▶ Your Answer :
In the reading passage, there is an ample support for the
author's claim that there are a few assumptions why Angkor collapsed.
the professor in the lecture gives several reasons as a
rebuttal to the author's point.
First, the professor argues that it does not make sense that
foreign invasion caused the collapse of Angkor. Generally speaking, invaders
try to keep the population to take more advantage of them. Likewise, if there
had been some invaders, they would have made citizens of Angkor stay. This
counters the reading passage's assertion that since Angkor was rich city, many
invaders occupied the kingdom.
Second, the professor contends that it is not plausible that
the decline of population resulted from a changed religion from Hinduism to
Buddihism. It is because there had been
always a variety of religions and moreover, temples of Hinduism lost the power
even before Buddihism coming. This casts doubts on the reading passage's
suggestion that Buddihism caused the population to reduce because they no
longer went to Hinduism temples to worship where they usually lived near.
Finally, the professor insists that a great drought cannot
be the reason for decline in population of Angkor. Scientists found many evidences
that more severe droughts had happened 100 years before the collapse. It means
people in Angkor could have managed to droughts and known how to survive. This
refutes the reading passage's idea that there was a long drought which brought
about the breakdown of Angkor, given that they found tree rings which shows
that a drastic drought occurred at that time.
21mins
260 words
|