Hi everyone, i'm applying for an Mba at ESSEC business school Paris next september and i need to practis my writing skills, any comment, advice will be appreciated !
Please find bellow one of my first essay.
As long as the pyramid and the sphinx are not going to move, Egypt doesn't have to worry about seeing them expatriated, therefore for more transportable items, the question of remaining them in their original country is more complex. Their is a part of truth in both sentences, but i can't agree with the global meaning. I will first treat the importance of country to owe and keep their own treasures and then adding some variable to my reflexion which advice more to open the frontier for the archaeological treasures.
First of all, excepting the fact that an elderly item discovered on some place doesn't necessarily belong originally to that place, indeed quiet a lot of the jewels found in the Egyptian's pyramid grave were actually some war trophies stolen from sub-Saharan's kings, most of the time this kind of item belongs to the history of the country. Part of the heritage, all those treasure should basically stay in each country and used in museum to retrace the past and explain how ancestors were leaving at that time.
Therefore, and at that point i completely disagree with the second idea of the statement, the rescue of those treasures is primordial, what would have become all the paint that we can admire in the Louvres if they where stay on average budget museum without any money to restore and take care about ? Although, historical items need to be accessible for a maximum of people, keeping them on different places decrease the chance they have to be known. Then i would affirm that it rather be an expatriate treasure than a not maintained one.
To conclude i would say that even if every part of the history, especially archaeological treasure, need to be in the place where they can be kept in the best way, in order for them to last, it's important to respect the origin of those pieces and taking care about passing history.
Please find bellow one of my first essay.
As long as the pyramid and the sphinx are not going to move, Egypt doesn't have to worry about seeing them expatriated, therefore for more transportable items, the question of remaining them in their original country is more complex. Their is a part of truth in both sentences, but i can't agree with the global meaning. I will first treat the importance of country to owe and keep their own treasures and then adding some variable to my reflexion which advice more to open the frontier for the archaeological treasures.
First of all, excepting the fact that an elderly item discovered on some place doesn't necessarily belong originally to that place, indeed quiet a lot of the jewels found in the Egyptian's pyramid grave were actually some war trophies stolen from sub-Saharan's kings, most of the time this kind of item belongs to the history of the country. Part of the heritage, all those treasure should basically stay in each country and used in museum to retrace the past and explain how ancestors were leaving at that time.
Therefore, and at that point i completely disagree with the second idea of the statement, the rescue of those treasures is primordial, what would have become all the paint that we can admire in the Louvres if they where stay on average budget museum without any money to restore and take care about ? Although, historical items need to be accessible for a maximum of people, keeping them on different places decrease the chance they have to be known. Then i would affirm that it rather be an expatriate treasure than a not maintained one.
To conclude i would say that even if every part of the history, especially archaeological treasure, need to be in the place where they can be kept in the best way, in order for them to last, it's important to respect the origin of those pieces and taking care about passing history.
