010, he left keele university and is now a professor at princeton university.

paul willis’s work has focused mainly, but not exclusively, on the ethnographic study of lived cultural forms in a wide variety of contexts. from highly structured to weakly structured ones, willis examines how practices of `informal cultural production` to produce and construct cultural worlds `from below`.[2]

trained in literary criticism at cambridge,[2] paul willis received his phd in 1972 from the centre for contemporary cultural studies at birmingham university where he remained as senior research fellow until 1981. he gave a paper at the 9th symposium of the natiohnal deviancy conference in january 1972 entitled 'a motor-bike subculture

during the 1980`s willis served as youth policy adviser to wolverhampton borough council in the english midlands. there he produced the youth review (published by the council and ashgate) which formed the basis for youth policy and for the formation of the democratically elected youth council, both still functioning. during the 1990s he served first as head of the division of media, communications and cultural studies, and then as a member of the professoriate at the university of wolverhampton. in 2000 willis co-founded the sage journal, ethnography. in 2003 willis was hired as a head professor of social and cultural ethnography at keele university.