南京师范大学考博英语模拟题及其解析 Gu'rUo3Do
Bernard Bailyn has recently reinterpreted the early history of the o4%y>d)
United States by applying new social research findings on the r; xLP
experiences of European migrants. In his reinterpretation, migration (d<4"!
becomes the organizing principle for rewriting the history of K,w"_T
preindustrial North America. His approach rests on four separate wQiX<)O
propositions. Ci<ATho
The first of these asserts that residents of early modern England *_KFW@bC:
moved regularly about their countryside; migrating to the New World W3;#fa:[L
was simply a “natural spillover”. Although at first the colonies 6X\ 2GC9
held little positive attraction for the English — they would rather
-W<vyNSr
have stayed home — by the eighteenth century people increasingly Uv?|G%cD-
migrated to America because they regarded it as the land of Geng duo OzQ -7|m'J
yuan xiao wan zheng kao bo ying yu zhen ti ji qi jie xi qing lian xi )DeA}e?F
quan guo mian fei zi xun dian hua: si ling ling liu liu ba liu jiu #Ap;_XcKw
qi ba ,huo jia zi xun qq: qi qi er liu qi ba wu san qi opportunity. ^RP)>d9Xp{
Secondly, Bailyn holds that, contrary to the notion that used to [ e8x&{L-_
flourish in America history textbooks, there was never a typical New T<L^N+<,{N
World community. For example, the economic and demographic character +8#_59;x
of early New England towns varied considerably. r} P<iX
Bailyn’s third proposition suggest two general patterns :Pg}Zz <
prevailing among the many thousands of migrants: one group came as 4<?8M vF
indentured servants, another came to acquire land. Surprisingly, \T\b NbPn
Bailyn suggests that those who recruited indentured servants were the m1IKVa7-\}
driving forces of transatlantic migration. These colonial !p[9{U->o;
entrepreneurs helped determine the social character of people who v0kqu
came to preindustrial North America. At first, thousands of unskilled }?@rO`:EF+
laborers were recruited; by the 1730’s, however, American employers Qq@G\eRo
demanded skilled artisans. 9Li%KOY
Finally, Bailyn argues that the colonies were a half-civilized sU"}-de
hinterland of the European culture system. He is undoubtedly correct I`w4Xrd
to insist that the colonies were part of an Anglo-American empire. =fYL}m5E
But to divide the empire into English core and colonial periphery, d @*GUmJ
as Bailyn does, devalues the achievements of colonial culture. It is wBInq~K_
true, as Bailyn claims, that high culture in the colonies never /c$\X<b);
matched that in England. But what of seventeenth-century New England, `- \/$M9s=
where the settlers created effective laws, built a distinguished o d7]tOK9
university, and published books? Bailyn might respond that New _6k*'aT~FK
England was exceptional. However, the ideas and institutions +hRmO
developed by New England Puritans had powerful effects on North X/;p-KX
American culture. ?6k}ii!c
Although Bailyn goes on to apply his approach to some thousands VN'Wq7>6
of indentured servants who migrated just prior to the revolution, he 6MG9a>=
fails to link their experience with the political development of the +@Ad1fJi
United States. Evidence presented in his work suggests how we might |w*R8ro_
make such a connection. These indentured servants were treated as teW6;O_
slaves for the period during which they had sold their time to American j6,ZEm
employers. It is not surprising that as soon as they served their time 6ATtW+sN ]
they passed up good wages in the cities and headed west to ensure their -L3|&