▶ Your Answer : In the reading passage, there are ample supports for the author's claim that there are some factors of the Angkor's demise. However, the professor in the lecture gives several reasons as a rebuttal for the author's point. First, the professor claims that the plague is not responsible for the demise. The black death only affected on coastal areas because the route that plague introduced was usually ship way. In other words, Angkor was not a coastal city so they unlikely to be attacked by the black death. This casts doubt on the reading passage's point that the major factor of decreased population is The black death. Next, the professor insists that the problem of water system was not disastrous for Angkor's people. There were a number of water systems such as irrigation. Therefore, people was able to deal with contamination problems. Engineering faults was not that crucial for them. This counters the reading passage's assertion that failed water system makes people hard to live on. Finally, the professor argues that maritime trade was not impact for them. Actually, Angkor's economy was based on agriculture, not a maritime trade. Thus, decline of maritime trade was merely one of the small problems on their economy. It was not significant challenge for them. This refutes the reading passage's suggestion that Angkor collapsed since they relied on maritime trade too much. |