Philosopher, “lover of wisdom,” that is, “of truth.” All philosophers have possessed2 this two-fold character; there is not one among those of antiquity3 who did not give examples of virtue4 to mankind, and lessons of moral truth. They might be mistaken, and undoubtedly5 were so, on subjects of natural philosophy; but that is of comparatively so little importance to the conduct of life, that philosophers had then no need of it. Ages were required to discover a part of the laws of nature. A single day is sufficient to enable a sage6 to become acquainted with the duties of man.
The philosopher is no enthusiast7; he does not set himself up for a prophet; he does not represent himself as inspired by the gods. I shall not therefore place in the rank of philosophers the ancient Zoroaster, or Hermes, or Orpheus, or any of those legislators in whom the countries of Chald?a, Persia, Syria, Egypt, and Greece made their boast. Those who called themselves the sons of gods were the fathers of imposture8; and if they employed falsehood to inculcate truths, they were unworthy of inculcating them; they were not philosophers; they were at best only prudent10 liars11.
By what fatality12, disgraceful perhaps to the nations of the West, has it happened that we are obliged to travel to the extremity13 of the East, in order to find a sage of simple manners and character, without arrogance14 and without imposture, who taught men how to live happy six hundred years before our era, at a period when the whole of the North was ignorant of the use of letters, and when the Greeks had scarcely begun to distinguish themselves by wisdom? That sage is Confucius, who deemed too highly of his character as a legislator for mankind, to stoop to deceive them. What finer rule of conduct has ever been given since his time, throughout the earth?
“Rule a state as you rule a family; a man cannot govern his family well without giving a good example; virtue should be common to the laborer15 and the monarch16; be active in preventing crimes, that you may lessen17 the trouble of punishing them.
“Under the good kings Yao and Xu, the Chinese were good; under the bad kings Kie and Chu, they were wicked.
“Do to another as to thyself; love mankind in general, but cherish those who are good; forget injuries, but never benefits.”
I have seen men incapable18 of the sciences, but never any incapable of virtue. Let us acknowledge that no legislator ever announced to the world more useful truths.
A multitude of Greek philosophers taught afterwards a morality equally pure. Had they distinguished19 themselves only by their vain systems of natural philosophy, their names would be mentioned at the present day only in derision. If they are still respected, it is because they were just, and because they taught mankind to be so.
It is impossible to read certain passages of Plato, and particularly the admirable exordium of the laws of Zaleucus, without experiencing an ardent21 love of honorable and generous actions. The Romans have their Cicero who alone is perhaps more valuable than all the philosophers of Greece. After him come men more respectable still, but whom we may almost despair of imitating; these are Epictetus in slavery, and the Antonines and Julian upon a throne.
Where is the citizen to be found among us who would deprive himself, like Julian, Antoninus, and Marcus Aurelius, of all the refined accommodations of our delicate and luxurious22 modes of living? Who would, like them, sleep on the bare ground? Who would restrict himself to their frugal23 habits? Who would, like them, march bareheaded and barefooted at the head of the armies, exposed sometimes to the burning sun, and at other times to the freezing blast? Who would, like them, keep perfect mastery of all his passions? We have among us devotees, but where are the sages20? where are the souls just and tolerant, serene24 and undaunted?
There have been some philosophers of the closet in France; and all of them, with the exception of Montaigne, have been persecuted25. It seems to me the last degree of malignity27 that our nature can exhibit, to attempt to oppress those who devote their best endeavors to correct and improve it.
I can easily conceive of the fanatics29 of one sect slaughtering30 those of another sect; that the Franciscans should hate the Dominicans, and that a bad artist should cabal31 and intrigue32 for the destruction of an artist that surpasses him; but that the sage Charron should have been menaced with the loss of life; that the learned and noble-minded Ramus should have been actually assassinated33; that Descartes should have been obliged to withdraw to Holland in order to escape the rage of ignorance; that Gassendi should have been often compelled to retire to Digne, far distant from the calumnies34 of Paris, are events that load a nation with eternal opprobrium35.
One of the philosophers who were most persecuted, was the immortal36 Bayle, the honor of human nature. I shall be told that the name of Jurieu, his slanderer38 and persecutor39, is become execrable; I acknowledge that it is so; that of the Jesuit Letellier is become so likewise; but is it the less true that the great men whom he oppressed ended their days in exile and penury40?
One of the pretexts41 made use of for reducing Bayle to poverty, was his article on David, in his valuable dictionary. He was reproached with not praising actions which were in themselves unjust, sanguinary, atrocious, contrary to good faith, or grossly offensive to decency42.
Bayle certainly has not praised David for having, according to the Hebrew historian, collected six hundred vagabonds overwhelmed with debts and crimes; for having pillaged44 his countrymen at the head of these banditti; for having resolved to destroy Nabal and his whole family, because he refused paying contributions to him; for having hired out his services to King Achish, the enemy of his country; for having afterwards betrayed Achish, notwithstanding his kindness to him; for having sacked the villages in alliance with that king; for having massacred in these villages every human being, including even infants at the breast, that no one might be found on a future day to give testimony47 of his depredations48, as if an infant could have possibly disclosed his villainy; for having destroyed all the inhabitants of some other villages under saws, and harrows, and axes, and in brick-kilns; for having wrested49 the throne from Ishbosheth, the son of Saul, by an act of perfidy50; for having despoiled51 of his property and afterwards put to death Mephibosheth, the grandson of Saul, and son of his own peculiar52 friend and generous protector, Jonathan; or for having delivered up to the Gibeonites two other sons of Saul, and five of his grandsons who perished by the gallows53.
I do not notice the extreme incontinence of David, his numerous concubines, his adultery with Bathsheba, or his murder of Uriah.
What then! is it possible that the enemies of Bayle should have expected or wished him to eulogize all these cruelties and crimes? Ought he to have said: Go, ye princes of the earth, and imitate the man after God’s own heart; massacre46 without pity the allies of your benefactor54; destroy or deliver over to destruction the whole family of your king; appropriate to your own pleasures all the women, while you are pouring out the blood of the men; and you will thus exhibit models of human virtue, especially if, in addition to all the rest, you do but compose a book of psalms55?
Was not Bayle perfectly56 correct in his observation, that if David was the man after God’s own heart, it must have been by his penitence57, and not by his crimes? Did not Bayle perform a service to the human race when he said, that God, who undoubtedly dictated58 the Jewish history, has not consecrated59 all the crimes recorded in that history?
However, Bayle was in fact persecuted, and by whom? By the very men who had been elsewhere persecuted themselves; by refugees who in their own country would have been delivered over to the flames; and these refugees were opposed by other refugees called Jansenists, who had been driven from their own country by the Jesuits; who have at length been themselves driven from it in their turn.
Thus all the persecutors declare against each other mortal war, while the philosopher, oppressed by them all, contents himself with pitying them.
It is not generally known, that Fontenelle, in 1718, was on the point of losing his pensions, place, and liberty, for having published in France, twenty years before, what may be called an abridgement of the learned Van Dale’s “Treatise on Oracles,” in which he had taken particular care to retrench60 and modify the original work, so as to give no unnecessary offence to fanaticism61. A Jesuit had written against Fontenelle, and he had not deigned62 to make him any reply; and that was enough to induce the Jesuit Letellier, confessor to Louis XIV., to accuse Fontenelle to the king of atheism63.
But for the fortunate mediation64 of M. d’Argenson, the son of a forging solicitor65 of Vire — a son worthy9 of such a father, as he was detected in forgery66 himself — would have proscribed67, in his old age, the nephew of the great Corneille.
It is so easy for a confessor to seduce68 his penitent69, that we ought to bless God that Letellier did no more harm than is justly imputed71 to him. There are two situations in which seduction and calumny72 cannot easily be resisted — the bed and the confessional.
We have always seen philosophers persecuted by fanatics. But can it be really possible, that men of letters should be seen mixed up in a business so odious73; and that they should often be observed sharpening the weapons against their brethren, by which they are themselves almost universally destroyed or wounded in their turn. Unhappy men of letters, does it become you to turn informers? Did the Romans ever find a Garasse, a Chaumieux, or a Hayet, to accuse a Lucretius, a Posidonius, a Varro, or a Pliny?
How inexpressible is the meanness of being a hypocrite! how horrible is it to be a mischievous74 and malignant75 hypocrite! There were no hypocrites in ancient Rome, which reckoned us a small portion of its innumerable subjects. There were impostors, I admit, but not religious hypocrites, which are the most profligate76 and cruel species of all. Why is it that we see none such in England, and whence does it arise that there still are such in France? Philosophers, you will solve this problem with ease.
§ II.
This brilliant and beautiful name has been sometimes honored, and sometimes disgraced; like that of poet, mathematician77, monk78, priest, and everything dependent on opinion. Domitian banished79 the philosophers, and Lucian derided80 them. But what sort of philosophers and mathematicians81 were they whom the monster Domitian exiled? They were jugglers with their cups and balls; the calculators of horoscopes, fortune-tellers, miserable82 peddling83 Jews, who composed philtres and talismans84; gentry85 who had special and sovereign power over evil spirits, who evoked87 them from their infernal habitations, made them take possession of the bodies of men and women by certain words or signs, and dislodged them by other words or signs.
And what were the philosophers that Lucian held up to public ridicule88? They were the dregs of the human race. They were a set of profligate beggars incapable of applying to any useful profession or occupation; men perfectly resembling the “Poor Devil,” who has been described to us with so much both of truth and humor; men who are undecided whether to wear a livery, or to write the almanac of the “Annus Mirabilis,” the marvellous year; whether to work on reviews, or on roads; whether to turn soldiers or priests; who in the meantime frequent the coffee-houses, to give their opinion upon the last new piece, upon God, upon being in general, and the various modes of being; who will then borrow your money, and immediately go away and write a libel against you in conjunction with the barrister Marchand, or the creature called Chaudon, or the equally despicable wretch89 called Bonneval.
It was not from such a school that the Ciceros, the Atticuses, the Epictetuses, the Trajans, Adrians, Antonines, and Julians proceeded. It was not such a school that formed a king of Prussia, who has composed as many philosophical91 treatises92 as he has gained battles, and who has levelled with the dust as many prejudices as enemies.
A victorious93 empress, at whose name the Ottomans tremble, and who so gloriously rules an empire more extensive than that of Rome, would never have been a great legistratrix, had she not been a philosopher. Every northern prince is so, and the North puts the South to absolute shame. If the confederates of Poland had only a very small share of philosophy, they would not expose their country, their estates, and their houses, to pillage43; they would not drench94 their territory in blood; they would not obstinately95 and wantonly reduce themselves to being the most miserable of mankind; they would listen to the voice of their philosophic90 king, who has given so many noble proofs and so many admirable lessons of moderation and prudence96 in vain.
The great Julian was a philosopher when he wrote to his ministers and pontiffs his exquisite97 letters abounding98 in clemency99 and wisdom, which all men of judgment100 and feeling highly admire, even at the present day, however sincerely they may condemn101 his errors.
Constantine was not a philosopher when he assassinated his relations, his son and his wife, and when, reeking102 with the blood of his family, he swore that God had sent to him the “Labarum” in the clouds. It is a long bound that carries us from Constantine to Charles IX., and Henry III., kings of one of the fifty great provinces of the Roman Empire. But if these kings had been philosophers, one would not have been guilty of the massacre of St. Bartholomew, and the other would not have made scandalous processions, nor have been reduced to the necessity of assassinating103 the duke of Guise104 and the cardinal105, his brother, and at length have been assassinated himself by a young Jacobin, for the love of God and of the holy church.
If Louis the Just, the thirteenth monarch of that name, had been a philosopher, he would not have permitted the virtuous106 de Thou and the innocent Marshal de Marillac to have been dragged to the scaffold; he would not have suffered his mother to perish with hunger at Cologne; and his reign86 would not have been an uninterrupted succession of intestine107 discords108 and calamities109.
Compare with those princes, thus ignorant, superstitious110, cruel, and enslaved by their own passions or those of their ministers, such a man as Montaigne, or Charron, or the Chancellor111 de l’H?pital, or the historian de Thou, or la Mothe Le Vayer, or a Locke, a Shaftesbury, a Sidney, or a Herbert; and say whether you would rather be governed by those sovereigns or by these sages.
When I speak of philosophers I do not mean the coarse and brutal112 cynics who appear desirous of being apes of Diogenes, but the men who imitate Plato and Cicero. As for you, voluptuous113 courtiers, and you also, men of petty minds, invested with a petty employment which confers on you a petty authority in a petty country, who uniformly exclaim against and abuse philosophy, proceed as long as you please with your invective114 railing. I consider you as the Nomentanuses inveighing116 against Horace; and the Cotins attempting to cry down Boileau.
§ III.
The stiff Lutheran, the savage117 Calvinist, the proud Anglican high churchman, the fanatical Jansenist, the Jesuit always aiming at dominion118, even in exile and at the very gallows, the Sorbonnist who deems himself one of the fathers of a council; these, and some imbecile beings under their respective guidance, inveigh115 incessantly119 and bitterly against philosophy. They are all different species of the canine120 race, snarling121 and howling in their peculiar ways against a beautiful horse that is pasturing in a verdant122 meadow, and who never enters into contest with them about any of the carrion123 carcasses upon which they feed, and for which they are perpetually fighting with one another.
They every day produce from the press their trash of philosophic theology, their philosophico-theological dictionaries; their old and battered124 arguments, as common as the streets, which they denominate “demonstrations”; and their ten thousand times repeated and ridiculous assertions which they call “lemmas,” and “corollaries”; as false coiners cover a lead crown with a plating of silver.
They perceive that they are despised by all persons of reflection, and that they can no longer deceive any but a few weak old women. This state is far more humiliating and mortifying126 than even being expelled from France and Spain and Naples. Everything can be supported except contempt. We are told that when the devil was conquered by Raphael — as it is clearly proved he was — that haughty127 compound of body and spirit at first easily consoled himself with the idea of the chances of war. But when he understood that Raphael laughed at him, he roundly swore that he would never forgive him. Accordingly, the Jesuits never forgave Pascal; accordingly, Jerieu went on calumniating128 Bayle even to the grave; and just in the same manner all the Tartuffes, all the hypocrites, in Molière’s time, inveighed129 against that author to his dying day. In their rage they resort to calumnies, as in their folly130 they publish arguments.
One of the most determined131 slanderers, as well as one of the most contemptible132 reasoners that we have among us, is an ex-Jesuit of the name of Paulian, who published a theologico-philosophical rhapsody in the city of Avignon, formerly133 a papal city, and perhaps destined134 to be so again. This person accuses the authors of the “Encyclop?dia” of having said:
“That as man is by his nature open only to the pleasures of the senses, these pleasures are consequently the sole objects of his desires; that man in himself has neither vice45 nor virtue, neither good nor bad morals, neither justice nor injustice135; that the pleasures of the senses produce all the virtues136; that in order to be happy, men must extinguish remorse137, etc.”
In what articles of the “Encyclop?dia,” of which five new editions have lately commenced, are these horrible propositions to be found? You are bound actually to produce them. Have you carried the insolence138 of your pride and the madness of your character to such an extent as to imagine that you will be believed on your bare word? These ridiculous absurdities139 may be found perhaps in the works of your own casuists, or those of the Porter of the Chartreux, but they are certainly not to be found in the articles of the “Encyclop?dia” composed by M. Diderot, M. d’Alembert, the chevalier Jaucourt, or M. de Voltaire. You have never seen them in the articles of the Count de Tressan, nor in those of Messrs. Blondel, Boucher-d’Argis, Marmontel, Venel, Tronchin, d’Aubenton, d’Argenville, and various others, who generously devoted140 their time and labors141 to enrich the “Encyclop?dic Dictionary,” and thereby142 conferred an everlasting143 benefit on Europe. Most assuredly, not one of them is chargeable with the abominations you impute70 to them. Only yourself, and Abraham Chaumieux, the vinegar merchant and crucified convulsionary, could be capable of broaching144 so infamous145 a calumny.
You confound error with truth, because you have not sense sufficient to distinguish between them. You wish to stigmatize146 as impious the maxim147 adopted by all publicists, “That every man is free to choose his country.”
What! you contemptible preacher of slavery, was not Queen Christina free to travel to France and reside at Rome? Were not Casimir and Stanislaus authorized148 to end their days in France? Was it necessary, because they were Poles, that they should die in Poland? Did Goldoni, Vanloo, and Cassini give offense149 to God by settling at Paris? Have all the Irish, who have established themselves in fame and fortune in France, committed by so doing a mortal sin?
And you have the stupidity to print such extravagance and absurdity150 as this, and Riballier has stupidity enough to approve and sanction you; and you range in one and the same class Bayle, Montesquieu, and the madman de La Metrie; and it may be added, you have found the French nation too humane151 and indulgent, notwithstanding all your slander37 and malignity, to deliver you over to anything but scorn!
What! do you dare to calumniate152 your country — if indeed a Jesuit can be said to have a country? Do you dare to assert “that philosophers alone in France attribute to chance the union and disunion of the atoms which constitute the soul of man?” “Mentiris impudentissime!” I defy you to produce a single book, published within the last thirty years, in which anything at all is attributed to chance, which is merely a word without a meaning.
Do you dare to accuse the sagacious and judicious154 Locke of having said “that it is possible the soul may be a spirit, but that he is not perfectly sure it is so; and that we are unable to decide what it may be able or unable to acquire?”
“Mentiris impudentissime!” Locke, the truly respectable and venerable Locke, says expressly, in his answer to the cavilling155 and sophistical Stilling-fleet, “I am strongly persuaded, although it cannot be shown, by mere153 reason, that the soul is immaterial, because the veracity156 of God is a demonstration125 of the truth of all that He has revealed, and the absence of another demonstration can never throw any doubt upon what is already demonstrated.”
See, moreover, under the article “Soul,” how Locke expresses himself on the bounds of human knowledge, and the immensity of the power of the Supreme157 Being. The great philosopher Bolingbroke declares that the opinion opposite to Locke’s is blasphemy158. All the fathers, during the first three ages of the church, regarded the soul as a light, attenuated159 species of matter, but did not the less, in consequence, regard it as immortal. But now, forsooth, even your college drudges160 consequentially161 put themselves forward and denounce as “atheists” those who, with the fathers of the Christian162 church, think that God is able to bestow163 and to preserve the immortality164 of the soul, whatever may be the substance it consists of.
You carry your audacity165 so far as to discover atheism in the following words, “Who produces motion in nature? God. Who produces vegetation in plants? God. Who produces motion in animals? God. Who produces thought in man? God.”
We cannot so properly say on this occasion, “Mentiris impudentissime”; but we should rather say you impudently166 blaspheme the truth. We conclude with observing that the hero of the ex-Jesuit Paulian is the ex-Jesuit Patouillet, the author of a bishop’s mandate167 in which all the parliaments of the kingdom are insulted. This mandate was burned by the hands of the executioner. Nothing after this was wanting but for the ex-Jesuit Paulian to elevate the ex-Jesuit Nonnotte to be a father of the church, and to canonize the Jesuits Malagrida, Guignard, Garnet, and Oldham, and all other Jesuits to whom God has granted the grace of being hanged or quartered; they were all of them great metaphysicians, great philosophico-theologians.
§ IV.
People who never think frequently inquire of those who do think, what has been the use of philosophy? To destroy in England the religious rage which brought Charles I. to the scaffold; to deprive an archbishop in Sweden of the power, with a papal bull in his hand, of shedding the blood of the nobility; to preserve in Germany religious peace, by holding up theological disputes to ridicule; finally, to extinguish in Spain the hideous168 and devouring169 flames of the Inquisition.
Gauls! unfortunate Gauls! it prevents stormy and factious170 times from producing among you a second “Fronde,” and a second “Damiens.” Priests of Rome! it compels you to suppress your bull “In c?na domini,” that monument of impudence171 and stupidity. Nations! it humanizes your manners. Kings, it gives you instruction!
§ V.
The philosopher is the lover of wisdom and truth; to be a sage is to avoid the senseless and the depraved. The philosopher, therefore, should live only among philosophers.
I will suppose that there are still some sages among the Jews; if one of these, when dining in company with some rabbis, should help himself to a plate of eels172 or hare, or if he cannot refrain from a hearty173 laugh at some superstitious and ridiculous observations made by them in the course of conversation, he is forever ruined in the synagogue; the like remark may be made of a Mussulman, a Gueber, or a Banian.
I know it is contended by many that the sage should never develop his opinions to the vulgar; that he should be a madman with the mad, and foolish among fools; no one, however, has yet ventured to say that he should be a knave174 among knaves175. But if it be required that a sage should always join in opinion with the deluders of mankind, is not this clearly the same as requiring that he should not be an honest man? Would any one require that a respectable physician should always be of the same opinion as charlatans176?
The sage is a physician of souls. He ought to bestow his remedies on those who ask them of him, and avoid the company of quacks177, who will infallibly persecute26 him. If, therefore, a madman of Asia Minor178, or a madman of India, says to the sage: My good friend, I think you do not believe in the mare179 Borac, or in the metamorphoses of Vishnu; I will denounce you, I will hinder you from being bostanji, I will destroy your credit; I will persecute you — the sage ought to pity him and be silent.
If ignorant persons, but at the same time persons of good understanding and dispositions180, and willing to receive instruction, should ask him: Are we bound to believe that the distance between the moon and Venus is only five hundred leagues, and that between Mercury and the sun the same, as the principal fathers of the Mussulman religion insist, in opposition181 to all the most learned astronomers182? — the sage may reply to them that the fathers may possibly be mistaken. He should at all times inculcate upon them that a hundred abstract dogmas are not of the value of a single good action, and that it is better to relieve one individual in distress183 than to be profoundly acquainted with the abolishing and abolished. When a rustic184 sees a serpent ready to dart185 at him, he will kill it; when a sage perceives a bigot and a fanatic28, what will he do? He will prevent them from biting.
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
possessed
|
|
| adj.疯狂的；拥有的，占有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
antiquity
|
|
| n.古老；高龄；古物，古迹 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
virtue
|
|
| n.德行，美德；贞操；优点；功效，效力 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
undoubtedly
|
|
| adv.确实地，无疑地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
sage
|
|
| n.圣人，哲人；adj.贤明的，明智的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
enthusiast
|
|
| n.热心人，热衷者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
imposture
|
|
| n.冒名顶替，欺骗 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
worthy
|
|
| adj.(of)值得的，配得上的；有价值的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
prudent
|
|
| adj.谨慎的，有远见的，精打细算的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
liars
|
|
| 说谎者( liar的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
fatality
|
|
| n.不幸，灾祸，天命 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
extremity
|
|
| n.末端，尽头；尽力；终极；极度 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
arrogance
|
|
| n.傲慢，自大 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
laborer
|
|
| n.劳动者，劳工 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
monarch
|
|
| n.帝王，君主，最高统治者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
lessen
|
|
| vt.减少，减轻；缩小 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
incapable
|
|
| adj.无能力的，不能做某事的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
distinguished
|
|
| adj.卓越的，杰出的，著名的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
sages
|
|
| n.圣人( sage的名词复数 )；智者；哲人；鼠尾草（可用作调料） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
ardent
|
|
| adj.热情的，热烈的，强烈的，烈性的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
luxurious
|
|
| adj.精美而昂贵的；豪华的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
frugal
|
|
| adj.节俭的，节约的，少量的，微量的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
serene
|
|
| adj. 安详的，宁静的，平静的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
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： |
|
|
|
|
26
persecute
|
|
| vt.迫害，虐待；纠缠，骚扰 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
malignity
|
|
| n.极度的恶意，恶毒；（病的）恶性 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
fanatic
|
|
| n.狂热者，入迷者；adj.狂热入迷的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
fanatics
|
|
| 狂热者，入迷者( fanatic的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
slaughtering
|
|
| v.屠杀，杀戮，屠宰( slaughter的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
cabal
|
|
| n.政治阴谋小集团 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
intrigue
|
|
| vt.激起兴趣，迷住；vi.耍阴谋；n.阴谋，密谋 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
assassinated
|
|
| v.暗杀( assassinate的过去式和过去分词 )；中伤；诋毁；破坏 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
calumnies
|
|
| n.诬蔑，诽谤，中伤（的话）( calumny的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
opprobrium
|
|
| n.耻辱，责难 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
immortal
|
|
| adj.不朽的；永生的，不死的；神的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
slander
|
|
| n./v.诽谤，污蔑 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
slanderer
|
|
| 造谣中伤者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
persecutor
|
|
| n. 迫害者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
penury
|
|
| n.贫穷，拮据 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
pretexts
|
|
| n.借口，托辞( pretext的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
decency
|
|
| n.体面，得体，合宜，正派，庄重 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
pillage
|
|
| v.抢劫；掠夺；n.抢劫，掠夺；掠夺物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
pillaged
|
|
| v.抢劫，掠夺( pillage的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
vice
|
|
| n.坏事；恶习；[pl.]台钳，老虎钳；adj.副的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
massacre
|
|
| n.残杀，大屠杀；v.残杀，集体屠杀 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
testimony
|
|
| n.证词；见证，证明 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
depredations
|
|
| n.劫掠，毁坏( depredation的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
wrested
|
|
| （用力）拧( wrest的过去式和过去分词 )； 费力取得； （从…）攫取； （ 从… ） 强行取去… | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
perfidy
|
|
| n.背信弃义，不忠贞 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
despoiled
|
|
| v.掠夺，抢劫( despoil的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
peculiar
|
|
| adj.古怪的，异常的；特殊的，特有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
gallows
|
|
| n.绞刑架，绞台 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
benefactor
|
|
| n. 恩人，行善的人，捐助人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
psalms
|
|
| n.赞美诗( psalm的名词复数 )；圣诗；圣歌；(中的) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
perfectly
|
|
| adv.完美地，无可非议地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
penitence
|
|
| n.忏悔，赎罪；悔过 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
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： |
|
|
|
|
59
consecrated
|
|
| adj.神圣的，被视为神圣的v.把…奉为神圣，给…祝圣( consecrate的过去式和过去分词 )；奉献 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
retrench
|
|
| v.节省，削减 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
fanaticism
|
|
| n.狂热，盲信 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
deigned
|
|
| v.屈尊，俯就( deign的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
atheism
|
|
| n.无神论，不信神 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
mediation
|
|
| n.调解 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
solicitor
|
|
| n.初级律师，事务律师 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
forgery
|
|
| n.伪造的文件等，赝品，伪造（行为） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
67
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： |
|
|
|
|
68
seduce
|
|
| vt.勾引，诱奸，诱惑，引诱 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
69
penitent
|
|
| adj.后悔的；n.后悔者；忏悔者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
70
impute
|
|
| v.归咎于 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
71
imputed
|
|
| v.把（错误等）归咎于( impute的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
72
calumny
|
|
| n.诽谤，污蔑，中伤 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
73
odious
|
|
| adj.可憎的，讨厌的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
74
mischievous
|
|
| adj.调皮的，恶作剧的，有害的，伤人的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
75
malignant
|
|
| adj.恶性的，致命的；恶意的，恶毒的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
76
profligate
|
|
| adj.行为不检的；n.放荡的人，浪子，肆意挥霍者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
77
mathematician
|
|
| n.数学家 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
78
monk
|
|
| n.和尚，僧侣，修道士 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
79
banished
|
|
| v.放逐，驱逐( banish的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
80
derided
|
|
| v.取笑，嘲笑( deride的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
81
mathematicians
|
|
| 数学家( mathematician的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
82
miserable
|
|
| adj.悲惨的，痛苦的；可怜的，糟糕的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
83
peddling
|
|
| 忙于琐事的，无关紧要的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
84
talismans
|
|
| n.护身符( talisman的名词复数 )；驱邪物；有不可思议的力量之物；法宝 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
85
gentry
|
|
| n.绅士阶级，上层阶级 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
86
reign
|
|
| n.统治时期，统治，支配，盛行；v.占优势 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
87
evoked
|
|
| [医]诱发的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
88
ridicule
|
|
| v.讥讽，挖苦；n.嘲弄 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
89
wretch
|
|
| n.可怜的人，不幸的人；卑鄙的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
90
philosophic
|
|
| adj.哲学的，贤明的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
91
philosophical
|
|
| adj.哲学家的，哲学上的，达观的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
92
treatises
|
|
| n.专题著作，专题论文，专著( treatise的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
93
victorious
|
|
| adj.胜利的，得胜的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
94
drench
|
|
| v.使淋透，使湿透 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
95
obstinately
|
|
| ad.固执地，顽固地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
96
prudence
|
|
| n.谨慎，精明，节俭 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
97
exquisite
|
|
| adj.精美的；敏锐的；剧烈的，感觉强烈的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
98
abounding
|
|
| adj.丰富的，大量的v.大量存在，充满，富于( abound的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
99
clemency
|
|
| n.温和，仁慈，宽厚 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
100
judgment
|
|
| n.审判；判断力，识别力，看法，意见 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
101
condemn
|
|
| vt.谴责，指责；宣判(罪犯)，判刑 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
102
reeking
|
|
| v.发出浓烈的臭气( reek的现在分词 )；散发臭气；发出难闻的气味 (of sth)；明显带有（令人不快或生疑的跡象） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
103
assassinating
|
|
| v.暗杀( assassinate的现在分词 )；中伤；诋毁；破坏 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
104
guise
|
|
| n.外表，伪装的姿态 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
105
cardinal
|
|
| n.(天主教的)红衣主教；adj.首要的，基本的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
106
virtuous
|
|
| adj.有品德的，善良的，贞洁的，有效力的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
107
intestine
|
|
| adj.内部的；国内的；n.肠 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
108
discords
|
|
| 不和（discord的复数形式） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
109
calamities
|
|
| n.灾祸，灾难( calamity的名词复数 )；不幸之事 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
110
superstitious
|
|
| adj.迷信的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
111
chancellor
|
|
| n.(英)大臣；法官；(德、奥)总理；大学校长 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
112
brutal
|
|
| adj.残忍的，野蛮的，不讲理的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
113
voluptuous
|
|
| adj.肉欲的，骄奢淫逸的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
114
invective
|
|
| n.痛骂，恶意抨击 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
115
inveigh
|
|
| v.痛骂 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
116
inveighing
|
|
| v.猛烈抨击，痛骂，谩骂( inveigh的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
117
savage
|
|
| adj.野蛮的；凶恶的，残暴的；n.未开化的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
118
dominion
|
|
| n.统治，管辖，支配权；领土，版图 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
119
incessantly
|
|
| ad.不停地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
120
canine
|
|
| adj.犬的，犬科的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
121
snarling
|
|
| v.（指狗）吠，嗥叫， （人）咆哮( snarl的现在分词 )；咆哮着说，厉声地说 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
122
verdant
|
|
| adj.翠绿的，青翠的，生疏的，不老练的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
123
carrion
|
|
| n.腐肉 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
124
battered
|
|
| adj.磨损的；v.连续猛击；磨损 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
125
demonstration
|
|
| n.表明，示范，论证，示威 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
126
mortifying
|
|
| adj.抑制的，苦修的v.使受辱( mortify的现在分词 )；伤害（人的感情）；克制；抑制（肉体、情感等） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
127
haughty
|
|
| adj.傲慢的，高傲的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
128
calumniating
|
|
| v.诽谤，中伤( calumniate的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
129
inveighed
|
|
| v.猛烈抨击，痛骂，谩骂( inveigh的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
130
folly
|
|
| n.愚笨，愚蠢，蠢事，蠢行，傻话 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
131
determined
|
|
| adj.坚定的；有决心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
132
contemptible
|
|
| adj.可鄙的，可轻视的，卑劣的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
133
formerly
|
|
| adv.从前，以前 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
134
destined
|
|
| adj.命中注定的；(for)以…为目的地的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
135
injustice
|
|
| n.非正义，不公正，不公平，侵犯（别人的）权利 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
136
virtues
|
|
| 美德( virtue的名词复数 )； 德行； 优点； 长处 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
137
remorse
|
|
| n.痛恨，悔恨，自责 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
138
insolence
|
|
| n.傲慢；无礼；厚颜；傲慢的态度 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
139
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： |
|
|
|
|
140
devoted
|
|
| adj.忠诚的，忠实的，热心的，献身于...的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
141
labors
|
|
| v.努力争取(for)( labor的第三人称单数 )；苦干；详细分析；（指引擎）缓慢而困难地运转 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
142
thereby
|
|
| adv.因此，从而 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
143
everlasting
|
|
| adj.永恒的，持久的，无止境的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
144
broaching
|
|
| n.拉削；推削；铰孔；扩孔v.谈起( broach的现在分词 )；打开并开始用；用凿子扩大（或修光）；（在桶上）钻孔取液体 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
145
infamous
|
|
| adj.声名狼藉的，臭名昭著的，邪恶的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
146
stigmatize
|
|
| v.污蔑，玷污 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
147
maxim
|
|
| n.格言，箴言 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
148
authorized
|
|
| a.委任的，许可的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
149
offense
|
|
| n.犯规，违法行为；冒犯，得罪 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
150
absurdity
|
|
| n.荒谬，愚蠢；谬论 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
151
humane
|
|
| adj.人道的，富有同情心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
152
calumniate
|
|
| v.诬蔑，中伤 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
153
mere
|
|
| adj.纯粹的；仅仅，只不过 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
154
judicious
|
|
| adj.明智的，明断的，能作出明智决定的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
155
cavilling
|
|
| n.（矿工的）工作地点抽签法v.挑剔，吹毛求疵( cavil的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
156
veracity
|
|
| n.诚实 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
157
supreme
|
|
| adj.极度的，最重要的；至高的，最高的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
158
blasphemy
|
|
| n.亵渎，渎神 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
159
attenuated
|
|
| v.（使）变细( attenuate的过去式和过去分词 )；（使）变薄；（使）变小；减弱 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
160
drudges
|
|
| n.做苦工的人，劳碌的人( drudge的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
161
consequentially
|
|
| adv.必然地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
162
Christian
|
|
| adj.基督教徒的；n.基督教徒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
163
bestow
|
|
| v.把…赠与，把…授予；花费 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
164
immortality
|
|
| n.不死，不朽 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
165
audacity
|
|
| n.大胆，卤莽，无礼 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
166
impudently
|
|
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
167
mandate
|
|
| n.托管地；命令，指示 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
168
hideous
|
|
| adj.丑陋的，可憎的，可怕的，恐怖的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
169
devouring
|
|
| 吞没( devour的现在分词 )； 耗尽； 津津有味地看； 狼吞虎咽地吃光 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
170
factious
|
|
| adj.好搞宗派活动的，派系的，好争论的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
171
impudence
|
|
| n.厚颜无耻；冒失；无礼 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
172
eels
|
|
| abbr. 电子发射器定位系统（=electronic emitter location system） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
173
hearty
|
|
| adj.热情友好的；衷心的；尽情的，纵情的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
174
knave
|
|
| n.流氓；（纸牌中的）杰克 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
175
knaves
|
|
| n.恶棍，无赖( knave的名词复数 )；（纸牌中的）杰克 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
176
charlatans
|
|
| n.冒充内行者，骗子( charlatan的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
177
quacks
|
|
| abbr.quacksalvers 庸医，骗子(16世纪习惯用水银或汞治疗梅毒的人)n.江湖医生( quack的名词复数 )；江湖郎中；（鸭子的）呱呱声v.（鸭子）发出嘎嘎声( quack的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
178
minor
|
|
| adj.较小(少)的，较次要的；n.辅修学科；vi.辅修 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
179
mare
|
|
| n.母马，母驴 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
180
dispositions
|
|
| 安排( disposition的名词复数 )； 倾向； （财产、金钱的）处置； 气质 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
181
opposition
|
|
| n.反对，敌对 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
182
astronomers
|
|
| n.天文学者，天文学家( astronomer的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
183
distress
|
|
| n.苦恼，痛苦，不舒适；不幸；vt.使悲痛 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
184
rustic
|
|
| adj.乡村的，有乡村特色的；n.乡下人，乡巴佬 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
185
dart
|
|
| v.猛冲，投掷；n.飞镖，猛冲 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |