Question

THE MATCH

There never was a time when the worid was without firo, but there was a time when men did not know how to kindle fire; and after they learned how to kindle one,
it was a long, long time before they learned how to kindle one easily. In these days we can kindle a fire without any trouble, because we can easily get a match;
but we must remember that the match is one of the most wonderful things in the world, and that it took men thousands of years to learn how to make one. Let us
learn the history of this famillar little object, the match.
Fire was first given to man by nature itsolf. When a forest is set on fire by cinders from a neighboring volcano, or when a tree is set ablaze by a thunderbolt, we
may say that nature strikes a match. In the early history of the world, nature had to kindle all the fires, for man by his own effort was unable to produce a spark.
The first method, then, of getting fire for use was to light sticks of wood at a flame kindled by nature--by a volcano, perhaps, or by a stroke of lightning. These
firebrands were carried to the home and used in kindling the fires there. The fire secured in this way was carefully guarded and was kept burning as long as
possible. But the flame, however faithfully watched, would sometimes be extinguished. A sudden gust of wind or a sudden shower would put it out. Then a new
firebrand would have to be secured, and this often meant a long journey and a deal of trouble.
In 1827, John Walker, a druggist in a small English town, tipped a splint with sulphur, chlorate of potash, and sulphid of antimony, and rubbed it on sandpaper, and
it burst into flame. The druggist had discovered the first friction-chemical match, the kind we use to-day. It is called friction-chemical because it is made by mixing
certain chemicals together and rubbing them. Although Walker's match did not require the bottle of acid, nevertheless it was not a good one. It could be lighted
only by hard rubbing, and it sputtered and threw fire in all directions. In a few years, however, phosphorus was substituted on the tip for antimony, and the change
worked wonders. The match could now be lighted with very little rubbing, and it was no longer necessary to have sandpaper upon which to rub it. It would ignite
when rubbed on any dry surface, and there was no longer any sputtering. This was the phosphorus match, the match with which we are so familiar.

How does the author develop the idea that humanity's early fire-starting tools may have been dangerous? Please respond in three to five complete sentences,
using evidence from the text to support your answer.

Answer 1

The author develops the idea that humanity's early fire-starting tools may have been dangerous by highlighting the difficulties and dangers of relying on natural sources of fire such as volcanoes and lightning strikes. The text describes how these fires were often difficult to obtain and keep burning, and were susceptible to being extinguished by sudden gusts of wind or rain. Additionally, the text mentions how obtaining new firebrands often meant a "long journey and a deal of trouble," suggesting that early humans may have faced significant risks and challenges in obtaining and maintaining fires.

Step-by-step explanation:

Again, use at your own discretion.

Answer 2

The author develops the idea that humanity's early fire-starting tools may have been dangerous by mentioning that fires were kindled by nature, such as a forest fire caused by a neighboring volcano or a tree struck by lightning. These methods of obtaining fire were unpredictable and uncontrolled, which could have resulted in accidental fires that were difficult to put out. Additionally, the author states that firebrands carried home could sometimes be extinguished by a sudden gust of wind or shower, which would require obtaining a new firebrand that often meant a long journey and a deal of trouble. This implies that obtaining fire was not only difficult but potentially dangerous, as it required traveling and exposing oneself to potential hazards.