TPO 30 Integrated Writing Task

The reading passage and lecture explored the credibility of the burning mirror with which Greeks defended Roman ships. Although the author of the article referred to the burning mirror as an impractical weapon, and several reasons were given in support of this argument, the lecturer found these reasons unconvincing.
To begin with, even though the article suggested that Greeks were not capable of making a single sheet of copper the precise and curved mirror with their manufacturing technology, the lecturer argued that it was a misconception. This was because the mirror could be composed of several small pieces of copper. In addition, some Greeks being good at math could form these small pieces into a large parabolic shape. Thereby, the lecturer believed that Greeks wouldn’t have difficulty in making the burning mirror.
Second, based on an experiment in which a device spent ten minutes setting a wooden and stable object on fire by concentrating the sun’s rays, the author indicated that these burning mirrors were impractical. Nevertheless, the lecturer pointed out that besides wood, Roman shipbuilders also used pitch which could rapidly catch fire to make the ships waterproof. As a result, once the pitch was burning, the fire would spread to the wood even if the ships were moving, implying that the burning mirror could be practical.
Last but not least, the lecturer acutely identified the weakness in the reading passage that, instead of utilizing the burning mirror, Greeks could use flaming arrows to attack Roman ships, which were as effective as the burning mirror. The lecturer alleged that Roman could readily detect the arrows and could be prepared to extinguish the fire. In contrast, the rays reflected by the mirrors couldn’t be observed, and to Roman’s surprise, the fire could suddenly start and catch them off guard. Accordingly, the lecturer believed that the burning mirror was more effective than blaming arrows.