The savage is in accord with this view on one point only. He has the primitive7 joy of battle in him; but he cares nothing for right or wrong, and his military power is exerted either wantonly, or with the object of plunder8 and domination. So long as he gratifies his selfish instincts, he does not care what happens to the rest of the human race, or to human nature. Civilised men have for centuries laid down rules of war,162 that human industry and human society might suffer only such damage as could not be avoided in the exercise of armed force; and above all, that human nature might not be corrupted9 by acts done or suffered in brutal10 violation of it. These rules of chivalry11 were not always kept, but by civilised nations they have never been broken without shame and repentance12. Savage races sometimes have a rudimentary tradition of the kind—the less savage they. But, in general, they have a brute13 courage and a brute ferocity, without mercy or law; and the worst of all are those who, living in community with races of merciful and law-abiding ideals, have themselves never been touched by the spirit of chivalry, and have ended by making the repudiation14 of it into a national religion of their own.
It has long been a recognised characteristic of the British stock, all over the world, to regard a stout15 opponent with generous admiration16, even with a feeling of fellowship; and to deal kindly17 with him when defeated. But this chivalry of feeling and conduct, now so widespread among us, is a spiritual inheritance and derived19, not from our Teutonic ancestors, but from our conquest by French civilisation20. It has never been shared by the Germans, or shown in any of their wars. Froissart remarked, five and a half centuries ago, on the difference between the French and English knights21, who played their limited game of war with honour and courtesy, and the Germans, who had neither of those qualities. A century later, it is recorded of Bayard—‘Le chevalier sans peur et sans reproche’—that whenever he was serving in an army with a German contingent22, he was careful to stay in billets till they had marched out, because of their habit of burning, when163 they left, the houses where they had found hospitality. In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries their barbarity was unbounded; the Thirty Years’ War was the lasting23 shame of Europe, and the Sack of Magdeburg a final example of the triumph of the wild swine in man. In the eighteenth century, Prussia produced a grotesque24 anticipation25 of Zulu ideals, and called its chief Frederick the Great. In the Napoleonic wars, the cruelty of his German allies disgusted the Iron Duke, who had commanded many ruffians and seen some appalling26 days of horror. In our own time, we have witnessed the brutal attacks on Denmark and Austria, the treachery of the Ems telegram, and the development of Bismarck’s blood-and-iron policy into the complete Machiavellism of Wilhelm II and his confederates. It is not a new character, the German; it is an old one, long inherited. Nemo repente fit Tirpissimas. If anyone doubts this, or wishes to doubt it, let him look through the criminal statistics of the German Government for the ten years preceding the War, and read the book of Professor Aschaffenburg, the chief criminologist of Germany, published in 1913. He will there find it stated and proved, that the most violent and abominable forms of crime were then prevalent in Germany, to a degree beyond all our experience—beyond all imagination of what was possible in a human community—and that the honest and patriotic27 writer himself regarded this ever-rising tide of savagery28, among the younger generation, as ‘a serious menace to the moral stability of Europe.’ It is against this younger generation, with these old vices29, that we have had to defend ourselves; and now that we have beaten them, now that the time has come when, if they had164 been clean fighters and fellow-men, every British hand would have been ready for their grip, we can but hold back with grave and temperate30 anger, and the recollection that we have first to safeguard the new world from those who have desolated31 and defiled32 the old.
Anger it must still be, however grave and temperate. Look at the conduct of the War, and especially at the conduct of the submarine war, as coolly and scientifically as you can, you will not find it possible to separate the purely33 military from the moral aspect. Technically34, the Germans were making trial of a new weapon which it was difficult to use effectively under the old rules. They quickly determined35, not to improve or adapt the weapon, but to abandon the rules. For this they were rightly condemned36 by the only powerful neutral opinion remaining in the world. But they not only broke the law, they broke it in German fashion. Their lawlessness, if skilfully37 carried out with the natural desire to avoid unnecessary suffering, might have been reduced to an almost technical breach38, involving little or no loss of life. But they chose instead to exhibit to the world, present and to come, the spectacle of a whole Service practising murder under deliberate orders; and adding strokes of personal cruelty hitherto known only among madmen or merciless barbarians39. Finally—and this concerns our future intercourse40 even more nearly—the German people at home, a nation haughtily41 claiming pre-eminence in all virtue42, moral and intellectual, accepted every order of their ruling caste, and applauded every act of their hordes43 in the battle, however abhorrent44 to sane45 human feeling. In all this, we need make no accusations46 of our own; we have only to set out the facts, and the words with which the165 German people and their teachers received them and rejoiced in them.
It was towards the end of 1914 that the German Admiralty conceived the idea of blockading the British Isles47 by means of a submarine fleet. There were, as we have already seen, great difficulties in the way. For the pursuit and capture of commerce, a submarine is not nearly so well fitted as an ordinary cruiser; is not, in fact, well fitted at all. To hold up and examine a ship on the surface is too dangerous a venture for a frail48 boat with a very small crew; to put a prize crew on board, and send the captured vessel49 into port, is generally impossible. As an exception, and in case of extreme necessity, it has always been recognised that a prize may be sunk, if the crew and passengers are safely provided for; but this proviso, too, is almost impossible for a submarine to fulfil. Besides these technical difficulties, there was also the danger of offending neutral powers, especially if their ships were to be sunk without evidence that they were carrying contraband50.
Under the advice of Grand Admiral von Tirpitz, it was decided51 to defy all these risks and difficulties. The question was asked by him, just before Christmas 1914, ‘What would America say, if Germany should declare a submarine war against all enemy trading vessels52?’ and on February 4, 1915, a formal proclamation followed from Berlin. This announced that the waters round Great Britain and Ireland were held to be a war-region, and that from February 18 ‘every enemy merchant-vessel found in this region will be destroyed, without its always being possible to warn the crews or passengers of the dangers threatening.’
166 No civilised Power had ever before threatened to murder non-combatants in this fashion; but there was even worse to come—the seamen53 of nations not at war at all were to take their chance of death with the rest. ‘Neutral ships will also incur54 danger in the war-region, where, in view of the misuse55 of neutral flags ordered by the British Government, and incidents inevitable56 in sea warfare57, attacks intended for hostile ships may affect neutral ships also.’ No ‘misuse of neutral flags’ has ever been ordered by our Government. The destruction of a merchant-vessel or liner without warning or search, is not an incident ‘inevitable in sea warfare’; it is an incident always avoided in any sea warfare except that waged by barbarians.
A fortnight later the sinkings began; and on March 9 three ships were torpedoed59, without warning, in one day. In the case of one of these, the Tangistan, 37 men were killed or drowned out of the 38 on board. On March 15 the stewardess60 and five men of the Fingal were drowned. And on the 27th the crew of the Aguila were fired upon while launching their boats; three were killed and several more wounded. On the 28th, the Elder-Dempster liner, the Falaba, from Liverpool to South Africa, was stopped and torpedoed in cold blood. As the crew and passengers sank, the Germans looked on from the deck of the U-boat, laughing and jeering61 at their struggling victims, of whom 111 perished. ‘The sinking of the Falaba,’ said the New York Times, ‘is perhaps the most shocking crime of the War.’
It did not long remain unsurpassed. In April, the German Embassy at Washington publicly advertised that vessels flying the flag of Great Britain or her allies were liable to destruction, and that travellers167 sailing in them would do so at their own risk. Intending travellers smiled at this outrageous63 threat and went on booking their passages to Europe. Even when those about to sail in the huge liner Lusitania received anonymous64 telegrams, warning them that the ship would be sunk, no one believed that the Government of a great Power could seriously intend such a crime. Not a single berth65 was countermanded66, and, on May 1, the Lusitania sailed from New York, carrying, besides her crew of 651, no less than 1,255 passengers.
On the morning of Friday, May 7, she made her landfall on the Irish coast. The sea was dangerously calm; but Captain Turner, wishing ‘to reach the bar at Liverpool at a time when he could proceed up the river without stopping to pick up a pilot,’ reduced speed to 18 knots, holding on the ordinary course. At 2 P.M. the Lusitania passed the Old Head of Kinsale; at 2.15 she was torpedoed without warning, and without a submarine having been sighted by anyone on board. Her main steam-pipe was cut, and her engines could not be stopped; she listed heavily to starboard, and while she was under way it was very difficult to launch the boats. At 2.36 she went down, and of the 1,906 souls on board, 1,134 went down with her, only 772 being saved in the boats which got clear.
