Author's argument on non-Palean woven baskets does not seems to make a cogent case. GRE argument

This is my first attempt for argument task. I tried my best to make it good. Tell me if I answered the prompt correctly or not. I really appreciate the honest marking. Thank you.

Woven baskets characterized by a particular distinctive pattern have previously been found only in the immediate vicinity of the prehistoric village of Palea and therefore were believed to have been made only by the Palean people. Recently, however, archaeologists discovered such a "Palean" basket in Lithos, an ancient village across the Brim River from Palea. The Brim River is very deep and broad, and so the ancient Paleans could have crossed it only by boat, and no Palean boats have been found. Thus it follows that the so-called Palean baskets were not uniquely Palean.

Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.

While it is possible that Palean baskets were not uniquely Palean but the author's argument does not seems to make a cogent case for this.

At the very first place the assumption made by the author regarding supposition that baskets to be made only by the Palean people seems vague. Archaeologists could have found the baskets in the vicinity of the Palean village but it does not prove if finding the baskets at one place makes the baskets originally from that place. Because later they got to find the same baskets across the river from Palean and it is possible that as far as they go and keep on searching, they may found more baskets apart from these two villages only. Author did not mention the data or archaeological survey stating that baskets were found only in Palean.

It is possible that the baskets could have been found in numerous places which author failed to gather the information.

Secondly, the author mentioned about the recent finding and assumed that it may not be uniquely Palean. However, it is possible that baskets were of Palean origin only and were carried along the river to other places or it is possible that the baskets could be of non palean origin and were transported to Palean. To substantiate this , more archaeological survey is required which can tell to some extent that which place they find the instruments or the raw materials of the basket. That could tell us the origin of the woven baskets.

Furthermore, if boats haven't been found that does not mean it might not be there. Many ancient things remain undiscovered because of being buried deep or may be destroyed completely. Plus there is no mention of transport between the two villages. Even if not by boat, there might be some other mode of transport for the ancient people which we are not able to discover here yet. So it is unwise to say that baskets are not uniquely Palean.

Conclusively, Archaeology works with history to find the source of the information. Apart from baskets author failed to mention the use of the baskets and we do not know from how long its been in use . It is possible that these baskets were used for transporting goods. In that case these are meant to be find in varied locations.

To know about the origin of the baskets , author need to find out the history first that for what purpose these were supposed to be? What kind of people used these baskets and what was the material used in the baskets. If it comes to be from a material which is neither supposed to be of Palean origin or its neighboring areas then again the whole argument is refuted here.

Hi, Here are my comments. I would focus more on the baskets floating across the river, as well as the Paleans using crude log rafts or something similar as boats, which would not be recognized as a boat by today's archeologists. Also, I would like more details on the basket found in Lithos. Are they sure of the age of the basket? Maybe it is a reproduction of an old Palean design created and left there recently. Also, is the entire Brim river deep and broad? Maybe Palean travelers explored up to a shallow part of the river and made it to the opposite bank that way. Plus, perhaps the climate was different back then, so the river may have been shallower or changed course over the years.

Hi, yes this seems much more convincing, plus I think it is better organized, with each paragraph having a clear argument. Your usage and grammar is much improved as well.