2. 外语
  3. THE RISE OF MOSCOW (1) The rise of Moscow during medieval times was a fundamental development in Russian history. Moscow beg

THE RISE OF MOSCOW (1) The rise of Moscow during medieval times was a fundamental development in Russian history. Moscow beg

admin2022-08-28  69
问题                                             THE RISE OF MOSCOW
    (1) The rise of Moscow during medieval times was a fundamental development in Russian history. Moscow began with very little and for a long time could not be compared to such flourishing principalities as Novgorod or Galicia. Even in its own area, the northeast, it was junior to old centers like Rostov and Suzdal. In accounting for Moscow’s rise, historians have emphasized several factors or rather groups of factors.
    (2) First, attention may be given to the doctrine of geographic causation. It stresses the decisive importance of the location on Moscow for the later expansion of the Muscovite state (the medieval state centered in Moscow) and includes several lines of argument. Moscow lay as a crossing of three roads. The most important was the way from the historically crucial city of Kiev and the declining south to the growing northeast. In fact Moscow has been described as the first stopping and setting point in the northeast. But it also profited from moments in other directions, including the reverse. Thus it seems immigrants came to Moscow after the Mongol devastation of the lands further to the northeast. Moscow was also situated on a bend of the Moscow River that flows from the northwest to the southeast into the Oka, the largest western tributary of the Volga River. To speak more broadly of water communications which span and unite European Russia, Moscow has the rare fortune of being located near the headwaters of four major rivers: the Oka, the Volga, the Don, and the Dnieper. This offered marvelous opportunities for expansion across the flowing plain, especially as there were no mountains or other natural obstacles to hem in the young principality.
    (3) In another sense too, Moscow benefited from a central position. It stood in the midst of lands inhabited by the Russian people which, so the argument runs, provided a proper setting for a natural growth in all directions. In fact some specialists have tried to estimate precisely how close to the geographic center of the Russian people Moscow was situated, noting also such circumstances as proximity to the land dividing the two main dialects of the Great Russian language. Central location within Russia, to make an additional point, cushioned Moscow from outside invaders. Thus, for example, it was the city of Novgorod, not Moscow, that continuously had to meet enemies from the northwest, while in the southeast Riazan absorbed the first blow from the direction. All in all, the considerable significance of the location on Moscow cannot be denied although this geographic factor has generally been assigned less relative weight by recent, scholars.
    (4) The economic argument is linked in part to the geographic. [A] The Moscow River served as an important trade artery, and as the Muscovite principality expanded around its waterways, it profited by and in turn helped to promote increasing economic intercourse. [B] One school of thought has treated the expansion of Moscow largely in terms of the growth of a common market. [C] Another economic approach emphasizes the success of the Muscovite princes in developing agriculture in their domains and supporting colonization. These princes clearly outdistance their rivals in obtaining peasants to settle in their lands. [D] As a further advantage, they managed to maintain in their realm a relative peace and security highly beneficial to economic life.
    (5) The last view introduces another key factor in explaining the Muscovite rise: the role of the rulers of Moscow. Moscow has generally been considered fortunate in its princes. Sheer luck constituted an important part of the picture. For several generations, the princes of Moscow had the advantage of male succession without interruption or conflict. In particular, for a long time the sons of the princes of Moscow were lucky not to have uncles competing for the Muscovite seat. When the classic power struggle between royal uncles and nephews finally erupted under Basil II (reigned 1425—1462), direct succession from father to son possessed sufficient standing and support in the principality of Moscow to overcome the challenge. The principality has also been considered fortunate because its early rulers, descending from the youngest son of Alexander Nevsky (1220—1263) and thus representing a junior princely branch, found it expedient to devote themselves to their small holdings instead of neglecting them for more ambitious undertakings elsewhere.
An introductory sentence for a brief summary of the passage is provided below. Complete the summary by selecting the THREE answer choices that express the most important ideas in the passage. Some sentences do not belong in the summary because they express ideas that are not presented in the passage or are minor ideas in the passage. This question is worth 2 points.
Historians point to several factors to account for Moscow’s rise during medieval times.
-
-
-
Answer Choices
(A) Moscow was located near the geographic center of Russian-speaking peoples and was situated advantageously with respect to enemies, travel, and expansion.
(B) Moscow expanded despite its early difficulty in its establishing command of its local waterways.
(C) Moscow was politically stable because its early rulers generally succeeded each other steadily and without violence.
(D) Moscow enjoyed numerous economic advantages due to expanding trade, successful farming and the relative absence of war.
(E) Because some of Moscow’s princes were descended from ancestors with relatively small holdings they were slow to improve life for the principality’s residents.
(F) Because its princes were deeply involved in economic activities such as agriculture and trade Moscow did not experience the power struggle that troubled other principalities.
选项
答案A,C,D
解析 本题属于文章总结题。A项可定位到文章的第2、3段，第2段阐述了莫斯科位于三条道路的交叉口，坐落于四条主要河流的源头等地理优势使其水陆交通便利，容易扩张领土。第3段提到了莫斯科坐落于俄罗斯人居住的土地中央，且其地理位置优势利于抵御外敌，故A项为第2、3段的概述。C项说莫斯科政治稳定，因为在王位继承过程中不存在斗争，这概括了最后一段的主旨，故D项是对文章第3、4段的概括总结。选项中expanding trade在第4段介绍水路交通时有所提及；successful farming在第4段中介绍莫斯科王子们对农业做出的贡献时有提及；absence of war在第3段介绍莫斯科优越的中心地理位置时，有提到中心位置帮助莫斯科抵御外敌入侵，故D项正确。由此可见，A、C、D三项涵盖了本文主体段落的信息要点。B项中的early difficulty in its establishing command of its local waterways “建设当地水路早期遇到的困难”在文中无依据。E项中的信息在文中均无依据，是利用个别字词拼凑出的选项。F项逻辑关系错误。莫斯科能避免权力斗争的原因是王子直接继承父亲王位，且多年以来，王室都没有叔侄王位之争，而不是因为王子们都在参与经济活动。该项因果关系错误，故排除。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/Ez5O777K
0

托福（TOEFL）

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)