It would be d. needed a haircut
The first one.
Explanation:
In this first one, the author is pulling apart what the evidence means (analysing it).
In the 2nd, it is NOT analyzing a piece of evidence specifically, it's summarizes the point and says it's supported by the evidence. So, not analyzing.
In the 3rd, the author is applying it to the situation and explaining why it's important, which is different from analysis.
In the 4th, the author is offering an example as evidence, not analyzing a piece of evidence.
Substitution of a verb and exclusion of an article.
Answer:
trevyn is correct.
Explanation:
Anglo-Saxon is going to be your answer.
A person named trevyn (srry if I spelled it wrong) wrote it in the comments. Good for u, and thx!
