2. 职称英语
  3. Shortly after the death of emperor Theodosius in 395 A.D., the Roman Empire

Shortly after the death of emperor Theodosius in 395 A.D., the Roman Empire

游客2023-12-25  8
问题     Shortly after the death of emperor Theodosius in 395 A.D., the Roman Empire was permanently divided into Eastern and Western empires. By the fifth century A.D., the power of the Western Roman Empire had declined considerably, though the Eastern Roman Empire centered in Byzantium continued to flourish. Various problems contributed to this undermining of the West.
    The accessions of Arcadius and Honorius, sons of Theodosius, as emperors in the East and West, respectively, illustrate the unfortunate pattern of child heirs that had unfavorable effects for both empires. When Arcadius died in 408, he was succeeded by his seven-year-old son, Theodosius II. Reigning until 423, Honorius was succeeded by his nephew Valentinian III, who was only five. Because of their young ages, Theodosius’ sons and grandsons could not rule without older advisors and supervising regents upon whom they naturally became dependent and from whom they were unable to break away after reaching maturity. As powerful individuals vied for influence and dominance at court, the general welfare was often sacrificed to private rivalries and ambitions. Moreover, it was the women of the dynasty who were the more capable and interesting characters. Holding the keys to succession through birth and inheritance, they became active players in the political arena.
    Compared with the East, however, the West faced a greater number of external threats along more permeable frontiers. Whereas the East could pursue war and diplomacy more effectively with their enemies on the long eastern frontier, the West was exposed to the more volatile tribal Germanic peoples on a frontier that stretched along the Rhine and Danube rivers for 1,000 miles. The East, however, only had to guard the last 500 miles of the Danube. In addition, the East had many more human and material resources with which to pursue its military and diplomatic objectives. The East also had a more deeply rooted unity in the Greek culture of the numerous Greek and Near Eastern cities that Rome had inherited from earlier Grecian empires. Latin culture had not achieved comparable penetration of the less urbanized West outside of Italy. The penetration of Germanic culture from the north had been so extensive along the permeable Rhine-Danube frontier that it was often difficult to distinguish between barbarians (speakers of German and other languages unrelated to Latin) and Romans in those regions by the fifth century anyway.
    One of the most outstanding features at the beginning of this period was the prominence of Germanic generals in the high command of the Roman Imperial army. The trend became significant, and several practical reasons can explain it. The foremost probably was the sheer need for military manpower that made it attractive to recruit bands of Germanic peoples for the armies, which, in turn, gave able chieftains and warlords the opportunity to gain imperial favor and advance in rank. Second, one way to turn Germanic chieftains from potential enemies into loyal supporters was to offer them a good position in the Roman military. Third, although Theodosius had risen to power as a military leader, he was also a cultured aristocrat and preferred to emphasize the civilian role of the emperor and to rely for protection on Germanic generals whose loyalties were primarily to him, their patron.  [br] In the third paragraph, why does the author discuss the Germanic culture?
选项 A、To compare the less urbanized West outside of Italy to the more urbanized East.
B、To explain why Roman military and political objectives necessarily changed in the fifth century.
C、To emphasize that the West is more urbanized than the East.
D、To explain why there were as many speakers of German as there were Romans on the western frontier.
答案 A
解析 第3段主要对比了东罗马帝国和西罗马帝国的渗透情况，包括地理边界和文化方面。第3段最后一句提到的日耳曼文化是对西罗马帝国的文化渗透，由此可推断，作者在第3段提到日耳曼文化是为了比较东罗马帝国和西罗马帝国的文化渗透情况，因此A项“比较意大利以外城市化程度较低的西罗马帝国与城市化程度较高的东罗马帝国”正确。B项“解释为什么在5世纪罗马的军事和政治目标必然会发生改变”在文中并未被提及，可排除。第3段第6句明确提到西罗马帝国的城市化程度比东罗马帝国的低，因此C项错误。第3段最后一句提到随着日耳曼文化的渗透，难以区分说德语的野蛮人和罗马人，但这并不是作者提及日耳曼文化的主要原因，只是文化渗透之广产生的结果，可排除D项“解释为什么说德语的人和说罗马语的人一样多”。
转载请注明原文地址:https://www.tihaiku.com/zcyy/3304647.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)