Justice is often done at last. Two or three authors, either venal2 or fanatical, eulogize the cruel and effeminate Constantine as if he had been a god, and treat as an absolute miscreant3 the just, the wise, and the great Julian. All other authors, copying from these, repeat both the flattery and the calumny4. They become almost an article of faith. At length the age of sound criticism arrives; and at the end of fourteen hundred years, enlightened men revise the cause which had been decided5 by ignorance. In Constantine we see a man of successful ambition, internally scoffing6 at things divine as well as human. He has the insolence7 to pretend that God sent him a standard in the air to assure him of victory. He imbrues himself in the blood of all his relations, and is lulled8 to sleep in all the effeminacy of luxury; but he is a Christian9 — he is canonized.
Julian is sober, chaste10, disinterested11, brave, and clement12; but he is not a Christian — he has long been considered a monster.
At the present day — after having compared facts, memorials and records, the writings of Julian and those of his enemies — we are compelled to acknowledge that, if he was not partial to Christianity, he was somewhat excusable in hating a sect stained with the blood of all his family; and that although he had been persecuted13, imprisoned14, exiled, and threatened with death by the Galileans, under the reign15 of the cruel and sanguinary Constantius, he never persecuted them, but on the contrary even pardoned ten Christian soldiers who had conspired17 against his life. His letters are read and admired: “The Galileans,” says he, “under my predecessor18, suffered exile and imprisonment19; and those who, according to the change of circumstances, were called heretics, were reciprocally massacred in their turn. I have called home their exiles, I have liberated21 their prisoners, I have restored their property to those who were proscribed22, and have compelled them to live in peace; but such is the restless rage of these Galileans that they deplore24 their inability any longer to devour25 one another.” What a letter! What a sentence, dictated26 by philosophy, against persecuting27 fanaticism28. Ten Christians29 conspiring30 against his life, he detects and he pardons them. How extraordinary a man! What dastardly fanatics31 must those be who attempt to throw disgrace on his memory!
In short, on investigating facts with impartiality32, we are obliged to admit that Julian possessed33 all the qualities of Trajan, with the exception of that depraved taste too long pardoned to the Greeks and Romans; all the virtues35 of Cato, without either his obstinacy36 or ill-humor; everything that deserves admiration37 in Julius C?sar, and none of his vices38. He possessed the continence of Scipio. Finally, he was in all respects equal to Marcus Aurelius, who was reputed the first of men.
There are none who will now venture to repeat, after that slanderer39 Theodoret, that, in order to propitiate40 the gods, he sacrificed a woman in the temple of Carres; none who will repeat any longer the story of the death scene in which he is represented as throwing drops of blood from his hand towards heaven, calling out to Jesus Christ: “Galilean, thou hast conquered”; as if he had fought against Jesus in making war upon the Persians; as if this philosopher, who died with such perfect resignation, had with alarm and despair recognized Jesus; as if he had believed that Jesus was in the air, and that the air was heaven! These ridiculous absurdities41 of men, denominated fathers of the Church, are happily no longer current and respected.
Still, however, the effect of ridicule42 was, it seems, to be tried against him, as it was by the light and giddy citizens of Antioch. He is reproached for his ill-combed beard and the manner of his walk. But you, Mr. Abbé de la Bletterie, never saw him walk; you have, however, read his letters and his laws, the monuments of his virtues. Of what consequence was it, comparatively, that he had a slovenly43 beard and an abrupt44, headlong walk, while his heart was full of magnanimity and all his steps tended to virtue34!
One important fact remains45 to be examined at the present day. Julian is reproached with attempting to falsify the prophecy of Jesus Christ, by rebuilding the temple of Jerusalem. Fires, it is asserted, came out of the earth and prevented the continuance of the work. It is said that this was a miracle, and that this miracle did not convert Julian, nor Alypius, the superintendent46 of the enterprise, nor any individual of the imperial court; and upon this subject the Abbé de la Bletterie thus expresses himself: “The emperor and the philosophers of his court undoubtedly47 employed all their knowledge of natural philosophy to deprive the Deity48 of the honor of so striking and impressive a prodigy49. Nature was always the favorite resource of unbelievers; but she serves the cause of religion so very seasonably, that they might surely suspect some collusion between them.”
