Historical objects should be brought back their country of origin. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Many ancient objects from different countries are kept in museums and art galleries throughout the world. And it is often said by many that inauthentic ownership of these old items is unfair, and the countries having these artifacts must return them to the countries of their origins. I personally support this statement.
Primarily, old artifacts hold historical, cultural, and religious values since items of past times are generally like sculptures of gods and angels, swords and other weapons of our great warriors, old coins, and many more to name. People respect these mementos as they give them a great insight into their roots. Having said that, by resurrecting the memories linked with former objects, one can know the eminence of their heritage, get inspired by the patriots and martyrs, and learn a lot about the lifestyle of their forefathers. Consequently, countries that confiscate the former precious items of the country of their origin cause cultural wars, political debates, and so many other problems if the items are not returned to their actual owners. For instance, a lot of pressure is being put on the British government by the Indian government to return the world’s most expensive diamond, Kohinoor, which was once stolen illegally during colonial times. This has created a heated debate, caused chaos, and risked the foreign relations between both nations.
In contrast, some critics might think that countries who have captured the old articles no matter by what means whether by winning battle or by any political deal or anything other planning and plotting are the actual owners to get considered now as these people dominated the world once upon a time and made these relics of their own. As famous saying states and backup their victories by clearing that everything is possible in love and war and if the same has been the case for centuries so why not now. Even, the countries who have this illegal possessions of other countries in their museums and galleries have preserved it safely and preserved it perhaps in a better way to serve its purpose of enriching people’s knowledge throughout the world than the countries where actually they belonged once. Therefore, the question of returning the old artifacts is useless.
In conclusion, possessing any historical antiques of any country by some dominating countries is wrong on the basis of ethicality and morality owing to people's emotions and cultural, historical, and religious values attached to these wrongly possessed old items. Hence, any such relic must be sent back to the country of its origin.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-12-17 | Kha Linh | 61 | view |
| 2024-12-08 | ankushgurumaa | 78 | view |
| 2024-11-30 | Trần Ánh Vy | 73 | view |
| 2024-11-26 | Trần Ánh Vy | 84 | view |
| 2024-11-26 | Huyenlbg87 | 11 | view |
- In many cities crime is increasing. Why do you think this is happening?What can governments do to help reduce crime levels? 70
- In many cities crime is increasing. Why do you think this is happening? What can governments do to help reduce crime levels? 93
- Imagine you have one week to spend on a vacation in a city you ve never been to before Would you prefer to spend the week participating in scheduled activities such as going on guided tours of the city or would you prefer to spend the week exploring the c 71
- Do you think that Private Institutions Should be Banned Discuss your options 78
- Without capital punishment our lives are less secure and crimes or violence increase. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion? 75
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 153, Rule ID: TO_NON_BASE[1]
Message: The verb after "to" should be in the base form: 'people'.
Suggestion: people
...sis of ethicality and morality owing to peoples emotions and cultural, historical, and ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, consequently, hence, if, so, then, therefore, for instance, in conclusion, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 13.1623246493 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 7.85571142285 51% => OK
Conjunction : 23.0 10.4138276553 221% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 34.0 24.0651302605 141% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 55.0 41.998997996 131% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2197.0 1615.20841683 136% => OK
No of words: 423.0 315.596192385 134% => OK
Chars per words: 5.1938534279 5.12529762239 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.53508145475 4.20363070211 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.63774492795 2.80592935109 94% => OK
Unique words: 241.0 176.041082164 137% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.569739952719 0.561755894193 101% => OK
syllable_count: 668.7 506.74238477 132% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 5.43587174349 37% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 8.0 0.809619238477 988% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 28.0 20.2975951904 138% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 88.5973664018 49.4020404114 179% => OK
Chars per sentence: 146.466666667 106.682146367 137% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.2 20.7667163134 136% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.4 7.06120827912 91% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.9879759519 176% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.174716571373 0.244688304435 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0578210395108 0.084324248473 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0524504968692 0.0667982634062 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.113154458758 0.151304729494 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0190229574318 0.056905535591 33% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.1 13.0946893788 131% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.06 50.2224549098 86% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.3001002004 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.12 12.4159519038 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.54 8.58950901804 111% => OK
difficult_words: 121.0 78.4519038076 154% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.1190380762 130% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.7795591182 130% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.