The reading passage suggests that the Great Zimbabwe ruins, an ancient stone city in southern Africa, were influenced by foreign civilizations such as the Phoenicians, Arabs, or even the Chinese. However, the professor in the lecture strongly disagrees, arguing that the ruins were constructed by the indigenous Shona people without outside influence. First, the reading claims that the architectural style of the ruins resembles structures built by Middle Eastern and Asian civilizations, implying that foreign builders must have played a role. However, the professor refutes this claim by stating that archaeological evidence shows that the construction techniques used in Great Zimbabwe were developed locally. He explains that the Shona people had a long history of stone masonry and that similar structures can be found in other regions of Africa, proving that the design was not imported from foreign cultures. Second, the reading argues that artifacts such as Chinese porcelain and Arabic coins found at the site suggest that foreign traders were involved in its construction. The professor counters this by clarifying that these items were merely trade goods and do not indicate foreign influence in the building process. He points out that Great Zimbabwe was a major trade hub, attracting merchants from distant lands, but trade does not equate to architectural influence. The presence of foreign goods only confirms that the city was engaged in commerce, not that foreigners built it. Finally, the reading suggests that early European explorers dismissed the idea that Africans could have built such an advanced city, further supporting the foreign-origin theory. The professor strongly rejects this notion, stating that these early claims were based on racial bias rather than factual evidence. He argues that modern archaeological research overwhelmingly supports the idea that Great Zimbabwe was built by the Shona civilization, with no need for foreign intervention. In conclusion, while the reading attributes the construction of Great Zimbabwe to outside influences, the professor disputes this claim by emphasizing local architectural traditions, the role of trade without foreign construction, and the dismissal of outdated, biased theories.