Hihimaei
Jul 29, 2021
Writing Feedback / Many historical objects lost after wars now are preserved in other countries [2]
Many historical objects were lost after wars by invaders then now are preserved in other countries instead of the mother lands. Although many people may not put much emphasis on whether these objects are displayed, I support the idea that they should belong to their parent country.
Firstly, I believe that historical artifacts are important to their nations, hence they would be more appreciated by citizens in their country of origin. Historical relics represent spiritual values as well as traditions throughout the historical upheavals. For instance, rickshaw, which was taken away by invaders and has recently been brought back to Vietnam, plays a specific role in re-appearing and reflecting feudal society in the Nguyen Dynasty. Therefore, citizens can easily access the history of their country through the stories behind these relics, as a result broaden their knowledge of history. Furthermore, relics have the emotional attachment of citizens in the country where they belong as they can raise the sense of patriotism from each bottom of hearts. Hence, citizens as well as local authorities seem to be more responsible for objects rather than other countries.
Secondly, these objects can help promote the relations among countries. To illustrate, in the past, most of the artifacts in feudalism of Western countries were stolen and commercial traded by invaders. Therefore, it is grateful that the governments of countries that currently keep these antiques have well-preserved them. Moreover, a country can receive great respect and esteem when they return antiques to the country that owned them. In another word, bringing historical objects back to their nation can strengthen the relationships among nations.
In conclusion, I agree that historical objects should be returned to their nations because they help foster the sense of patriotism in people as well as increase the promotion of relations with other countries.
Historical objects should be brought back to their country of origin
Many historical objects were lost after wars by invaders then now are preserved in other countries instead of the mother lands. Although many people may not put much emphasis on whether these objects are displayed, I support the idea that they should belong to their parent country.
Firstly, I believe that historical artifacts are important to their nations, hence they would be more appreciated by citizens in their country of origin. Historical relics represent spiritual values as well as traditions throughout the historical upheavals. For instance, rickshaw, which was taken away by invaders and has recently been brought back to Vietnam, plays a specific role in re-appearing and reflecting feudal society in the Nguyen Dynasty. Therefore, citizens can easily access the history of their country through the stories behind these relics, as a result broaden their knowledge of history. Furthermore, relics have the emotional attachment of citizens in the country where they belong as they can raise the sense of patriotism from each bottom of hearts. Hence, citizens as well as local authorities seem to be more responsible for objects rather than other countries.
Secondly, these objects can help promote the relations among countries. To illustrate, in the past, most of the artifacts in feudalism of Western countries were stolen and commercial traded by invaders. Therefore, it is grateful that the governments of countries that currently keep these antiques have well-preserved them. Moreover, a country can receive great respect and esteem when they return antiques to the country that owned them. In another word, bringing historical objects back to their nation can strengthen the relationships among nations.
In conclusion, I agree that historical objects should be returned to their nations because they help foster the sense of patriotism in people as well as increase the promotion of relations with other countries.
