My (almost) first essay

Hello! I am starting to use this website, so please tell me if something is wrong.

I would like you to look through my essay and point out grammar mistakes. And maybe there are some ways to make my text more fluent and enjoyable for reading.

This is my first essay which I wrote during preparing for TOEFL exam.

The reading text claims that the famous Chevalier's memoirs, despite they provide important historical information, are questioned to be accurate by critics. They suppose that author used artificial situations, which were not real, to make his text enjoyable for readers. In contrast to the reading fragment, the lecturer convinces us with the opposite. She gives 3 particular proofs of possible accuracy for cases given in the reading.

First of all, the lecturer tells about the wealth of Chevalier while he has been in Switzerland. It is stated in the text, that Chevalier wrote in his memoirs, that he was a rich person in Switzerland and spent a lot of money on parties and gambling. But at the same time there are historical evidences that he borrowed money from local merchant. The lecturer pays attention to that being rich does not always mean to have a lot of money as they are. The wealth can be counted in terms of property. And it could possibly be that Chevalier, thirsting for parties and gambling, had to convert property into money by selling things. This process usually takes up to to several days to be done. So, Chevalier indeed could borrow money but only because he needed money immediately. This in turn does not mean that he was poor.

The second thing, pointed out in the lecture, is his conversation with Voltair. While text says, that critics suppose that it is impossible to write each word from the conversation correctly, if it was held several years ago, the lecturer pays attention to the fact that Chevalier made small notes after each meeting with Voltair. So, writing his memoirs, he just referred to those notes. This statement can be proved by witnesses.

Finally, the lecturer also discuss the situation around his escape from the prison in Venice. She points out that there were more influential people in that prison and none of them escaped with help of their friends. Furthermore, lecturer says that there are government documents that say that after Chevalier’s escape the ceiling in the prison cell had to be repared. So, if there was no escape, why had the ceiling to be repaired?

So, according to the lecture, the Chevalier’s memoirs can indeed be correct from historical point of view.

When I was writing it, I was sure that everything was ok (though it could possible be written in a better way, but it wasn't due to the lack of time), but looking at the text now I have some doubts about its accuracy. In particular, phrases like

there are historical evidences that he borrowed money

confuse me - are they grammatically correct? Or should it be like

there are historical evidences that support the fact that (in favor of the fact that) he borrowed money

Also I have doubts about this:

The second thing, pointed out in the lecture, is his conversation with Voltair

It that correct? Or the only possible way of writing in situations of this type is the following

The second thing that was pointed out in the lecture was his conversation with Voltair?

I learned grammar while I was at school, but the problem is that usually only simple and typical situations are considered. In native language, as it seems to me, there is more fluency and subtleties. Probably I could read more about it somewhere...

Thank you in advance!