This was, for the German Government and the German Navy, an unparalleled disgrace. The German nation had still the chance of repudiating67 such a crime. But they knew no reason for repudiating it; it was congenial to their long-established character, and differed only in concentrated villainy from the countless68 murders and brutalities which had troubled the criminologists before the War. The German people168 adopted the crime as their own act, and celebrated69 it with universal joy. ‘The news,’ said the well-known K?lnische Zeitung, ‘will be received by the German people with unanimous satisfaction, since it proves to England and the whole world, that Germany is quite in earnest in regard to her submarine warfare.’ The K?lnische Volkszeitung, a prominent Roman Catholic and patriotic paper, was even more delighted. ‘With joyful70 pride we contemplate71 this latest deed of our Navy, and it will not be the last.’ The two words ‘joyful’ and ‘pride’ are here the mark of true savagery. Only savages72 could be joyful over the horrible death of a thousand women, children, and non-combatants; only savages could feel pride in the act, for it was in no way a difficult or dangerous feat18. But this half-witted wickedness is clearly recognised in Germany as the national ideal. In the midst of the general exultation73, when medals were being struck, holidays given to school children, and subscriptions74 got up for the ‘heroic’ crew of the U-boat, Pastor75 Baumgarten preached on the ‘Sermon on the Mount,’ and gave his estimate of the German character in these words: ‘Whoever cannot prevail upon himself to approve, from the bottom of his heart, the sinking of the Lusitania—whoever cannot conquer his sense of the gigantic cruelty to countless perfectly76 innocent victims, and give himself up to honest delight at this victorious77 exploit of German defensive78 power—him we judge to be no true German.’
‘It will not be the last.’ The threat was soon made good. On August 9, of the same year, the White Star liner Arabic, one day out from Liverpool, was 60 miles from the Irish coast when she sighted the ss.169 Dunsley in a sinking condition. She naturally steered79 towards her; but as she approached, a submarine suddenly appeared from behind the Dunsley and torpedoed the Arabic without a moment’s warning. Boats were got out, but the ship sank in eight minutes and 30 lives were lost out of 424.
In both these cases the Germans, feeling that their joy and pride were not exciting the sympathy of neutral nations, afterwards tried to justify80 themselves by asserting that our liners carried munitions81 of war. This was obviously impossible in the case of the Arabic, which was bound from England to America. With regard to the Lusitania, an inquiry83 was held by Judge Julius Meyer of the Federal District Court of New York, who found that the Lusitania did not carry explosives, and added: ‘The evidence presented has disposed, without question and for all time, of any false claims brought forward to justify this inexpressibly cowardly attack on an unarmed passenger steamer.’
The year closed with the torpedoing84, again without warning, on December 30, of the P. and O. liner Persia, from London to Bombay. She sank in five minutes, and out of a total of 501 on board, 335 were lost with her. Four of her boats were picked up after having been thirty hours at sea.
The year 1916 was a not less proud one for Germany; but it was distinctly less joyful. The American people took a fundamentally different view of war, especially of war at sea, and they began to express the difference forcibly. The German Government, after months of argument, was driven to make a show of withdrawing from the most extreme position. They admitted, on February 9, 1916, that their method was wrong where170 it involved danger to neutrals, and they offered to pay a money compensation for their American victims. They also repeated the pledge they had already given, and broken, that unarmed merchantmen should not be sunk without warning, and unless the safety of the passengers and crew could be assured; provided that the vessels did not try to escape or resist. This again is a purely savage line of thought; no civilised man could seriously claim that he was justified85 in killing86 unarmed non-combatants or neutrals by the mere87 fact of their running away from him. As for the ‘safety of passengers and crew,’ we shall see presently how that was ‘assured.’
But it matters little how the pledge was worded; it was never intended to be kept. Only six weeks after it was given, it was cruelly broken once more. On March 24, 1916, the French passenger steamer Sussex, carrying 270 women and children, and 110 other passengers, from Folkestone to Dieppe, was torpedoed without warning as she was approaching the French coast. Many were killed or severely88 injured by the explosion, others were drowned in getting out the boats. There were twenty-five Americans on board, and their indignation was intense; for the ship was unarmed, and carried no munitions or war stores of any kind. Nor, as President Wilson pointed89 out, did she follow the route of the transports or munition82 ships. She was simply a well-known passenger steamer, and eighty of her company on board were murdered in cold blood by pirates.
The President went on to say that the German Government ‘has failed to appreciate the seriousness of the situation which has arisen, not only out of the171 attack on the Sussex but out of the whole method and character of submarine warfare as they appear in consequence of the practice of indiscriminate destruction of merchantmen, by commanders of German submarines. The United States Government,’ he continued, ‘has adopted a very patient attitude, and at every stage of this painful experience of tragedy upon tragedy, has striven to be guided by well-considered regard for the extraordinary circumstances of an unexampled war.... To its pain, it has become clear to it that the standpoint which it adopted from the beginning is inevitably90 right—namely, that the employment of submarines for the destruction of enemy trade is of necessity completely irreconcilable91 with the principles of humanity, with the long existing, undisputed rights of neutrals, and with the sacred privileges of non-combatants.’
This note touches the real point, and settles it; until the submarine is as powerfully armed and armoured, and manned with as large a crew as a cruiser of the ordinary kind, it is not a ship which can be used for the general purposes of blockade by any civilised nation. And it may be added that, even if the Germans had possessed92 submarines of a suitable kind, they could not have brought their prizes into port, because our Fleet and not theirs had the control of the seas. As it was, they pretended once more to submit, and gave nominal93 orders that merchant-vessels ‘shall not be sunk without warning and without saving human lives, unless these vessels attempt to escape or offer resistance.’
It was not intended that this third promise should be kept; there were other ways of evading94 the issue.172 The Rappahannock, a ship which sailed with a crew of 37, from Halifax, on October 17, 1916, was never heard of again, except in the wireless95 message by which the German Admiralty reported her destruction. The plan of sinking without a trace was first officially recommended by Count Luxburg, the German diplomatic agent in the Argentine; but the German Professor Flamm, of Charlottenburg, has also the honour of having proposed it in the paper Die Woche. ‘The best would be if destroyed neutral ships disappeared without leaving a trace, and with everything on board, because terror would very quickly keep seamen and travellers away from the danger zones, and thus save a number of lives.’ No doubt the Rappahannock was ‘spurlos versenkt’; so was the North Wales, and so were many others meant to be. The German method, in 1916, was to torpedo58 the ship, and then shell the survivors96 in their open boats. This was done in the cases of the Kildare and the Westminster, both sunk in the Mediterranean97; but on neither occasion were the pirates successful in killing the whole of the crew, and their crime was therefore known and doubly execrated98 by the whole civilised world. None the less, they continued the hideous99 practice, and in the following eight months fired upon the helpless survivors of at least twelve ships, enumerated100 with authentic101 details in a list published by the Times on August 20, 1917.
On the whole, the year 1916 was a difficult one for the German people. The objections of America to the practice of piracy102 were becoming uncomfortably urgent; promises had to be made under compulsion, and the ‘joyful pride’ of the nation would have been much173 diminished if it had not been reinforced by two successes of a new kind. On March 17, 1916, the Russian hospital ship Portugal was torpedoed off the Turkish coast in the Black Sea. She carried no wounded, but had on board a large crew and a staff of Red Cross nurses and orderlies. It was a clear morning, the ship was flying the Red Cross flag, and had a Red Cross conspicuously103 painted on every funnel104; but she was deliberately105 destroyed, with 85 of those on board, including 21 nurses and 24 other members of the Red Cross staff. On November 21, a British hospital ship, the Britannic, was sunk in the same way. She was a huge vessel, and had on board 1,125 people, of whom 25 were doctors, 76 nurses, and 399 medical staff. The outrage62 was said by the Germans to be justified by ‘the suspicion of the misuse of the hospital ship for purposes of transport.’ This suspicion was wholly unfounded, and the submarine commander had taken no steps to enquire106 into the truth.
In 1917 and 1918, the ‘proudest’ and most ‘joyful’ period in the short history of the German Navy, there was no longer any need for the humiliation107 of excuses. On January 31, 1917, Germany proclaimed her intention of sinking at sight every ship found in the waters around the British Isles and the coast of France, or in the Mediterranean Sea. It was at the same time announced—quite falsely—that the German Government had conclusive108 proof of the misuse of hospital ships for the transport of munitions and troops, and that therefore the traffic of hospital ships within certain areas ‘would no longer be tolerated.’ President Wilson dealt promptly109 with this infamous110 proclamation. On February 3, he told Congress that he had severed174 diplomatic relations between America and Germany; on April 6, he formally declared war.
The savages were now entirely111 free to take their own way, and they took it. On the night of March 20, 1917, the hospital ship Asturias, steaming with all navigating112 lights, and with all the proper Red Cross signs brilliantly illuminated113, was torpedoed and sunk without warning. Of the medical staff on board, 14 were lost, including one nurse, and of the ship’s company 29, including one stewardess. On March 30, the Gloucester Castle was torpedoed without warning, but her wounded were all got off in safety. On April 17, the Donegal and the Lanfranc were both sunk while bringing wounded to British ports. In the Donegal, 29 wounded were lost, and 12 of the crew. The Lanfranc carried, besides 234 British wounded and a medical staff of 52, a batch114 of wounded German prisoners to the number of 167, including officers. ‘The moment the torpedo struck the Lanfranc,’ wrote a British officer on board, ‘the Prussians made a mad rush for the life-boats. One of their officers came up to a boat close to which I was standing115. I shouted to him to go back, whereupon he stood and scowled116, “You must save us.” I told him to wait his turn. Other Prussians showed their cowardice117 by dropping on their knees and imploring118 pity. Some cried “Kamarad,” as they do on the battle-field. I allowed none of them to pass me.... In these moments, while wounded Tommies lay in their cots unaided, the Prussian moral dropped to zero. Our cowardly prisoners made another crazy effort to get into a life-boat. They managed to crowd into one—it toppled over. The Prussians were thrown into the water, and they fought with each other in order175 to reach another boat containing a number of gravely wounded British soldiers.... The behaviour of our own lads I shall never forget!’—but there is no need to tell that part of the story; it is old, centuries old, and is repeated unfailingly whenever a British ship goes down.
In July 1917, a new type of ‘heroic deed’ was added to the ‘proud and joyful’ list. At 8 P.M., on July 31, the Belgian Prince was torpedoed without warning; the crew escaped in three boats. The submarine then ordered the boats to come alongside, took the master on board and sent him below. ‘Then,’ says Mr. Thomas Bowman, chief engineer, ‘all the crew and officers were ordered aboard, searched, and the life-belts taken off most of the crew and thrown overboard. I may add, during this time the Germans were very abusive towards the crew. After this the German sailors got into the two life-boats, threw the oars119, bailers, and gratings overboard, took out the provisions and compasses, and then damaged the life-boats with an axe120. The small boat was left intact, and five German sailors got into her and went towards the (sinking) ship. When they boarded her, they signalled to the submarine with a flash-lamp, and then the submarine cast the damaged life-boats adrift and steamed away from the ship for about two miles, after which he stopped. About 9 P.M. the submarine dived, and threw everybody in the water without any means of saving themselves.’
Mr. Bowman swam till daylight, and was picked up by a chance patrol-boat. The only other survivors were a man named Silessi, and an American named Snell, who had succeeded in hiding a life-belt under his overcoat.
176 The intention here was, of course, that the Belgian Prince should be ‘spurlos versenkt’; and in other cases the same result was aimed at by ramming121 and sinking the boats with the shipwrecked men in them. The crews of the French steamers Lyndiane and Zumaya were destroyed in this way in the summer of 1918; and on June 27 the case of the Llandovery Castle marked, perhaps, the highest pitch of German ‘pride.’ This hospital ship was torpedoed and sunk without warning, though she was showing all her distinguishing lights. After she had gone down, the pirate commander took his U-boat on a smashing-up cruise among the survivors; and by hurling122 it hither and thither123, he succeeded in ramming and sinking all the boats and rafts except one, which escaped. The survivors in this boat heard the sound of gunfire behind them for some time; it can only be conjectured124 that the murderers were finishing their work with shrapnel. The number of those cruelly done to death in this massacre125 was 244.
The deeds here enumerated form a small but characteristic part of the German submarine record. The total number of women, children, and non-combatants, murdered in the course of the U-boat blockade, is more than seventeen thousand. It has been a failure as a blockade; nine million tons of British, and six million of allied126 and neutral shipping127 have been sunk; but the U-boats have never, for a day, held the control of the sea. The policy was a device of savages, and of a nation of savages. There is no escape from this charge; for the policy was approved and deliberately adopted, by the representatives of the whole German people, with the exception only of the few despised177 and detested128 Minority Socialists130. In October 1918, Herr Haase testified in the Reichstag: ‘Most of the Parties are now trying to get away from the accentuated131 submarine war ... in reality all the Parties, except the Socialist129 Minority, share the guilt132. The first resolution in favour of submarine war was drafted by all the leaders, including Herr Scheidemann and Herr Ebert. The accentuation of submarine warfare was a natural consequence. You Socialists are also guilty because, to the very last, you gave the old regime the credits for carrying on the War.’
The Germans do not yet realise the crime they confess; they have corrupted one of the oldest and noblest bonds in human life—the brotherhood133 of ‘them that go down to the sea in ships, and have their business in great waters.’ And this they have done because they are, by nature, not seamen but savages.
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
savage
|
|
| adj.野蛮的；凶恶的，残暴的；n.未开化的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
lamentable
|
|
| adj.令人惋惜的，悔恨的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
aggression
|
|
| n.进攻，侵略，侵犯，侵害 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
abominable
|
|
| adj.可厌的，令人憎恶的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
violation
|
|
| n.违反(行为)，违背(行为)，侵犯 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
attain
|
|
| vt.达到，获得，完成 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
primitive
|
|
| adj.原始的；简单的；n.原(始)人，原始事物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
plunder
|
|
| vt.劫掠财物，掠夺；n.劫掠物，赃物；劫掠 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
corrupted
|
|
| （使）败坏( corrupt的过去式和过去分词 )； （使）腐化； 引起（计算机文件等的）错误； 破坏 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
brutal
|
|
| adj.残忍的，野蛮的，不讲理的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
chivalry
|
|
| n.骑士气概，侠义；（男人）对女人彬彬有礼，献殷勤 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
repentance
|
|
| n.懊悔 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
brute
|
|
| n.野兽，兽性 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
repudiation
|
|
| n.拒绝；否认；断绝关系；抛弃 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
admiration
|
|
| n.钦佩，赞美，羡慕 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
kindly
|
|
| adj.和蔼的，温和的，爽快的；adv.温和地，亲切地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
feat
|
|
| n.功绩；武艺，技艺；adj.灵巧的，漂亮的，合适的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
derived
|
|
| vi.起源；由来；衍生；导出v.得到( derive的过去式和过去分词 )；（从…中）得到获得；源于；（从…中）提取 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
civilisation
|
|
| n.文明，文化，开化，教化 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
knights
|
|
| 骑士； （中古时代的）武士( knight的名词复数 )； 骑士； 爵士； （国际象棋中）马 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
contingent
|
|
| adj.视条件而定的；n.一组，代表团，分遣队 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
lasting
|
|
| adj.永久的，永恒的；vbl.持续，维持 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
grotesque
|
|
| adj.怪诞的，丑陋的；n.怪诞的图案，怪人（物） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
anticipation
|
|
| n.预期，预料，期望 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
appalling
|
|
| adj.骇人听闻的，令人震惊的，可怕的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
patriotic
|
|
| adj.爱国的，有爱国心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
savagery
|
|
| n.野性 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
vices
|
|
| 缺陷( vice的名词复数 )； 恶习； 不道德行为； 台钳 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
temperate
|
|
| adj.温和的，温带的，自我克制的，不过分的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
desolated
|
|
| adj.荒凉的，荒废的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
defiled
|
|
| v.玷污( defile的过去式和过去分词 )；污染；弄脏；纵列行进 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
purely
|
|
| adv.纯粹地，完全地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
technically
|
|
| adv.专门地，技术上地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
determined
|
|
| adj.坚定的；有决心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
condemned
|
|
| adj. 被责难的, 被宣告有罪的 动词condemn的过去式和过去分词 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
skilfully
|
|
| adv. (美skillfully)熟练地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
breach
|
|
| n.违反，不履行；破裂；vt.冲破，攻破 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
barbarians
|
|
| n.野蛮人( barbarian的名词复数 )；外国人；粗野的人；无教养的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
intercourse
|
|
| n.性交；交流，交往，交际 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
haughtily
|
|
| adv. 傲慢地, 高傲地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
virtue
|
|
| n.德行，美德；贞操；优点；功效，效力 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
hordes
|
|
| n.移动着的一大群( horde的名词复数 )；部落 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
abhorrent
|
|
| adj.可恶的，可恨的，讨厌的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
sane
|
|
| adj.心智健全的，神志清醒的，明智的，稳健的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
accusations
|
|
| n.指责( accusation的名词复数 )；指控；控告；（被告发、控告的）罪名 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
isles
|
|
| 岛( isle的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
frail
|
|
| adj.身体虚弱的；易损坏的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
vessel
|
|
| n.船舶；容器，器皿；管，导管，血管 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
contraband
|
|
| n.违禁品，走私品 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
decided
|
|
| adj.决定了的，坚决的；明显的，明确的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
vessels
|
|
| n.血管( vessel的名词复数 )；船；容器；（具有特殊品质或接受特殊品质的）人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
seamen
|
|
| n.海员 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
incur
|
|
| vt.招致，蒙受，遭遇 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
misuse
|
|
| n.误用，滥用；vt.误用，滥用 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
inevitable
|
|
| adj.不可避免的，必然发生的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
warfare
|
|
| n.战争(状态)；斗争；冲突 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
torpedo
|
|
| n.水雷，地雷；v.用鱼雷破坏 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
59
torpedoed
|
|
| 用鱼雷袭击（torpedo的过去式与过去分词形式） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
stewardess
|
|
| n.空中小姐，女乘务员 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
jeering
|
|
| adj.嘲弄的，揶揄的v.嘲笑( jeer的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
outrage
|
|
| n.暴行，侮辱，愤怒；vt.凌辱，激怒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
outrageous
|
|
| adj.无理的，令人不能容忍的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
anonymous
|
|
| adj.无名的；匿名的；无特色的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
berth
|
|
| n.卧铺，停泊地，锚位；v.使停泊 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
countermanded
|
|
| v.取消（命令），撤回( countermand的过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
67
repudiating
|
|
| v.（正式地）否认( repudiate的现在分词 )；拒绝接受；拒绝与…往来；拒不履行（法律义务） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
68
countless
|
|
| adj.无数的，多得不计其数的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
69
celebrated
|
|
| adj.有名的，声誉卓著的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
70
joyful
|
|
| adj.欢乐的，令人欢欣的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
71
contemplate
|
|
| vt.盘算，计议；周密考虑；注视，凝视 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
72
savages
|
|
| 未开化的人，野蛮人( savage的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
73
exultation
|
|
| n.狂喜，得意 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
74
subscriptions
|
|
| n.（报刊等的）订阅费( subscription的名词复数 )；捐款；（俱乐部的）会员费；捐助 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
75
pastor
|
|
| n.牧师，牧人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
76
perfectly
|
|
| adv.完美地，无可非议地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
77
victorious
|
|
| adj.胜利的，得胜的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
78
defensive
|
|
| adj.防御的；防卫的；防守的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
79
steered
|
|
| v.驾驶( steer的过去式和过去分词 )；操纵；控制；引导 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
80
justify
|
|
| vt.证明…正当(或有理)，为…辩护 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
81
munitions
|
|
| n.军火，弹药；v.供应…军需品 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
82
munition
|
|
| n.军火；军需品；v.给某部门提供军火 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
83
inquiry
|
|
| n.打听，询问，调查，查问 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
84
torpedoing
|
|
| 用爆破筒爆破 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