1. It is not true that it is said in the Gospel, that the Jewish temple should not be rebuilt. The gospel of Matthew, which was evidently written after the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus, prophesies50, certainly, that not one stone should remain upon another of the temple of the Idum?an Herod; but no evangelist says that it shall never be rebuilt. It is perfectly51 false that not one stone remained upon another when Titus demolished52 it. All its foundations remained together, with one entire wall and the tower Antonia.
2. Of what consequence could it be to the Supreme53 Being whether there was a Jewish temple, a magazine, or a mosque54, on the spot where the Jews were in the habit of slaughtering55 bullocks and cows?
3. It is not ascertained57 whether it was from within the circuit of the walls of the city, or from within that of the temple, that those fires proceeded which burned the workmen. But it is not very obvious why the Jews should burn the workmen of the emperor Julian, and not those of the caliph Omar, who long afterwards built a mosque upon the ruins of the temple; or those of the great Saladin who rebuilt the same mosque. Had Jesus any particular predilection58 for the mosques59 of the Mussulmans?
4. Jesus, notwithstanding his having predicted that there would not remain one stone upon another in Jerusalem, did not prevent the rebuilding of that city.
5. Jesus predicted many things which God permitted never to come to pass. He predicted the end of the world, and his coming in the clouds with great power and majesty61, before or about the end of the then existing generation. The world, however, has lasted to the present moment, and in all probability will last much longer.
6. If Julian had written an account of this miracle, I should say that he had been imposed upon by a false and ridiculous report; I should think that the Christians, his enemies, employed every artifice62 to oppose his enterprise, that they themselves killed the workmen, and excited and promoted the belief of their being destroyed by a miracle; but Julian does not say a single word on the subject. The war against the Persians at that time fully63 occupied his attention; he put off the rebuilding of the temple to some other time, and he died before he was able to commence the building.
7. This prodigy is related by Ammianus Marcellinus, who was a Pagan. It is very possible that it may have been an interpolation of the Christians. They have been charged with committing numberless others which have been clearly proved.
But it is not the less probable that at a time when nothing was spoken of but prodigies64 and stories of witchcraft65, Ammianus Marcellinus may have reported this fable66 on the faith of some credulous67 narrator. From Titus Livius to de Thou, inclusively, all historians have been infected with prodigies.
8. Contemporary authors relate that at the same period there was in Syria a great convulsion of the earth, which in many places broke out in conflagrations68 and swallowed up many cities. There was therefore more miracle.
9. If Jesus performed miracles, would it be in order to prevent the rebuilding of a temple in which he had himself sacrificed, and in which he was circumcised? Or would he not rather perform miracles to convert to Christianity the various nations who at present ridicule it? Or rather still, to render more humane69, more kind, Christians themselves, who, from Arius and Athanasius down to Roland and the Paladins of the Cévennes, have shed torrents70 of human blood, and conducted themselves nearly as might be expected from cannibals?
Hence I conclude that “nature” is not in “collusion,” as La Bletterie expresses it, with Christianity, but that La Bletterie is in collusion with some old women’s stories, one of those persons, as Julian phrases it, “quibus cum stolidis aniculis negotium erat.”
La Bletterie, after having done justice to some of Julian’s virtues, yet concludes the history of that great man by observing, that his death was the effect of “divine vengeance71.” If that be the case, all the heroes who have died young, from Alexander to Gustavus Adolphus, have, we must infer, been punished by God. Julian died the noblest of deaths, in the pursuit of his enemies, after many victories. Jovian, who succeeded him, reigned72 a much shorter time than he did, and reigned in disgrace. I see no divine vengeance in the matter; and I see in La Bletterie himself nothing more than a disingenuous73, dishonest declaimer. But where are the men to be found who will dare to speak out?
Libanius the Stoic74 was one of these extraordinary men. He celebrated75 the brave and clement Julian in the presence of Theodosius, the wholesale76 murderer of the Thessalonians; but Le Beau and La Bletterie fear to praise him in the hearing of their own puny77 parish officers.
§ II.
Let any one suppose for a moment that Julian had abandoned false gods for Christianity; then examine him as a man, a philosopher, and an emperor; and let the examiner then point out the man whom he will venture to prefer to him. If he had lived only ten years longer, there is great probability that he would have given a different form to Europe from that which it bears at present.
The Christian religion depended upon his life; the efforts which he made for its destruction rendered his name execrable to the nations who have embraced it. The Christian priests, who were his contemporaries, accuse him of almost every crime, because he had committed what in their eyes was the greatest of all — he had lowered and humiliated78 them. It is not long since his name was never quoted without the epithet79 of apostate80 attached to it; and it is perhaps one of the greatest achievements of reason that he has at length ceased to be mentioned under so opprobrious81 a designation. Who would imagine that in one of the “Mercuries of Paris,” for the year 1745, the author sharply rebukes82 a certain writer for failing in the common courtesies of life, by calling this emperor Julian “the apostate”? Not more than a hundred years ago the man that would not have treated him as an apostate would himself have been treated as an atheist83.
What is very singular, and at the same time perfectly true, is that if you put out of consideration the various disputes between Pagans and Christians, in which this emperor was engaged; if you follow him neither to the Christian churches nor idolatrous temples, but observe him attentively84 in his own household, in camp, in battle, in his manners, his conduct, and his writings, you will find him in every respect equal to Marcus Aurelius.
Thus, the man who has been described as so abominable85 and execrable, is perhaps the first, or at least the second of mankind. Always sober, always temperate86, indulging in no licentious87 pleasures, sleeping on a mere88 bear’s skin, devoting only a few hours, and even those with regret, to sleep; dividing his time between study and business, generous, susceptible89 of friendship, and an enemy to all pomp, and pride, and ostentation90. Had he been merely a private individual he must have extorted91 universal admiration.
If we consider him in his military character, we see him constantly at the head of his troops, establishing or restoring discipline without rigor92, beloved by his soldiers and at the same time restraining their excesses, conducting his armies almost always on foot, and showing them an example of enduring every species of hardship, ever victorious93 in all his expeditions even to the last moments of his life, and at length dying at the glorious crisis when the Persians were routed. His death was that of a hero, and his last words were those of a philosopher: “I submit,” says he, “willingly to the eternal decrees of heaven, convinced that he who is captivated with life, when his last hour is arrived, is more weak and pusillanimous94 than he who would rush to voluntary death when it is his duty still to live.” He converses95 to the last moment on the immortality96 of the soul; manifests no regrets, shows no weakness, and speaks only of his submission97 to the decrees of Providence98. Let it be remembered that this is the death of an emperor at the age of thirty-two, and let it be then decided whether his memory should be insulted.
As an emperor, we see him refusing the title of “Dominus,” which Constantine affected99; relieving his people from difficulties, diminishing taxes, encouraging the arts; reducing to the moderate amount of seventy ounces each those presents in crowns of gold, which had before been exacted from every city to the amount of three or four hundred marks; promoting the strict and general observance of the laws; restraining both his officers and ministers from oppression, and preventing as much as possible all corruption100.
Ten Christian soldiers conspire16 to assassinate101 him; they are discovered, and Julian pardons them. The people of Antioch, who united insolence to voluptuousness102, offer him an insult; he revenges himself only like a man of sense; and while he might have made them feel the weight of imperial power, he merely makes them feel the superiority of his mind. Compare with this conduct the executions which Theodosius (who was very near being made a saint) exhibited in Antioch, and the ever dreadful and memorable103 slaughter56 of all the inhabitants of Thessalonica, for an offence of a somewhat similar description; and then decide between these two celebrated characters.
Certain writers, called fathers of the Church — Gregory of Nazianzen, and Theodoret — thought it incumbent104 on them to calumniate105 him, because he had abandoned the Christian religion. They did not consider that it was the triumph of that religion to prevail over so great a man, and even over a sage106, after having resisted tyrants107. One of them says that he took a barbarous vengeance on Antioch and filled it with blood. How could a fact so public and atrocious escape the knowledge of all other historians? It is perfectly known that he shed no blood at Antioch but that of the victims sacrificed in the regular services of religion. Another ventures to assert that before his death he threw some of his own blood towards heaven, and exclaimed, “Galilean, thou hast conquered.” How could a tale so insipid108 and so improbable, even for a moment obtain credit? Was it against the Christians that he was then combating? and is such an act, are such expressions, in the slightest degree characteristic of the man?
Minds of a somewhat superior order to those of Julian’s detractors may perhaps inquire, how it could occur that a statesman like him, a man of so much intellect, a genuine philosopher, could quit the Christian religion, in which he was educated, for Paganism, of which, it is almost impossible not to suppose, he must have felt the folly109 and ridicule. It might be inferred that if Julian yielded too much to the suggestions of his reason against the mysteries of the Christian religion, he ought, at least in all consistency110, to have yielded more readily to the dictates111 of the same reason, when more correctly and decidedly condemning112 the fables113 of Paganism.
Perhaps, by attending a little to the progress of his life, and the nature of his character, we may discover what it was that inspired him with so strong an aversion to Christianity. The emperor Constantine, his great-uncle, who had placed the new religion on the throne, was stained by the murder of his wife, his son, his brother-in-law, his nephew, and his father-in-law. The three children of Constantine began their bloody114 and baleful reign, with murdering their uncle and their cousins. From that time followed a series of civil wars and murders. The father, the brother, and all the relations of Julian, and even Julian himself, were marked down for destruction by Constantius, his uncle. He escaped this general massacre20, but the first years of his life were passed in exile, and he at last owed the preservation115 of his life, his fortune, and the title of C?sar, only to Eusebia, the wife of his uncle Constantius, who, after having had the cruelty to proscribe23 his infancy116, had the imprudence to appoint him C?sar, and the still further and greater imprudence of then persecuting him.
He was, in the first instance, a witness of the insolence with which a certain bishop117 treated his benefactress Eusebia. He was called Leontius, and was bishop of Tripoli. He sent information to the empress, “that he would not visit her unless she would consent to receive him in a manner corresponding to his episcopal dignity — that is, that she should advance to receive him at the door, that she should receive his benediction118 in a bending attitude, and that she should remain standing60 until he granted her permission to be seated.” The Pagan pontiffs were not in the habit of treating princesses precisely119 in this manner, and such brutal120 arrogance121 could not but make a deep impression on the mind of a young man attached at once to philosophy and simplicity122.
If he saw that he was in a Christian family, he saw, at the same time, that he was in a family rendered distinguished123 by parricides; if he looked at the court bishops124, he perceived that they were at once audacious and intriguing125, and that all anathematized each other in turn. The hostile parties of Arius and Athanasius filled the empire with confusion and carnage; the Pagans, on the contrary, never had any religious quarrels. It is natural therefore that Julian, who had been educated, let it be remembered, by philosophic126 Pagans, should have strengthened by their discourses127 the aversion he must necessarily have felt in his heart for the Christian religion. It is not more extraordinary to see Julian quit Christianity for false gods, than to see Constantine quit false gods for Christianity. It is highly probable that both changed for motives128 of state policy, and that this policy was mixed up in the mind of Julian with the stern loftiness of a stoic soul.
The Pagan priests had no dogmas; they did not compel men to believe that which was incredible; they required nothing but sacrifices, and even sacrifices were not enjoined129 under rigorous penalties; they did not set themselves up as the first order in the state, did not form a state within a state, and did not mix in affairs of government. These might well be considered motives to induce a man of Julian’s character to declare himself on their side; and if he had piqued130 himself upon being nothing besides a Stoic, he would have had against him the priests of both religions, and all the fanatics of each. The common people would not at that time have endured a prince who was content simply with the pure worship of a pure divinity and the strict observance of justice. It was necessary to side with one of the opposing parties. We must therefore believe that Julian submitted to the Pagan ceremonies, as the majority of princes and great men attend the forms of worship in the public temples. They are led thither131 by the people themselves, and are often obliged to appear what in fact they are not; and to be in public the first and greatest slaves of credulity. The Turkish sultan must bless the name of Omar. The Persian sophi must bless the name of Ali. Marcus Aurelius himself was initiated132 in the mysteries of Eleusis.
We ought not therefore to be surprised that Julian should have debased his reason by condescending133 to the forms and usages of superstition134; but it is impossible not to feel indignant against Theodoret, as the only historian who relates that he sacrificed a woman in the temple of the moon at Carres. This infamous135 story must be classed with the absurd tale of Ammianus, that the genius of the empire appeared to Julian before his death, and with the other equally ridiculous one, that when Julian attempted to rebuild the temple of Jerusalem, there came globes of fire out of the earth, and consumed all the works and workmen without distinction.
Iliacos intra muros peccatur et extra.
— Horace, book i, ep. ii, 16.
Both Christians and Pagans equally, circulated fables concerning Julian; but the fables of the Christians, who were his enemies, were filled with calumny. Who could ever be induced to believe that a philosopher sacrificed a woman to the moon, and tore out her entrails with his own hands? Is such atrocity136 compatible with the character of a rigid137 Stoic?
He never put any Christians to death. He granted them no favors, but he never persecuted them. He permitted them, like a just sovereign, to keep their own property; and he wrote in opposition138 to them like a philosopher. He forbade their teaching in the schools the profane139 authors, whom they endeavored to decry140 — this was not persecuting them; and he prevented them from tearing one another to pieces in their outrageous141 hatred142 and quarrels — this was protecting them. They had in fact therefore nothing with which they could reproach him, but with having abandoned them, and with not being of their opinion. They found means, however, of rendering143 execrable to posterity144 a prince, who, but for his change of religion, would have been admired and beloved by all the world.
Although we have already treated of Julian, under the article on “Apostate”; although, following the example of every sage, we have deplored145 the dreadful calamity146 he experienced in not being a Christian, and have done justice elsewhere to his various excellences147, we must nevertheless say something more upon the subject.
We do this in consequence of an imposture148 equally absurd and atrocious, which we casually149 met with in one of those petty dictionaries with which France is now inundated150, and which unfortunately are so easily compiled. This dictionary of theology which I am now alluding151 to proceeds from an ex-Jesuit, called Paulian, who repeats the story, so discredited152 and absurd, that the emperor Julian, after being mortally wounded in a battle with the Persians, threw some of his blood towards heaven, exclaiming, “Galilean, thou hast conquered”— a fable which destroys itself, as Julian was conqueror153 in the battle, and Jesus Christ certainly was not the God of the Persians.
Paulian, notwithstanding, dares to assert that the fact is incontestable. And upon what ground does he assert it? Upon the ground of its being related by Theodoret, the author of so many distinguished lies; and even this notorious writer himself relates it only as a vague report; he uses the expression, “It is said.” This story is worthy154 of the calumniators who stated that Julian had sacrificed a woman to the moon, and that after his death a large chest was found among his movables filled with human heads.
This is not the only falsehood and calumny with which this ex-Jesuit Paulian is chargeable. If these contemptible155 wretches156 knew what injury they did to our holy religion, by endeavoring to support it by imposture, and by the abominable abuse with which they assail157 the most respectable characters, they would be less audacious and infuriated. They care not, however, for supporting religion; what they want is to gain money by their libels; and despairing of being read by persons of sense, and taste, and fashion, they go on gathering158 and compiling theological trash, in hopes that their productions will be adopted in the seminaries.
We sincerely ask pardon of our well-informed and respectable readers for introducing such names as those of the ex-Jesuits Paulian, Nonnotte, and Patouillet; but after having trampled159 to death serpents, we shall probably be excused for crushing fleas160.
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
sect
|
|
| n.派别，宗教，学派，派系 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
venal
|
|
| adj.唯利是图的，贪脏枉法的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
miscreant
|
|
| n.恶棍 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
calumny
|
|
| n.诽谤，污蔑，中伤 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
decided
|
|
| adj.决定了的，坚决的；明显的，明确的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
scoffing
|
|
| n. 嘲笑, 笑柄, 愚弄 v. 嘲笑, 嘲弄, 愚弄, 狼吞虎咽 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
insolence
|
|
| n.傲慢；无礼；厚颜；傲慢的态度 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
lulled
|
|
| vt.使镇静，使安静（lull的过去式与过去分词形式） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
Christian
|
|
| adj.基督教徒的；n.基督教徒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
chaste
|
|
| adj.贞洁的；有道德的；善良的；简朴的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
disinterested
|
|
| adj.不关心的，不感兴趣的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
clement
|
|
| adj.仁慈的；温和的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
persecuted
|
|
| （尤指宗教或政治信仰的）迫害(~sb. for sth.)( persecute的过去式和过去分词 )； 烦扰，困扰或骚扰某人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
imprisoned
|
|
| 下狱，监禁( imprison的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
reign
|
|
| n.统治时期，统治，支配，盛行；v.占优势 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
conspire
|
|
| v.密谋，（事件等）巧合，共同导致 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
conspired
|
|
| 密谋( conspire的过去式和过去分词 )； 搞阴谋； （事件等）巧合； 共同导致 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
predecessor
|
|
| n.前辈，前任 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
imprisonment
|
|
| n.关押，监禁，坐牢 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
massacre
|
|
| n.残杀，大屠杀；v.残杀，集体屠杀 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
liberated
|
|
| a.无拘束的，放纵的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
proscribed
|
|
| v.正式宣布（某事物）有危险或被禁止( proscribe的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
proscribe
|
|
| v.禁止；排斥；放逐，充军；剥夺公权 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
deplore
|
|
| vt.哀叹，对...深感遗憾 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
devour
|
|
| v.吞没；贪婪地注视或谛听，贪读；使着迷 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
dictated
|
|
| v.大声讲或读( dictate的过去式和过去分词 )；口授；支配；摆布 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
persecuting
|
|
| （尤指宗教或政治信仰的）迫害(~sb. for sth.)( persecute的现在分词 )； 烦扰，困扰或骚扰某人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
fanaticism
|
|
| n.狂热，盲信 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
Christians
|
|
| n.基督教徒( Christian的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
conspiring
|
|
| 密谋( conspire的现在分词 )； 搞阴谋； （事件等）巧合； 共同导致 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
fanatics
|
|
| 狂热者，入迷者( fanatic的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
impartiality
|
|
| n. 公平, 无私, 不偏 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
possessed
|
|
| adj.疯狂的；拥有的，占有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
virtue
|
|
| n.德行，美德；贞操；优点；功效，效力 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
virtues
|
|
| 美德( virtue的名词复数 )； 德行； 优点； 长处 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
obstinacy
|
|
| n.顽固；（病痛等）难治 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
admiration
|
|
| n.钦佩，赞美，羡慕 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
vices
|
|
| 缺陷( vice的名词复数 )； 恶习； 不道德行为； 台钳 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
slanderer
|
|
| 造谣中伤者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
propitiate
|
|
| v.慰解，劝解 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
absurdities
|
|
| n.极端无理性( absurdity的名词复数 )；荒谬；谬论；荒谬的行为 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
ridicule
|
|
| v.讥讽，挖苦；n.嘲弄 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
slovenly
|
|
| adj.懒散的，不整齐的，邋遢的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
abrupt
|
|
| adj.突然的，意外的；唐突的，鲁莽的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
remains
|
|
| n.剩余物，残留物；遗体，遗迹 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
superintendent
|
|
| n.监督人，主管，总监；(英国)警务长 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
undoubtedly
|
|
| adv.确实地，无疑地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
deity
|
|
| n.神，神性；被奉若神明的人(或物) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
prodigy
|
|
| n.惊人的事物，奇迹，神童，天才，预兆 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
prophesies
|
|
| v.预告，预言( prophesy的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
perfectly
|
|
| adv.完美地，无可非议地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
demolished
|
|
| v.摧毁( demolish的过去式和过去分词 )；推翻；拆毁（尤指大建筑物）；吃光 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
supreme
|
|
| adj.极度的，最重要的；至高的，最高的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
mosque
|
|
| n.清真寺 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
slaughtering
|
|
| v.屠杀，杀戮，屠宰( slaughter的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
slaughter
|
|
| n.屠杀，屠宰；vt.屠杀，宰杀 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
ascertained
|
|
| v.弄清，确定，查明( ascertain的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
predilection
|
|
| n.偏好 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
59
mosques
|
|
| 清真寺； 伊斯兰教寺院，清真寺； 清真寺，伊斯兰教寺院( mosque的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
standing
|
|
| n.持续，地位；adj.永久的，不动的，直立的，不流动的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
majesty
|
|
| n.雄伟，壮丽，庄严，威严；最高权威，王权 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
artifice
|
|
| n.妙计，高明的手段；狡诈，诡计 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
fully
|
|
| adv.完全地，全部地，彻底地；充分地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
prodigies
|
|
| n.奇才，天才（尤指神童）( prodigy的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
witchcraft
|
|
| n.魔法，巫术 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
fable
|
|
| n.寓言；童话；神话 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
67
credulous
|
|
| adj.轻信的，易信的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
68
conflagrations
|
|
| n.大火（灾）( conflagration的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
69
humane
|
|
| adj.人道的，富有同情心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
70
torrents
|
|
| n.倾注；奔流( torrent的名词复数 )；急流；爆发；连续不断 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
71
vengeance
|
|
| n.报复，报仇，复仇 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
72
reigned
|
|
| vi.当政，统治（reign的过去式形式） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
73
disingenuous
|
|
| adj.不诚恳的，虚伪的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
74
stoic
|
|
| n.坚忍克己之人，禁欲主义者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
75
celebrated
|
|
| adj.有名的，声誉卓著的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
76
wholesale
|
|
| n.批发；adv.以批发方式；vt.批发，成批出售 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
77
puny
|
|
| adj.微不足道的，弱小的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
78
humiliated
|
|
| 感到羞愧的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
79
epithet
|
|
| n.（用于褒贬人物等的）表述形容词，修饰语 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
80
apostate
|
|
| n.背叛者，变节者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
81
opprobrious
|
|
| adj.可耻的，辱骂的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
82
rebukes
|
|
| 责难或指责( rebuke的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
83
atheist
|
|
| n.无神论者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
84
attentively
|
|
| adv.聚精会神地；周到地；谛；凝神 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
85
abominable
|
|
| adj.可厌的，令人憎恶的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
86
temperate
|
|
| adj.温和的，温带的，自我克制的，不过分的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
87
licentious
|
|
| adj.放纵的，淫乱的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
88
mere
|
|
| adj.纯粹的；仅仅，只不过 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
89
susceptible
|
|
| adj.过敏的，敏感的；易动感情的，易受感动的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
90
ostentation
|
|
| n.夸耀，卖弄 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
91
extorted
|
|
| v.敲诈( extort的过去式和过去分词 )；曲解 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
92
rigor
|
|
| n.严酷，严格，严厉 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
93
victorious
|
|
| adj.胜利的，得胜的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
94
pusillanimous
|
|
| adj.懦弱的，胆怯的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
95
converses
|
|
| v.交谈，谈话( converse的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
96
immortality
|
|
| n.不死，不朽 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
97
submission
|
|
| n.服从，投降；温顺，谦虚；提出 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
98
providence
|
|
| n.深谋远虑，天道，天意；远见；节约；上帝 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
99
affected
|
|
| adj.不自然的，假装的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
100
corruption
|
|
| n.腐败，堕落，贪污 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
101
assassinate
|
|
| vt.暗杀，行刺，中伤 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
102
voluptuousness
|
|
| n.风骚，体态丰满 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
103
memorable
|
|
| adj.值得回忆的，难忘的，特别的，显著的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
104
incumbent
|
|
| adj.成为责任的，有义务的；现任的，在职的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
105
calumniate
|
|
| v.诬蔑，中伤 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
106
sage
|
|
| n.圣人，哲人；adj.贤明的，明智的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
107
tyrants
|
|
| 专制统治者( tyrant的名词复数 )； 暴君似的人； （古希腊的）僭主； 严酷的事物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
108
insipid
|
|
| adj.无味的，枯燥乏味的，单调的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
109
folly
|
|
| n.愚笨，愚蠢，蠢事，蠢行，傻话 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
110
consistency
|
|
| n.一贯性，前后一致，稳定性；(液体的)浓度 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
111
dictates
|
|
| n.命令，规定，要求( dictate的名词复数 )v.大声讲或读( dictate的第三人称单数 )；口授；支配；摆布 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
112
condemning
|
|
| v.（通常因道义上的原因而）谴责( condemn的现在分词 )；宣判；宣布…不能使用；迫使…陷于不幸的境地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
113
fables
|
|
| n.寓言( fable的名词复数 )；神话，传说 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
114
bloody
|
|
| adj.非常的的；流血的；残忍的；adv.很；vt.血染 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
115
preservation
|
|
| n.保护，维护，保存，保留，保持 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
116
infancy
|
|
| n.婴儿期；幼年期；初期 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
117
bishop
|
|
| n.主教，（国际象棋）象 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
118
benediction
|
|
| n.祝福；恩赐 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
119
precisely
|
|
| adv.恰好，正好，精确地，细致地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
120
brutal
|
|
| adj.残忍的，野蛮的，不讲理的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
121
arrogance
|
|
| n.傲慢，自大 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
122
simplicity
|
|
| n.简单，简易；朴素；直率，单纯 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
123
distinguished
|
|
| adj.卓越的，杰出的，著名的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
124
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： |
|
|
|
|
125
intriguing
|
|
| adj.有趣的；迷人的v.搞阴谋诡计(intrigue的现在分词)；激起…的好奇心 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
126
philosophic
|
|
| adj.哲学的，贤明的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
127
discourses
|
|
| 论文( discourse的名词复数 )； 演说； 讲道； 话语 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
128
motives
|
|
| n.动机，目的( motive的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
129
enjoined
|
|
| v.命令( enjoin的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
130
piqued
|
|
| v.伤害…的自尊心( pique的过去式和过去分词 )；激起（好奇心） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
131
thither
|
|
| adv.向那里；adj.在那边的，对岸的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
132
initiated
|
|
| n. 创始人 adj. 新加入的 vt. 开始，创始，启蒙，介绍加入 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
133
condescending
|
|
| adj.谦逊的,故意屈尊的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
134
superstition
|
|
| n.迷信，迷信行为 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
135
infamous
|
|
| adj.声名狼藉的，臭名昭著的，邪恶的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
136
atrocity
|
|
| n.残暴，暴行 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
137
rigid
|
|
| adj.严格的，死板的；刚硬的，僵硬的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
138
opposition
|
|
| n.反对，敌对 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
139
profane
|
|
| adj.亵神的，亵渎的；vt.亵渎，玷污 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
140
decry
|
|
| v.危难，谴责 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
141
outrageous
|
|
| adj.无理的，令人不能容忍的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
142
hatred
|
|
| n.憎恶，憎恨，仇恨 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
143
rendering
|
|
| n.表现，描写 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
144
posterity
|
|
| n.后裔，子孙，后代 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
145
deplored
|
|
| v.悲叹，痛惜，强烈反对( deplore的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
146
calamity
|
|
| n.灾害，祸患，不幸事件 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
147
excellences
|
|
| n.卓越( excellence的名词复数 )；（只用于所修饰的名词后）杰出的；卓越的；出类拔萃的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
148
imposture
|
|
| n.冒名顶替，欺骗 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
149
casually
|
|
| adv.漠不关心地，无动于衷地，不负责任地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
150
inundated
|
|
| v.淹没( inundate的过去式和过去分词 )；（洪水般地）涌来；充满；给予或交予（太多事物）使难以应付 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
151
alluding
|
|
| 提及，暗指( allude的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
152
discredited
|
|
| 不足信的，不名誉的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
153
conqueror
|
|
| n.征服者，胜利者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
154
worthy
|
|
| adj.(of)值得的，配得上的；有价值的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
155
contemptible
|
|
| adj.可鄙的，可轻视的，卑劣的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
156
wretches
|
|
| n.不幸的人( wretch的名词复数 )；可怜的人；恶棍；坏蛋 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
157
assail
|
|
| v.猛烈攻击，抨击，痛斥 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
158
gathering
|
|
| n.集会，聚会，聚集 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
159
trampled
|
|
| 踩( trample的过去式和过去分词 )； 践踏； 无视； 侵犯 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
160
fleas
|
|
| n.跳蚤( flea的名词复数 )；爱财如命；没好气地（拒绝某人的要求） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |