When King Frederick William IV. issued the February manifesto2, in 1847,[35] and summoned the United Diet with the Chambers3, he thought in his royal great-heartedness to have accorded to his people a free gift of his affection and his confidence, and to have anticipated many wishes; but close behind the rejoicings which welcomed the patent of February, there lay the bitterest disenchantment for the noble King.
The honorable old royalists of Prussia, who had been educated and had grown up in the honest Prussian absolutism of Frederick William III., first looked with suspicion at this new royal gift; they could not at all understand why their own King of Prussia should have thought it necessary to summon a Parliament somewhat on the model of England, and they foresaw all sorts of evils in the future, as they thoughtfully shook their gray and honored heads. To these men, who at that time were still very numerous, and whose influence was considerable, succeeded those who certainly felt that the abuses of bureaucracy were no longer curable by patriarchal absolutism, but who still thought that the King, by this measure, had conceded the very utmost possible in that direction. They saw in the patent the last fortress4 of the monarchy5 which must be held against liberalism at any cost. In opposition6[166] to these royalists, the host of liberals unfolded their gay banner in different columns. They only could see in the February patent the starting-point of a further movement, which, founded on the patent, might transform the absolute state into a modern constitutional monarchy. There existed even individuals who perceived that the patent would prove an obstacle to their revolutionary tendencies, and desired to refuse its acceptance.
We will not criticise7 these parties, but it is certain that none of them regarded the patent in the spirit of the royal donor—unless perhaps some who had understood that the King, basing his action on the existing Provincial8 Assemblies, proposed in a similar manner to erect9 a peculiar10 Prussian Representative Monarchy. They beheld11 the February patent to be no final measure, but the beginning of States Government, which could only develop itself under specially12 favorable circumstances, and in course of time.
Bismarck was one of the men who, although without absolutely expressing the opinion, regarded the patent as the starting-point of a new order of things, in common with the liberals, but not in the sense of a constitutional monarchy, but comprehended it, as the King did, as a step towards a peculiar and specifically Prussian State Government.
The Saxon Provincial Diet at Merseburg had chosen the Dyke13 Captain and First Lieutenant14 von Brauchitsch of Scharteuke, in the Circle of Jerichow, as Deputy at the United Diet, and had selected Dyke Captain von Bismarck of Sch?nhausen as his representative. As Herr von Brauchitsch was very ill, his representative was summoned.
Bismarck appeared in the White Saloon of the Royal Palace at C?lln on the Spree, where the Three Estates’ Assembly held its Sessions, as a representative of the Knight’s Estate of Jerichow, and a vassal15 and chivalric16 servitor of the King. He was at that time, however, as liberal as most of his associates; liberalism then floated in the air and was inhaled17; it was impossible to avoid it. Against many abuses it was also justifiable18; hence its mighty19 influence.
A conservative party, in the sense in which we wish it to be understood, did not then exist; nor did the general confusion of opinions at the time allow of the formation of true parties. It is[167] true that Bismarck met many men in the White Saloon, whose opinions were well known to him; of these were his brother, the Landrath, his cousins, the Counts von Bismarck-Bohlen and von Bismarck-Briest, his future father-in-law, Herr von Putkammer, von Thadden, von Wedell, and many others—but unfortunately these gentlemen in general, as Herr von Thadden once bluntly said of himself, were not even bad orators20, but no orators at all. Nor could the two Freiherrs von Manteuffel contend in eloquence21 with the brilliant rhetoricians of the liberals, such as Freiherr von Vincke, Camphausen, Mevissen, Beckerath, and others.
Very few persons now exist who can read those speeches of the First United Diet, once so celebrated22, without a melancholy23 or satirical smile: those were the blossom-days of liberal phraseology, causing an enthusiasm of which we can not now form any adequate idea.
They acted with such an influence upon Bismarck, but he was soon sobered, when he attained25 the conviction that these great speakers, moved by their construction of the patent of February, advocated an end not contemplated26 by the spirit of the patent. To him it did not seem honest to contend for modern constitutionalism upon the judicial27 merits of the February patent, against its sense and spirit.
An inimical inspiration acted on him in liberal phraseology, and the more magnificent the oratory28, the more repugnant it became to him, especially where he saw untruth clearly in view. He employed some time in making it evident to himself that the liberal idea was the very fact under the government of which men, otherwise of great honor, in the very best of faith, brought forward matters in themselves quite false; and the deepest want of confidence then made itself master of his mind. He began to understand how dangerous a power so intangible might become to the sovereignty.
At the sitting of the Three Estates on the 17th May, the Deputy von Saucken made one of those wordy enthusiastic speeches at that time so popular, and declared that the Prussian people had risen in the year 1813 for the sole end of obtaining a constitution. This had previously29 been asserted by Beckerath and others on several occasions.
[168]
After the liberal speaker had descended30 amidst the plaudits of the Assembly, the Deputy Bismarck, for the first time, appeared upon the tribune. His stature31 was great, his plentiful32 hair was cut short, his healthily ruddy countenance33 was fringed by a strong blond beard, his shining eyes were somewhat prominent, à fleur de tête, as the French idiom has it—such was his aspect. He gazed upon the assembly for a moment, and then spoke34 simply, but with some hesitation35, in a strong, sometimes shrill36 voice, with not altogether pleasing emphasis:—“For me it is difficult—after a speech replete37 with such noble enthusiasm—to address you, in order to bring before you a plain re-statement.” He then glanced at some length at the real merits of a previous vote, and continued in the following words:—
“To discuss the remaining points of the speech, I prefer to choose a time when it will be necessary to enter upon questions of policy; at present I am compelled to contradict what is stated from this tribune, as well as what is so loudly and so frequently asserted outside this hall, in reference to the necessity for a constitution, as if the movements of our nation in 1813 should be ascribed to other causes and motives39 than those of the tyranny exercised by the foreigner in our land.”
Here the speaker was assailed40 with such loud marks of disapprobation, hisses41, and outcries, that he could no longer make himself intelligible42. He quietly drew a newspaper from his pocket—it was the “Spenersche Zeitung”—and read it, leaning in an easy attitude, until the President-Marshal had restored order; he then concluded, still interrupted by hisses, with these words:—“In my opinion it is doing sorry service to the national honor, to conclude that ill-treatment and humiliation43 suffered by Prussia at the hands of a foreign ruler would not be enough to rouse Prussian blood, and cause all other feelings to be absorbed by the hatred44 of foreigners.”
Amidst great commotion45 Bismarck left the tribune, ten or twelve voices being clamorous46 to be heard.
Bismarck in 1847-1848.
It is not intelligible to us at the present day, how the casual statement of a simple opinion, which, even had it been untrue, need have offended no one, could raise such a storm. Nor had Bismarck personally offended any one, but he had protested against liberalism, and at once the Mamelukes of this most evil[169] despot pounced47 upon him—upon this unfortunate member of the chivalry48 of the province of Saxony. The elder gentlemen were especially offended, who had voluntarily taken the field in 1813, and had now attributed the motive38 they thought then actuated them, and perhaps they really entertained, to the nation. It was curious, too, that they flatly denied the right of criticism to this member, on the ground that he was not in existence in those great days. When, with loud clamor, these gentlemen had given vent49 to their moral indignation, Bismarck again ascended50 the tribune; but the[170] anger of the liberals was so great that the Marshal had to use all his authority to protect him during his speech.
Bismarck now spoke fluently, in the manner since so familiar to us, but coldly and sarcastically51: “I can certainly not deny that I did not as yet exist in those days, and I am truly sorry not to have been permitted to take part in that movement; my regret for this is certainly diminished by the explanations I have received just now upon the movements of that epoch52. I always thought the servitude against which the sword was then used was a foreign servitude; I now learn that it lay at home. For this correction I am not by any means grateful!”
The hisses of the liberals were now met by many voices with “Hear, hear!” From this moment the hatred of the press was concentrated upon Bismarck; being without exception in the hands of the liberals, it governed public opinion entirely53, and it assailed Bismarck even more unscrupulously and unconscientiously than it had attacked Von Thadden and Von Manteuffel. As contradiction was impossible, the world probably thought Bismarck was still one of the wild Junkers who, armed to the teeth in steel, considered village tyranny and dissoluteness to be the best kind of constitution, and in deep political ignorance was still standing54 at about the mental mark of Dietrich von Quitzow,[36] or at the most of one of the Junkers of the time of Frederick I. The liberal press certainly succeeded in producing a caricature of Bismarck, composed of a kind of a black bogy and a ridiculous bugbear; the latter they were speedily obliged to drop, but the bogy they have the more firmly retained, and frightened political babies with it until very recent days.
No one has any idea at the present time how the liberal press of those days assailed men who were obnoxious55 to them. In the year 1849, two gentlemen were introduced to each other in society; as ordinarily happens, they mistook their several names on a hurried introduction. The elder gentleman spoke in an intellectual, remarkable56, exhaustive, and instructive manner concerning the affairs of Hungary, whence he had recently returned, and showed himself to be a person of thought, information, and politeness. His interlocutor for a long time could not believe[171] that this was Herr von Thadden-Triglaff; the ridiculous caricature the liberal press had sent broadcast into society of this eminent57 and singular man was so firmly fixed58 in his convictions.
We have laid some emphasis on this point, as it forms an explanation of the obstinate59 suspicion with which, for many after years, Bismarck was regarded by a section of the public. It is also plainly evident that the young politician often defended himself against this “world of scorn” with equal and biting scorn, and covered himself with the shield of contempt against mockery he did not deserve. He was continually assailed, sometimes in the rudest manner, and sometimes with poisonous acumen60; and he could not have been Bismarck had he borne it with patience.
Thus it befell that he soon found himself in full battle array against liberalism, and his speeches at the time show that he took a serious view of the matter. He gave utterance61 to his convictions and opinions in conformity62 with his natural fearless nature; he adhered closely to the matter at issue, but the form in which he did so was that of the most cutting attack, whetted63 in general by a cloud of contempt for his opponent, or of bitter ridicule64.
In the debate of the Three Estates of the 1st of June, 1847, known as the Periodicity Debate, Bismarck spoke as follows:
“I will not take the trouble to examine the solidity of the various grounds of right, on which each of us presumes himself to stand; but, I believe, it has become certain, from the debate and from every thing which I have gathered from the discussion of the question, that a different construction and interpretation65 of the older estates legislation was possible and practically existent—not among laymen66 only, but also among weighty jurists—and that it would be very doubtful what a court of justice, if such a question were before it, would decree concerning it. Under such circumstances, the declaration would, according to general principles of law, afford a solution. This declaration has become implicit67 upon us, implicit by the patent of the 3d of February of this year; by this the King has declared that the general promises of former laws have been no other than those fulfilled by the present law. It appears that this declaration has been regarded by a portion of this Assembly as inaccurate68, but such is a fate to which every declaration is equally subject. Every declaration is[172] considered by those whose opinions it does not confirm, to be wrong, or the previous conviction could not have been sincere. The question really is, in whom the right resides to issue an authentic69 and legally binding71 declaration. In my opinion, the King alone; and this conviction, I believe, lies in the conscience of the people. For when yesterday an Honorable Deputy from K?nigsberg asserted that there was a dull dissatisfaction among the people on the proclamation of the patent of the 3d of February, I must reply, on the contrary, that I do not find the majority of the Prussian nation represented in the meetings which take place in the B?ttchersh?fchen. (Murmurs73.) In inarticulate sounds I really can not discover any refutation of what I have said, nor do I find it in the goose-quills of the newspaper correspondents; no! not even in a fraction of the population of some of the large provincial towns. It is difficult to ascertain74 public opinion; I think I find it in some of the middle provinces, and it is the old Prussian conviction that a royal word is worth more than all the constructions and quirks75 applied76 to the letter of the law. (Some voices: Bravo!) Yesterday a parallel was drawn77 between the method employed by the English people in 1688, after the abdication78 of James II., for the preservation79 of its rights, and that by which the Prussian nation should now attain24 a similar end. There is always something suspicious in parallels with foreign countries. Russia had been held up to us as a model of religious toleration; the French and Danish exchequers80 have been recommended as examples of proper finances. To return to the year 1688 in England, I must really beg this august assembly, and especially an honorable deputy from Silesia, to pardon me if I again speak of a circumstance which I did not personally perceive. The English people was then in a different position to that of the Prussian people now; a century of revolution and civil war had invested it with the right to dispose of a crown, and bind70 up with it conditions accepted by William of Orange. On the other hand, the Prussian sovereigns were in possession of a crown, not by grace of the people, but by God’s grace; an actually unconditional81 crown, some of the rights of which they voluntarily conceded to the people—an example rare in history. I will leave the question of right, and proceed to that concerning the utility and desirability of asking or suggesting[173] any change in the legislation as it actually now exists. I adhere to the conviction, which I assume to be that of the majority of the Assembly, that periodicity is necessary to a real vitality82 of this Assembly; but it is another matter whether we should seek this by way of petition. Since the emanation of the patent of the 3d of February, I do not believe that it would be consonant83 with the royal pleasure, or that it is inherent with the position of ourselves as estates, to approach His Majesty84 already with a petition for an amendment85 of it. At any rate let us allow the grass of this summer to grow over it. The King has repeatedly said, that he did not wish to be coerced86 and driven; but I ask the Assembly what should we be doing otherwise than coercing87 and driving him, if we already approached the throne with requests for changes in the legislation? To the gravity of this view I ask permission of the Assembly to add another reason. It is certainly well known how many sad predictions have been made by the opponents of our polity connected with the fact that the Government would find itself forced by the estates into a position which it would not have willingly taken up. But although I do not assume the Government would allow itself to be coerced, I still think that it is in the interests of the Government to avoid the slightest trace of unwillingness88 as to concessions89, and that it is in all our interests not to concede to the enemies of Prussia the delight of witnessing the fact that, by a petition—a vote—presented by us as the representatives of sixteen millions of subjects, we should throw a shade of unwillingness upon such a concession90. It has been said that His Majesty the King and the Commissioner91 of the Diet have themselves pointed92 out this path. For myself, I could not otherwise understand this than that, as the King has done, so also the Commissioner of the Diet indicated this as the legal way we should pursue in case we found ourselves aggrieved93; but that it would be acceptable to His Majesty the King and the Government that we should make use of this right, I have not been able to perceive. If, however, we did so, it would be believed that urgent grounds existed for it—that there was immediate94 danger in the future; but of this I can not convince myself. The next session of the Assembly is assured; the Crown, also, is thereby95 in the advantageous96 position, that within four years, or even a shorter period, it can with perfect[174] voluntariness, and without asking, take the initiative as to that which is now desired. Now, I ask, is not the edifice97 of our State firmer towards foreign countries?—will not the feeling of satisfaction be greater at home, if the continuation of our national polity be inaugurated by the initiative of the Crown, than by petition from ourselves? Should the Crown not find it good to take the initiative, no time is lost. The third Diet will not follow so rapidly upon the second, that the King would have no time to reply to a petition presented under such circumstances by the second. Yesterday a deputy from Prussia—I think from the circle of Neustadt—uttered a speech which I could only comprehend as meaning that it was our interest to pull up the flower of confidence as a weed preventing us from seeing the bare ground, and cast it out. I say with pride that I can not agree with such an opinion. If I look back for ten years, and compare that which was written and said in the year 1837 with that which is proclaimed from the steps of the throne to the whole nation, I believe we have great reason to have confidence in the intentions of His Majesty. In this confidence I beg to recommend this august assembly to adopt the amendment of the Honorable Deputy from Westphalia—not that of the Honorable Deputy from the county of Mark—but that of Herr von Lilien.”
This speech is certainly a Prussian-Royalist confession98 of faith as opposed to the constitutional doctrine99, and was so accepted at times with cheers, at other times with murmurs, and, finally with a flood of personal opposition.
The political side of Bismarck’s attitude is clear enough from this speech. We will signalize another aspect of it by the following passages from a speech delivered by Bismarck on the occasion of that debate known as the Jews’ Debate, on the 15th of June.
“On ascending100 this place to-day, it is with greater hesitation than usual, as I am sensible that by what I am about to utter, some few remarks of the speakers of yesterday, of no very flattering tone, will have in a certain sense to be reviewed. I must openly confess that I am attached to a certain tendency, yesterday characterized by the Honorable Deputy from Crefeld as dark and medi?val; this tendency which again dares to oppose the freer development of Christianity in the way the Deputy from[175] Crefeld regards as the only true one. Nor can I further deny that I belong to that great mass, which, as was remarked by the Honorable Deputy from Posen, stands in opposition to the more intelligent portion of the nation, and, if my memory do not betray me, was held in considerable scorn by that intelligent section—the great mass that still clings to the convictions imbibed102 at the breast,—the great mass to which a Christianity superior to the State is too elevated. If I find myself in the line of fire of such sharp sarcasms103 without a murmur72, I believe I may throw myself upon the indulgence of the Honorable Assembly, if I confess, with the same frankness which distinguished104 my opponents, that yesterday, at times of inattention, it did not quite appear certain to me whether I was in an assembly for which the law had provided, in reference to its election, the condition of communion with some one of the Christian101 churches. I will pass at once to the question itself. Most of the speakers have spoken less upon the bill than upon emancipation in general. I will follow their example. I am no enemy to the Jews, and if they are enemies to me, I forgive them. Under certain circumstances I even love them. I would grant them every right, save that of holding superior official posts in Christian countries.
“We have heard from the Minister of Finance, and from other gentlemen on the ministerial bench, sentiments as to the definition of a Christian State, to which I almost entirely subscribe105; but, on the other hand, we were yesterday told that Christian supremacy106 is an idle fiction, an invention of recent State philosophers. I am of opinion that the idea of Christian supremacy is as ancient as the ci-devant Holy Roman Empire—as ancient as the great family of European States; that it is, in fact, the very soil in which these states have taken root, and that every state which wishes to have its existence enduring, if it desires to point to any justification107 for that existence, when called in question, must be constituted on a religious basis. For me, the words ‘by the grace of God’ affixed108 by Christian rulers to their names form no empty sound; but I see in the phrase the acknowledgment that princes desire to sway the sceptres intrusted to them by the Almighty109 according to God’s will on earth. I, however, can only recognize as the will of God that which is contained in the Christian Gospels, and I believe I am within my right when[176] I call such a State Christian, whose problem is to realize and verify the doctrine of Christianity. That our State does not in all ways succeed in this, the Honorable Deputy from the county of Mark yesterday demonstrated in a parallel he drew between the truths of the Gospel and the paragraphs of national jurisprudence, in a way rather clever than consonant with my religious feelings. But although the solution of the problem is not always successful, I am still convinced that the aim of the State is the realization110 of Christian doctrine; however, I do not think we shall approach this aim more closely with the aid of the Jews. If the religious basis of the State be acknowledged, I am sure that among ourselves the basis can only be that of Christianity. If we withdraw from the State this religious basis, our State becomes nothing more than a fortuitous aggregation111 of rights, a sort of bulwark112 against the universal war of each against all, such as an elder philosophy instituted. Its legislation then would no longer recreate itself from the original fountain of eternal truth, but only from the vague and mutable ideas of humanity taking shape only from the conceptions formed in the brains of those who occupy the apex113. How such states could deny the right of the practical application of such ideas—as, for instance, those of the communists on the immorality114 of property, the high moral value of theft, as an experiment for the rehabilitation115 of the native rights of man—is not clear to me; for these very ideas are entertained by their advocates as humane116, and, indeed, as constituting the very flower of humanitarianism117. Therefore, gentlemen, let us not diminish the Christianity of the people by showing that it is superfluous118 to the legislature; let us not deprive the people of the belief that our legislation is derived119 from the fountain of Christianity, and that the State seeks to promote the realization of Christianity, though that end may not always be attained.
...
“Besides this, several speakers, as in almost every question, have referred to the examples of England and France as models worthy120 of imitation. This question is of much less consequence there, because the Jews are so much less numerous than here. But I would recommend to the gentlemen who are so fond of seeking their ideas beyond the Vosges, a guide-line distinguishing[177] the English and the French. That consists in the proud feeling of national honor, which does not so easily and commonly seek for models worthy of imitation and wonderful patterns, as we do here, in foreign lands.”
It will be understood that this speech was much criticised; but it became a regular armory121 for his opponents; it was taken for granted that Bismarck himself had stated that he stood in “the dark ages,” that he had “imbibed reactionary122 ideas with his mother’s milk,” and other similar things, although he was only ridiculing123 the ideas of his opponents; there was seldom an opportunity lost, when he was twitted with “the dark ages” and the “prejudices imbibed at the breast.” Bismarck possessed124 humor enough to laugh at this pitiful trick, and once exclaimed very well: “Deputy Krause rode in the lists against me on a horse, in front the dark ages, behind mother’s milk!” What a picture Herr Krause, the Burgomaster of Elbing (if we are not misinformed), would make upon such a fabulous125 steed!
Bismarck left the United Diet with a thorn in his breast. He had lost many of the youthful illusions he had carried thither126; the Prussia he found in the White Saloon was as remote as heaven from the Prussia he had hitherto believed in, and his patriotic127 heart was sorrowful. He perceived that the sovereignty of Prussia was about to encounter severe contests; that his duty lay with the monarch’s idea, and that his native land must be rescued from the insolent128 pretensions129 of the modern parliamentary spirit, from the most dangerous of all paper governments. In short, he arrived with hazy130, but somewhat liberal, views, and he returned a politician thoroughly131 acquainted with his duty and his work, which consisted in aiding the King to restore the Estates’ Monarchy. It was a gift, but he received it with a sigh. His youth was at an end.
Bismarck has ever remained true to his patriotic duties, everywhere in earnestness, and at no time has he withdrawn132 his hand from the plough; he went bravely on, when so many cast their weapons away and fled.
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
emancipation
|
|
| n.（从束缚、支配下）解放 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
manifesto
|
|
| n.宣言，声明 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
chambers
|
|
| n.房间( chamber的名词复数 )；（议会的）议院；卧室；会议厅 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
fortress
|
|
| n.堡垒，防御工事 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
monarchy
|
|
| n.君主，最高统治者；君主政体，君主国 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
opposition
|
|
| n.反对，敌对 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
criticise
|
|
| v.批评，评论；非难 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
provincial
|
|
| adj.省的，地方的；n．外省人，乡下人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
erect
|
|
| n./v.树立，建立，使竖立；adj.直立的，垂直的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
peculiar
|
|
| adj.古怪的，异常的；特殊的，特有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
beheld
|
|
| v.看，注视( behold的过去式和过去分词 )；瞧；看呀；（叙述中用于引出某人意外的出现）哎哟 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
specially
|
|
| adv.特定地；特殊地；明确地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
dyke
|
|
| n.堤，水坝，排水沟 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
lieutenant
|
|
| n.陆军中尉，海军上尉；代理官员，副职官员 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
vassal
|
|
| n.附庸的；属下；adj.奴仆的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
chivalric
|
|
| 有武士气概的，有武士风范的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
17
inhaled
|
|
| v.吸入( inhale的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
justifiable
|
|
| adj.有理由的，无可非议的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
mighty
|
|
| adj.强有力的；巨大的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
orators
|
|
| n.演说者，演讲家( orator的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
eloquence
|
|
| n.雄辩；口才，修辞 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
celebrated
|
|
| adj.有名的，声誉卓著的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
melancholy
|
|
| n.忧郁，愁思；adj.令人感伤（沮丧）的，忧郁的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
attain
|
|
| vt.达到，获得，完成 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
attained
|
|
| （通常经过努力）实现( attain的过去式和过去分词 )； 达到； 获得； 达到（某年龄、水平、状况） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
contemplated
|
|
| adj. 预期的 动词contemplate的过去分词形式 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
judicial
|
|
| adj.司法的，法庭的，审判的，明断的，公正的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
oratory
|
|
| n.演讲术；词藻华丽的言辞 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
previously
|
|
| adv.以前，先前（地） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
descended
|
|
| a.为...后裔的，出身于...的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
stature
|
|
| n.（高度）水平，（高度）境界，身高，身材 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
plentiful
|
|
| adj.富裕的，丰富的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
countenance
|
|
| n.脸色，面容；面部表情；vt.支持，赞同 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
spoke
|
|
| n.（车轮的）辐条；轮辐；破坏某人的计划；阻挠某人的行动 v.讲，谈（speak的过去式）；说；演说；从某种观点来说 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
hesitation
|
|
| n.犹豫，踌躇 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
shrill
|
|
| adj.尖声的；刺耳的；v尖叫 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
replete
|
|
| adj.饱满的，塞满的；n.贮蜜蚁 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
motive
|
|
| n.动机，目的；adv.发动的，运动的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
motives
|
|
| n.动机，目的( motive的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
assailed
|
|
| v.攻击( assail的过去式和过去分词 )；困扰；质问；毅然应对 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
hisses
|
|
| 嘶嘶声( hiss的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
intelligible
|
|
| adj.可理解的，明白易懂的，清楚的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
humiliation
|
|
| n.羞辱 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
hatred
|
|
| n.憎恶，憎恨，仇恨 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
commotion
|
|
| n.骚动，动乱 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
clamorous
|
|
| adj.吵闹的，喧哗的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
pounced
|
|
| v.突然袭击( pounce的过去式和过去分词 )；猛扑；一眼看出；抓住机会（进行抨击） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
chivalry
|
|
| n.骑士气概，侠义；（男人）对女人彬彬有礼，献殷勤 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
vent
|
|
| n.通风口，排放口；开衩；vt.表达，发泄 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
ascended
|
|
| v.上升，攀登( ascend的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
sarcastically
|
|
| adv.挖苦地，讽刺地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
epoch
|
|
| n.(新)时代；历元 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
entirely
|
|
| ad.全部地，完整地；完全地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
standing
|
|
| n.持续，地位；adj.永久的，不动的，直立的，不流动的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
obnoxious
|
|
| adj.极恼人的，讨人厌的，可憎的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
remarkable
|
|
| adj.显著的，异常的，非凡的，值得注意的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
eminent
|
|
| adj.显赫的，杰出的，有名的，优良的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
fixed
|
|
| adj.固定的，不变的，准备好的；(计算机)固定的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
59
obstinate
|
|
| adj.顽固的，倔强的，不易屈服的，较难治愈的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
acumen
|
|
| n.敏锐，聪明 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
utterance
|
|
| n.用言语表达，话语，言语 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
conformity
|
|
| n.一致，遵从，顺从 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
whetted
|
|
| v.（在石头上）磨（刀、斧等）( whet的过去式和过去分词 )；引起，刺激（食欲、欲望、兴趣等） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
ridicule
|
|
| v.讥讽，挖苦；n.嘲弄 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
interpretation
|
|
| n.解释，说明，描述；艺术处理 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
laymen
|
|
| 门外汉，外行人( layman的名词复数 )； 普通教徒（有别于神职人员） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
67
implicit
|
|
| a.暗示的，含蓄的，不明晰的，绝对的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
68
inaccurate
|
|
| adj.错误的，不正确的，不准确的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
69
authentic
|
|
| a.真的，真正的；可靠的，可信的，有根据的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
70
bind
|
|
| vt.捆，包扎；装订；约束；使凝固；vi.变硬 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
71
binding
|
|
| 有约束力的，有效的，应遵守的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
72
murmur
|
|
| n.低语，低声的怨言；v.低语，低声而言 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
73
murmurs
|
|
| n.低沉、连续而不清的声音( murmur的名词复数 )；低语声；怨言；嘀咕 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
74
ascertain
|
|
| vt.发现，确定，查明，弄清 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
75
quirks
|
|
| n.奇事，巧合( quirk的名词复数 )；怪癖 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
76
applied
|
|
| adj.应用的；v.应用，适用 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
77
drawn
|
|
| v.拖，拉，拔出；adj.憔悴的，紧张的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
78
abdication
|
|
| n.辞职；退位 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
79
preservation
|
|
| n.保护，维护，保存，保留，保持 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
80
exchequers
|
|
| n.（英国）财政部( exchequer的名词复数 )；国库，金库 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
81
unconditional
|
|
| adj.无条件的，无限制的，绝对的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
82
vitality
|
|
| n.活力，生命力，效力 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
83
consonant
|
|
| n.辅音；adj.[音]符合的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
84
majesty
|
|
| n.雄伟，壮丽，庄严，威严；最高权威，王权 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
85
amendment
|
|
| n.改正，修正，改善，修正案 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
86
coerced
|
|
| v.迫使做( coerce的过去式和过去分词 )；强迫；（以武力、惩罚、威胁等手段）控制；支配 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
87
coercing
|
|
| v.迫使做( coerce的现在分词 )；强迫；（以武力、惩罚、威胁等手段）控制；支配 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
88
unwillingness
|
|
| n. 不愿意，不情愿 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
89
concessions
|
|
| n.（尤指由政府或雇主给予的）特许权( concession的名词复数 )；承认；减价；（在某地的）特许经营权 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
90
concession
|
|
| n.让步，妥协；特许(权) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
91
commissioner
|
|
| n.（政府厅、局、处等部门）专员，长官，委员 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
92
pointed
|
|
| adj.尖的，直截了当的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
93
aggrieved
|
|
| adj.愤愤不平的，受委屈的；悲痛的；（在合法权利方面）受侵害的v.令委屈，令苦恼，侵害( aggrieve的过去式)；令委屈，令苦恼，侵害( aggrieve的过去式和过去分词) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
94
immediate
|
|
| adj.立即的；直接的，最接近的；紧靠的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
95
thereby
|
|
| adv.因此，从而 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
96
advantageous
|
|
| adj.有利的；有帮助的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
97
edifice
|
|
| n.宏伟的建筑物(如宫殿，教室) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
98
confession
|
|
| n.自白，供认，承认 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
99
doctrine
|
|
| n.教义；主义；学说 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
100
ascending
|
|
| adj.上升的，向上的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
101
Christian
|
|
| adj.基督教徒的；n.基督教徒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
102
imbibed
|
|
| v.吸收( imbibe的过去式和过去分词 )；喝；吸取；吸气 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
103
sarcasms
|
|
| n.讥讽，讽刺，挖苦( sarcasm的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
104
distinguished
|
|
| adj.卓越的，杰出的，著名的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
105
subscribe
|
|
| vi.(to)订阅，订购；同意；vt.捐助，赞助 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
106
supremacy
|
|
| n.至上；至高权力 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
107
justification
|
|
| n.正当的理由；辩解的理由 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
108
affixed
|
|
| adj.[医]附着的，附着的v.附加( affix的过去式和过去分词 )；粘贴；加以；盖（印章） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
109
almighty
|
|
| adj.全能的，万能的；很大的，很强的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
110
realization
|
|
| n.实现；认识到，深刻了解 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
111
aggregation
|
|
| n.聚合，组合；凝聚 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
112
bulwark
|
|
| n.堡垒，保障，防御 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
113
apex
|
|
| n.顶点，最高点 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
114
immorality
|
|
| n. 不道德, 无道义 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
115
rehabilitation
|
|
| n.康复，悔过自新，修复，复兴，复职，复位 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
116
humane
|
|
| adj.人道的，富有同情心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
117
humanitarianism
|
|
| n.博爱主义；人道主义；基督凡人论 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
118
superfluous
|
|
| adj.过多的，过剩的，多余的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
119
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： |
|
|
|
|
120
worthy
|
|
| adj.(of)值得的，配得上的；有价值的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
121
armory
|
|
| n.纹章，兵工厂，军械库 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
122
reactionary
|
|
| n.反动者，反动主义者；adj.反动的，反动主义的，反对改革的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
123
ridiculing
|
|
| v.嘲笑，嘲弄，奚落( ridicule的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
124
possessed
|
|
| adj.疯狂的；拥有的，占有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
125
fabulous
|
|
| adj.极好的；极为巨大的；寓言中的，传说中的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
126
thither
|
|
| adv.向那里；adj.在那边的，对岸的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
127
patriotic
|
|
| adj.爱国的，有爱国心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
128
insolent
|
|
| adj.傲慢的，无理的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
129
pretensions
|
|
| 自称( pretension的名词复数 )； 自命不凡； 要求； 权力 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
130
hazy
|
|
| adj.有薄雾的，朦胧的；不肯定的，模糊的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
131
thoroughly
|
|
| adv.完全地，彻底地，十足地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
132
withdrawn
|
|
| vt.收回；使退出；vi.撤退，退出 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |