▶ Your Answer :
The reading and the lecture both
talk about Anasazi’s migration. The reading says that a severe drought is the
cause of Anasazi’s migration. However, the lecturer argues that there is a controversy
to say that Anasazi left their homeland due to severe drought because the
evidences the reading gives have some issues.
Firstly,
the reading contends that bones from Anasazi graves is an indication that Anasazi
people suffered malnutrition because of extreme drought. On the contrary, the professor
disagrees with this statement. She claims that bones that indicates Anasazi underwent
malnutrition do not mean much for the migration. Since up to forty-five percent
of Anasazi suffered malnutrition even when they had plenty of food, it would
not be an proper evidence that Anasazi left because of drought.
Secondly,
in the reading, the author argues that Anasazi planned to resettle in the area
after drought. In contrast, the speaker makes an opposing point to this claim. The
point is that they would have returned if they planned to comeback after drought
ends. Because the drought was done between 1300 to 1340, they should have
resettled in the area after these years. In turn, they didn’t comeback, which
means that they did not leave to return after drought.
Finally,
the reading goes on to say that Anasazi migrated to look for dependable water supplies.
However, the lecturer contradicts this statement, arguing that it is not true
that Anasazi left to find plentiful water supplies because when they moved to
the land that today’s Arizona, the place didn’t have enough water and there was
even harsh environment.
|