▶ Your Answer :
The lecturer argues that all explanations
in the reading passage do not give proper answers on why the ancient Khmer
Empire suddenly disappeared. This contradicts the reading passage’s claim that
there are three hypotheses to explain what brought about the sudden disappearance
of Angkor.
First, the lecturer claims that it is not
relevant to explain the distinction of Angkor with plague such as the Black
Death. As the Black Death has been spread out through ships, the damage of the
Black Death is known to be found at coastal areas. However, Angkor was situated
at an inland area, not at a coastal area. Also, whether the Black Death really
caused serious problems in the region is still controversial. This casts doubt
on the reading passage’s claim that the Black Death resulted in the sudden
decline of the Angkor’s inhabitants.
Second, the lecturer contends that the
flaws on the Angkor irrigation system cannot be the reason for the Angkor’s
sudden population reduction, either. Only half of the Angkor population relied
on the water resources from the irrigation system. Moreover, there must be
other water resources than the water from the irrigation system. This means that
the flaws on the system could not be crucial. This refutes the reading passage’s
claim that the failed water system would lead to water shortage in the region
and eventually to the disappearance of Angkor.
Lastly, the lecturer maintains that the
rise of Chinese maritime trade power had also not a significant impact on
Angkor. As Angkor traded in mostly agricultural goods, its economy was not dramatically
affected by the maritime trade where mostly luxury goods were traded in, such
as mirrors and potteries. This counters the reading passage’s claim that the
rise of maritime trade caused inland areas’ economy including Angkor to
decline, as the inland cities were dependent on trade.
|