In 1938 an archaeologist in Iraq acquired a set of clay jars that had been excavated two years earlier by villagers constructing a railroad line. The vessel was about 2,200 years old. Each clay jar contained a copper cylinder surrounding an iron rod. The archaeologist proposed that vessels were ancient electric batteries and even demonstrated that they can produce a small electric current when filled with some liquids. However, it is not likely that the vessels were actually used as electric batteries in ancient times.
First of all, if the vessels were used as batteries, they would probably have been attached to some electricity conductors such as metal wires. But there is no evidence that any metal wires were located near the vessels. All that has been excavated are the vessels themselves.
Second, the copper cylinders inside the jars look exactly like copper cylinders discovered in the ruins of Seleucia, an ancient city located nearby. We know that the copper cylinders from Seleucia were used for holding scrolls of sacred texts, not for generating electricity. Since the cylinders found with the jars have the same shape, it is very likely they were used for holding scrolls as well. That no scrolls were found inside the jars can be explained by the fact that the scrolls simply disintegrated over the centuries.
Finally, what could ancient people have done with the electricity that the vessels were supposed to have generated? They had no devices that relied on electricity. As batteries, the vessels would have been completely useless to them.
The reading and the lecture is about a set of clay jars excavated from a village during the railroad construction two years ago. The author of the reading feels that these copper cylinders cannot be an ancient battery and presents three claims. However, the lecture challenges the claim made by the author. He presents the opinion that these vessel could be ancient battery.
To begin with the author, the author argues that there was no any electric conductor such as metal wires around the vessels. The specific argument made by author is challenged by the lecturer stating that these excavation were conducted by the villagers not the expert or the archaeologist. According to him, the villagers might have not recognized or overlooked the metallic wires.
The author compares the cylinder with the copper cylinder which looks similar to one that is discovered in the ruins of Seleucia. Furthermore the author adds that this type of tool was used to hold the sacred text. Although the lectures agree that the instrument might have been originally designed and built to keep the scroll , he claims that its use was later modified and it was used to generate the electricity.
The author at the last claims that there were no any devices that could be run through electricity. However, the lecturer disagree with the claims and states that this might have been used as an invisible or the magical power using the shock or the flash of the spark. He further adds this might have been used to heal the ache and pain using the shock as the modern doctor use the electric current.
At the last, the lecturer doubts the points forwarded by the author regarding the copper vessel and provides his explanation to prove that those excavated jar were traditionally used to produce electricity.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 337, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this vessel' or 'these vessels'?
Suggestion: this vessel; these vessels
...he author. He presents the opinion that these vessel could be ancient battery. To begin...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 60, Rule ID: NOW[2]
Message: Did you mean 'now' (=at this moment) instead of 'no' (negation)?
Suggestion: now
...uthor, the author argues that there was no any electric conductor such as metal wi...
^^
Line 5, column 206, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this excavation' or 'these excavations'?
Suggestion: this excavation; these excavations
...challenged by the lecturer stating that these excavation were conducted by the villagers not the...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 131, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Furthermore,
...is discovered in the ruins of Seleucia. Furthermore the author adds that this type of tool ...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 328, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...ly designed and built to keep the scroll , he claims that its use was later modifi...
^^
Line 13, column 47, Rule ID: NOW[2]
Message: Did you mean 'now' (=at this moment) instead of 'no' (negation)?
Suggestion: now
...thor at the last claims that there were no any devices that could be run through e...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
furthermore, however, if, look, regarding, such as, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 10.4613686534 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 30.3222958057 102% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1502.0 1373.03311258 109% => OK
No of words: 303.0 270.72406181 112% => OK
Chars per words: 4.95709570957 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.17215713816 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.50275990318 2.5805825403 97% => OK
Unique words: 155.0 145.348785872 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.511551155116 0.540411800872 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 460.8 419.366225166 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.8233932497 49.2860985944 89% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.285714286 110.228320801 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.6428571429 21.698381199 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.64285714286 7.06452816374 66% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 4.19205298013 143% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.169007896283 0.272083759551 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0639964188018 0.0996497079465 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.087925403177 0.0662205650399 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0996758145253 0.162205337803 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0705710721891 0.0443174109184 159% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.8 13.3589403974 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 53.8541721854 109% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.49 12.2367328918 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.91 8.42419426049 94% => OK
difficult_words: 62.0 63.6247240618 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 Out of 30
---------------------
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.