Why is there a Germany? Part of the answer goes back to a battle fought in A

游客2024-11-21  6

问题     Why is there a Germany? Part of the answer goes back to a battle fought in A.D. 9 in the treacherous marshes and dense thickets of Teutoburg Forest, near modern Osnabrueck. As described by the Roman historian Tacitus, three Roman legions led by Quinctilius Varus had crossed the Rhine from Gaul, intent on incorporating the vast area known as Germania into the empire. They were ambushed and annihilated by German tribes under the command of a warrior named Arminius. It was one of the worst military disasters the Romans ever suffered. Some years ago, archaeologists discovered the site of the battle: the debris field was a mile wide and 15 miles long. Caesar Augustus, it is said, roamed the hallways of his palace, crying, " Quinctilius Varus, give me back my legions!" Henceforth, the Romans pretty much wrote off the area east of the Rhine and north of the Alps. The line of demarcation survives to this day as a cultural divide — beer versus wine, butter versus oil, Germanic versus Romance.
    So the victory of Arminius established certain facts on the ground. In his fascinating study, Christopher B. Krebs draws attention to another part of the explanation for Germany’s existence — the role played by Tacitus himself, through the influence of a small volume called "Germania." Think of it as an ancient exercise in social anthropology. The Romans had been bedeviled for years by the motley tribes they lumped together as Germans. Tacitus set out to describe them.
    In his telling, the Germans possessed "fierce blue eyes, tawny hair, huge bodies." They prized freedom, scorned luxury and esteemed military courage above all else. They were a people of sturdy values for whom "good laws" were no substitute for "good habits." In the land of the Germans, Tacitus writes, " nobody laughs off vice: and to corrupt and to be corrupted is not called ’ modern times.’ " Pointedly, he observed that the Germans were "not tainted by intermarriage with any other nations" but rather existed "as a distinct unadulterated people that resembles only itself."
    Fast forward 14 centuries. Central Europe is a mosaic of fractious principalities, united by Christianity and a Germanic language, but little else. The literate elites, looking abroad to the advanced kingdoms of England and France, have begun to wonder: who are we? They know that a book called "Germania" once existed, but the text itself has been lost since antiquity. Suddenly, in the mid-15th century, book collectors pick up vague rumors: a copy may have surfaced in a distant monastery. And yes, it’s true!
    Krebs, a classicist who teaches at Harvard, lays out the recovery of "Germania," in 1455, like a detective story. But that is just the beginning. Tacitus’s book was exactly what nationalists had been waiting for. It tells a story of origins. It describes a proud, brave and virtuous people. In truth, its portrait was complex. The Germans were not one nation —Tacitus lists 50 tribes. They manifested plenty of appalling qualities. And Tacitus, who probably never set foot in Germany, clearly had an agenda: to provoke his own soft and decadent society. All this proved easy enough to ignore. "Germania" was received as the "golden booklet." It was published and republished. An adviser to Frederick the Great, citing Tacitus, called the German people " still the same aboriginal and indigenous nation which has preserved its independence, its name and its language from its origin to this day."
    In hindsight, it’s clear where this is heading. Phrases from Tacitus like "not tainted" and "unadulterated" are picked up by 19th-century German theorists of race and superiority. The most popular German textbook of the time would refer to " the unmixed German blood which flows in our veins." In a newly unified Germany, "Germania" was high on every reading list. Clubs sprang up to celebrate peasant virtues, physical prowess and Aryan superiority. The Nazis would leverage all this for their own purposes. In 1924, the young Heinrich Himmler read "Germania" while on a train trip. In his diary he evoked "the glorious image of the loftiness, purity and nobleness of our ancestors." He vowed, "Thus shall we be again," adding the ominous note, " or at least some among us." The Nazi Party convention held in Nuremberg in 1936 featured a "Germanic Room" with Tacitean quotations. In 1943, Himmler sent troops to a palazzo in Italy where he believed the oldest manuscript of "Germania" was preserved. They didn’t find it. The manuscript made its way to Germany eventually — in 2009, for an exhibition marking the 2,000th anniversary of Arminius’ victory.
    Krebs’s quick march through a wealth of material hits a few boggy academic patches but becomes increasingly sure-footed. He has a light touch and a dry sense of humor. And despite the title of his book, he does not hold "Germania" responsible for acts committed in its name. "Tacitus did not write a most dangerous book," he concludes. "His readers made it so." [br] According to Krebs what is responsible for the aggressive acts committed by the Germans is______.

选项 A、a small volume called "Germania"
B、the influence of a small volume called "Germania"
C、the readers of "Germania"
D、none of the above

答案 D

解析 推断题。根据最末段Krebs的观点,日耳曼民族的一系列侵略行为并不能归咎于“Germania”这部小册子上,故A和B都不符。最末句“His readers made it so.”指的是一部分别有用心的人借助这部册子煽动民族情绪以达到自己的目的,所以Krebs指的是这部分人有责任。而C选项是泛指,并不是所有读书的读者都有责任;在上下文语义中Krebs有针对性,而一到选项中此针对性消失,故C也不合适。只有D最为合适。
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3855304.html
最新回复(0)