Under Tiberius we hear of a general expulsion of the Jews, as afterward7 under Claudius. “Expulsion of Jews” is a term with which later European history has made us familiar. In the case of such expulsions as the Jews suffered in England, France, Spain, and Portugal, we know that the term is literally8 exact. Practically all Jews were in the instances cited compelled to leave the country and settle elsewhere. The expulsion ordered by Tiberius was unquestionably wholly ineffective in practice, since there were many Jews in Rome shortly after, although we have no record that the decree was 305repealed. But it may be questioned whether even in theory it resembled the expulsions of later times.
The facts are given fully9 by Suetonius (Tiberius, 36):
Externas caerimonias Aegyptios Iudaicosque ritus compescuit, coactis qui superstitione ea tenebantur religiosas vestes cum instrumento omni comburere. Iudaeorum iuventutem per speciem sacramenti in provincias gravioris caeli distribuit: reliquos gentis eiusdem vel similia sectantes urbe summovit sub poena perpetuae servitutis nisi obtemperassent.
He checked the spread of foreign rites12, particularly the Egyptian and Jewish. He compelled those who followed the former superstition10 to burn their ritual vestments and all their religious utensils13. The younger Jews he transferred to provinces of rigorous climate under the pretense14 of assigning them to military service. All the rest of that nation, and all who observed its rites, he ordered out of the city under the penalty of being permanently16 enslaved if they disobeyed.
Undoubtedly17 the same incident is mentioned by Tacitus in the Annals (ii. 85), where we hear that “action was taken about the eradication18 of Egyptian and Jewish rites. A senatusconsultum was passed, which transferred four thousand freedmen of military age who were affected19 by this superstition to Sardinia in order to crush brigandage20 there.... The rest were to leave Italy unless they abandoned their impious rites before a certain day.”
Between these two accounts there are discrepancies21 that cannot be cured by the simple process of amalgamating22 the two, as has generally been done. These divergences23 will be treated in detail later. For the present it will be well to compare an independent account, that of Josephus, with the two.
306Josephus (Ant. XVIII. iii. 5) tells us of a Jew, “a thoroughly24 wicked man,” who was forced to flee from Judea for some crime, and with three worthy25 associates supported himself by swindling in Rome. This man persuaded Fulvia, a proselyte of high rank, the wife of a certain Saturninus, to send rich gifts to the temple. The presents so received were used by the four men for themselves. Upon the complaint of Saturninus, “Tiberius ordered all the Jews [π?ν τ? ?ουδα?κ?ν] to be driven from Rome. The consuls26 enrolled27 four thousand of them, and sent them to the island of Sardinia. He punished very many who claimed that their ancestral customs prevented them from serving.” Apart from the incident which, Josephus says, occasioned the expulsion, we have a version here which is not quite in accord with the one either of Tacitus or of Suetonius.
Of these men Josephus is probably the nearest in time to the events he is describing, but also the most remote in comprehension. Besides the story just told, Josephus tells another, in which it is a votary28 of Isis who is deceived, with the connivance29 of the priests of the Egyptian goddess. The two incidents which he relates are placed in juxtaposition30 rather than connection by him, but the mere31 fact that they are told in this way indicates that a connection did exist in the source, written or oral, from which he derived32 them. Josephus does not mention that the Egyptian worship was attacked as well as the Jewish, and indeed he takes pains to suggest that the two incidents were not really connected at all.
307From all these statements, and from the reference that Philo makes in the Legatio ad Gaium,[332] there is very little that we can gather with certainty. This much, however, seems established: an attempt was made to check the spread both of Judaism and of Isis-worship. In this attempt a certain number of Jews were expelled from the city or from Italy. Four thousand soldiers—actual or reputed Jews—were transferred to Sardinia for the same reason. There are certain difficulties, however, in the way of supposing that it really was a general expulsion of all Jews, as Josephus and Suetonius, but not Tacitus, say.
Tacitus’ omission33 to state it, if such a general expulsion took place, is itself a difficulty; but like every argumentum ex silentio, it scarcely permits a valid34 inference. It seems strange, to be sure, that a severe and deserved punishment of the taeterrima gens, “that disgusting race,” should be represented to be something much milder than really was the case. But Tacitus is neither here nor in other places taking pains to cite the decree accurately35, and the omission of even a significant detail may be laid to inadvertence.
But what Tacitus does say cannot be lightly passed over. Four thousand men, libertini generis, “of the freedmen class,” were transferred to Sardinia for military service. All these four thousand were ea superstitione infecti, “tainted with this superstition.” Now, the Jews who formed the community at Rome in the time of Cicero may have been largely freedmen, but their descendants were not classed as libertini generis. 308The phrase is not used in Latin of those who were of servile origin, but solely36 of those who were themselves emancipated37 slaves. There is, however, scarcely a possibility that there could have been at Rome in 19 C.E. so large a body of Jewish freed slaves of military age. There had been no war in recent times from which these slaves could have been derived. We may assume therefore that most, if not all, of these men were freedmen of other nationalities who were converts to Judaism.
This is confirmed by the words ea superstitione infecti, “tainted with this superstition.” These words are meaningless unless they refer to non-Jewish proselytes.[333] Men who were born Jews could not be so characterized. If Tacitus had meant those who were Jews by birth, it is scarcely conceivable that he would have used a phrase that would suggest just the opposite. The words, further, imply that many of these four thousand were rather suspected of Jewish leanings than definitely proselytes. Perhaps they were residents of the districts largely inhabited by Jews, notably38 the Transtiberine region.
Again, to suppose that all the Jews were banished39 by Tiberius involves an assumption as to that emperor’s methods wholly at variance40 with what we know of him. A very large number of Jewish residents in Rome were Roman citizens (Philo, 569 M), and so far from being a meaningless distinction in the early empire, that term through the influence of the rising science of jurisprudence was, in fact, just beginning to have its meaning and implications defined. A wholesale41 expulsion of 309Roman citizens by either an administrative42 act or a senatusconsultum is unthinkable under Tiberius. Exile, in the form of relegation43 or expulsion, was a well-known penalty for crime after due trial and conviction, which in every instance would have to be individual. Even in the Tacitean caricature[334] we find evidence of the strict legality with which Tiberius acted on all occasions. No senatusconsultum could have decreed a general banishment44 for all Jews, whether Roman citizens or not, without contravening45 the fundamental principles of the Roman law.
How thoroughly confused the transmission of this incident had become in the accounts we possess, is indicated in the final sentence from Suetonius: “He ordered them out of the city, under the penalty of being permanently enslaved if they disobeyed.” The very term perpetua servitus, as though there were a limited slavery in Rome at the time, is an absurdity46. It becomes still more so when we recall that slavery, except in the later form of compulsory47 service in the mines and galleys48, was not known as a penalty at Roman law. The state had no machinery49 for turning a freeman into a slave, except by his own will, and then it did so reluctantly. We shall be able to see what lies behind this confusion when we have considered one or two other matters.
The alleged50 expulsion is not mentioned by Philo in the extant fragments. The allusion51 to some oppressive acts of Sejanus (In Flaccum, §11; 1. ii. p. 517 M; and Leg. ad Gaium, § 24. ii. p. 569 M) is not clear. But it is difficult 310to understand the highly eulogistic52 references to Tiberius, then long dead, if a general Jewish expulsion had been ordered by that emperor.
That the senatusconsultum in question was general, and was directed indiscriminately at all foreign religions, appears not merely from the direct statement of Suetonius and Tacitus, and the association of the two stories by Josephus, but also from a reference of Seneca. In his philosophic53 essays, written in the form of letters to his friend Lucilius (108, 22), he says: “I began [under the teaching of Sotion] to abstain54 from animal food.... You ask me when I ceased to abstain. My youth was passed during the first years of Tiberius Caesar’s rule. At that time foreign rites were expelled; but one of the proofs of adherence55 to such a superstition was held to be the abstinence from the flesh of certain animals. At the request of my father, who did not fear malicious56 prosecution57, but hated philosophy, I returned to my former habits.”
The words of Seneca, sacra movebantur, suggest the τ?ν ?ν ?ταλ?? παρακινηθ?ντων of Philo (loc. cit.), “when there was a general agitation58 [against the Jews?] in Italy.” It is further noticeable that the mathematici, i.e. the soothsayers, against whom the Roman laws were at all times severe, were also included in this decree.[335]
SYMBOLS AND INSCRIPTIONS60 FROM JEWISH CATACOMBS AND CEMETERIES61 IN ROME
(From Garrucci)
It has been pointed62 out before (above, p. 242) that the observance of foreign religious rites was never forbidden as such by Roman laws. From the first of the instances, the Bacchanalian63 persecution64 of 186 B.C.E., it was always some definite crime, immorality65 or imposture66, 311that was attacked and of which the rites mentioned were alleged to be the instruments. The “expulsion” of the Isis-worshipers during the republic meant only that certain foreigners were summarily ordered to leave the city, something that the Lex Junia Penni in 83 B.C.E. and the Lex Papia of 65 B.C.E. attempted to enforce, and which the Roman police might do at any time when they thought the public interest demanded it. Roman citizens practising these rites could never be proceeded against, unless they were guilty of one of the crimes these foreign practices were assumed to involve.
The two stories cited by Josephus, one concerning an Isis-worshiper, the other a Jew, may not be true. Whether true or not, the incidents they record surely did not of themselves cause the expulsion of either group. But these are fair samples of the stories that were probably told and believed in Rome, and similar incidents no doubt did occur. The association of the mathematici with the other two makes it probable that the senatusconsultum was directed against fraud, the getting of money under false pretenses68, and that the Jewish, Isiac, and other rites, as well as astrology, were mentioned solely as types of devices to that end.
What actually happened was no doubt that in Rome and in Italy overzealous officials undertook to treat the observance of foreign rites as conclusive71 or at least presumptive evidence of guilt67 under this act. Perhaps, as Philo says, it was one of the instances of Sejanus’ tyranny to do so. But there is no reason to doubt Philo’s express testimony72 that Tiberius promptly73 312checked this excess of zeal70 and enforced the decree as it was intended (loc. cit.): ?? ο?κ ?π? π?ντα? προβ?ση? τ?? ?πεξελε?σεω?, ?λλ’ ?π? μ?νου? το?? α?τ?ου?—?λ?γοι δ? ?σαν—κιν?σαι δ? μηδ?ν ?ξ ?θου?; i.e. “since the prosecution was not directed against all, but only against the guilty, who were very few. Otherwise there was to be no departure from the customary attitude.”
The transference of the four thousand recruits, libertini generis, to Sardinia undoubtedly took place, and was very likely the expression of alarm on the part of Sejanus or Tiberius at the spread of Judaism in Rome. It may well be that the removal of these men was caused rather by the desire to withdraw them from the range of proselytism than by the purpose of allowing them to die in the severe climate of Sardinia. There is as a matter of fact no evidence that Sardinia had a noticeably different climate from that of Italy. It was one of the granaries of the empire.[336]
Perhaps we may reconstitute the decree as follows: The penalty imposed was, for foreigners, expulsion; for Roman citizens, perhaps exile; for freedmen, forfeiture74 of their newly acquired liberty in favor of their former masters or the latter’s heirs. This last fact will explain the statement of Suetonius. Many of the people affected were no doubt freedmen, and several instances where such a penalty was actually inflicted75 would account quite adequately for the words perpetua servitus of Suetonius. The “malicious prosecution,” calumnia, which Seneca asserts his father did not fear, would be based, as against Roman citizens, on the violation76 313of this law against fraudulent practices, of which, as we have seen, the adoption77 of foreign rites would be taken as evidence.
The personal relations between Gaius and the Jewish king Agrippa seemed to guarantee an era of especial prosperity for the Roman Jews. However, the entire principate of that indubitable paranoiac78 was filled with the agitation that attended his attempt to set up his statue at Jerusalem. His death, which Josephus describes in gratifyingly minute detail, brought permanent relief on that point.
It is during the reign1 of his successor Claudius that we hear of another expulsion: Iudaeos impulsore Chresto adsidue tumultuantis Roma expulit (Suet. Claud. 25), “The Jews who engaged in constant riots by the machinations of a certain Chrestus, he expelled from Rome.” It has constantly been stated that this refers to the agitation in the Roman Jewry which the preaching of Christianity aroused. For that, however, there is no sufficient evidence. Jesus, to be sure, is called Chrestus, Χρηστ??, the Upright, in many Christian79 documents.[337] This play upon words is practically unavoidable. But Chrestus is a common name among all classes of society.[338] Jews would be especially likely to bear it, since it was a fairly good rendering80 of such a frequently occurring name as Zadok. The riot in question was no doubt a real enough event, and the expulsion equally real, even if it did not quite imply all that seems to be contained in it.
314If it were a decree of general expulsion of all Jews, it would be strikingly at variance with the edicts in favor of the Jews which Claudius issued, and which are contained in Josephus (Ant. XIX. v.). As in the case of other documents cited here, there is no reason to question the substantial accuracy of their contents, although they are surely not verbatim transcriptions from the records. It is as clearly impossible in the case of Claudius as in that of Tiberius to suppose an arbitrary disregard of law on his part, so that a general ejection of all Jews from the city, including those who were Roman citizens, is not to be thought of.
Neither Tacitus nor Josephus mentions the expulsion. The silence of neither is conclusive, but it lends strong probability to the assumption that the decree cannot have been so radical81 a measure as a general expulsion of all Jews from the city would be. The passage from Suetonius is concerned wholly with acts of Claudius affecting foreigners—non-Romans, i.e. Lycians, Rhodians, Gauls, Germans—and if we keep in mind Suetonius’ habits of composition, it is highly likely that he has put together here all that he found together in his source. We are to understand therefore by the Iudaei of this passage only foreign Jews, which implies that the majority of the Jews were not affected by it at all.
But were even all foreign Jews included? Is there anything in the passage that is not perfectly82 consistent with the assumption that some relatively83 small group of Jews led by a certain Chrestus was ejected from the 315city for disorderly conduct? The silence of the other writers, the total absence of effect on the growth of the Jewish population, would seem to make this after all the simplest meaning of Suetonius’ words.
The fact of the expulsion is confirmed by that passage in the Acts of the Apostles in which the meeting of Paul and Aquila at Corinth is mentioned (Acts xviii. 1, 2): “[Paul] found a certain Jew born in Pontus, lately come from Italy with his wife Priscilla, (because that Claudius had commanded all Jews to depart from Rome).” The testimony is late,[339] but it will be noticed that Aquila is an Asiatic by birth, and so very likely had no legal right of residence at Rome in any circumstances.
Finally, expulsion “from Rome” may have meant only exclusion84 from the pomoerium, the sacral limit of the city that followed an imaginary line not at all coincident with its real walls. To escape from the operation of the decree, it would merely have been necessary to cross the Tiber, where as a matter of fact the Jews generally lived, since the Transtiberine region was not included in the pomoerium. In general, expulsion from the city specified85 that the expelled person might not come within the first milestone86, but in view of the difficulties presented by the assumption of a real expulsion, this supposition may also be considered.
Mention has already been made of the special association of Claudius’ successor, Nero, with the Jews. The success that attended their efforts at propaganda during that emperor’s reign is evidenced by the fact 316that Poppaea Sabina became a semi-proselyte. And during Nero’s reign occurs an event of special importance to the Jews of Rome, the first Christian persecution.
In the reign of Nero, possibly in that of Claudius, there was brought to the various Jewish congregations of the Roman world, seemingly not beyond that, the “good news,” ε?αγγ?λιον, that a certain Jesus, of Nazareth in Galilee, was the long-promised Messiah. To most, perhaps, the facts cited of his life indicated only that he was one of the “many swindlers,” γ?ητε? ?νθρωποι, like those whom Felix captured and put to death (Jos. Ant. XX. viii. 5). But some believed. If we are to credit the Acts of the Apostles, this belief at once produced a bitter conflict between those who did so believe, afterwards called Christians87, and those who did not.[340] But the Acts in the form in which it has come down to us represents a recension of much later date, made when the enmity between Jew and Christian was real and indubitable.
It may be that in certain places those Jews who accepted the evangel almost at once formed congregations of their own, synagogues or ecclesiae (the terms are practically synonymous),[341] different from the synagogues of those who rejected it. But there were from the beginning differences of degree in its acceptance, and even in the existing recension of the Acts there is good evidence that its acceptance or rejection88 did not immediately and everywhere produce a schism90.
317In the city of Rome a persecution of Christians, as distinct from Jews, took place under Nero. That fact is attested by both Suetonius and Tacitus and by the earliest of the Christian writers. Tertullian quotes the commentarii, the official records, for it.
The record as it appears in Suetonius is characteristically different from that in Tacitus. In Suetonius we have a brief statement (Nero, 16): Afflicti suppliciis Christiani, genus hominum superstitionis novae ac maleficae, “Punishment was inflicted upon the Christians, a class of men that maintained a new and harmful form of superstition.” This statement is made as one item, apparently91 of minor92 importance, in the list of Nero’s creditable actions, as Suetonius tells us later (ibid. 19): Haec partim nulla reprehensione, partim etiam non mediocri laude digna, in unum contuli, “These acts, some of which are wholly blameless, while others deserve even considerable approbation93, I have gathered together.” Whether the punishment of the Christians is in the former or the latter class does not appear.
In Tacitus, on the other hand, we have the famous account that Nero sought to divert from himself the suspicion of having set Rome on fire, by fastening it upon those “whom the people hated for their wickedness, the so-called Christians” (Ann. xv. 44). These were torn by dogs, or crucified, or tied to stakes and burned in a coat of pitch to serve as lanterns to the bestially94 cruel emperor. The truth of these stories depends upon the reliability95 of Tacitus in general. They 318have been received with justifiable96 doubt, ever since the quite conscienceless methods of Tacitus’ rhetorical style have been made evident. The last form of punishment, the tunica molesta, has made a particular impression on the ancient and modern world. It is referred to by Seneca, Juvenal, and Martial97, but by none of them associated with the Christians. From the passage in Seneca (Epist. ad Lucil. xiv. 4) it is simply a standard form of cruelty, such as the rack, thumbscrew, and maiden98 of later times. The very fact that the courtier Seneca dares to mention it as a form of saevitia would indicate that it was not used by Seneca’s master, Nero. But what is particularly striking is that Tertullian[342] in his Apology does not mention any cruelties, in the sense of savage99 tortures, inflicted upon the Christians. The context (Apologeticus, § 5) indicates that the punishment was banishment to some penal15 colony, relegatio, a punishment considered capital at law, but still different from the tunica molesta.
But a new element was introduced in the case of the Christians, which, except in the treatment of the Druidic brotherhoods100 among the Gauls, is unusual in Roman methods. It is scarcely possible to read the Apology of Tertullian without being convinced that the profession of Christianity was in and for itself an indictable offense101 at Roman law since the time of Nero, quite apart from the fantastic crimes of which the Christians were held to be guilty.[343] Tertullian undoubtedly had legal training, and his exposition of the logical absurdities102 into which the fact led Roman officials is convincing enough, 319but the fact remains103. The nomen Christianum, “the profession of Christianity,” was considered a form of maiestas, “treason,” and punished capitally. In effect this was an attempt to stamp out a religion, just as Claudius had sought to stamp out the Druids (Suetonius, Claud. 25). (Comp. above, p. 142.)
When Tertullian wrote, perhaps even in the time of Tacitus and Suetonius, the gulf104 between Jew and Christian was wide and impassable. It can hardly have been so in Nero’s time. The statement that Nero’s measures were instigated105 by Jews is a later invention for which there is simply no evidence whatever.[344] The fact that the nomen Christianum was either actually considered treason or partook of the nature of treason, makes it probable that the Messianic idea, which was the very essence of the evangel, was the basis of the Roman statute106. In Judea the special and drastic crushing of every “impostor” has been spoken of, and its significance indicated (above, p. 292). The preaching of Christianity in Rome itself could only have seemed to Nero, or his advisers107, an attempt at propagating, under the guise108 of religion, what had long been considered in the East simple sedition109. While therefore the spread of Judaism, Isis-worship, Mithraism, was offensive, and attempts were made to check it, the spread of Christianity was an increase in crime and was treated as such. Perhaps a partial analogy may be offered in the attitude of conservative Americans to doctrines111 they regard as mischievous112, like Socialism, and to those which are directly criminal, like some forms of organized Anarchism.
320The elaborate scheme of salvation113 prepared by the Cilician Jew Paul[345] gradually gained almost general acceptance among Christians, although in the mother ecclesia at Jerusalem it found determined114 and obstinate115 resistance long after Paul’s death.[346] The fundamental doctrine110, that the Law was not necessarily the way of salvation for any but born Jews, and even for them was of doubtful efficacy, was the direct negation116 of the Pharisaic doctrine that through the Law there was effected immediate89 communion of man with God in this world and the next.
As long as the Christians were merely a heretical Jewish sect, their fortunes affected the whole Jewish community. When their propaganda became, not a supplement to that of the Jews, but its rival, and soon its successful and triumphant117 rival, its history is wholly separated, and the measures that dealt with the Christians and those that concerned the Jews were no longer in danger of being confused. To the Jews the success of the propaganda of Paul seemed to depend on the fact that he had abolished the long and severe ritual of initiation118; he had increased his numbers by decreasing the cost of admission. So we find, shortly after the destruction of the temple, R. Nehemiah ben ha-Kannah asserting (Ab. iii. 6) that to discard the yoke119 of the Law was to assume the yoke of the kingdom and of the world; i.e. so far from making the path to unworldliness easier, it laid insuperable obstacles in the way. The statement is applicable to Jews of lax observance, but it seems particularly applicable to the Pauline Christians, who 321had not merely lightened the load, but deliberately120 and ex professo wholly discarded it.
Outside of the references that give us certain data about the external history of the Roman Jewish community of the first century, we have other data of a wholly different sort, data that allow of a more intimate glimpse into its actual life. They are furnished us by the Roman satirists, whose literary labors121 have scarcely an analogue122 in our days. Satire123 itself was assumed to be a Roman genre124.[347] Whether or not it was of Roman invention, the miscellanies that have given us so many and such vivid pictures of ancient life are known to us wholly in Latin. It is safe to say that if satirists such as Horace, Persius, Juvenal, and Martial had not come down to us, ancient history would be a vastly bleaker125 province than it is.
Of Horace and his representation of Jewish life we have already spoken. It will be remembered that the one aspect which earned for the Jews his none too respectful raillery was their eager proselytism. And it is excellent evidence of how important this proselytism was in the Jewish life of the time, that in the two generations that stretched from Nero to Nerva the same aspect is present to men of such diverse types as Persius and Juvenal.
With Persius we enter a wholly different stratum126 of society from that of Horace and, as we shall later see, of Juvenal. Persius was by birth and breeding an aristocrat127. He was descended128 from an ancient Etruscan house, and could boast, accordingly, of a nobility of 322lineage compared with which the Roman Valerii and Caecilii were the veriest mushrooms.[348] But he was almost wholly devoid129 of the vices69 that often mark his class. An austere130 Stoic131, his short life was dedicated132 to the severe discipline that his contemporary and fellow-Stoic Seneca found it easier to preach than to practise.
Persius wrote little, and that little has all come down to us. His Latin, however, is so crabbed133 and difficult that he is easily the least read of Roman poets.[349] His productions are called Satires134. They are less that than homilies, in which, of course, the virtues135 he inculcates are best illustrated136 by the vices he attacks.
One of these vices is superstition. The mental condition that is terrified by vain and monstrous137 imaginings of ignorant men is set forth138 in the Fifth Satire:[350]
But when the day of Herod comes and the lamps on the grimy sills, garlanded with violets, disgorge their unctuous139 smoke-clouds; when the tail of a tunny-fish fills its red dish and the white jar bursts with wine, you move your lips in silent dread140 and turn pale at the Sabbath of the circumcised.
As a picture of Jewish life on the eve of the Sabbath, this passage is invaluable141. We can readily imagine how the activities of a squalid suburb inhabited by a brawling142 class of men, mostly of Oriental descent, must have impressed both the grandee143 and the Stoic.
But the passage is cited here, not merely as a genre-picture, but more especially because it is again the phase of Jewish life, so often neglected in histories, that has brought the Jews to Persius’ attention. The ordinary Roman, not saved from carnal weakness by 323Stoicism, is found to stand in particular dread of the strange and nameless God of the Jews, to whom he brings a reverence145 and awe146 that ought legitimately147 to be directed only to the gods of his ancestors.
Persius wrote while the temple was still standing148. In 70 the temple was destroyed. A gaping149 mob saw the utensils of the inner shrine150 carried in triumph through the city, and could feast its eyes, if it chose, on the admirable portrayal151 of that procession, on the Arch of Titus near the Forum152. It might be supposed that the God who in Roman eyes could not save His habitation from the flames, could hope for no adherents153 among His conquerors154. But after the destruction of the temple, in the lifetime of the very men who cheered Titus when he returned from Palestine, we see the propaganda more vigorous, if anything, than before.
It is in the pages of Juvenal that we find evidence of that fact, and here again we are confronted with a sharply outlined personality. Decimus Junius Juvenalis was born near Aquinum in Southern Italy, where the Italic stock had probably suffered less admixture with foreign elements than was the case at Rome. What his intellectual training was we can only conjecture155 from its results, the turgid but sonorous156 and often brilliant eloquence157 of his Satires. Whether they are true pictures of Roman life and society or not may be doubted. But they indubitably reflect his own soul. We see there a soured raté, a man embittered158 by his failure to receive the rewards due to his merits. In the capital of the 324world, the city where he, the man of undoubted Roman stock, should have found a career open before him, he discovered himself to be a stranger. He was no match for the nimble-witted Greeks that thronged159 every profession and crawled into entrances too low to admit the scion160 of Cincinnatus and Fabricius. How much of this was the venom161 of defeated ambition, and how much was honest indignation at the indescribable meanness of the lives he depicted162, we cannot now determine.
Throughout all his work one note may be heard, the note of rage at a Rome where everything characteristically Roman was pushed into the background, a Rome in the hands of Greeks, Egyptians, and Jews. And in the case of the last it is particularly the danger noted163 by Strabo and Seneca,[351] of an actual conquest of Rome by the Jewish faith, that rouses his savage indignation.
The lines in which he states his feeling are well-known (Juvenal, Sat. xiv. 96 seq.):
Some whose lot it is to have a father that reveres164 the Sabbath, worship nothing but the clouds and the sky and think that the flesh of swine from which their father abstained165 is closely related to that of man. Soon they become circumcised. Trained to despise the laws of Rome they learn, maintain, and revere144 the Law of the Jews, which Moyses has transmitted in a mystic volume;—laws that forbid them to show the way to any but members of their cult5, and bid them guide to a spring none but their circumcised brethren.
We need be at no pains to correct Juvenal’s estimate of Jewish beliefs or Jewish theology. As in the case of Persius, the interest of the passage lies in the fact that it gives additional testimony to the success with which 325the Jewish synagogues, despite official frowns and even repressive measures, despite the severe conditions they imposed upon initiates166, were constantly gaining in membership.
Juvenal’s other references to the Jews[352] show us certain unlovely aspects of their life. The hawkers and fortune-tellers whom he describes are certainly not the best representatives of the Roman community. It is no part of his purpose to give a complete picture of the community. But it is his purpose to denounce the degeneration which made the imperial city a disagreeable place for real Romans to sojourn167 in, and the Jewish peddler at the Grove168 of Egeria and the swindling hags who sell potent169 spells for cash give him the colors he requires.
One other writer must be mentioned, Martial. With him we are in the very heart of Grub Street. Marcus Valerius Martialis came from Spain to the capital. He had evidently no definite expectation of any career beyond that of a man of letters, and such a career involved at that time (as it continued to do until the nineteenth century) something of the life of a parasite170. He had at least some of the characteristics of a parasite—a ready tongue, a strong stomach, and an easy conscience. But within his own field of poetry, the epigram, he was a real master. Subsequent centuries have rarely equaled the mordancy171 of his wit or the sting of his lampoon172. At the foot of the banquet tables, jostled by hungry mountebanks and the very dregs of Roman society, he kept his mocking eyes open 326to the foibles of his host no less than to the disgustingly frank vices of his fellows.
And Martial meets Jews on his way through the teeming173 city. But if Horace, Persius, and Juvenal have their eyes upon Romans that were being Judaized, Martial presents to us the counterpart, Jews that actually were, or sought to be, as Greek or Roman as possible. In speech it is likely that most Roman Jews (and Roman Christians as well) were Greek.[353] But Greek was almost as well understood at Rome as Latin, and perhaps even better understood among the masses. Two of his Epigrams (vii. 30, and xi. 94) make it clear enough that the Jew at Rome did not live aloof174 from his fellow-citizens, and wealthy Jews did not scruple175 to purchase in the market the gratifications they were especially enjoined176 by their faith to forego. We can readily believe that Martial is recounting real experiences, but these cases must have been exceptional. As we shall see later, the Jewish community was certainly not a licentious177 one. That point appears specifically from the controversial literature. But it is equally well to remember that as individuals they were subject to human passions, and the excesses found in other classes of society might also be met with among them.
Grecized in speech and name, and no doubt in dress, the Jews accepted for their conduct the external forms and standards about them. One very interesting indication of the completeness with which they identified themselves with the city in which they lived is the expression “fatherland” that they used of it; e.g. in 327Akmonia (Ramsay, Cities and Bishops178 of Phrygia, no. 561). Again, in Ostia a large and well-carved slab179 was recently found in which a decree of the Jews at Ostia was set forth. The corporation grants to its gerusiarch, Gaius Julius Justus, a place for a sepulchre. The officers are Livius, Dionysius, Antonius, and another man whose name is lost (Not. Scav. 1907, p. 479). Surely but for the unambiguous statement of the inscription59 itself one would not have looked for Jews in this assemblage of Julii, Livii, and Antonii.
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
reign
|
|
| n.统治时期，统治，支配，盛行；v.占优势 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
attested
|
|
| adj.经检验证明无病的，经检验证明无菌的v.证明( attest的过去式和过去分词 )；证实；声称…属实；使宣誓 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
specially
|
|
| adv.特定地；特殊地；明确地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
disapproval
|
|
| n.反对，不赞成 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
cult
|
|
| n.异教，邪教；时尚，狂热的崇拜 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
cults
|
|
| n.迷信( cult的名词复数 )；狂热的崇拜；（有极端宗教信仰的）异教团体 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
afterward
|
|
| adv.后来；以后 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
literally
|
|
| adv.照字面意义，逐字地；确实 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
fully
|
|
| adv.完全地，全部地，彻底地；充分地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
superstition
|
|
| n.迷信，迷信行为 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
sect
|
|
| n.派别，宗教，学派，派系 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
rites
|
|
| 仪式，典礼( rite的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
utensils
|
|
| 器具，用具，器皿( utensil的名词复数 )； 器物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
pretense
|
|
| n.矫饰，做作，借口 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
penal
|
|
| adj.刑罚的；刑法上的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
permanently
|
|
| adv.永恒地，永久地，固定不变地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
undoubtedly
|
|
| adv.确实地，无疑地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
eradication
|
|
| n.根除 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
affected
|
|
| adj.不自然的，假装的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
brigandage
|
|
| n.抢劫；盗窃；土匪；强盗 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
discrepancies
|
|
| n.差异，不符合（之处），不一致（之处）( discrepancy的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
amalgamating
|
|
| v.（使）（金属）汞齐化( amalgamate的现在分词 )；（使）合并；联合；结合 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
divergences
|
|
| n.分叉( divergence的名词复数 )；分歧；背离；离题 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
thoroughly
|
|
| adv.完全地，彻底地，十足地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
worthy
|
|
| adj.(of)值得的，配得上的；有价值的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
consuls
|
|
| 领事( consul的名词复数 )； （古罗马共和国时期）执政官 （古罗马共和国及其军队的最高首长，同时共有两位，每年选举一次） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
enrolled
|
|
| adj.入学登记了的v.[亦作enrol]( enroll的过去式和过去分词 )；登记，招收，使入伍（或入会、入学等），参加，成为成员；记入名册；卷起，包起 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
votary
|
|
| n.崇拜者；爱好者；adj.誓约的，立誓任圣职的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
connivance
|
|
| n.纵容；默许 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
juxtaposition
|
|
| n.毗邻，并置，并列 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
mere
|
|
| adj.纯粹的；仅仅，只不过 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
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： |
|
|
|
|
33
omission
|
|
| n.省略，删节；遗漏或省略的事物，冗长 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
valid
|
|
| adj.有确实根据的；有效的；正当的，合法的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
accurately
|
|
| adv.准确地，精确地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
solely
|
|
| adv.仅仅，唯一地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
emancipated
|
|
| adj.被解放的，不受约束的v.解放某人（尤指摆脱政治、法律或社会的束缚）( emancipate的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
notably
|
|
| adv.值得注意地，显著地，尤其地，特别地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
banished
|
|
| v.放逐，驱逐( banish的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
variance
|
|
| n.矛盾，不同 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
wholesale
|
|
| n.批发；adv.以批发方式；vt.批发，成批出售 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
administrative
|
|
| adj.行政的，管理的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
relegation
|
|
| n.驱逐，贬黜；降级 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
banishment
|
|
| n.放逐，驱逐 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
contravening
|
|
| v.取消，违反( contravene的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
absurdity
|
|
| n.荒谬，愚蠢；谬论 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
compulsory
|
|
| n.强制的，必修的；规定的，义务的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
galleys
|
|
| n.平底大船，战舰( galley的名词复数 )；（船上或航空器上的）厨房 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
machinery
|
|
| n.(总称)机械，机器；机构 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
alleged
|
|
| a.被指控的，嫌疑的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
allusion
|
|
| n.暗示，间接提示 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
eulogistic
|
|
| adj.颂扬的，颂词的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
philosophic
|
|
| adj.哲学的，贤明的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
abstain
|
|
| v.自制，戒绝，弃权，避免 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
adherence
|
|
| n.信奉，依附，坚持，固着 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
malicious
|
|
| adj.有恶意的，心怀恶意的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
prosecution
|
|
| n.起诉，告发，检举，执行，经营 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
agitation
|
|
| n.搅动；搅拌；鼓动，煽动 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
59
inscription
|
|
| n.（尤指石块上的）刻印文字，铭文，碑文 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
inscriptions
|
|
| （作者）题词( inscription的名词复数 )； 献词； 碑文； 证劵持有人的登记 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
cemeteries
|
|
| n.（非教堂的）墓地，公墓( cemetery的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
pointed
|
|
| adj.尖的，直截了当的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
bacchanalian
|
|
| adj.闹酒狂饮的；n.发酒疯的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
persecution
|
|
| n. 迫害,烦扰 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
immorality
|
|
| n. 不道德, 无道义 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
imposture
|
|
| n.冒名顶替，欺骗 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
67
guilt
|
|
| n.犯罪；内疚；过失，罪责 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
68
pretenses
|
|
| n.借口（pretense的复数形式） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
69
vices
|
|
| 缺陷( vice的名词复数 )； 恶习； 不道德行为； 台钳 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
70
zeal
|
|
| n.热心，热情，热忱 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
71
conclusive
|
|
| adj.最后的，结论的；确凿的，消除怀疑的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
72
testimony
|
|
| n.证词；见证，证明 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
73
promptly
|
|
| adv.及时地，敏捷地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
74
forfeiture
|
|
| n.（名誉等）丧失 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
75
inflicted
|
|
| 把…强加给，使承受，遭受( inflict的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
76
violation
|
|
| n.违反(行为)，违背(行为)，侵犯 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
77
adoption
|
|
| n.采用，采纳，通过；收养 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
78
paranoiac
|
|
| n.偏执狂患者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
79
Christian
|
|
| adj.基督教徒的；n.基督教徒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
80
rendering
|
|
| n.表现，描写 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
81
radical
|
|
| n.激进份子，原子团，根号；adj.根本的，激进的，彻底的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
82
perfectly
|
|
| adv.完美地，无可非议地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
83
relatively
|
|
| adv.比较...地，相对地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
84
exclusion
|
|
| n.拒绝，排除，排斥，远足，远途旅行 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
85
specified
|
|
| adj.特定的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
86
milestone
|
|
| n.里程碑；划时代的事件 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
87
Christians
|
|
| n.基督教徒( Christian的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
88
rejection
|
|
| n.拒绝，被拒，抛弃，被弃 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
89
immediate
|
|
| adj.立即的；直接的，最接近的；紧靠的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
90
schism
|
|
| n.分派，派系，分裂 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
91
apparently
|
|
| adv.显然地；表面上，似乎 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
92
minor
|
|
| adj.较小(少)的，较次要的；n.辅修学科；vi.辅修 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
93
approbation
|
|
| n.称赞；认可 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
94
bestially
|
|
| adv.野兽地，残忍地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
95
reliability
|
|
| n.可靠性，确实性 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
96
justifiable
|
|
| adj.有理由的，无可非议的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
97
martial
|
|
| adj.战争的，军事的，尚武的，威武的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
98
maiden
|
|
| n.少女，处女；adj.未婚的，纯洁的，无经验的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
99
savage
|
|
| adj.野蛮的；凶恶的，残暴的；n.未开化的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
100
brotherhoods
|
|
| 兄弟关系( brotherhood的名词复数 )； （总称）同行； （宗教性的）兄弟会； 同业公会 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
101
offense
|
|
| n.犯规，违法行为；冒犯，得罪 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
102
absurdities
|
|
| n.极端无理性( absurdity的名词复数 )；荒谬；谬论；荒谬的行为 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
103
remains
|
|
| n.剩余物，残留物；遗体，遗迹 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
104
gulf
|
|
| n.海湾；深渊，鸿沟；分歧，隔阂 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
105
instigated
|
|
| v.使（某事物）开始或发生，鼓动( instigate的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
106
statute
|
|
| n.成文法，法令，法规；章程，规则，条例 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
107
advisers
|
|
| 顾问，劝告者( adviser的名词复数 )； （指导大学新生学科问题等的）指导教授 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
108
guise
|
|
| n.外表，伪装的姿态 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
109
sedition
|
|
| n.煽动叛乱 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
110
doctrine
|
|
| n.教义；主义；学说 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
111
doctrines
|
|
| n.教条( doctrine的名词复数 )；教义；学说；（政府政策的）正式声明 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
112
mischievous
|
|
| adj.调皮的，恶作剧的，有害的，伤人的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
113
salvation
|
|
| n.（尤指基督）救世，超度，拯救，解困 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
114
determined
|
|
| adj.坚定的；有决心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
115
obstinate
|
|
| adj.顽固的，倔强的，不易屈服的，较难治愈的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
116
negation
|
|
| n.否定；否认 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
117
triumphant
|
|
| adj.胜利的，成功的；狂欢的，喜悦的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
118
initiation
|
|
| n.开始 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
119
yoke
|
|
| n.轭；支配；v.给...上轭，连接，使成配偶 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
120
deliberately
|
|
| adv.审慎地；蓄意地；故意地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
121
labors
|
|
| v.努力争取(for)( labor的第三人称单数 )；苦干；详细分析；（指引擎）缓慢而困难地运转 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
122
analogue
|
|
| n.类似物；同源语 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
123
satire
|
|
| n.讽刺，讽刺文学，讽刺作品 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
124
genre
|
|
| n.(文学、艺术等的)类型，体裁，风格 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
125
bleaker
|
|
| 阴冷的( bleak的比较级 )； （状况）无望的； 没有希望的； 光秃的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
126
stratum
|
|
| n.地层，社会阶层 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
127
aristocrat
|
|
| n.贵族，有贵族气派的人，上层人物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
128
descended
|
|
| a.为...后裔的，出身于...的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
129
devoid
|
|
| adj.全无的，缺乏的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
130
austere
|
|
| adj.艰苦的；朴素的，朴实无华的；严峻的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
131
stoic
|
|
| n.坚忍克己之人，禁欲主义者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
132
dedicated
|
|
| adj.一心一意的；献身的；热诚的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
133
crabbed
|
|
| adj.脾气坏的；易怒的；（指字迹）难辨认的；（字迹等）难辨认的v.捕蟹( crab的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
134
satires
|
|
| 讽刺，讥讽( satire的名词复数 )； 讽刺作品 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
135
virtues
|
|
| 美德( virtue的名词复数 )； 德行； 优点； 长处 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
136
illustrated
|
|
| adj. 有插图的，列举的 动词illustrate的过去式和过去分词 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
137
monstrous
|
|
| adj.巨大的；恐怖的；可耻的，丢脸的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
138
forth
|
|
| adv.向前；向外，往外 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
139
unctuous
|
|
| adj.油腔滑调的，大胆的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
140
dread
|
|
| vt.担忧，忧虑；惧怕，不敢；n.担忧，畏惧 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
141
invaluable
|
|
| adj.无价的，非常宝贵的，极为贵重的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
142
brawling
|
|
| n.争吵，喧嚷 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
143
grandee
|
|
| n.贵族；大公 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
144
revere
|
|
| vt.尊崇，崇敬，敬畏 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
145
reverence
|
|
| n.敬畏，尊敬，尊严；Reverence:对某些基督教神职人员的尊称；v.尊敬，敬畏，崇敬 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
146
awe
|
|
| n.敬畏，惊惧；vt.使敬畏，使惊惧 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
147
legitimately
|
|
| ad.合法地；正当地，合理地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
148
standing
|
|
| n.持续，地位；adj.永久的，不动的，直立的，不流动的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
149
gaping
|
|
| adj.口的；张口的；敞口的；多洞穴的v.目瞪口呆地凝视( gape的现在分词 )；张开，张大 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
150
shrine
|
|
| n.圣地，神龛，庙；v.将...置于神龛内，把...奉为神圣 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
151
portrayal
|
|
| n.饰演；描画 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
152
forum
|
|
| n.论坛，讨论会 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
153
adherents
|
|
| n.支持者，拥护者( adherent的名词复数 )；党羽；徒子徒孙 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
154
conquerors
|
|
| 征服者，占领者( conqueror的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
155
conjecture
|
|
| n./v.推测，猜测 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
156
sonorous
|
|
| adj.响亮的，回响的；adv.圆润低沉地；感人地；n.感人，堂皇 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
157
eloquence
|
|
| n.雄辩；口才，修辞 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
158
embittered
|
|
| v.使怨恨，激怒( embitter的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
159
thronged
|
|
| v.成群，挤满( throng的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
160
scion
|
|
| n.嫩芽，子孙 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
161
venom
|
|
| n.毒液，恶毒，痛恨 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
162
depicted
|
|
| 描绘，描画( depict的过去式和过去分词 )； 描述 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
163
noted
|
|
| adj.著名的，知名的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
164
reveres
|
|
| v.崇敬，尊崇，敬畏( revere的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
165
abstained
|
|
| v.戒（尤指酒），戒除( abstain的过去式和过去分词 )；弃权（不投票） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
166
initiates
|
|
| v.开始( initiate的第三人称单数 )；传授；发起；接纳新成员 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
167
sojourn
|
|
| v./n.旅居，寄居；逗留 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
168
grove
|
|
| n.林子，小树林，园林 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
169
potent
|
|
| adj.强有力的，有权势的；有效力的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
170
parasite
|
|
| n.寄生虫；寄生菌；食客 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
171
mordancy
|
|
| n.尖酸，刻薄 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
172
lampoon
|
|
| n.讽刺文章；v.讽刺 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
173
teeming
|
|
| adj.丰富的v.充满( teem的现在分词 )；到处都是；（指水、雨等）暴降；倾注 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
174
aloof
|
|
| adj.远离的；冷淡的，漠不关心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
175
scruple
|
|
| n./v.顾忌，迟疑 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
176
enjoined
|
|
| v.命令( enjoin的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
177
licentious
|
|
| adj.放纵的，淫乱的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
178
bishops
|
|
| （基督教某些教派管辖大教区的）主教( bishop的名词复数 )； （国际象棋的）象 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
179
slab
|
|
| n.平板，厚的切片；v.切成厚板，以平板盖上 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |