In 1957 a European silver coin dating to the eleventh century was discovered at a Native American archaeological site in the state of Maine in the United States. Many people believed the coin had been originally brought to North America by European explorers known as the Norse, who traveled across the Atlantic Ocean and came into contact with Native Americans almost a thousand years ago.
However, some archaeologists believe that the coin is not a genuine piece of historical evidence but a historical fake; they think that the coin was placed at the site recently by someone who wanted to mislead the public. There are three main reasons why some archaeologists believe that the coin is not genuine historical evidence.
Great Distance from Norse Settlements
First, the Native American site in Maine where the coin was discovered is located very far from other sites documenting a Norse presence in North America. Remains of Norse settlements have been discovered in far eastern Canada. The distance between the Maine site and the Norse settlements in Canada is more than a thousand kilometers, suggesting the coin has no real connection with the settlements.
No Other Coins Found
A second problem is that no other coins have been found at the Canadian sites that were inhabited by the Norse. This suggests that the Norse did not bring any silver coins with them to their North American settlements.
No Use for European Coins
Third, the Norse who traveled to North America would have understood that silver coins would most likely be useless to them. Silver coins may have been in wide use in Europe at the time, but the Norse, as experienced explorers, would have known that native North Americans did not recognize silver coins as money.
The reading passage mainly states that the silver coins in North America were not dated from Norse. However, the professor in the lecture disagrees the viewpoint of historical fake by refuting each point mentioned in the article.
First, the author contends that it is far away from Maine to Norse. On the other hand, the professor provides the evidence that some natives from North America might travel long distance and bring back coin. That's why the great distance may not be problem because of their traveling behavior.
Second, it is believed by the author that there were no other coins found at the Canadian sites. Nevertheless, the professor suggests that the natives might travel from Norse back to Europe, and while they heading home, they brought all of the silver coins back with them since they were valuable. So it is possible that no other coins left since those coins were travel back to Europe with Norse settlements.
Last but not the least, the author mentions that silver coins would be useless since native north Americans did not view them as money. But the professors explains that although they might not be viewed as money, they can be recognized as unusual objects, such as necklace or jewerly, which can be trade and exchange. Therefore the original hypothesis does not hold water.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 209, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: That's
...avel long distance and bring back coin. Thats why the great distance may not be probl...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 234, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...d while they heading home, they brought all of the silver coins back with them since they ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 319, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...werly, which can be trade and exchange. Therefore the original hypothesis does not hold w...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, may, nevertheless, second, so, therefore, while, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 22.0 30.3222958057 73% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1097.0 1373.03311258 80% => OK
No of words: 221.0 270.72406181 82% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.96380090498 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.85565412703 4.04702891845 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.26740632143 2.5805825403 88% => OK
Unique words: 126.0 145.348785872 87% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.570135746606 0.540411800872 106% => OK
syllable_count: 329.4 419.366225166 79% => 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: 6.0 8.23620309051 73% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.9483641536 49.2860985944 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.7272727273 110.228320801 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.0909090909 21.698381199 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.72727272727 7.06452816374 124% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.191662154623 0.272083759551 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0807589071719 0.0996497079465 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0810662972515 0.0662205650399 122% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.119399672816 0.162205337803 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0419787605539 0.0443174109184 95% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.0 13.3589403974 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 53.8541721854 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.49 12.2367328918 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.42 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 53.0 63.6247240618 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.