It is worthy1 of observation that amongst all the ideas and all the feelings which led to the French Revolution, the idea and the taste for political liberty, properly so called, were the last to manifest themselves and the first to disappear.
For some time past the ancient fabric2 of the Government had begun to be shaken; it tottered3 already, but liberty was not yet thought of. Even Voltaire had scarcely thought about it; three years’ residence in England had shown him what that liberty is, but without attaching him to it. The sceptical philosophy which was then in vogue4 in England enchanted5 him; the political laws of England hardly attracted his attention; he was more struck by their defects than by their merits. In his letters on England, which are one of his best pieces, Parliament is hardly mentioned; the fact was that he envied the English their literary freedom without caring for their political freedom, as if the former could ever long exist without the latter.
Towards the middle of the eighteenth century, a certain number of writers began to appear who devoted6 themselves especially to questions of public administration, and who were designated, in consequence of several principles which they held in common, by the general name of political economists7 or physiocrates. These economists have left less conspicuous8 traces in history than the French philosophers; perhaps they contributed less to the approach of the Revolution; yet I think that the true character of the Revolution may best be studied in their works. The French philosophers confined themselves for the most part to very general and very abstract opinions on government; the economists, without abandoning theory, clung more closely to facts. The former said what might be thought; the latter sometimes pointed9 out what might be done. All the institutions which the Revolution was about to annihilate10 for ever were the peculiar11 objects of their attacks; none found favour in their sight. All the institutions, on the contrary, which may be regarded as the product of the Revolution,[137] were announced beforehand by these economical writers, and ardently12 recommended; there is hardly one of these institutions of which the germ may not be discovered in some of their writings; and those writings may be said to contain all that is most substantial in the Revolution itself.
Nay13, more, their books already bore the stamp of that revolutionary and democratic temper which we know so well: they breathe not only the hatred14 of certain privileges, but even diversity was odious15 to them; they would adore equality, even in servitude. All that thwarts16 their designs is to be crushed. They care little for plighted17 faith, nothing for private rights—or rather, to speak accurately18, private rights have already ceased in their eyes to exist—public utility is everything. Yet these were men, for the most part, of gentle and peaceful lives, worthy persons, upright magistrates19, able administrators20; but the peculiar spirit of their task bore them onwards.
The past was to these economists a subject of endless contempt. ‘This nation has been governed for centuries on false principles,’ said Letronne, ‘everything seems to have been done by haphazard21.’ Starting from this notion, they set to work; no institution was so ancient or so well-established in the history of France that they hesitated to demand its suppression from the moment that it incommoded them or deranged22 the symmetry of their plans. One of these writers proposed to obliterate23 at once all the ancient territorial24 divisions of the kingdom, and to change all the names of the provinces, forty years before the Constituent25 Assembly executed this scheme.
They had already conceived the idea of all the social and administrative26 reforms which the Revolution has accomplished27 before the idea of free institutions had begun to cross their minds. They were, indeed, extremely favourable28 to the free exchange of produce, and to the doctrine29 of laissez faire et laissez passer, the basis of free trade and free labour; but as for political liberties, properly so called, these did not occur to their minds, or, if perchance they did occur to their imaginations, such ideas were at once rejected. Most of them began to display considerable hostility30 to deliberative assemblies, to local or secondary powers, and, in general, to all the checks which have been established, at different times, in all free nations, to balance the central power of the Government. ‘The system of checks,’ said Quesnay, ‘is a fatal idea in government.’ ‘The speculations31 on which a system of checks has been devised are chimerical,’ said a friend of the same writer.
[138]
The sole guarantee invented by them against the abuse of power was public education; for, as Quesnay elsewhere observes, ‘despotism is impossible when the nation is enlightened.’ ‘Struck by the evils arising from abuses of authority,’ said another of his disciples32, ‘men have invented a thousand totally useless means of resistance, whilst they have neglected the only means which are truly efficacious, namely, public, general, and continual instruction in the principles of essential justice and natural order.’ This literary nonsense was, according to these thinkers, to supply the place of all political securities.
Letronne, who so bitterly deplored33 the forlorn condition in which the Government had left the rural districts, who described them as without roads, without employment, and without information, never conceived that their concerns might be more successfully carried on if the inhabitants themselves were entrusted34 with the management of them.
Turgot himself, who deserves to rank far above all the rest for the elevation35 of his character and the singular merits of his genius, had not much more taste than the other economists for political liberty, or, at least, that taste came to him later, and when it was forced upon him by public opinion. To him, as well as to all the others, the chief political security seemed to be a certain kind of public instruction, given by the State, on a particular system and with a particular tendency. His confidence in this sort of intellectual drug, or, as one of his contemporaries expressed it, ‘in the mechanism37 of an education regulated by principles,’ was boundless38. ‘I venture to assure your Majesty,’ said he, in a report to the King, proposing a plan of this nature, ‘that in ten years your people will have changed out of knowledge; and that by their attainments39, by their morality, and by their enlightened zeal40 for your service and for that of the country, France will be raised far above all other nations. Children who are now ten years of age will then have grown up as men prepared for the public service, attached to their country, submissive, not through fear but through reason, to authority, humane41 to their fellow-citizens, accustomed to recognise and to respect the administration of justice.’
Political freedom had been so long destroyed in France that men had almost entirely42 forgotten what are its conditions and its effects. Nay, more, the shapeless ruins of freedom which still remained, and the institutions which seem to have been formed to supply its place, rendered it an object of suspicion and of prejudice. Most of the Provincial43 Assemblies which were still in existence retained the spirit of the Middle Ages as well as their obsolete44 formalities,[139] and they checked rather than advanced the progress of society. The Parliaments, which alone stood in lieu of political bodies, had no power to prevent the evil which the Government did, and frequently prevented the good which the Government attempted to do.
To accomplish the revolution which they contemplated45 by means of all these antiquated46 instruments appeared impracticable to the school of economists. To confide36 the execution of their plans to the nation, mistress of herself, was not more agreeable to them; for how was it possible to cause a whole people to adopt and follow a system of reform so extensive and so closely connected in all its parts? It seemed to them more easy and more proper to make the administrative power of the Crown itself the instrument of their designs.
That new administrative power had not sprung from the institutions of the Middle Ages, nor did it bear the mark of that period; in spite of its errors they discovered in it some beneficial tendencies. Like themselves it was naturally favourable to equality of conditions and to uniformity of rules; as much as themselves it cordially detested47 all the ancient powers which were born of feudalism or tended to aristocracy. In all Europe no machine of government existed so well organised, so vast, or so strong. To find such a government ready to their hands seemed to them a most fortunate circumstance; they would have called it providential, if it had been the fashion then, as it now is, to cause Providence48 to intervene on all occasions. ‘The state of France,’ said Letronne, ‘is infinitely49 better than that of England, for here reforms can be accomplished which will change the whole condition of the country in a moment; whilst among the English such reforms may always be thwarted50 by political parties.’
The point was, then, not to destroy this absolute power, but to convert it. ‘The State must govern according to the rules of essential order,’ said Mercier de la Rivière, ‘and when this is the case it ought to be all powerful.’ ‘Let the State thoroughly51 understand its duty, and then let it be altogether free.’ From Quesnay to the Abbé Bodeau they were all of the same mind. They not only relied on the royal administration to reform the social condition of their own age, but they partially52 borrowed from it the idea of the future government they hoped to found. The latter was framed in the image of the former.
These economists held that it is the business of the State not only to command the nation, but to fashion it in a certain manner, to form the character of the population upon a certain preconceived[140] model, to inspire the mind with such opinions and the heart with such sentiments as it may deem necessary. In fact, they set no limits to the rights of the State, nor to what it could effect. The State was not only to reform men, but to transform them—perhaps if it chose, to make others! ‘The State can make men what it pleases,’ said Bodeau. That proposition includes all their theories.
This unlimited53 social power which the French economists had conceived was not only greater than any power they ever beheld54, but it differed from every other power by its origin and its nature. It did not flow directly from the Deity55, it did not rest on tradition; it was an impersonal56 power; it was not called the King, but the State; it was not the inheritance of a family, but the product and the representative of all. It entitled them to bend the right of every man to the will of the rest.
That peculiar form of tyranny which is called Democratic Despotism, and which was utterly57 unknown to the Middle Ages, was already familiar to these writers. No gradations in society, no distinctions of classes, no fixed58 ranks—a people composed of individuals nearly alike and entirely equal—this confused mass being recognised as the only legitimate59 sovereign, but carefully deprived of all the faculties60 which could enable it either to direct or even to superintend its own government. Above this mass a single officer, charged to do everything in its name without consulting it. To control this officer, public opinion, deprived of its organs; to arrest him, revolutions, but no laws. In principle, a subordinate agent; in fact, a master.
As nothing was as yet to be found about them which came up to this ideal, they sought it in the depths of Asia. I affirm, without exaggeration, that there is not one of these writers who has not, in some of his productions, passed an emphatic61 eulogy62 on China. That, at least, is always to be found in their books; and, as China was still very imperfectly known, there is no trash they have not written about that empire. That stupid and barbarous government, which a handful of Europeans can overpower when they please, appeared to them the most perfect model to be copied by all the nations of the earth. China was to them what England, and subsequently the United States, became for all Frenchmen. They expressed their emotion and enchantment63 at the aspect of a country, whose sovereign, absolute but unprejudiced, drives a furrow64 once a year with his own hands in honour of the useful arts; where all public employments are obtained by competitive examination, and which has a system of philosophy for its religion, and men of letters for its aristocracy.
[141]
It is supposed that the destructive theories which are designated in our times by the name of socialism are of recent origin: this, again, is a mistake; these theories are contemporary with the first French school of economists. Whilst they were intent on employing the all-powerful government they had conceived in order to change the form of society, other writers grasped in imagination the same power to subvert65 its foundations.
In the Code de la Nature, by Morelly, will be found, side by side with the doctrines66 of the economists on the omnipotence67 and unlimited rights of the State, several of the political theories which have most alarmed the French nation in these later times, and which are supposed to have been born before our eyes—community of goods, the right to labour, absolute equality of conditions, uniformity in all things, a mechanical regularity68 in all the movements of individuals, a tyranny to regulate every action of daily life, and the complete absorption of the personality of each member of the community into the whole social body.
‘Nothing in society shall belong in singular property to any one,’ says the first article of this code. ‘Property is detestable, and whosoever shall attempt to re-establish it, shall be shut up for life, as a maniac69 or an enemy of mankind. Every citizen is to be supported, maintained, and employed at the public expense,’ says Article II. ‘All productions are to be stored in public magazines, to be distributed to the citizens and to supply their daily wants. Towns will be erected70 on the same plan; all private dwellings71 or buildings will be alike; at five years of age all children will be taken from their parents and brought up in common at the cost of the State and in a uniform manner.’
Such a book might have been written yesterday: it is a hundred years old. It appeared in 1755, at the very time when Quesnay founded his school. So true it is that centralisation and socialism are products of the same soil; they are to each other what the grafted72 tree is to the wild stock.
Of all the men of their time, these economists are those who would appear most at home in our own; their passion for equality is so strong, and their taste for freedom is so questionable73, that one might fancy they are our contemporaries. In reading the speeches and the books of the men who figured in the Revolution of 1789, we are suddenly transported into a place and a state of society quite unknown to us; but in perusing74 the books of this school of economists one may fancy we have been living with these people, and have just been talking with them.
About the year 1750 the whole French nation would not have[142] been disposed to exact a larger amount of political freedom than the economists themselves. The taste and even the notion of freedom had perished with the use of it. The nation desired reform rather than rights; and if there had been at that time on the throne of France a sovereign of the energy and the character of Frederick the Great, I doubt not that he would have accomplished in society and in government many of the great changes which have been brought about by the Revolution, and this not only without the loss of his crown, but with a considerable augmentation of his power. It is said that one of the ablest ministers of Louis XV., M. de Machault, had a glimpse of this idea, and imparted it to his master; but such undertakings76 are not the result of advice: to be able to perform them a man must have been able to conceive them.
Twenty years later the state of things was changed. A vision of political freedom had visited the mind of France, and was every day becoming more attractive, as may be inferred from a variety of symptoms. The provinces began to conceive the desire to manage once more their own affairs. The notion that the whole people has a right to take part in the government diffused77 itself and took possession of the public. Recollections of the old States-General were revived. The nation, which detested its own history, recalled no other part of it with pleasure but this. This fresh current of opinion bore away the economists themselves, and compelled them to encumber78 their Unitarian system with some free institutions.
When, in 1771, the Parliaments were destroyed, the same public, which had so often suffered from their prejudices, was deeply affected79 by their fall. It seemed as if with them fell the last barrier which could still restrain the arbitrary power of the Crown.
This opposition80 astonished and irritated Voltaire. ‘Almost all the kingdom is in a state of effervescence and consternation,’ he wrote to one of his friends; ‘the ferment81 is as great in the provinces as at Paris itself. Yet this edict seems to be full of useful reforms. To abolish the sale of public offices, to render the administration of justice gratuitous82, to prevent suitors from coming from all corners of the kingdom to Paris to ruin themselves there, to charge the Crown with the payment of the expenses of the seignorial jurisdictions83—are not these great services rendered to the nation? These Parliaments, moreover, have they not been often barbarous and persecutors? I am really amazed at the out-of-the-way people who take the part of these insolent84 and indocile citizens. For my own part I think the King right; and since we must serve, I think[143] it better to serve under a lion born of a good family, and who is by birth much stronger than I am, than under two hundred rats of my own condition.’ And he adds, by way of excuse, ‘Remember that I am bound to appreciate highly the favour the King has conferred on all the lords of manors85, by undertaking75 to pay the expenses of their jurisdictions.’
Voltaire, who had long been absent from Paris, imagined that public opinion still remained at the point where he had left it. But he was mistaken. The French people no longer confined themselves to the desire that their affairs should be better conducted; they began to wish to conduct their affairs themselves, and it was manifest that the great Revolution, to which everything was contributing, would be brought about not only with the assent86 of the people, but by their hands.
From that moment, I believe that this radical87 Revolution, which was to confound in common ruin all that was worst and all that was best in the institutions and condition of France, became inevitable88. A people so ill-prepared to act for themselves could not undertake a universal and simultaneous reform without a universal destruction. An absolute sovereign would have been a less dangerous innovator89. For myself, when I reflect that this same Revolution, which destroyed so many institutions, opinions, and habits adverse90 to freedom, also destroyed so many of those things without which freedom can hardly exist, I incline to the belief that had it been wrought91 by a despot it would perhaps have left the French nation less unfit one day to become a free people, than wrought as it was by the sovereignty of the people and by the people themselves.
What has here been said must never be lost sight of by those who would understand the history of the French Revolution.
When the love of the French for political freedom was awakened92, they had already conceived a certain number of notions on matters of government, which not only did not readily ally themselves with the existence of free institutions, but which were almost contrary to them.
They had accepted as the ideal of society a people having no aristocracy but that of its public officers, a single and all-powerful administration, directing the affairs of State, protecting those of private persons. Meaning to be free, they by no means meant to deviate93 from this first conception: only they attempted to reconcile it with that of freedom.
They, therefore, undertook to combine an unlimited administrative centralisation with a preponderating94 legislative95 body—the[144] administration of a bureaucracy with the government of electors. The nation as a whole had all the rights of sovereignty; each citizen taken singly was thrust into the strictest dependence96; the former was expected to display the experience and the virtues97 of a free people—the latter the qualities of a faithful servant.
This desire of introducing political freedom in the midst of institutions and opinions essentially98 alien or adverse to it, but which were already established in the habits or sanctioned by the taste of the French themselves, is the main cause of the abortive99 attempts at free government which have succeeded each other in France for more than sixty years; and which have been followed by such disastrous100 revolutions, that, wearied by so many efforts, disgusted by so, laborious101 and so sterile102 a work, abandoning their second intentions for their original aim, many Frenchmen have arrived at the conclusion that to live as equals under a master is after all not without some charm. Thus it is that the French of the present day are infinitely more similar to the Economists of 1750 than to their fathers in 1789.
I have often asked myself what is the source of that passion for political freedom which in all ages has been the fruitful mother of the greatest things which mankind have achieved—and in what feelings that passion strikes root and finds its nourishment103.
It is evident that when nations are ill directed they soon conceive the wish to govern themselves; but this love of independence, which only springs up under the influence of certain transient evils produced by despotism, is never lasting104: it passes away with the accident that gave rise to it; and what seemed to be the love of freedom was no more than the hatred of a master. That which nations made to be free really hate is the curse of dependence.
Nor do I believe that the true love of freedom is ever born of the mere105 aspect of its material advantages; for this aspect may frequently happen to be overcast106. It is very true that in the long run freedom ever brings, to those who know how to keep it, ease, comfort, and often wealth; but there are times at which it disturbs for a season the possession of these blessings107; there are other times when despotism alone can confer the ephemeral enjoyment108 of them. The men who prize freedom only for such things as these are not men who ever long preserved it.
That which at all times has so strongly attached the affection of certain men is the attraction of freedom itself, its native charms independent of its gifts—the pleasure of speaking, acting109, and breathing without restraint, under no master but God and the[145] law. He who seeks in freedom aught but herself is fit only to serve.
There are nations which have indefatigably110 pursued her through every sort of peril111 and hardship. They loved her not for her material gifts; they regard herself as a gift so precious and so necessary that no other could console them for the loss of that which consoles them for the loss of everything else. Others grow weary of freedom in the midst of their prosperities; they allow her to be snatched without resistance from their hands, lest they should sacrifice by an effort that well-being112 which she had bestowed113 upon them. For them to remain free, nothing was wanting but a taste for freedom. I attempt no analysis of that lofty sentiment to those who feel it not. It enters of its own accord into the large hearts God has prepared to receive it; it fills them, it enraptures114 them; but to the meaner minds which have never felt it, it is past finding out.
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
worthy
|
|
| adj.(of)值得的，配得上的；有价值的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
fabric
|
|
| n.织物，织品，布；构造，结构，组织 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
tottered
|
|
| v.走得或动得不稳( totter的过去式和过去分词 )；踉跄；蹒跚；摇摇欲坠 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
Vogue
|
|
| n.时髦，时尚；adj.流行的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
enchanted
|
|
| adj. 被施魔法的，陶醉的，入迷的 动词enchant的过去式和过去分词 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
devoted
|
|
| adj.忠诚的，忠实的，热心的，献身于...的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
economists
|
|
| n.经济学家，经济专家( economist的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
conspicuous
|
|
| adj.明眼的，惹人注目的；炫耀的，摆阔气的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
pointed
|
|
| adj.尖的，直截了当的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
annihilate
|
|
| v.使无效；毁灭；取消 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
peculiar
|
|
| adj.古怪的，异常的；特殊的，特有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
ardently
|
|
| adv.热心地，热烈地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
nay
|
|
| adv.不；n.反对票，投反对票者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
hatred
|
|
| n.憎恶，憎恨，仇恨 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
odious
|
|
| adj.可憎的，讨厌的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
thwarts
|
|
| 阻挠( thwart的第三人称单数 )； 使受挫折； 挫败； 横过 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
plighted
|
|
| vt.保证，约定（plight的过去式与过去分词形式） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
accurately
|
|
| adv.准确地，精确地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
magistrates
|
|
| 地方法官，治安官( magistrate的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
administrators
|
|
| n.管理者( administrator的名词复数 )；有管理（或行政）才能的人；（由遗嘱检验法庭指定的）遗产管理人；奉派暂管主教教区的牧师 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
haphazard
|
|
| adj.无计划的，随意的，杂乱无章的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
deranged
|
|
| adj.疯狂的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
obliterate
|
|
| v.擦去，涂抹，去掉...痕迹，消失，除去 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
territorial
|
|
| adj.领土的，领地的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
constituent
|
|
| n.选民；成分，组分；adj.组成的，构成的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
administrative
|
|
| adj.行政的，管理的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
accomplished
|
|
| adj.有才艺的；有造诣的；达到了的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
favourable
|
|
| adj.赞成的，称赞的，有利的，良好的，顺利的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
doctrine
|
|
| n.教义；主义；学说 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
hostility
|
|
| n.敌对，敌意；抵制［pl.］交战，战争 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
speculations
|
|
| n.投机买卖( speculation的名词复数 )；思考；投机活动；推断 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
disciples
|
|
| n.信徒( disciple的名词复数 )；门徒；耶稣的信徒；（尤指）耶稣十二门徒之一 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
deplored
|
|
| v.悲叹，痛惜，强烈反对( deplore的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
entrusted
|
|
| v.委托，托付( entrust的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
elevation
|
|
| n.高度；海拔；高地；上升；提高 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
confide
|
|
| v.向某人吐露秘密 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
mechanism
|
|
| n.机械装置；机构，结构 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
boundless
|
|
| adj.无限的；无边无际的；巨大的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
attainments
|
|
| 成就，造诣； 获得( attainment的名词复数 )； 达到； 造诣； 成就 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
zeal
|
|
| n.热心，热情，热忱 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
humane
|
|
| adj.人道的，富有同情心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
entirely
|
|
| ad.全部地，完整地；完全地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
provincial
|
|
| adj.省的，地方的；n．外省人，乡下人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
obsolete
|
|
| adj.已废弃的，过时的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
contemplated
|
|
| adj. 预期的 动词contemplate的过去分词形式 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
antiquated
|
|
| adj.陈旧的，过时的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
detested
|
|
| v.憎恶，嫌恶，痛恨( detest的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
providence
|
|
| n.深谋远虑，天道，天意；远见；节约；上帝 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
infinitely
|
|
| adv.无限地，无穷地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
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： |
|
|
|
|
51
thoroughly
|
|
| adv.完全地，彻底地，十足地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
partially
|
|
| adv.部分地，从某些方面讲 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
unlimited
|
|
| adj.无限的，不受控制的，无条件的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
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： |
|
|
|
|
55
deity
|
|
| n.神，神性；被奉若神明的人(或物) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
impersonal
|
|
| adj.无个人感情的，与个人无关的，非人称的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
utterly
|
|
| adv.完全地，绝对地 | |
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
legitimate
|
|
| adj.合法的，合理的，合乎逻辑的；v.使合法 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
faculties
|
|
| n.能力( faculty的名词复数 )；全体教职员；技巧；院 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
emphatic
|
|
| adj.强调的，着重的；无可置疑的，明显的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
eulogy
|
|
| n.颂词；颂扬 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
enchantment
|
|
| n.迷惑，妖术，魅力 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
furrow
|
|
| n.沟；垄沟；轨迹；车辙；皱纹 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
subvert
|
|
| v.推翻；暗中破坏；搅乱 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
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： |
|
|
|
|
67
omnipotence
|
|
| n.全能，万能，无限威力 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
68
regularity
|
|
| n.规律性，规则性；匀称，整齐 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
69
maniac
|
|
| n.精神癫狂的人；疯子 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
70
ERECTED
|
|
| adj. 直立的，竖立的，笔直的 vt. 使 ... 直立，建立 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
71
dwellings
|
|
| n.住处，处所( dwelling的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
72
grafted
|
|
| 移植( graft的过去式和过去分词 )； 嫁接； 使（思想、制度等）成为（…的一部份）； 植根 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
73
questionable
|
|
| adj.可疑的，有问题的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
74
perusing
|
|
| v.读（某篇文字）( peruse的现在分词 )；（尤指）细阅；审阅；匆匆读或心不在焉地浏览（某篇文字） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
75
undertaking
|
|
| n.保证，许诺，事业 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
76
undertakings
|
|
| 企业( undertaking的名词复数 )； 保证； 殡仪业； 任务 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
77
diffused
|
|
| 散布的，普及的，扩散的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
78
encumber
|
|
| v.阻碍行动，妨碍，堆满 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
79
affected
|
|
| adj.不自然的，假装的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
80
opposition
|
|
| n.反对，敌对 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
81
ferment
|
|
| vt.使发酵；n./vt.（使）激动，（使）动乱 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
82
gratuitous
|
|
| adj.无偿的，免费的；无缘无故的，不必要的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
83
jurisdictions
|
|
| 司法权( jurisdiction的名词复数 )； 裁判权； 管辖区域； 管辖范围 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
84
insolent
|
|
| adj.傲慢的，无理的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
85
manors
|
|
| n.庄园（manor的复数形式） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
86
assent
|
|
| v.批准，认可；n.批准，认可 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
87
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： |
|
|
|
|
88
inevitable
|
|
| adj.不可避免的，必然发生的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
89
innovator
|
|
| n.改革者；创新者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
90
adverse
|
|
| adj.不利的；有害的；敌对的，不友好的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
91
wrought
|
|
| v.引起；以…原料制作；运转；adj.制造的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
92
awakened
|
|
| v.（使）醒( awaken的过去式和过去分词 )；（使）觉醒；弄醒；（使）意识到 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
93
deviate
|
|
| v.(from)背离，偏离 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
94
preponderating
|
|
| v.超过，胜过( preponderate的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
95
legislative
|
|
| n.立法机构，立法权；adj.立法的，有立法权的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
96
dependence
|
|
| n.依靠，依赖；信任，信赖；隶属 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
97
virtues
|
|
| 美德( virtue的名词复数 )； 德行； 优点； 长处 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
98
essentially
|
|
| adv.本质上，实质上，基本上 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
99
abortive
|
|
| adj.不成功的，发育不全的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
100
disastrous
|
|
| adj.灾难性的，造成灾害的；极坏的，很糟的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
101
laborious
|
|
| adj.吃力的，努力的，不流畅 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
102
sterile
|
|
| adj.不毛的，不孕的，无菌的，枯燥的，贫瘠的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
103
nourishment
|
|
| n.食物，营养品；营养情况 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
104
lasting
|
|
| adj.永久的，永恒的；vbl.持续，维持 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
105
mere
|
|
| adj.纯粹的；仅仅，只不过 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
106
overcast
|
|
| adj.阴天的，阴暗的，愁闷的；v.遮盖，（使）变暗，包边缝；n.覆盖，阴天 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
107
blessings
|
|
| n.（上帝的）祝福( blessing的名词复数 )；好事；福分；因祸得福 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
108
enjoyment
|
|
| n.乐趣；享有；享用 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
109
acting
|
|
| n.演戏，行为，假装；adj.代理的，临时的，演出用的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
110
indefatigably
|
|
| adv.不厌倦地，不屈不挠地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
111
peril
|
|
| n.(严重的)危险；危险的事物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
112
well-being
|
|
| n.安康，安乐，幸福 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
113
bestowed
|
|
| 赠给，授予( bestow的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
114
enraptures
|
|
| v.使狂喜( enrapture的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |