As we have seen, even during the months of June and July a ferment5 had already begun in certain circles at Rome about the “Dialogues.” Complaints and accusations6 were rife8, the Pope was artfully worked upon—these were the first portents10 of the heavy storm which was to break over Galileo’s head. The Master of the Palace went about Rome in great fear for himself as well as for Galileo, and told his troubles to Count Magalotti.[280] At the beginning of August, Riccardi begged him to deliver up the eight copies of the “Dialogues” which Magalotti had brought to Rome, with the assurance that he would return them in ten days at the latest. It was not in Magalotti’s power to grant this request, the books having, as we know, long ago passed into other hands.[281]
A few days later the first thunderclap broke over Galileo. His publisher, Landini, at Florence received instructions, though for the time they were only provisional, forbidding the further sale of the “Dialogues.” The succeeding scenes[164] of the melancholy11 drama quickly followed. A special commission was instituted at Rome by order of the Pope to investigate the whole affair. Urban afterwards repeatedly stated with great emphasis to Niccolini, that it was out of regard for the Grand Duke, as well as for Galileo, that the very unusual measure was taken of not referring his cause directly to the Holy Office, but to a separate congregation.[282]
It is altogether a characteristic trait in all the proceedings12 of the Roman curia against Galileo, that there was a parade of great consideration for and forbearance towards him although strictly13 within the limits of their real intentions. Even the favour ostensibly shown to him of referring his cause to a preliminary commission, composed of theologians and mathematicians14, was not so great in reality as it was trumpeted15 to be at the Vatican. It was composed of persons by no means favourable3 to him, and all the endeavours of Niccolini and other powerful friends of Galileo to have influential16 persons who were friendly to him put on the commission, such as Fathers Castelli and Campanella, were frustrated17 by the Pope. It occasioned a dangerous threat to be held over the undaunted Campanella, who energetically exerted himself in the matter.[283]
Meanwhile disquieting18 rumours19 had reached Florence, and Galileo recognised with terror his dangerous position, though not to its full extent; this perhaps was as yet foreseen by no one. He appealed in full confidence to his friendly young sovereign for protection, and found a willing ear. On the 24th August a note on this business was sent to Niccolini, by order of the Grand Duke. It is clear that Ferdinand’s efforts to assist Galileo were sincere from the circumstance that, although the letter was written in[165] Cioli’s name, Galileo was the author of it, as appears from the original draft in his handwriting in the Palatina Library at Florence.
The Grand Duke in this letter expresses his surprise that a book which had been laid before the supreme20 authorities at Rome by the author in person, had been carefully read there again and again, as well as afterwards at Florence, and at the author’s request had been altered as seemed good to the authorities, and had finally received the imprimatur both there and here, should now after two years be considered suspicious and be prohibited. The astonishment21 of his Highness was the greater, because he knew that neither of the main opinions treated of were positively22 confirmed, but only the reasons for and against brought together; and this was done, as his Highness knew for certain, for the benefit of the Holy Church itself, in order that on subjects which in their nature are difficult to understand, those with whom the decision rests may see, with less expenditure23 of time and trouble, on which side the truth lies, and bring it into agreement with Holy Scripture24. The Grand Duke was of opinion that this opposition25 must be directed rather against the person of the author than against his book, or this or that opinion, ancient or modern. In order, however, to convince himself of the merits or misdemeanours of his servant, his Highness desires that that which is granted in all disputes and before all tribunals should be permitted to him,—to defend himself against his accusers. The Grand Duke therefore urges that the accusations brought against the work, which have caused it to be prohibited, may be sent here for the author, who stands firmly on his innocence26, to see them. He is so convinced that all this originates in the calumnies27 of envious28 and malicious29 persecutors, that he has offered his sovereign to leave the country and renounce30 his favour unless he can palpably prove how pious31 and sincere his sentiments on these subjects have always been and still are. The letter concludes with the commission, by the Grand Duke’s orders, to take the[166] necessary steps towards the fulfilment of his most reasonable request.[284]
On the same day on which this despatch32 went off, a mandate33 was issued from Rome, which not only confirmed the provisional prohibition of the “Dialogues,” but requested Landini to send all the copies in stock to Rome. He replied that all the copies had been delivered to the purchasers.
Niccolini on receipt of the Grand Duke’s order hastened to carry it out, but met with more bitter and obstinate34 opposition than either he or the Tuscan court had expected. On 4th September, when the ambassador was about to execute his mission at the Vatican, the Pope met him bluntly with the words: “Your Galileo has ventured to meddle35 with things that he ought not, and with the most important and dangerous subjects which can be stirred up in these days.” Niccolini remarked that the philosopher had not published his work without the approval of the Church, to which the Pope angrily rejoined that Galileo and Ciampoli had deceived him, especially Ciampoli, who had dared to tell him that Galileo would be entirely36 guided by the papal commands, and that it was all right; he had not either seen or read the work, and this was all he had known about it. His Holiness then made bitter complaints against the Master of the Palace, adding, however, that he had been deceived himself, for he had been enticed37 by fair speeches to approve the book, and by more fair speeches to allow it to be printed at Florence, without at all complying with the form prescribed by the Inquisitor, and with the name of the Roman censor38 of the press, who had nothing whatever to do with works which did not appear at Rome. Niccolini then ventured to say, that he knew that a special congregation was appointed to try this affair, and as it might happen (as was the case) that there might be persons on it unfavourable to Galileo, he humbly39 petitioned that Galileo might have an opportunity of justifying41 himself. Urban answered curtly42: “In these affairs of[167] the Holy Office, nothing is ever done but to pronounce judgment43, and then summon to recant.” “Does it not then appear to your Holiness,” answered the ambassador, “that Galileo should be informed beforehand of the objections to, scruples44 and criticisms respecting his book, and of the points to which the Holy Office takes exception?” “The Holy Office,” replied the Pope, angrily, “as I told you before, does not proceed in that way, and does not take that course, nor does it ever give such information beforehand: it is not the custom. Besides, Galileo knows well enough what the objections are, if he only chooses to know, because we have talked to him about it, and he has heard them all from ourself.” Niccolini now urged that the work was dedicated45 to the Grand Duke, and written by one of his most eminent46 servants; he hoped, therefore, that Galileo would be treated with indulgence. Urban replied that he had even prohibited books dedicated to himself, and that in matters where it was a question of endangering religion, the Grand Duke also was bound, as a Christian47 prince, to co-operate in enforcing penalties. Niccolini had therefore better write plainly to his Highness that he (the Pope) warned him not to meddle with things which he could not come out of with honour. The undaunted ambassador now expressed his conviction that his Holiness would not allow them to go so far as entirely to prohibit the book, which had received sanction, without at least hearing Galileo. But Urban replied, that this was the least that could happen to him, and he had better take care that he was not summoned before the Holy Office. The Pope then assured Niccolini that the preliminary commission was composed of theologians and men well versed48 in science, all grave and pious men, who would weigh every particular, word for word, for it was a question of the most godless business which could ever be discussed. He also charged the ambassador to tell his sovereign that the doctrine49 was in the highest degree sinful; everything would be maturely considered; his Highness had better not interfere50, and must be on his guard. In conclusion,[168] the Pope not only imposed the strictest secrecy51 on Niccolini as to what he had been told, but desired that the Grand Duke also should be charged to keep the secret, adding that he “had acted with great consideration for Galileo, by having impressed upon him what he knew before, and by not referring his affairs, as he ought to have done, to the Holy Office, but to a specially-appointed congregation.” Urban added the bitter remark that his behaviour towards Galileo had been far better than Galileo’s towards him, for he had deceived him.
In the narration52 of the whole of this interesting conversation between the Pope and the Tuscan ambassador, we have given an almost literal translation of the Italian original of Niccolini’s report of it to Cioli, of 5th September, 1632.[285] Urban’s last angry expression caused Niccolini to remark in his despatch that he found “ill will here too; and as for the Pope, he could not be more against poor Galileo than he was.” He then said that he had communicated Cioli’s letter of 24th August to the Master of the Palace, and that Riccardi thought they would hardly condemn53 the “Dialogues” altogether, but only alter some passages which really were objectionable. He had also offered, as far as he could do so without incurring54 censure55 or transgressing56 rules, to inform the ambassador at once of what was going to be done, adding however, that he must be cautious, for he had already felt the lash57 in this matter. He then complained that they had not acted in accordance with his letter to the Inquisitor, that the introduction was printed in different type from the rest of the work, and that the conclusion did not agree with the introduction. Towards the end of the despatch, Niccolini says that “it will be better to act without any temper in this business, and rather to negotiate with the ministers and Cardinal58 Barberini than with the Pope himself, because he obstinately59 persists that it is a hopeless case, and if you dispute it, or threaten anything,[169] or are defiant60, his Holiness lets fall hard words and has no respect for anybody.”
The conclusion of Cioli’s reply of 19th September to this ominous61 despatch of Niccolini’s gives us an insight into the attitude which the Tuscan Government, even at that time, desired to assume towards the papal chair in this unfortunate business. Cioli writes:—
“His Highness has heard the letters of your excellency of the 4th and 5th, and by this affair of Signor Mariano and that of Signor Galileo he was placed in so much difficulty that I do not know how it will be. I know well that his Holiness will never have to blame the ministers for giving bad advice.”[286]
Two letters from Count Magalotti,[287] who was usually well informed, arrived almost at the same time as this despatch. Both bear the date of 4th September; one is to Mario Guiducci, the other to Galileo, who in a letter of 23rd August, which is lost, had expressed his anxiety to Magalotti lest his work should be pronounced suspicious, and the Copernican doctrine condemned63 as heretical by the authorities. Magalotti’s news was, on the whole, reassuring64. According to the opinions of persons who are generally present at the sittings of the Congregation of the Holy Office, he thought he could assure Galileo that it would never go so far as for the Copernican system to be condemned by the supreme authority.[288] He thought, with Riccardi, that they would not entirely prohibit the “Dialogues,” but only correct them, so as to sustain the decree of 5th March, 1616. He also urgently advised, like Niccolini, that they should arm themselves with the utmost patience, and rather confer with Cardinal Barberini[170] than with Urban, “for reasons which it is not necessary to discuss here.”
Neither Galileo himself, nor Magalotti, nor his other friends, ever thought of any personal danger to him; Niccolini and the Grand Duke might perhaps have been more sharp-sighted, but they were bound to silence. The threads, however, of this great intrigue65 can only be disentangled by the later historian, who has watched the progress of the whole melancholy drama. Two facts are perfectly66 obvious to the attentive67 observer: the first, that at Rome, with the Pope at their head, they were determined68 to bring Galileo to trial before the Inquisition; and the second, that they did not yet clearly see how it was to be done with some shadow of justice. To find this out was the real purpose of the appointment of the special congregation, which Urban had boasted of as a signal act of forbearance towards Galileo. All the objections to the book were subjects rather for accusation7 against the censors69 who had sanctioned it than against the author, who had submitted it to them, altered it, and again submitted the alterations70. The responsibility for the publication really rested not with the author, but with those who had sanctioned it. The Pope’s accusation, however, that Galileo had coaxed71 them to give the permission by fair speeches, was too indefinite to institute a trial upon, and neither did the irregular quotation72 of the imprimatur of the Master of the Palace, nor the typographical difference between the preface and the rest of the book offer sufficient ground for a legal prosecution73. In this difficult case, therefore, it required all the Romish craft and legal sophistry74 at command, to find a pretext for bringing Galileo to trial before the Inquisition, which should, at any rate according to Romish principles, justify40 it in the eyes of the world.
The preliminary commission appointed by Urban VIII. was to perform this by no means easy task in brilliant style. It was certainly very much lightened by a discovery in the acts of the trial of Galileo in 1616, which was evidently a surprise to them—the note of 26th February, 1616.
[171]
What vast importance they at once thought fit to assign to this annotation75 without signature, we learn from a despatch of Niccolini’s to Cioli, of 11th September.[289] Niccolini refers in it to a recent interview with the Master of the Palace. He had again strongly advised that nothing be done in a hurry, and that time must be gained, for the Pope was firmly convinced that religion was really imperilled, for the work did not treat of mathematics, but of Holy Scripture, religion, and faith, and the orders respecting the printing of the work had not been complied with, for the opinion of the author was not merely indicated, but expressed in many places in the most decided76 and unsuitable manner. After Riccardi had assured the ambassador that all efforts to get Campanella and Castelli put on the preliminary commission had failed, but that he (Riccardi) would do his best to defend Galileo, both from friendship for him, and to serve his Highness, and because he had given the permission to print, he confided77 to Niccolini, under seal of profound secrecy, as of the highest importance, “that it had been discovered in the books of the Holy Office, that sixteen years ago, it having been heard that Galileo entertained that opinion, and disseminated78 it in Florence, he was summoned to Rome, and forbidden by Cardinal Bellarmine, in the name of the Pope and the Holy Office, to hold that opinion, and this alone is enough to ruin him entirely.”[290]
This communication of Riccardi’s contains an obvious mis-statement, namely, that any document had been found showing that Galileo had been summoned to Rome in 1616. As we have seen,[291] all the historical documents show that[172] he was not summoned, but that his visit was entirely voluntary. This verbal statement of Riccardi’s, unsupported by any document, is of no value as evidence, compared with the letters of Galileo of that period, and his depositions79 afterwards before his judges, who were accurately80 informed of all the previous proceedings. The second part of his communication to Niccolini is also far from precise. He does indeed say that Galileo, in 1616, had in the name of the Pope and the Holy Congregation been forbidden (prohibito), “il poter tenere questo opinione,” but according to the father’s account this prohibition was communicated to him by Cardinal Bellarmine. Riccardi is evidently not precisely81 instructed, and does not know that, according to the notification of 26th February, 1616, Galileo received an absolute prohibition before notary82 and witnesses.
The preliminary commission had just then, after about a month’s session, completed its labours, and submitted to the Pope a long memorial on the Galileo affair. The document begins with a concise84 statement of the course of the negotiations85 about the publication of the “Dialogues,” and then the three following indictments86 were brought against the author:—
(1) Galileo has transgressed87 orders in deviating88 from the hypothetical treatment by decidedly maintaining that the earth moves and the sun is stationary89. (2) He has erroneously ascribed the phenomena90 of the tides to the stability of the sun and the motion of the earth, which do not exist; (3) and he has further been deceitfully silent about the command laid upon him by the Holy Office, in the year 1616, which was as follows: “To relinquish91 altogether the said opinion that the sun is the centre of the world and immovable, and that the earth moves; nor henceforth to hold, teach, or defend it in any way whatsoever93, verbally or in writing, otherwise proceedings would be taken against him by the[173] Holy Office, which injunction the said Galileo acquiesced94 in and promised to obey.”
Then follows the remark: “It must now be considered what proceedings are to be taken, both against the person of the author and against the printed book.” Yet the nature of these proceedings is not in any way discussed in the document, but it now refers more in detail in five counts to the historical events, from the time when the “Dialogues” were submitted in Rome in 1630, to the publication in Florence in 1632. A sixth count considers that the following points in the “Dialogues” themselves must be laid to the author’s account:—
“1. That without orders and without making any communication about it, he put the imprimatur of Rome on the title page.
“2. That he had printed the preface in different type, and rendered it useless by its separation from the rest of the work; further, that he had put the saving clause at the end in the mouth of a simpleton, and in a place where it is hard to find; that it is but coolly received by the other interlocutor, so that it is only cursorily95 touched upon, and not fully9 discussed.
“3. That he had very often in the work deviated96 from the hypothesis, either by absolutely asserting that the earth moves, and that the sun is stationary, or by representing the arguments upon which these views rest as convincing and necessarily true, or by making the contrary appear impossible.
“4. That he had treated the subject as undecided, and as if he were waiting for, though he does not expect, explanation.
“5. That he contemns97 authors who are of a contrary opinion, and those whom Holy Church chiefly employs.
“6. That he perniciously asserts and sets forth92 that, in the apprehension98 of geometrical matters, there is some equality between the Divine and human mind.
“7. That he had represented it to be an argument for the truth that Ptolemaics go over to the Copernicans, but not vice62 versa.
“8. That he had erroneously ascribed the tides in the ocean to the stability of the sun and the motion of the earth, which do not exist.”
The special commission, however, by no means draws the conclusion from all these errors and failings, that the “Dialogues” should be prohibited, but says: “All these things[174] could be corrected, if it was thought that the book to which such favour should be shown were of any value.”
Immediately after this follows the seventh point, saying that “the author had transgressed the mandate of the Holy Office of 1616, ‘that he should relinquish the said opinion,’ etc.—down to, ‘and promised to obey.’”[292]
Herewith the memorial of the preliminary commission concludes. It draws no conclusions from the facts adduced, but leaves that to his Holiness the Pope. The last count confirms Galileo’s chief offence: he is guilty of having disobeyed a special mandate of the ecclesiastical authorities, has broken a solemn promise made before a notary and witnesses. Such a crime, according to inquisitorial usage, demanded severe punishment. The perfidy99 of 1616 had signally triumphed.
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
intercedes
|
|
| v.斡旋，调解( intercede的第三人称单数 )；说情 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
prohibition
|
|
| n.禁止；禁令，禁律 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
favourable
|
|
| adj.赞成的，称赞的，有利的，良好的，顺利的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
pretext
|
|
| n.借口，托词 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
ferment
|
|
| vt.使发酵；n./vt.（使）激动，（使）动乱 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
accusations
|
|
| n.指责( accusation的名词复数 )；指控；控告；（被告发、控告的）罪名 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
accusation
|
|
| n.控告，指责，谴责 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
rife
|
|
| adj.(指坏事情)充斥的，流行的，普遍的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
fully
|
|
| adv.完全地，全部地，彻底地；充分地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
portents
|
|
| n.预兆( portent的名词复数 )；征兆；怪事；奇物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
melancholy
|
|
| n.忧郁，愁思；adj.令人感伤（沮丧）的，忧郁的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
proceedings
|
|
| n.进程，过程，议程；诉讼(程序)；公报 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
strictly
|
|
| adv.严厉地，严格地；严密地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
mathematicians
|
|
| 数学家( mathematician的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
trumpeted
|
|
| 大声说出或宣告（trumpet的过去式与过去分词形式） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
influential
|
|
| adj.有影响的，有权势的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
frustrated
|
|
| adj.挫败的，失意的，泄气的v.使不成功( frustrate的过去式和过去分词 )；挫败；使受挫折；令人沮丧 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
disquieting
|
|
| adj.令人不安的，令人不平静的v.使不安，使忧虑，使烦恼( disquiet的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
rumours
|
|
| n.传闻( rumour的名词复数 )；风闻；谣言；谣传 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
supreme
|
|
| adj.极度的，最重要的；至高的，最高的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
astonishment
|
|
| n.惊奇，惊异 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
positively
|
|
| adv.明确地，断然，坚决地；实在，确实 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
expenditure
|
|
| n.(时间、劳力、金钱等)支出；使用，消耗 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
scripture
|
|
| n.经文，圣书，手稿；Scripture:(常用复数)《圣经》，《圣经》中的一段 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
opposition
|
|
| n.反对，敌对 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
innocence
|
|
| n.无罪；天真；无害 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
calumnies
|
|
| n.诬蔑，诽谤，中伤（的话）( calumny的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
envious
|
|
| adj.嫉妒的，羡慕的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
malicious
|
|
| adj.有恶意的，心怀恶意的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
renounce
|
|
| v.放弃；拒绝承认，宣布与…断绝关系 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
pious
|
|
| adj.虔诚的；道貌岸然的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
despatch
|
|
| n./v.(dispatch)派遣；发送；n.急件；新闻报道 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
mandate
|
|
| n.托管地；命令，指示 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
obstinate
|
|
| adj.顽固的，倔强的，不易屈服的，较难治愈的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
meddle
|
|
| v.干预，干涉，插手 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
entirely
|
|
| ad.全部地，完整地；完全地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
enticed
|
|
| 诱惑，怂恿( entice的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
censor
|
|
| n./vt.审查，审查员；删改 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
humbly
|
|
| adv. 恭顺地，谦卑地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
justify
|
|
| vt.证明…正当(或有理)，为…辩护 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
justifying
|
|
| 证明…有理( justify的现在分词 )； 为…辩护； 对…作出解释； 为…辩解（或辩护） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
curtly
|
|
| adv.简短地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
judgment
|
|
| n.审判；判断力，识别力，看法，意见 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
scruples
|
|
| n.良心上的不安( scruple的名词复数 )；顾虑，顾忌v.感到于心不安，有顾忌( scruple的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
dedicated
|
|
| adj.一心一意的；献身的；热诚的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
eminent
|
|
| adj.显赫的，杰出的，有名的，优良的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
Christian
|
|
| adj.基督教徒的；n.基督教徒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
versed
|
|
| adj. 精通，熟练 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
doctrine
|
|
| n.教义；主义；学说 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
interfere
|
|
| v.(in)干涉，干预；(with)妨碍，打扰 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
secrecy
|
|
| n.秘密，保密，隐蔽 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
narration
|
|
| n.讲述，叙述；故事；记叙体 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
condemn
|
|
| vt.谴责，指责；宣判(罪犯)，判刑 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
incurring
|
|
| 遭受，招致，引起( incur的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
censure
|
|
| v./n.责备；非难；责难 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
transgressing
|
|
| v.超越( transgress的现在分词 )；越过；违反；违背 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
lash
|
|
| v.系牢；鞭打；猛烈抨击；n.鞭打；眼睫毛 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
cardinal
|
|
| n.(天主教的)红衣主教；adj.首要的，基本的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
59
obstinately
|
|
| ad.固执地，顽固地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
defiant
|
|
| adj.无礼的，挑战的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
ominous
|
|
| adj.不祥的，不吉的，预兆的，预示的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
vice
|
|
| n.坏事；恶习；[pl.]台钳，老虎钳；adj.副的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
condemned
|
|
| adj. 被责难的, 被宣告有罪的 动词condemn的过去式和过去分词 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
reassuring
|
|
| a.使人消除恐惧和疑虑的，使人放心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
intrigue
|
|
| vt.激起兴趣，迷住；vi.耍阴谋；n.阴谋，密谋 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
perfectly
|
|
| adv.完美地，无可非议地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
67
attentive
|
|
| adj.注意的，专心的；关心(别人)的，殷勤的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
68
determined
|
|
| adj.坚定的；有决心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
69
censors
|
|
| 删剪（书籍、电影等中被认为犯忌、违反道德或政治上危险的内容）( censor的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
70
alterations
|
|
| n.改动( alteration的名词复数 )；更改；变化；改变 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
71
coaxed
|
|
| v.哄，用好话劝说( coax的过去式和过去分词 )；巧言骗取；哄劝，劝诱 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
72
quotation
|
|
| n.引文，引语，语录；报价，牌价，行情 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
73
prosecution
|
|
| n.起诉，告发，检举，执行，经营 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
74
sophistry
|
|
| n.诡辩 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
75
annotation
|
|
| n.注解 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
76
decided
|
|
| adj.决定了的，坚决的；明显的，明确的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
77
confided
|
|
| v.吐露（秘密，心事等）( confide的过去式和过去分词 )；（向某人）吐露（隐私、秘密等） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
78
disseminated
|
|
| 散布，传播( disseminate的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
79
depositions
|
|
| 沉积（物）( deposition的名词复数 )； （在法庭上的）宣誓作证； 处置； 罢免 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
80
accurately
|
|
| adv.准确地，精确地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
81
precisely
|
|
| adv.恰好，正好，精确地，细致地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
82
notary
|
|
| n.公证人，公证员 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
83
destined
|
|
| adj.命中注定的；(for)以…为目的地的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
84
concise
|
|
| adj.简洁的，简明的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
85
negotiations
|
|
| 协商( negotiation的名词复数 )； 谈判； 完成（难事）； 通过 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
86
indictments
|
|
| n.（制度、社会等的）衰败迹象( indictment的名词复数 )；刑事起诉书；公诉书；控告 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
87
transgressed
|
|
| v.超越( transgress的过去式和过去分词 )；越过；违反；违背 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
88
deviating
|
|
| v.偏离，越轨( deviate的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
89
stationary
|
|
| adj.固定的，静止不动的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
90
phenomena
|
|
| n.现象 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
91
relinquish
|
|
| v.放弃，撤回，让与，放手 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
92
forth
|
|
| adv.向前；向外，往外 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
93
whatsoever
|
|
| adv.（用于否定句中以加强语气）任何；pron.无论什么 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
94
acquiesced
|
|
| v.默认，默许( acquiesce的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
95
cursorily
|
|
| adv.粗糙地，疏忽地，马虎地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
96
deviated
|
|
| v.偏离，越轨( deviate的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
97
contemns
|
|
| v.侮辱，蔑视( contemn的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
98
apprehension
|
|
| n.理解，领悟；逮捕，拘捕；忧虑 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
99
perfidy
|
|
| n.背信弃义，不忠贞 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |