In the paintings by seventeenth-century Dutch artist Vermeer, we find several recurrent items: a satin jacket, a certain Turkish carpet, and wooden chairs with lion' s head finials. These reappearing objects might seem to evince a dearth of props. Yet we know that many of the props Vermeer used were expensive. Thus, while we might speculate about exactly why Vermeer worked with a small number of familiar objects, it was clearly not for lack of props that the recurrent items were used. The conclusion follows logically if which one of the following is assumed? ["If a dearth of props accounted for the recurrent objects in Vermeer's paintings, we would not see expensive props in any of them.", "The props that recur in Vermeer's paintings were always available to him.", "The satin jacket and wooden chairs that recur in the paintings were owned by Vermeer's sister.", "The several recurrent items that appeared in Vermeer's paintings had special sentimental importance for him."]