机经真题 23 Passage 2

纠错
置顶

Roman Conquests and the European Economy

纠错

In paragraph 1, why does the author discuss the potter's wheel, the potter's kiln, and the shaft furnace when discussing technology in Roman provinces?

Click on an oval to select your answer. To choose a different answer,

click one different oval.

  • A
    To support the claim that Britain was technologically slow
  • B
    To indicate that each European country had its own manufacturing tools
  • C
    To demonstrate how Rome was more technologically advanced than most European countries
  • D
    To provide examples of some of the manufacturing tools introduced by the Romans in the new provinces
显示答案
正确答案: A

我的笔记 编辑笔记

  • 原文
  • 译文
  • The Roman Empire spent centuries expanding from the Mediterranean throughout Europe, incorporating Britain, Gaul (modern France), Spain, and other areas into the Empire before reaching its height in the first and second centuries C.E. Naturally, Rome's control had a number of effects on the economies of the new provinces. Technologically, Rome was not a great deal more advanced than many of the provinces' native cultures, although the tendency was for the general level of technology to fall as one moved farther from the Mediterranean. Britain, in particular, was surprisingly delayed in some ways; the potter's wheel had only been introduced at the end of the first century B.C.E., although it had been in use in Gaul for the previous four centuries, and the potter's kiln (oven) had arrived even later. Similarly, the shaft furnace used in the Roman heartland for the smelting of metals first appeared in Britain about the time of the Roman conquest. But in other crafts, such as fine metalworking, which were related to the requirements of aristocratic patrons, the native craftsmen were quite as competent as their Roman counterparts.



    Nevertheless, with the incorporation of the new areas into the Empire came a series of fundamentally important changes. Technological changes were probably the least significant, and many of the more important changes operated on industry indirectly. First, there was the Pax Romana, the Roman peace, not universal and not unbroken, but sufficiently intact to convert a normal condition of war to one of peace; the consequences of this alone on the pattern of trade and growth of population and markets were profound. Similarly, what had been a series of divided tribes were now united into single provinces, a fact which over a period of time must have destroyed many of the older cultural barriers to the movement of goods and craftsmen. Although large areas of Europe had shared a basically common culture, they were divided politically into a large number of independent tribes often at war with their neighbors. Their economies were basically agricultural, and although crafts flourished, many were geared to the demands of the tribal aristocracies rather than any larger market. Most of the population lived in the countryside and such concentrations as occurred in the hill forts and towns were small by comparison with the great cities of the Mediterranean world, and the markets which they created were correspondingly small.



    All of the more advanced areas, including the south of Britain, had some form of monetary economy (an economy in which coins or paper money is used as payment for goods and services), but in many areas this did not involve the widespread use of low-value copper coins, and without them the system was incapable of coping with the small transactions of everyday life. Thus the introduction of the Roman monetary system, which had a graduated coinage suitable for almost every transaction, had a revolutionary effect on the economy, the more so as it appeared together with a developed, if by our standards primitive, banking system with facilities for loans. Finally, the acceptance of all this was no doubt encouraged by the imposition of the elaborate system of Roman taxation.



    The rapid development of an extensive network of roads, particularly necessary for the short distance movement of raw materials and manufactured goods, also was of great importance, and it is probable that facilities for river traffic were also improved. It should also not be forgotten that the Roman government deliberately encouraged the romanization of the tribal aristocracies. The acceptance of such a concept would have involved not only wearing the toga—the distinctive garment of the Roman citizen—and taking baths, but also an appreciation of the advantages of urban life and of the idea that it was the duty of the wealthy citizens of a city or state to contribute to the public good by spending part of their fortune on public works. Taken together, these factors totally changed the economic face of Western Europe in a remarkably short time. In particular, they led to the appearance of true cities, which provided the markets necessary for the development and growth of industry.


  • 罗马帝国在几个世纪中不断从地中海扩张至整个欧洲,将不列颠、高卢(今法国)、西班牙及其他地区纳入其版图,在公元一至二世纪达到鼎盛。自然地,罗马的统治对新省份的经济产生了诸多影响。在技术层面上,罗马相比许多地方原住文化并无大幅领先,尽管越远离地中海地区,技术水平往往越低。尤其是不列颠,在某些方面技术发展令人意外地滞后;例如,制陶轮直到公元前一世纪末才被引入,而高卢早在四个世纪前就已使用该工具,陶窑到来得更晚。类似地,罗马本土用于金属冶炼的竖炉,直到征服不列颠之际才出现在当地。但在其他工艺如精密金属加工等方面——这些手艺通常服务于贵族阶层——本地工匠的技艺并不逊色于罗马人。

    尽管如此,随着新地区被纳入帝国统治,也随之带来了诸多根本性的重要变化。技术上的改变可能是最不显著的,许多更重要的变化则是间接地影响了工业。首先是“罗马和平”(Pax Romana),虽然这并非普遍且持续不变,但足以将原本持续战乱的状态转变为和平,这一变化本身就对贸易格局、人口增长以及市场扩展带来了深远影响。同样地,原本分散的部落被统一成一个个省份,长期而言势必打破了许多阻碍商品与工匠流通的文化障碍。尽管欧洲大部分地区原本就有相似的文化,但在政治上却被划分为许多相互交战的独立部落。他们的经济基本是农业为主,虽然手工业也存在,但主要是服务于部落贵族,而非更大的市场。大多数人口居住在乡村,即使在山地堡垒或城镇中有所集中,也远远不及地中海世界的大城市,因此市场规模也相应较小。

    所有较为发达的地区,包括不列颠南部,原本都存在某种形式的货币经济(即使用货币支付商品与服务的系统),但在许多地区,低面额的铜币并未广泛流通,缺乏这种货币使得日常生活中的小额交易难以完成。因此,罗马引入的货币系统——拥有不同面值的硬币,几乎适用于所有交易——对当地经济产生了革命性的影响,尤其是它还伴随着一个尽管从现代角度看很原始,但确实存在的贷款银行系统。最终,这一整套制度的接受程度无疑还受到罗马复杂税收制度的推动。

    罗马迅速发展了一套广泛的道路网络,尤其对短距离运输原材料与制成品极为重要;河运设施也可能有所改善。此外,不应忽视的是,罗马政府有意推动部落贵族的“罗马化”。接受这一观念不仅意味着穿托加袍——罗马公民的标志性服饰——和洗澡,更意味着认同城市生活的好处,并接受这样一种理念:富裕公民有责任通过投资公共工程来回馈社会。综合而言,这些因素在极短时间内彻底改变了西欧的经济面貌。尤其是,它们促成了真正意义上的城市出现,而城市提供了工业发展所必需的市场。
  • 官方解析
  • 网友贡献解析
  • 标签
    0 感谢 不懂
    解析
    【答案】A
    【题型】修辞目的题
    【解析】题目要求理解例子的功能。
    答案句:“Britain, in particular, was surprisingly delayed in some ways; the potter's wheel had only been introduced at the end of the first century BCE, although it had been in use in Gaul for the previous four centuries, and the potter's kiln (oven) had arrived even later. Similarly, the shaft furnace used in the Roman heartland for the smelting of metals first appeared in Britain about the time of the Roman conquest. ”
    这一组例子出现在句子“Britain, in particular, was surprisingly delayed…”之后,用于支持“Britain技术落后”的判断。 陶轮在高卢使用了四百年,Britan却刚引进; 陶窑来得更晚; 冶炼金属的竖炉也到征服时期才出现。 这组例子都是为强调一个核心观点:Britan在技术上比其他地区滞后得多。因此,这些技术不是为了说罗马多先进,也不是说明各国技术不同,更不是讲它们是罗马带来的技术,而是说明Britan技术发展慢。
    A. To support the claim that Britain was technologically slow(支持英国技术落后的说法)正确,正好对应原文的目的:例子是为了说明“Britain was surprisingly delayed”。
    B. To indicate that each European country had its own manufacturing tools(指出各国有不同的工具)错误,文章没有对比不同国家工具多样性,而是强调技术发展时间早晚。
    C. To demonstrate how Rome was more technologically advanced than most European countries(说明罗马技术更先进)错误,原文指出罗马与省份“technologically not a great deal more advanced”,并未强调“遥遥领先”。
    D. To provide examples of some of the manufacturing tools introduced by the Romans in the new provinces(列举罗马带入的新工具)错误,原文明确指出“这些技术是征服时期才刚出现在不列颠”,但没有说它们是“罗马主动引入”的发明或传入成果,目的是强调本地发展滞后。
    所以重点在于识别例子的目的是否用于支持观点,不能被“工具名称”本身所迷惑。例子本身服务于强调“技术滞后”,而非“技术来源”或“工具多样性”

题目讨论

如果对题目有疑问,欢迎来提出你的问题,热心的小伙伴会帮你解答。

最新提问