prep 黑死病阅读疑问

chenyu2436

The Black Death, a severe epidemic that ravaged fourteenth-century Europe, has intrigued scholars ever since Francis Gasquet's 1893 study contending that this epidemic greatly intensified the political and religious upheaval that ended the Middle Ages. Thirty-six years later, historian George Coulton agreed but, paradoxically, attributed a silver lining to the Black Death: prosperity engendered by diminished competition for food, shelter, and work led survivors of the epidemic into the Renaissance and subsequent rise of modern Europe.

In the 1930s, however, Evgeny Kosminsky and other Marxist historians claimed the epidemic was merely an ancillary factor contributing to a general agrarian crisis stemming primarily from the inevitable decay of European feudalism. In arguing that this decline of feudalism was economically determined, the Marxist asserted that the Black Death was a relatively insignificant factor. This became the prevailing view until after the Second World War, when studies of specific regions and towns revealed astonishing mortality rates ascribed to the epidemic, thus restoring the central role of the Black Death in history.

This central role of the Black Death (traditionally attributed to bubonic plague brought from Asia) has been recently challenged from another direction. Building on bacteriologist John Shrewsbury's speculations about mislabeled epidemics, zoologist Graham Twigg employs urban case studies suggesting that the rat population in Europe was both too sparse and insufficiently migratory to have spread plague. Moreover, Twigg disputes the traditional trade-ship explanation for plague transmissions by extrapolating from data on the number of dead rats aboard Nile sailing vessels in 1912. The Black Death, which he conjectures was anthrax instead of bubonic plague, therefore caused far less havoc and fewer deaths than historians typically claim.

Although correctly citing the exacting conditions needed to start or spread bubonic plague, Twigg ignores virtually a century of scholarship contradictory to his findings and employs faulty logic in his single-minded approach to the Black Death. His speculative generalizations about the numbers of rats in medieval Europe are based on isolated studies unrepresentative of medieval conditions, while his unconvincing trade-ship argument overlooks land-based caravans, the overland migration of infected rodents, and the many other animals that carry plague.

According to the passage, the post-Second World War studies that altered the prevailing view of the Black Death involved which of the following?

• ADetermining the death rates caused by the Black Death in specific regions and towns
• BDemonstrating how the Black Death intensified the political and religious upheaval that ended the Middle Ages
• CPresenting evidence to prove that many medieval epidemics were mislabeled
• DArguing that the consequences of the Black Death led to the Renaissance and the rise of modern Europe
• EEmploying urban case studies to determine the number of rats in medieval Europe
  

正确答案是A 但是我选了 B 这里真的很不明白为什么答案是A因为**上有个人跟我的疑问一样，所以直接把他的问题复制粘贴了，希望原主人不要介意。。
即使定位了,我还是有疑问,前面说了主流理论认为传染病不是封建制度衰落的主要原因,主要原因是经济决定的土地问题,而二战后的研究发现黑死大量的死亡率证据,又把黑死拉回到其是导致中世纪巨变的理论中心,

那题目问二战后的发现主要改变了主流观点对黑死病的看法是什么
个人理解原文的主流观点应该是指 "黑死不是导致巨变的主要原因"而不是"认为黑死只造成了少量死亡"
请nn帮忙，谢谢

chenyu2436

没人解答么顶一下

chenyu2436

再顶，nn你们在哪里

rose_wong

我这道题和你错的一样，但是仔细多看几遍题之后发现题目问的是study里面包含的是什么，可以在原文中找到when studies of specific regions and towns revealed astonishing mortality rates ascribed to the epidemic，就是你标橙的那句话。这样的话答案就应该选和study相关的，也就是A。而B选项是由A这个study展现出来的结论

GPSGWJ

B错在how上面 并没有讲黑死病如何intensified
题目问的是改变观点是因为什么 最直接的就是死亡率的determination