Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they support/contradict specific points made in the reading passage. The vessel

The article rejects the usefulness of some vessels as batteries in ancient times and provides three reasons of support. However, the professor explains the theories of the reading are not convincing, so the vessel could have been used indeed as batteries in previous years and refutes each of the author's claims.

First, the reading says that the hypothesis of the vessel being used as batteries is unlikely because it lacked of electrical conductors, such as metal wires. The professor refutes this point by saying that the vessels were found by local people. Therefore, they were not trained to recognize the importance of metal wires. Perhaps, the vessels had metal wires, and the people overlooked or threw them away.

Second, the article posits that the structure looks alike to a copper cylinder discovered in Selucia, a city nearby, which was utilized to hold scrolls of sacred books. Hence, this theory suggests that the vessel could have had the same purpose as the copper cylinder. However, the professor says that although the vessel could be used initially as holder, the invention of the vessel as a battery later is feasible. In other words, according to the speaker, originally the vessel was used to hold sacred books, and later it would be adapted for another purpose, such as a battery.

Finally, the reading says that the vessel was useless in that period of time as the battery because objects did not reply on electricity. The professor opposes to this point by saying that the vessel could have been used to create tingle sensations. Therefore, ancient people could convince others about invisible powers. Moreover, the vessel may have had healing proprieties. For example, modern medicine uses electricity to stimulate muscle and relieve pain. Perhaps, the vessel could have been utilized for a similar purpose back in time.