▶ Your Answer: Both the reading passage and the lecture
deal with the reason why the Anasazi mysteriously disappeared. While the writer insists that
the Anasazi migrated due to a severe drought, the speaker refutes this claim in
that the ‘drought theory’ is groundless. To begin with,
the speaker points out that the condition of bones from Anasazi graves does not
necessarily mean that a drought led to their malnutrition. In specific, it is
mentioned that even during the affluent harvest season, malnutrition was prevalent
among the Anasazi citizens since most of the crops were provided to religious
elites rather than the general public. This clearly refuses the reading passage’s claim
that the lack of rainfall failed to feed the large population.
Next, the
speaker mentions that the Anasazi’s intention to return back after a drought is
also questionable. Whereas the passage sees that they would have come back to
their homeland once the climate situation reverts to normal, the speaker
pinpoints the fact that the Anasazi actually never returned.
Lastly, it is
said during the lecture that the areas the Anasazi moved to were not, in fact, adequate
for water supplies. Some new settlements such as Arizona, which was known for little
moisture and its unsuitableness for agriculture, were even harsher for them to
survive. That is to say, the reading passage’s point that their migration to external regions was interconnected to the escape from drought conditions might
be severely flawed. |