Question

Even though one book after another repeats this myth, the popularity of spices had nothing to do with disguising the taste of meat or fish that had gone bad. Any lord who could afford spices (which were expensive) could easily get fresh meat or fish (which were readily available); and when a cook happened to be stuck with rancid food, the spices he had available could not hide the awful smell or taste. Whenever they could, people used the spices that were so popular, they became an expensive necessity: pepper, ginger, sugar, sometimes saffron. Only the very rich could afford the luxuries—such as ambergris (which is coughed up by whales and offers a strange, perfumy taste of the sea).

–Sugar Changed the World,
Marc Aronson and Marina Budhos

The central idea in this passage is that spices were popular because they were flavorful, not because they helped people eat spoiled food. Which ideas are key details supporting this? Check all that apply.

Spices could not disguise bad meat.
Ambergris has a briny, sealike taste.
Fresh meat and fish were easy to find.
Only the very rich could afford luxuries.
A myth is often repeated in books.

Answer 1

Selected:
- Spices could not disguise bad meat.
- Fresh meat and fish were easy to find.
- Only the very rich could afford luxuries.

Brief reasons: The passage says spices couldn’t hide rancid smell/taste, that fresh meat/fish were readily available (so spices weren’t needed to cover spoilage), and that some costly flavorings were luxuries only the rich could buy—supporting that spices were used for flavor and status, not to mask bad food.