▶ Your Answer :
In this set of materials, both the reading and the lecture deal with Egypt's collapse. The lecturer argues that some of the reasons about this topic have flaws. On the other hand, the writer believes that Egypt had three factors that caused to be destroyed.
To begin with, the professor in the lecture claims that governors in Egypt would not revolted to the Pharaoh. The speaker further explained that governors were rewards rewarded when they obeyed to the Pharaoh, so they were not able to oppose the rules of Egypt. Moreover, as Egypt political system was centralized to Pahraoh, the provincial governors always had to obey to the king. This point refutes the writer's opinion that the main reason for the downfall was the changed attitude of provincial governors to the Pahraoh. The author also explained that these greedy and mean governors probably revolted against monarchy.
The speaker goes on to say that documents written about the climate changes founded that researchers are not reliable. She insists the drought in Egypt was more likely to be localized rather than the whole area of Egypt. According to the document, only eastern empire had harsh weather conditions while other places did not havd had any climate changes. This point refutes the writer's point that severe drought in Egypt caused this country to be collapsed. The drought triggered Egyptians to have famine due to the less crop productions.
Lastly, the lecturer contends that the dynasty would not collape because of fightings for the throne. She described that Pepi, the last Pharaoh, was not the only one who reigned the kingdom for a long time. The professor thinks that power strugglings of sons and grandchildrens happened not only in his kingdom but also in other prior kingdoms as well. Therefore, the Egypt would not be collapsed because of the political turmoils. This casts doubt on the writer's arguement that Egypt kingdom was destroyed due to the power of rivaries rivarly among the last Pharaoh's sons and grand childrens.
To sum up, the lecturer argues that Egypy was not destroyed because of the recent factors that had shown. However, the author disagrees with the lecture's idea for the three reasons.
글자수의 초과로 인해 통합형에서 컨클루션은 필요하지 않습니다~~
또한 글이 너무 깁니다~~
통합형에선 단어수의 제한이 있기 때문에 좀 더 간결하게 써주세여~~~
홧팅하세여~~!!!! |