▶ Your Answer : In this given a set of materials, there are some discrepancy between on the views of the lecturer and the author over the issue about theories of the Maya collapse. The Lecturer gives several reasons as a rebuttal to the author's point. First, the lecturer claims that there are no records of any revolt, Even though the Maya used a sophisticated writing system. Moreover, It would have been possible to spread a revolt to other cities from one city since the Maya consisted of separated individual city-state. This casts doubt on the reading passage's suggestion that there were social turmoil of a peasant revolt in the Maya society and this caused the downfall of Maya society. Next, the lecturer insists that collapse resulting from a reorganization of trade route does not correspond to historical accounts. Teotihuacan declined during the sixth century, which reduced its economic importance. In other words, It would have been a key trade center before the Mayan collapse in the 12th century. This counters the reading passages's argument that changing trade routes would have been led to the Maya's disappearance. Finally, the lecturer argues that there is no evidence that the diseases were responsible for the maya collapse. To elaborate in detail, Yellow fever and Malaria were founded in the sixteen century, however, the Maya's collapse was in the 12th century. In addition, If there was an epidemic, it would have been possible to find some reliable evidence such as mass graves. This refutes the reading passage's assertion that the disease caused the Mayan devastation.
감사합니다 :)
|