85
justified
|
|
| a.正当的，有理的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
86
killing
|
|
| n.巨额利润；突然赚大钱，发大财 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
87
mere
|
|
| adj.纯粹的；仅仅，只不过 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
88
severely
|
|
| adv.严格地；严厉地；非常恶劣地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
89
pointed
|
|
| adj.尖的，直截了当的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
90
inevitably
|
|
| adv.不可避免地；必然发生地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
91
irreconcilable
|
|
| adj.（指人）难和解的，势不两立的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
92
possessed
|
|
| adj.疯狂的；拥有的，占有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
93
nominal
|
|
| adj.名义上的；(金额、租金)微不足道的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
94
evading
|
|
| 逃避( evade的现在分词 )； 避开； 回避； 想不出 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
95
wireless
|
|
| adj.无线的；n.无线电 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
96
survivors
|
|
| 幸存者，残存者，生还者( survivor的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
97
Mediterranean
|
|
| adj.地中海的；地中海沿岸的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
98
execrated
|
|
| v.憎恶( execrate的过去式和过去分词 )；厌恶；诅咒；咒骂 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
99
hideous
|
|
| adj.丑陋的，可憎的，可怕的，恐怖的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
100
enumerated
|
|
| v.列举，枚举，数( enumerate的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
101
authentic
|
|
| a.真的，真正的；可靠的，可信的，有根据的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
102
piracy
|
|
| n.海盗行为，剽窃，著作权侵害 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
103
conspicuously
|
|
| ad.明显地，惹人注目地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
104
funnel
|
|
| n.漏斗；烟囱；v.汇集 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
105
deliberately
|
|
| adv.审慎地；蓄意地；故意地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
106
enquire
|
|
| v.打听，询问；调查，查问 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
107
humiliation
|
|
| n.羞辱 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
108
conclusive
|
|
| adj.最后的，结论的；确凿的，消除怀疑的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
109
promptly
|
|
| adv.及时地，敏捷地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
110
infamous
|
|
| adj.声名狼藉的，臭名昭著的，邪恶的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
111
entirely
|
|
| ad.全部地，完整地；完全地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
112
navigating
|
|
| v.给（船舶、飞机等）引航，导航( navigate的现在分词 )；（从海上、空中等）横越；横渡；飞跃 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
113
illuminated
|
|
| adj.被照明的；受启迪的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
114
batch
|
|
| n.一批(组，群)；一批生产量 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
115
standing
|
|
| n.持续，地位；adj.永久的，不动的，直立的，不流动的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
116
scowled
|
|
| 怒视，生气地皱眉( scowl的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
117
cowardice
|
|
| n.胆小，怯懦 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
118
imploring
|
|
| 恳求的，哀求的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
119
oars
|
|
| n.桨，橹( oar的名词复数 )；划手v.划（行）( oar的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
120
axe
|
|
| n.斧子；v.用斧头砍，削减 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
121
ramming
|
|
| n.打结炉底v.夯实（土等）( ram的现在分词 )；猛撞；猛压；反复灌输 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
122
hurling
|
|
| n.爱尔兰式曲棍球v.猛投，用力掷( hurl的现在分词 )；大声叫骂 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
123
thither
|
|
| adv.向那里；adj.在那边的，对岸的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
124
conjectured
|
|
| 推测，猜测，猜想( conjecture的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
125
massacre
|
|
| n.残杀，大屠杀；v.残杀，集体屠杀 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
126
allied
|
|
| adj.协约国的；同盟国的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
127
shipping
|
|
| n.船运（发货，运输，乘船） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
128
detested
|
|
| v.憎恶，嫌恶，痛恨( detest的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
129
socialist
|
|
| n.社会主义者；adj.社会主义的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
130
socialists
|
|
| 社会主义者( socialist的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
131
accentuated
|
|
| v.重读( accentuate的过去式和过去分词 )；使突出；使恶化；加重音符号于 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
132
guilt
|
|
| n.犯罪；内疚；过失，罪责 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
133
brotherhood
|
|
| n.兄弟般的关系，手中情谊 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |