The bond of a common passion had for an instant linked all classes together. No sooner was that bond relaxed than they flew asunder3, and the veritable spirit of the Revolution, disguised before, was suddenly unveiled. After the triumph which had been obtained over the King, the next thing was to ascertain4 who should win the fruits of the victory; the States-General having been conceded, who should predominate in that assembly. The King could no longer refuse to convoke5 them; but he had still the power to determine the form they were to assume. One hundred and seventy-five years had elapsed since their last meeting. They had become a mere6 indistinct tradition. None knew precisely7 what should be the number of the deputies, the mutual8 relations of the three Orders, the mode of election, the forms of deliberation. The King alone could have settled these questions: he did not settle them. After having allowed the disputed powers, which he sought to retain, to be snatched away from him, he failed to use those which were not disputed.
M. de Brienne, the First Minister, had strange notions on this subject, and caused his master to adopt a resolution unparalleled in history. He regarded the questions, whether the electoral franchise9 was to be universal or limited, whether the assembly was to be numerous or restricted, whether the Orders were to be separated or united, whether they were to be equal or unequal in their rights, as a matter of erudition. Consequently an Order in Council commanded all the constituted bodies of the realm to make researches as to the structure of the old States-General and the forms used by them; and added that ‘His Majesty10 invited all the learned persons of the kingdom, more especially those who belonged to the Academy of Belles-lettres and Antiquities11, to address to the Keeper of the Seals papers and information on this subject.’
Thus was the constitution of the country treated like an academical essay, put up to competition. The call was heard.[230] All the local powers deliberated on the answer to be given to the King. All the corporate12 bodies put in their claims. All classes endeavoured to rake up from the ruins of the old States-General the forms which seemed best adapted to secure their own peculiar13 interests. Every one had something to say; and as France was the most literary country in Europe, there was a deluge14 of publications. The conflict of classes was inevitable15; but that conflict, which should naturally have been reserved for the States-General themselves, where it might have been kept within bounds when it arose on given questions, finding a boundless16 field before it, and being fed by general controversy17, speedily assumed a degree of strange boldness and excessive violence, to be accounted for by the secret excitement of the public mind, but which no external symptom had as yet prepared men for. Between the time when the King renounced18 his absolute authority and the commencement of the elections about five months elapsed. In this interval19 little was changed in the actual state of things, but the movement which was driving the French nation to a total subversion20 of society dashed onwards with increasing velocity21.
At first nothing was talked of but the constitution of the States-General; big books were hastily filled with crude erudition, in which an attempt was made to reconcile the traditions of the Middle Ages with the demands of the present time: then the question of the old States-General was dropped. This heap of mouldy precedents22 was flung aside, and it was asked what, on general and abstract principles, the legislative23 power ought to be. At each step the horizon extended: beyond the constitution of the legislature the discussion embraced the whole framework of government: beyond the frame of government the whole fabric24 of society was to be shaken to its foundations. At first men spoke25 of a better ponderation of powers, a better adjustment of the rights of classes, but soon they advanced, they hurried, they rushed to pure democracy. At first Montesquieu was cited and discussed, at last Rousseau was the only authority; he, and he alone, became and was to remain the Teacher of the first age of the Revolution. The old régime was still in complete existence, and already the institutions of England were deemed superannuated26 and inadequate27. The root of every incident that followed was implanted in men’s minds. Scarcely an opinion was professed28 in the whole course of the Revolution which might not already be traced in its germ: there was not an idea realised by the Revolution, that some theory had not at once reached and even surpassed.
‘In all things the majority of numbers is to give the law’:[231] such was the keynote of the whole controversy. Nobody dreamed that the concession29 of political rights could be determined30 by any other element than that of number. ‘What can be more absurd,’ exclaims a writer who was one of the most moderate of the time, ‘than that a body which has twenty millions of heads should be represented in the same manner as one which has an hundred thousand?’[126] After having shown that there were in France eighty thousand ecclesiastics31 and about a hundred and twenty thousand nobles, Siéyès merely adds, ‘Compare this number of these two hundred thousand privileged persons to that of twenty-six million souls, and judge the question.’[127]
The most timid among the innovators of the Revolution, those who wished that the reasonable prerogatives32 of the different Orders should be respected, talked, nevertheless, as if there were neither class nor Order, and still took the numerical majority[128] as the sole basis of their calculations. Everybody framed his own statistics, but all was statistical34. ‘The relation of privileged persons to those not privileged,’ said Lafon-Ladebat, ‘is as one to twenty-two.’[129] According to the city of Bourg,[130] the commons formed nineteen-twentieths of the population; according to the city of N?mes,[131] twenty-nine thirtieths. It was, as you see, a mere question of figures. From this political arithmetic, Volney deduced, as a natural consequence, universal suffrage;[132] Roederer, universal eligibility;[133] Péthion, the unity35 of the assembly.[134]
Many of these writers, in drawing out their figures, knew nothing of the quotient: and the calculation frequently led them beyond their hopes, and even beyond their wishes.
The most striking thing, at this passionate36 epoch37, was not so much the passions which broke forth2, as the power of the opinions that prevailed; and the opinion that prevailed above all others was, that not only there were no privileges, but even that there were no private rights. Even those who professed the largest consideration for privileges and private rights considered such privileges and rights as wholly indefensible—not only those exercised in their own time, but those existing at any time and in any[232] country. The conception of a temperate38 and ponderated Government, that is to say, of a Government in which the different classes of society, and the different interests which divide them, balance each other—in which men are weighed not only as individuals, but by reason of their property, their patronage39, and their influence in the scale of the common weal,—these conceptions were wanting in the mind of the multitude; they were replaced by the notion of a crowd, consisting of similar elements, and they were superseded40 by votes, not as the representatives of interests or of persons, but of numerical force.[135]
Another thing well worthy41 of remark in this singular movement of the mind, was its pace, at first so easy and regulated, at last so headlong and impetuous. A few months’ interval marked this difference. Read what was written in the first weeks of 1788 by the keenest opponents of the old régime, you will be struck by the forbearance of their language: then take the publications of the most moderate reformers in the last five months of the same year, you will find them revolutionary.
The Government had challenged discussion on itself: no bounds therefore would be set to the theme. The same impulse which had been given to opinions soon drove the passions of the nation with furious rapidity in the same direction. At first the commons complained that the nobility carried their rights too far. Later on, the existence of any such rights was denied. At first it was proposed to share power with the upper classes: soon all power was refused to them. The aristocracy was to become a sort of extraneous42 substance in the uniform texture43 of the nation. Some said the privileged classes were a hundred thousand, some that they were five hundred thousand. All agreed in thinking that they formed a mere handful, foreign to the rest of the nation, only to be tolerated in the interest of public tranquillity44. ‘Take away in your imagination,’ said Rabaut Saint-Etienne, ‘the whole of the clergy45—take away even the whole nobility, there still remains46 the nation.’ The commons were a complete social body: all the rest was vain superfluity: not only the nobles had no right to be masters of the rest, they had scarcely the right to be their fellow-citizens.
[233]
For the first time perhaps in the history of the world, the upper classes had separated and isolated47 themselves to such a degree from all other classes, that their members could be counted one by one and set apart like sheep draughted from a flock: whilst the middle classes were bent48 on not mixing with the class above them, but, on the contrary, stood carefully aloof49 from all contact. These two symptoms, had they been understood, would have revealed the immensity of the Revolution which was about to take place, or rather which was already made.
Now follow the movement of passion in the track of opinion. At first hatred50 was expressed against privileges, none against persons. But by degrees the tone becomes more bitter, emulation51 becomes jealousy52, enmity becomes detestation, a thousand conflicting associations are piled together to form the mighty53 mass which a thousand arms are at once to lift, and drop upon the head of the aristocracy so as to crush it.
The privileged ranks were attacked in countless54 publications. They were defended in so few, that it is somewhat difficult to ascertain what was said in their favour. It may seem surprising that the assailed55 classes, holding most of the great offices of State and owning a large portion of the land of the country, should have found so few defenders56, though so many eloquent57 voices have pleaded their cause since they have been conquered, decimated, ruined. But this is explained by the extreme confusion into which the aristocracy was thrown, when the rest of the nation, having proceeded for a time in the track marked out by itself, suddenly turned against it. With astonishment59, it perceived that the opinions used to attack it were its own opinions. The notions which compassed its annihilation were familiar to its own mind. What had been the amusement of aristocratic leisure became a terrible weapon against aristocratic society. In common with their adversaries60, these nobles were ready enough to believe that the most perfect form of society would be that most nearly akin61 to the natural equality of man; in which merit alone, and not either birth or fortune, should determine rank; and in which government would be a simple contract, and law the creation of a numerical majority. They knew nothing of politics but what they had read in books, and in the same books; the only difference was that one party was bent on trying a great social experiment, which must be made at the expense of the other party. But, though their interests were different, their opinions were the same: those same patricians62 would have made the Revolution if they had been born plebeians63.
When therefore they suddenly found themselves attacked, they[234] were singularly embarrassed in their defence. Not one of them had ever considered by what means an aristocracy may justify64 its privileges in the eyes of the people. They knew not what to say in order to show how it is that an aristocracy can alone preserve the people from oppression of the Crown and the calamities65 of revolution, insomuch that the privileges apparently66 established in the sole interest of those who possess them do constitute the best security that can be found for the tranquillity and prosperity even of those who are without them. All these arguments which are so familiar to those who have a long experience of public affairs, and who have acquired the science of government, were to those nobles of France novel and unknown.
Instead of this, they spoke of the services which their forefathers67 had rendered six hundred years ago; of the superstitious68 veneration69 due to a past, which was now detested70; of the necessity of a nobility to uphold the honour of arms and the traditions of military valour. In opposition71 to a proposal to admit the peasantry to the franchise in the provincial72 assemblies, and even to preside over those bodies, M. de Bazancourt, a Councillor of State, declared that the kingdom of France was based upon honour and prerogative33: so great was the ignorance and so deep the obscurity in which absolute power had concealed73 the real laws of society, even from the eyes of those to whom it was most interested in making them known.
The language of the nobles was often arrogant74, because they were accustomed to be the first; but it was irresolute75, because they doubted of their own right. Who can depict76 the endless divisions in the bosom77 of the assailed parties? The spirit of rivalry78 and contention79 raged amongst those who were thus isolated themselves—the nobles against the priests (the first voice raised to demand the confiscation80 of the property of the clergy was that of a noble[136]), the priests against the nobles, the lesser81 nobility against the great lords, the parish priests against the bishops82.[137]
The discussion roused by the King’s Edicts, after having run round a vast circumference83 of institutions and laws, always ended at the two following points, which practically expressed the objects of the contest.
1. In the States-General, then about to meet, were the commons to have a greater number of representatives than each of the[235] two other Orders, so that the total number of its deputies should be equal to those of the nobility and clergy combined?
2. Were the Orders to deliberate together or separately?
This reduplication of the commons and the fusion58 of the three Orders in one assembly appeared, at the time, to be things less novel and less important than they were in reality. Some minor84 circumstances which had long existed, or were then in existence, concealed their novelty and their magnitude. For ages the provincial Estates of Languedoc had been composed and had sat in this manner, with no other result than that of giving to the middle class a larger share of public business, and of creating common interests and greater facility of intercourse85 between that class and the two higher Orders. This example had been copied, subsequently, in the two or three provincial assemblies which were held in 1779: instead of dividing the classes, it had been found to draw them together.
The King himself appeared to have declared in favour of this system; for he had just applied86 it to the provincial assemblies, which the last edict had called into being in all the provinces having previously87 no Estates of their own (1788). It was still imperfectly seen, without a clear perception of the fact, that an institution which had only modified the ancient constitution of the country, when established in a single province, could not fail to bring about its total and violent overthrow88 the moment it was applied to the whole State. It was evident that the commons, if equal in number to the two other Orders in the General Assembly of the nation, must instantly preponderate89 there;—not as participating in their business, but as the supreme90 master of it. For the commons would stand united between two bodies, not only divided against each other, but divided against themselves—the commons having the same interests, the same passions, the same object: the two other Orders having different interests, different objects, and frequently different passions: these having the current of public opinion in their favour, those having it against them. This preference from without could not fail to drive a certain number of nobles and priests to join the commons; so that whilst it banded all the commons together, it detached from the nobility and the clergy all those who were aiming at popularity or seeking to track out a new road to power.
In the States of Languedoc it was common to see the commons forsake91 their own body to vote with the nobles and the bishops, because the established influence of aristocracy, still prevailing92 in their opinions and manners, weighed upon them. But here, the[236] reverse necessarily occurred; and the commons necessarily found themselves in a majority, although the number of their own representatives was the same.
The action of such a party in the Assembly could not fail to be, not only preponderating93, but violent; for it was sure to encounter there all that could excite the passions of man. To bring parties to live together in a conflict of opposite opinions is no easy task. But to enclose in the same arena94 political bodies, already formed, completely organised, each having its proper origin, its past, its traditions, its peculiar usages, its spirit of union—to plant them apart, always in presence of each other, and to compel them to carry on an incessant95 debate, with no medium between them, is not to provoke discussion but war.
Moreover, this majority, inflamed96 by its own passions and the passions of its antagonists97, was all powerful. Nothing could, I will not say arrest, but retard98 its movements; for nothing remained to check it but the power of the Crown, already disarmed99, and inevitably100 destined101 to yield to the strain of a single Assembly concentrated against itself.
This was not to transpose gradually the balance of power, but to upset it. It was not to impart to the commons a share in the exorbitant102 rights of the aristocracy, but suddenly to transfer unbounded power to other hands—to abandon the guidance of affairs to a single passion, a single idea, a single interest. This was not a reform, but a revolution. Mounier, who, alone among the reformers of that time, seems to have settled in his own mind what it was he wished to effect, and what were the conditions of a regular and free government,—Mounier, who in his plan of government had divided the three Orders, was nevertheless favourable103 to this union of them, and for this reason: that what was wanted before all things was an assembly to destroy the remains of the old constitution, all special privileges, and all local privileges, which could never be done with an Upper House composed of the nobles and the clergy.
It would seem at any rate that the reduplication of the votes of the commons and the fusion of the three Orders in one body must have been questions inseparable from each other; for to what end should the number of representatives of the commons be augmented104, if that branch of the Assembly was to debate and vote apart from the other two?
M. Necker thought proper to separate these questions. No doubt he desired both the reduplication of the commons, and that the three Orders should vote together. It is very probable that[237] the King leaned in the same direction. By the aristocracy he had just been conquered. It was the aristocracy which pressed him hardest, which had roused the other classes against the royal authority, and had led them to victory. These blows had been felt, and the King had not sufficient penetration105 to perceive that his adversaries would soon be compelled to defend him, and that his friends would become his masters. Louis XVI. therefore, like his minister, was inclined to constitute the States-General in the manner which the commons desired. But they were afraid to go so far. They stopped half-way, not from any clear perception of their danger, but confused by the inarticulate clamour around them. What man or what class has ever had the penetration to see when it became necessary to come down from a lofty pinnacle106, in order to avoid being hurled107 down from it?
It was then decided108 that the commons should return twice as many members as each of the other Orders, but the question of the vote in common was left unsettled. Of all courses of action, this was certainly the most dangerous.
Nothing contributes more to the maintenance of despotism than the division and mutual rivalry of classes. Absolute power lives on them: on condition, however, that these divisions are confined to a pacific bitterness, that men envy their neighbours without excessive hatred, and that these classes, though separated, are not in arms. But every Government must perish in the midst of a violent collision of classes, when once they have begun to make war on each other.
No doubt, it was very late in the day to seek to maintain the old constitution of the States-General, even if it were reformed. But this resolution, however rash, was supported by the law of the land, which had still some authority. The Government had tradition in its favour, and still had its hand upon the instrument of the law. If the double number of the commons and the vote of the three Orders in common had been conceded at once, no doubt a revolution would have been made, but it would have been made by the Crown, which by pulling down these old institutions itself might have deadened their fall. The upper classes must have submitted to an inevitable necessity. Borne in by the pressure of the Crown, simultaneously109 with that of the commons, they would at once have acknowledged their inability to resist. Despairing of their own ascendency, they would only have contended for equal rights, and would have learnt the lesson of fighting to save something, instead of fighting to retain everything.
Would it not have been possible to do throughout France what[238] was actually done by the Three Orders in Dauphiny? In that province the Provincial Estates chose, by a general vote, the representatives of the Three Orders to the States-General. Each Order in the provincial State had been elected separately and stood for itself alone; but all the Orders combined to name the deputies to the States-General, so that every noble had commoners among his constituents110, and every commoner nobles. The three representations, though remaining distinct, thus acquired a certain resemblance. Could not the same thing have been done elsewhere than in Dauphiny? If the Orders had been constituted in this manner, might they not have co-existed in a single Assembly without coming to a violent collision?
Too much weight must not be given to these legislative expedients111. The ideas and the passions of man, not the mechanism112 of law, are the motive113 force of human affairs. Doubtless whatever steps had at that time been taken to form and regulate the Assemblies of the nation, it may be thought that war would have broken forth in all its violence between classes. Their animosities were perhaps already too fierce for them to have worked in harmony, and the power of the King was already too weak to compel them to agree. But it must be admitted that nothing could have been done more calculated than what was done to render the conflict between them instantaneous and mortal. Could the utmost art, skill, and deliberate design have brought all this to pass more surely than was actually done by inexperience and temerity114? An opportunity had been afforded to the commons to take courage, to prepare for the encounter, and to count their numbers. Their moral ardour had immoderately increased, and had doubled the weight of their party. They had been allured115 by every hope; they were intimidated116 by every fear. Victory had been flaunted117 before their eyes, not given, but they were invited to seize it. After having left the two classes for five months to exasperate118 their old hatreds119, and repeat the long story of their grievances120, until they were inflamed against each other with furious resentment121, they were arrayed face to face, and the first question they had to decide was one which included all other questions; on that issue alone they might have settled at once, and in a single day, all their quarrels.
What strikes one most in the affairs of the world is not so much the genius of those who made the Revolution, because they desired it, as the singular imbecility of those who made it without desiring it,—not so much the part played by great men as the influence frequently exercised by the smallest personages in history. When I survey the French Revolution I am amazed at the immense[239] magnitude of the event, at the glare it has cast to the extremities122 of the earth, at the power of it, which has more or less been felt by all nations. If I turn to the Court, which had so great a share in the Revolution, I perceive there some of the most trivial scenes in history—a king, who had no greatness save that of his virtues123, and those not the virtues of a king; hairbrained or narrow-minded ministers, dissolute priests, rash or money-seeking courtiers, futile124 women, who held in their hands the destinies of the human race. Yet these paltry125 personages set going, push on, precipitate126 prodigious127 events. They themselves have little share in them. They themselves are mere accidents. They might almost pass for primal128 causes. And I marvel129 at the Almighty130 Power which, with levers as short as these, can set rolling the mass of human society.
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
subdued
|
|
| adj. 屈服的，柔和的，减弱的 动词subdue的过去式和过去分词 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
forth
|
|
| adv.向前；向外，往外 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
asunder
|
|
| adj.分离的，化为碎片 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
ascertain
|
|
| vt.发现，确定，查明，弄清 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
convoke
|
|
| v.召集会议 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
mere
|
|
| adj.纯粹的；仅仅，只不过 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
precisely
|
|
| adv.恰好，正好，精确地，细致地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
mutual
|
|
| adj.相互的，彼此的；共同的，共有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
franchise
|
|
| n.特许，特权，专营权，特许权 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
majesty
|
|
| n.雄伟，壮丽，庄严，威严；最高权威，王权 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
antiquities
|
|
| n.古老( antiquity的名词复数 )；古迹；古人们；古代的风俗习惯 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
corporate
|
|
| adj.共同的，全体的；公司的，企业的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
peculiar
|
|
| adj.古怪的，异常的；特殊的，特有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
deluge
|
|
| n./vt.洪水，暴雨，使泛滥 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
inevitable
|
|
| adj.不可避免的，必然发生的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
boundless
|
|
| adj.无限的；无边无际的；巨大的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
controversy
|
|
| n.争论，辩论，争吵 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
renounced
|
|
| v.声明放弃( renounce的过去式和过去分词 )；宣布放弃；宣布与…决裂；宣布摒弃 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
interval
|
|
| n.间隔，间距；幕间休息，中场休息 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
subversion
|
|
| n.颠覆，破坏 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
velocity
|
|
| n.速度，速率 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
precedents
|
|
| 引用单元； 范例( precedent的名词复数 )； 先前出现的事例； 前例； 先例 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
legislative
|
|
| n.立法机构，立法权；adj.立法的，有立法权的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
fabric
|
|
| n.织物，织品，布；构造，结构，组织 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
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： |
|
|
|
|
26
superannuated
|
|
| adj.老朽的，退休的；v.因落后于时代而废除，勒令退学 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
inadequate
|
|
| adj.(for,to)不充足的，不适当的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
professed
|
|
| 公开声称的，伪称的，已立誓信教的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
concession
|
|
| n.让步，妥协；特许(权) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
determined
|
|
| adj.坚定的；有决心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
ecclesiastics
|
|
| n.神职者，教会，牧师( ecclesiastic的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
32
prerogatives
|
|
| n.权利( prerogative的名词复数 )；特权；大主教法庭；总督委任组成的法庭 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
prerogative
|
|
| n.特权 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
statistical
|
|
| adj.统计的，统计学的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
unity
|
|
| n.团结，联合，统一；和睦，协调 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
passionate
|
|
| adj.热情的，热烈的，激昂的，易动情的，易怒的，性情暴躁的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
epoch
|
|
| n.(新)时代；历元 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
temperate
|
|
| adj.温和的，温带的，自我克制的，不过分的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
patronage
|
|
| n.赞助，支援，援助；光顾，捧场 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
superseded
|
|
| [医]被代替的，废弃的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
worthy
|
|
| adj.(of)值得的，配得上的；有价值的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
extraneous
|
|
| adj.体外的；外来的；外部的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
texture
|
|
| n.(织物)质地；(材料)构造；结构；肌理 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
tranquillity
|
|
| n. 平静, 安静 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
clergy
|
|
| n.[总称]牧师，神职人员 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
remains
|
|
| n.剩余物，残留物；遗体，遗迹 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
isolated
|
|
| adj.与世隔绝的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
bent
|
|
| n.爱好，癖好；adj.弯的；决心的，一心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
aloof
|
|
| adj.远离的；冷淡的，漠不关心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
hatred
|
|
| n.憎恶，憎恨，仇恨 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
emulation
|
|
| n.竞争；仿效 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
jealousy
|
|
| n.妒忌，嫉妒，猜忌 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
mighty
|
|
| adj.强有力的；巨大的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
countless
|
|
| adj.无数的，多得不计其数的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
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： |
|
|
|
|
56
defenders
|
|
| n.防御者( defender的名词复数 )；守卫者；保护者；辩护者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
eloquent
|
|
| adj.雄辩的，口才流利的；明白显示出的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
fusion
|
|
| n.溶化；熔解；熔化状态，熔和；熔接 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
59
astonishment
|
|
| n.惊奇，惊异 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
adversaries
|
|
| n.对手，敌手( adversary的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
akin
|
|
| adj.同族的，类似的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
patricians
|
|
| n.（古罗马的）统治阶层成员( patrician的名词复数 )；贵族，显贵 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
plebeians
|
|
| n.平民( plebeian的名词复数 )；庶民；平民百姓；平庸粗俗的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
64
justify
|
|
| vt.证明…正当(或有理)，为…辩护 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
calamities
|
|
| n.灾祸，灾难( calamity的名词复数 )；不幸之事 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
apparently
|
|
| adv.显然地；表面上，似乎 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
67
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： |
|
|
|
|
68
superstitious
|
|
| adj.迷信的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
69
veneration
|
|
| n.尊敬，崇拜 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
70
detested
|
|
| v.憎恶，嫌恶，痛恨( detest的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
71
opposition
|
|
| n.反对，敌对 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
72
provincial
|
|
| adj.省的，地方的；n．外省人，乡下人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
73
concealed
|
|
| a.隐藏的，隐蔽的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
74
arrogant
|
|
| adj.傲慢的，自大的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
75
irresolute
|
|
| adj.无决断的，优柔寡断的，踌躇不定的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
76
depict
|
|
| vt.描画，描绘；描写，描述 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
77
bosom
|
|
| n.胸，胸部；胸怀；内心；adj.亲密的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
78
rivalry
|
|
| n.竞争，竞赛，对抗 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
79
contention
|
|
| n.争论，争辩，论战；论点，主张 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
80
confiscation
|
|
| n. 没收, 充公, 征收 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
81
lesser
|
|
| adj.次要的，较小的；adv.较小地，较少地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
82
bishops
|
|
| （基督教某些教派管辖大教区的）主教( bishop的名词复数 )； （国际象棋的）象 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
83
circumference
|
|
| n.圆周，周长，圆周线 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
84
minor
|
|
| adj.较小(少)的，较次要的；n.辅修学科；vi.辅修 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
85
intercourse
|
|
| n.性交；交流，交往，交际 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
86
applied
|
|
| adj.应用的；v.应用，适用 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
87
previously
|
|
| adv.以前，先前（地） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
88
overthrow
|
|
| v.推翻，打倒，颠覆；n.推翻，瓦解，颠覆 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
89
preponderate
|
|
| v.数目超过；占优势 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
90
supreme
|
|
| adj.极度的，最重要的；至高的，最高的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
91
forsake
|
|
| vt.遗弃，抛弃；舍弃，放弃 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
92
prevailing
|
|
| adj.盛行的；占优势的；主要的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
93
preponderating
|
|
| v.超过，胜过( preponderate的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
94
arena
|
|
| n.竞技场，运动场所；竞争场所，舞台 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
95
incessant
|
|
| adj.不停的，连续的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
96
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： |
|
|
|
|
97
antagonists
|
|
| 对立[对抗] 者，对手，敌手( antagonist的名词复数 )； 对抗肌； 对抗药 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
98
retard
|
|
| n.阻止，延迟；vt.妨碍，延迟，使减速 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
99
disarmed
|
|
| v.裁军( disarm的过去式和过去分词 )；使息怒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
100
inevitably
|
|
| adv.不可避免地；必然发生地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
101
destined
|
|
| adj.命中注定的；(for)以…为目的地的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
102
exorbitant
|
|
| adj.过分的；过度的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
103
favourable
|
|
| adj.赞成的，称赞的，有利的，良好的，顺利的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
104
Augmented
|
|
| adj.增音的 动词augment的过去式和过去分词形式 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
105
penetration
|
|
| n.穿透，穿人，渗透 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
106
pinnacle
|
|
| n.尖塔，尖顶，山峰；(喻)顶峰 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
107
hurled
|
|
| v.猛投，用力掷( hurl的过去式和过去分词 )；大声叫骂 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
108
decided
|
|
| adj.决定了的，坚决的；明显的，明确的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
109
simultaneously
|
|
| adv.同时发生地，同时进行地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
110
constituents
|
|
| n.选民( constituent的名词复数 )；成分；构成部分；要素 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
111
expedients
|
|
| n.应急有效的，权宜之计的( expedient的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
112
mechanism
|
|
| n.机械装置；机构，结构 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
113
motive
|
|
| n.动机，目的；adv.发动的，运动的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
114
temerity
|
|
| n.鲁莽，冒失 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
115
allured
|
|
| 诱引，吸引( allure的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
116
intimidated
|
|
| v.恐吓；威胁adj.害怕的；受到威胁的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
117
flaunted
|
|
| v.炫耀，夸耀( flaunt的过去式和过去分词 )；有什么能耐就施展出来 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
118
exasperate
|
|
| v.激怒，使（疾病）加剧，使恶化 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
119
hatreds
|
|
| n.仇恨，憎恶( hatred的名词复数 )；厌恶的事 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
120
grievances
|
|
| n.委屈( grievance的名词复数 )；苦衷；不满；牢骚 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
121
resentment
|
|
| n.怨愤，忿恨 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
122
extremities
|
|
| n.端点( extremity的名词复数 )；尽头；手和足；极窘迫的境地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
123
virtues
|
|
| 美德( virtue的名词复数 )； 德行； 优点； 长处 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
124
futile
|
|
| adj.无效的，无用的，无希望的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
125
paltry
|
|
| adj.无价值的，微不足道的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
126
precipitate
|
|
| adj.突如其来的；vt.使突然发生；n.沉淀物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
127
prodigious
|
|
| adj.惊人的，奇妙的；异常的；巨大的；庞大的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
128
primal
|
|
| adj.原始的；最重要的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
129
marvel
|
|
| vi.(at)惊叹vt.感到惊异；n.令人惊异的事 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
130
almighty
|
|
| adj.全能的，万能的；很大的，很强的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |