France had long been the most literary of all the nations of Europe; although her literary men had never exhibited such intellectual powers as they displayed about the middle of the eighteenth century, or occupied such a position as that which they then assumed. Nothing of the kind had ever been seen in France, or perhaps in any other country. They were not constantly mixed up with public affairs as in England: at no period, on the contrary, had they lived more apart from them. They were invested with no authority whatever, and filled no public offices in a society crowded with public officers; yet they did not, like the greater part of their brethren in Germany, keep entirely1 aloof2 from the arena3 of politics and retire into the regions of pure philosophy and polite literature. They busied themselves incessantly4 with matters appertaining to government, and this was, in truth, their special occupation. Thus they were continually holding forth5 on the origin and primitive6 forms of society, the primary rights of the citizen and of government, the natural and artificial relations of men, the wrong or right of customary laws, and the principles of legislation. While they thus penetrated7 to the fundamental basis of the constitution of their time, they examined its structure with minute care and criticised its general plan. All, it is true, did not make a profound and special study of these great problems: the greater part only touched upon them cursorily8, and as it were in sport: but they all dealt with them more or less. This species of abstract and literary politics was scattered9 in unequal proportions through all the works of the period; from the ponderous10 treatise11 to the popular song, not one of them but contained some grains of it.
As for the political systems of these writers, they varied12 so greatly one from the other that any attempt to reconcile them, or to form any one theory of government out of them, would be an[120] impracticable task. Nevertheless, by discarding matters of detail, so as to get at the first leading ideas, it may be easily discovered that the authors of these different systems agreed at least in one very general notion, which all of them seem to have alike conceived, and which appears to have pre-existed in their minds before all the notions peculiar13 to themselves and to have been their common fountain-head. However widely they may have diverged14 in the rest of their course, they all started from this point. They all agreed that it was expedient15 to substitute simple and elementary rules, deduced from reason and natural law, for the complicated traditional customs which governed the society of their time. Upon a strict scrutiny16 it may be seen that what might be called the political philosophy of the eighteenth century consisted, properly speaking, in this one notion.
These opinions were by no means novel; for three thousand years they had unceasingly traversed the imaginations of mankind, though without being able to stamp themselves there. How came they at last to take possession of the minds of all the writers of this period? Why, instead of progressing no farther than the heads of a few philosophers, as had frequently been the case, had they at last reached the masses, and assumed the strength and the fervour of a political passion to such a degree, that general and abstract theories upon the nature of society became daily topics of conversation, and even inflamed18 the imaginations of women, and of the peasantry? How was it that literary men, possessing neither rank, nor honours, nor fortune, nor responsibility, nor power, became, in fact, the principal political men of the day, and even the only political men, inasmuch as whilst others held the reins19 of government, they alone grasped its authority?
A few words may suffice to show what an extraordinary and terrible influence these circumstances, which apparently20 belong only to the history of French literature, exercised upon the Revolution, and even upon the present condition of France.
It was not by chance that the philosophers of the eighteenth century thus coincided in entertaining notions so opposed to those which still served as bases to the society of their time: these ideas had been naturally suggested to them by the aspect of the society which they had all before their eyes. The sight of so many unjust or absurd privileges, the burden of which was more and more felt whilst their cause was less and less understood, urged, or rather precipitated21, the minds of one and all towards the idea of the natural equality of man’s condition. Whilst they looked upon so many strange and irregular institutions, born of other times, which[121] no one had attempted either to bring into harmony with each other or to adapt to modern wants, and which appeared likely to perpetuate22 their existence though they had lost their worth, they learned to abhor23 what was ancient and traditional, and naturally became desirous of re-constructing the social edifice24 of their day upon an entirely new plan—a plan which each one traced solely25 by the light of his reason.[70]
These writers were predisposed, by their own position, to relish26 general and abstract theories upon the subject of government, and to place in them the blindest confidence. The almost immeasurable distance in which they lived from practical duties afforded them no experience to moderate the ardour of their character; nothing warned them of the obstacles which the actual state of things might oppose to reforms, however desirable. They had no idea of the perils27 which always accompany the most needful revolutions; they had not even a presentiment28 of them, for the complete absence of all political liberty had the effect of rendering29 the transaction of public affairs not only unknown to them, but even invisible. They were neither employed in those affairs themselves, nor could they see what those employed in them were doing. They were consequently destitute30 of that superficial instruction which the sight of a free community, and the tumult31 of its discussions, bestow32 even upon those who are least mixed up with government. Thus they became far more bold in innovation, more fond of generalising and of systems, more disdainful of the wisdom of antiquity33, and still more confident in their individual reason, than is commonly to be seen in authors who write speculative34 books on politics.
The same state of ignorance opened to them the ears and hearts of the people. It may be confidently affirmed that if the French had still taken part, as they formerly35 had done, in the States-General, or if even they had found a daily occupation in the administration of the affairs of the country in the assemblies of their several provinces, they would not have allowed themselves to be inflamed as they were by the ideas of the writers of the day, since they would have retained certain habits of public business which would have preserved them from the evils of pure theory.
Had they been able, like the English, gradually to modify the spirit of their ancient institutions by practical experience without destroying them, they would perhaps have been less inclined to invent new ones. But there was not a man who did not daily feel himself injured in his fortune, in his person, in his comfort, or his pride by some old law, some ancient political custom, or some[122] other remnant of former authority, without perceiving at hand any remedy that he could himself apply to his own particular hardship. It appeared that the whole constitution of the country must either be endured or destroyed.
The French, however, had still preserved one liberty amidst the ruin of every other: they were still free to philosophise almost without restraint upon the origin of society, the essential nature of governments, and the primordial36 rights of mankind.
All those who felt themselves aggrieved37 by the daily application of existing laws were soon enamoured of these literary politics. The same taste soon reached even those who by nature or by their condition of life seemed the farthest removed from abstract speculations38. Every tax-payer wronged by the unequal distribution of the taille was fired by the idea that all men ought to be equal; every little landowner devoured39 by the rabbits of his noble neighbour was delighted to be told that all privileges were, without distinction, contrary to reason. Every public passion thus assumed the disguise of philosophy; all political action was violently driven back into the domain40 of literature; and the writers of the day, undertaking41 the guidance of public opinion, found themselves at one time in that position which the heads of parties commonly hold in free countries. No one in fact was any longer in a condition to contend with them for the part they had assumed.
An aristocracy in all its vigour42 not only carries on the affairs of a country, but directs public opinion, gives a tone to literature, and the stamp of authority to ideas; but the French nobility of the eighteenth century had entirely lost this portion of its supremacy43; its influence had followed the fortunes of its power; and the position it had occupied in the direction of the public mind had been entirely abandoned to the writers of the day, to occupy as they pleased. Nay44 more, this very aristocracy whose place they thus assumed, favoured their undertaking. So completely had it forgotten the fact that general theories, once admitted, inevitably45 transform themselves in time into political passions and deeds, that doctrines46 the most adverse47 to the peculiar rights, and even to the existence, of the nobility were looked upon as ingenious exercises of the mind; the nobles even shared as a pleasant pastime in these discussions, and quietly enjoyed their immunities48 and privileges whilst they serenely49 discussed the absurdity50 of all established customs.
Astonishment51 has frequently been expressed at the singular blindness with which the higher classes under the old monarchy52 of France thus contributed to their own ruin. But whence could they[123] have become more enlightened? Free institutions are not less necessary to show the greater citizens their perils than to secure to the lesser53 their rights. For more than a century since the last traces of public life had disappeared in France, no shock, no rumour54 had ever warned those most directly interested in the maintenance of the ancient constitution that the old building was tottering55 to its fall. As nothing had changed in its external aspect, they imagined that everything had remained the same. Their minds were thus bounded by the same horizon at which that of their fathers had stopped. In the public documents of the year 1789 the nobility appears to have been as much preoccupied56 with the idea of the encroachments of the royal power as it could possibly have been in those of the fifteenth century. On the other hand, the unfortunate Louis XVI. just before his own destruction by the incursion of democracy, still continued (as has been justly remarked by Burke) to look upon the aristocracy as the chief rival of the royal power, and mistrusted it as much as if he was still living in the days of the Fronde. The middle and lower classes on the contrary were in his eyes, as in those of his forefathers57, the surest support of the throne.
But that which must appear still more strange to men of the present day—men who have the shattered fragments of so many revolutions before their eyes—is the fact, that not the barest notion of a violent revolution ever entered into the minds of the generation which witnessed it. Such a notion was never discussed, for it was never conceived. Those minor58 shocks which the exercise of political liberty is continually imparting to the best constituted societies, serve daily to call to mind the possibility of an earthquake, and to keep public vigilance on the alert; but in the state of society of France in the eighteenth century, on the brink59 of this abyss, nothing had yet indicated that the fabric60 leaned.
On examining with attention the Instructions drawn61 up by the three Orders before their convocation in 1789—by all the three, the nobility and clergy62, as well as the Tiers-état—noting seriatim all the demands made for the changes of laws or customs, it will be seen with a sort of terror, on terminating this immense labour, and casting up the sum total of all these particular requirements, that what was required is no less than the simultaneous and systematic63 abolition64 of every law and every usage current throughout the country; and that what was impending65 must be one of the most extensive and dangerous revolutions that ever appeared in the world. Yet the very men who were so shortly to become its victims knew nothing of it. They fancied that the total and[124] sudden transformation66 of so ancient and complicated a state of society was to be effected, without any concussion67, by the aid and efficacy of reason alone; and they fatally forgot that maxim68 which their forefathers, four hundred years before, had expressed in the simple and energetic language of their time: ‘Par requierre de trop grande franchise69 et libertés chet-on en trop grande servaige.’ (By requiring too great liberty and franchise, men fall into too great servitude.)
It was not surprising that the nobility and middle classes, so long excluded from all public action, should have displayed this strange inexperience; but what astonishes far more is, that the very men who had the conduct of public affairs, the ministers, the magistrates70, and the Intendants, should not have evinced more foresight71. Many of them, nevertheless, were very clever men in their profession, and were thoroughly72 possessed73 of all the details of the public administration of their time; but in that great science of government, which teaches the comprehension of the general movement of society, the appreciation74 of what is passing in the minds of the masses, and the foreknowledge of the probable results—they were just as much novices75 as the people itself. In truth, it is only the exercise of free institutions that can teach the statesman this principal portion of his art.
This may easily be seen in the Memoir76 addressed by Turgot to the King in 1775, in which, among other matters, he advised his Majesty77 to summon a representative assembly, freely elected by the whole nation, to meet every year, for six weeks, about his own person, but to grant it no effective power. His proposal was, that this assembly should take cognisance of administrative78 business, but never of the government—should offer suggestions rather than express a will—and, in fact, should be commissioned to discuss laws, but not to make them. ‘In this wise,’ said the Memoir, ‘the royal power would be enlightened, but not thwarted79, and public opinion contented80 without danger: for these assemblies would have no authority to oppose any indispensable operation; and if, which is most improbable, they should not lend themselves to this duty, his Majesty would still be the master to do as he pleases.’
It was impossible to show greater ignorance of the true bearing of such a measure, and of the spirit of the times. It has frequently happened, it is true, that towards the end of a revolutionary period, such a proposal as that made by Turgot has been carried into effect with impunity81, and that a shadow of liberty has been granted without the reality. Augustus made the experiment with[125] success. A nation fatigued82 by a prolonged struggle may willingly consent to be duped in order to obtain repose83; and history shows that enough may then be done to satisfy it, by collecting from all parts of the country a certain number of obscure or dependent individuals, and making them play before it the part of a political assembly for the wages they receive. There have been several examples of the kind. But at the commencement of a revolution such experiments always fail; they inflame17, without satisfying the people. This truth, known to the humblest citizen of a free country, was not known to Turgot, great administrator84 as he was.
If now it be taken into consideration that this same French nation, so ignorant of its own public affairs, so utterly85 devoid86 of experience, so hampered87 by its institutions, and so powerless to amend88 them, was also in those days the most lettered and witty89 nation of the earth, it may readily be understood how the writers of the time became a great political power, and ended by being the first power in the country.
In England those who wrote on the subject of government were connected with those who governed; the latter applied90 new ideas to practice—the former corrected or controlled their theories by practical observation. But in France the political world remained divided into two separate provinces, with no mutual91 intercourse92. One portion governed; the other established abstract principles on which all government ought to be founded. Here measures were taken in obedience93 to routine; there general laws were propounded94, without even a thought as to the means of their application. These kept the direction of affairs; those guided the intelligence of the nation.
Above the actual state of society—the constitution of which was still traditional, confused, and irregular, and in which the laws remained conflicting and contradictory95, ranks sharply sundered96, the conditions of the different classes fixed97 whilst their burdens were unequal—an imaginary state of society was thus springing up, in which everything appeared simple and co-ordinate, uniform, equitable98, and agreeable to reason. The imagination of the people gradually deserted99 the former state of things in order to seek refuge in the latter. Interest was lost in what was, to foster dreams of what might be; and men thus dwelt in fancy in this ideal city, which was the work of literary invention.
The French Revolution has been frequently attributed to that of America. The American Revolution had certainly considerable influence upon the French; but the latter owed less to what was[126] actually done in the United States than to what was thought at the same time in France. Whilst to the rest of Europe the Revolution of America still only appeared a novel and strange occurrence, in France it only rendered more palpable and more striking that which was already supposed to be known. Other countries it astonished; to France it brought more complete conviction. The Americans seemed to have done no more than execute what the literary genius of France had already conceived; they gave the substance of reality to that which the French had excogitated. It was as if Fénelon had suddenly found himself in Salentum.
This circumstance, so novel in history, of the whole political education of a great people being formed by its literary men, contributed more than anything perhaps to bestow upon the French Revolution its peculiar stamp, and to cause those results which are still perceptible.
The writers of the time not only imparted their ideas to the people who effected the Revolution, but they gave them also their peculiar temperament100 and disposition101. The whole nation ended, after being so long schooled by them, in the absence of all other leaders and in profound ignorance of practical affairs, by catching102 up the instincts, the turn of mind, the tastes, and even the humours of those who wrote; so that, when the time for action came, it transported into the arena of politics all the habits of literature.
A study of the history of the French Revolution will show that it was carried on precisely103 in that same spirit which has caused so many abstract books to be written on government. There was the same attraction towards general theories, complete systems of legislation, and exact symmetry in the laws—the same contempt of existing facts—the same reliance upon theory—the same love of the original, the ingenious, and the novel in institutions—the same desire to reconstruct, all at once, the entire constitution by the rules of logic104, and upon a single plan, rather than seek to amend it in its parts. The spectacle was an alarming one; for that which is a merit in a writer is often a fault in a statesman: and the same things which have often caused great books to be written, may lead to great revolutions.
Even the political language of the time caught something of the tone in which the authors spoke105: it was full of general expressions, abstract terms, pompous106 words, and literary turns. This style, aided by the political passions which it expressed, penetrated through all classes, and descended107 with singular facility even to the lowest. Considerably108 before the Revolution, the edicts of Louis[127] XVI. frequently spoke of the law of nature and the rights of man; and I have found instances of peasants who, in their memorials called their neighbours ‘fellow-citizens,’ their Intendant ‘a respectable magistrate,’ their parish-priest ‘the minister of the altar,’ and God ‘the Supreme109 Being,’ and who wanted nothing but spelling to become very indifferent authors.
These new qualities became so completely incorporated with the old stock of the French character, that habits resulting only from this singular education have frequently been attributed to the natural disposition of the French. It has been asserted that the taste, or rather the passion, which the French have displayed during the last sixty years for general ideas and big words in political discussion, arose from some characteristic peculiar to the French race, which has been somewhat pedantically110 called ‘the genius of France,’ as if this pretended characteristic could suddenly have displayed itself at the end of the last century, after having remained concealed111 during the whole history of the country.
It is singular that the French have preserved the habits which they had derived112 from literature, whilst they have almost entirely lost their ancient love of literature itself. I have been frequently astonished in the course of my own public life, to see that men who had never read the works of the eighteenth century, or of any other, and who had a great contempt for authors, nevertheless so faithfully retain some of the principal defects which were displayed before their birth by the literary spirit of that day.
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
entirely
|
|
| ad.全部地，完整地；完全地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
aloof
|
|
| adj.远离的；冷淡的，漠不关心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
arena
|
|
| n.竞技场，运动场所；竞争场所，舞台 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
incessantly
|
|
| ad.不停地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
forth
|
|
| adv.向前；向外，往外 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
primitive
|
|
| adj.原始的；简单的；n.原(始)人，原始事物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
penetrated
|
|
| adj. 击穿的，鞭辟入里的 动词penetrate的过去式和过去分词形式 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
cursorily
|
|
| adv.粗糙地，疏忽地，马虎地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
scattered
|
|
| adj.分散的，稀疏的；散步的；疏疏落落的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
ponderous
|
|
| adj.沉重的，笨重的，(文章)冗长的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
treatise
|
|
| n.专著；(专题)论文 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
varied
|
|
| adj.多样的，多变化的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
peculiar
|
|
| adj.古怪的，异常的；特殊的，特有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
diverged
|
|
| 分开( diverge的过去式和过去分词 )； 偏离； 分歧； 分道扬镳 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
expedient
|
|
| adj.有用的，有利的；n.紧急的办法，权宜之计 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
scrutiny
|
|
| n.详细检查，仔细观察 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
inflame
|
|
| v.使燃烧；使极度激动；使发炎 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
inflamed
|
|
| adj.发炎的，红肿的v.（使）变红，发怒，过热( inflame的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
reins
|
|
| 感情，激情； 缰( rein的名词复数 )； 控制手段； 掌管； （成人带着幼儿走路以防其走失时用的）保护带 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
apparently
|
|
| adv.显然地；表面上，似乎 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
precipitated
|
|
| v.（突如其来地）使发生( precipitate的过去式和过去分词 )；促成；猛然摔下；使沉淀 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
perpetuate
|
|
| v.使永存，使永记不忘 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
abhor
|
|
| v.憎恶；痛恨 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
edifice
|
|
| n.宏伟的建筑物(如宫殿，教室) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
solely
|
|
| adv.仅仅，唯一地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
relish
|
|
| n.滋味，享受，爱好，调味品；vt.加调味料，享受，品味；vi.有滋味 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
perils
|
|
| 极大危险( peril的名词复数 )； 危险的事（或环境） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
presentiment
|
|
| n.预感，预觉 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
rendering
|
|
| n.表现，描写 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
destitute
|
|
| adj.缺乏的；穷困的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
tumult
|
|
| n.喧哗；激动，混乱；吵闹 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
bestow
|
|
| v.把…赠与，把…授予；花费 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
antiquity
|
|
| n.古老；高龄；古物，古迹 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
speculative
|
|
| adj.思索性的，暝想性的，推理的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
formerly
|
|
| adv.从前，以前 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
primordial
|
|
| adj.原始的；最初的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
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： |
|
|
|
|
38
speculations
|
|
| n.投机买卖( speculation的名词复数 )；思考；投机活动；推断 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
devoured
|
|
| 吞没( devour的过去式和过去分词 )； 耗尽； 津津有味地看； 狼吞虎咽地吃光 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
domain
|
|
| n.(活动等)领域，范围；领地，势力范围 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
undertaking
|
|
| n.保证，许诺，事业 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
vigour
|
|
| （=vigor）n.智力，体力，精力 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
supremacy
|
|
| n.至上；至高权力 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
nay
|
|
| adv.不；n.反对票，投反对票者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
inevitably
|
|
| adv.不可避免地；必然发生地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
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： |
|
|
|
|
47
adverse
|
|
| adj.不利的；有害的；敌对的，不友好的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
immunities
|
|
| 免除，豁免( immunity的名词复数 )； 免疫力 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
serenely
|
|
| adv.安详地，宁静地，平静地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
absurdity
|
|
| n.荒谬，愚蠢；谬论 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
astonishment
|
|
| n.惊奇，惊异 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
monarchy
|
|
| n.君主，最高统治者；君主政体，君主国 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
lesser
|
|
| adj.次要的，较小的；adv.较小地，较少地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
rumour
|
|
| n.谣言，谣传，传闻 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
tottering
|
|
| adj.蹒跚的，动摇的v.走得或动得不稳( totter的现在分词 )；踉跄；蹒跚；摇摇欲坠 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
preoccupied
|
|
| adj.全神贯注的，入神的；被抢先占有的；心事重重的v.占据（某人）思想，使对…全神贯注，使专心于( preoccupy的过去式) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
forefathers
|
|
| n.祖先，先人；祖先，祖宗( forefather的名词复数 )；列祖列宗；前人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
minor
|
|
| adj.较小(少)的，较次要的；n.辅修学科；vi.辅修 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
59
brink
|
|
| n.(悬崖、河流等的)边缘，边沿 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
fabric
|
|
| n.织物，织品，布；构造，结构，组织 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
drawn
|
|
| v.拖，拉，拔出；adj.憔悴的，紧张的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
clergy
|
|
| n.[总称]牧师，神职人员 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
systematic
|
|
| adj.有系统的，有计划的，有方法的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
abolition
|
|
| n.废除，取消 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
impending
|
|
| a.imminent, about to come or happen | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
transformation
|
|
| n.变化；改造；转变 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
67
concussion
|
|
| n.脑震荡；震动 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
68
maxim
|
|
| n.格言，箴言 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
69
franchise
|
|
| n.特许，特权，专营权，特许权 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
70
magistrates
|
|
| 地方法官，治安官( magistrate的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
71
foresight
|
|
| n.先见之明，深谋远虑 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
72
thoroughly
|
|
| adv.完全地，彻底地，十足地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
73
possessed
|
|
| adj.疯狂的；拥有的，占有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
74
appreciation
|
|
| n.评价；欣赏；感谢；领会，理解；价格上涨 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
75
novices
|
|
| n.新手( novice的名词复数 )；初学修士（或修女）；（修会等的）初学生；尚未赢过大赛的赛马 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
76
memoir
|
|
| n.[pl.]回忆录，自传；记事录 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
77
majesty
|
|
| n.雄伟，壮丽，庄严，威严；最高权威，王权 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
78
administrative
|
|
| adj.行政的，管理的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
79
thwarted
|
|
| 阻挠( thwart的过去式和过去分词 )； 使受挫折； 挫败； 横过 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
80
contented
|
|
| adj.满意的，安心的，知足的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
81
impunity
|
|
| n.(惩罚、损失、伤害等的)免除 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
82
fatigued
|
|
| adj. 疲乏的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
83
repose
|
|
| v.(使)休息；n.安息 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
84
administrator
|
|
| n.经营管理者，行政官员 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
85
utterly
|
|
| adv.完全地，绝对地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
86
devoid
|
|
| adj.全无的，缺乏的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
87
hampered
|
|
| 妨碍，束缚，限制( hamper的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
88
amend
|
|
| vt.修改，修订，改进；n.[pl.]赔罪，赔偿 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
89
witty
|
|
| adj.机智的，风趣的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
90
applied
|
|
| adj.应用的；v.应用，适用 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
91
mutual
|
|
| adj.相互的，彼此的；共同的，共有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
92
intercourse
|
|
| n.性交；交流，交往，交际 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
93
obedience
|
|
| n.服从，顺从 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
94
propounded
|
|
| v.提出（问题、计划等）供考虑[讨论]，提议( propound的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
95
contradictory
|
|
| adj.反驳的，反对的，抗辩的；n.正反对，矛盾对立 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
96
sundered
|
|
| v.隔开，分开( sunder的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
97
fixed
|
|
| adj.固定的，不变的，准备好的；(计算机)固定的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
98
equitable
|
|
| adj.公平的；公正的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
99
deserted
|
|
| adj.荒芜的，荒废的，无人的，被遗弃的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
100
temperament
|
|
| n.气质，性格，性情 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
101
disposition
|
|
| n.性情，性格；意向，倾向；排列，部署 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
102
catching
|
|
| adj.易传染的，有魅力的，迷人的，接住 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
103
precisely
|
|
| adv.恰好，正好，精确地，细致地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
104
logic
|
|
| n.逻辑(学)；逻辑性 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
105
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： |
|
|
|
|
106
pompous
|
|
| adj.傲慢的，自大的；夸大的；豪华的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
107
descended
|
|
| a.为...后裔的，出身于...的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
108
considerably
|
|
| adv.极大地；相当大地；在很大程度上 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
109
supreme
|
|
| adj.极度的，最重要的；至高的，最高的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
110
pedantically
|
|
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
111
concealed
|
|
| a.隐藏的，隐蔽的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
112
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： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |