剑10T2P1-tea and the industrial revolution及译文

Tea and Industrial Revolution
A Alan Macfarlane thinks he could rewrite history. The professor of anthropological science at King’s College, Cambridge has, like other historians, spent decades trying to understand the enigma (n.难理解的状况、奥秘) of the Industrial Revolution. Why did this particular important event - the world-changing birth of industry - happen in Britain? And why did it happen at the end of the 18th century?
B Macfarlane compares the question to a puzzle. He claims that there were about 20 different factors and all of them needed to be present before the revolution could happen. The chief conditions are to be found in history textbooks. For industry to ‘take off’ (v.起飞), there needed to be the technology and power to drive factories, large urban populations to provide cheap labour easy transport to move goods around, an affluent (adj.富裕的) middle-class willing to buy mass-produced objects, a market-driven economy, and a political system that allowed this to happen. While this was the case for England, other nations, such as Japan, Holland and France also met some of these criteria (n.标准). All these factors (n.因素) must have been necessary but not sufficient (adj.足够的) to cause the revolution. Holland had everything except coal, while China also had many of these factors.
C Most historians, however, are convinced (v.相信) that one or two missing factors are needed to solve the puzzle. The missing factors, he proposes, are to be found in every kitchen cupboard. Tea and beer, two of the nation’s favorite drinks, drove the revolution. Tannin, the active ingredient (n. 成分) in tea, and hops, used in making beer, both contain antiseptic (adj.防腐的、杀菌的) properties. This -plus the fact that both are made with boiled water- helped prevent epidemics (n.流行病、传染病) of waterborne diseases, such as dysentery, in densely populated urban areas. The theory initially sounds eccentric but his explanation of the detective work that went into his deduction and the fact his case has been strengthened by a favorable appraisal (n.评估) of his research by Roy Porter (distinguished medical historian) the skepticism (n.怀疑、批评) gives way to wary admiration.
D Historians had noticed one interesting factor around the mid-18th century that required explanation. Between about 1650 and 1740, the population was static. But then there was a burst (n.爆发、爆炸)in population. The infant (n.婴儿) mortality rate (n.死亡率) halved in the space of 20 years, and this happened in both rural areas and cities, and across all classes. Four possible causes have been suggested. There could have been a sudden change in the viruses (n.病毒) and bacteria (n.细菌) present at that time, but this is unlikely. Was there a revolution in medical science? But this was a century before Lister introduced antiseptic surgery. Was there a change in environmental conditions? There were improvements in agriculture that wiped out malaria (n.疟疾), but these were small gains. Sanitation (n.卫生系统或设备) did not become widespread until the 19th century. The only option left was food. But the height and weight statistics show a decline. So the food got worse. Efforts to explain this sudden reduction in child deaths appeared to draw a blank (adj.空白的).
E This population burst seemed to happen at just the right time to provide labor for the Industrial Revolution. But why? When the Industrial Revolution started, it was economically efficient to have people crowded together forming towns and cities. But with crowded living conditions comes disease, particularly from human waste. Some research in the historical records revealed that there was a change in the incidence of waterborne disease at that time, the English were protected by the strong antibacterial agent in hops, which were added to make beer last. But in the late 17th century a tax was introduced on malt (n.麦芽). The poor turned to water and gin, and in the 1720s the mortality rate began to rise again.
F Macfarlane looked to Japan, which was also
developing large cities about the same time, and also had no sanitation. Waterborne diseases in the Japanese population were far fewer than those in Britain. Could it be the prevalence (n.盛行) of tea in their culture? That was when Macfarlane thought about the
role of tea in Britain. The history of tea in Britain provided an extraordinary coincidence (n.
巧合) of dates. Tea was relatively expensive until Britain started direct trade with China in
the early 18th century. By the 1740s, about the time that infant mortality was falling, the drink was common. Macfarlane guesses that the fact that water had to be boiled, together with the stomach-purifying properties of tea so eloquently described in Buddhist texts, meant that the breast milk provided by mothers was healthier than it had ever been. No other European nation drank tea so often as the British, which, by Macfarlane’s logic, pushed the other nations out of the race for the Industrial Revolution. G But, if tea is a factor in the puzzle, why didn’t this cause an industrial revolution in Japan? Macfarlane notes that
in the 17th century, Japan had large cities, high literacy rates and even a futures market. However, Japan decided against a work-based revolution (n.革命), by giving up labor-saving devices (n.设备、装置), even animals, to avoid putting people out of work. Astonishingly,
the nation that we now think of as one of the most technologically advanced, entered the
19th century having almost abandoned the wheel.
茶与工业革命
一个剑桥的教授说，在饮水习惯的改变是英国工业革命的理由。

Anjana Ahuja报道说。

A．A lan Macfarlane,在剑桥K ing’s College的人类科学教授已经像其他历史学家一样，花了几十年来研究工业革命的谜团。

为什么就是这个大爆炸-世界改变的工业出
生-发生在英国？为什么它是在18世纪末发生？
B．M acfarlane把这个谜放到一个综合因素考虑。

“大概有20个不同的因素，在改革发生前，所有的这些因素都必须符合。

”他说。

为了工业起飞，必须要有技
术与力量来推动工厂，城镇人口众多来提供廉价劳力，运输便利来四处运货，
一个富有的中产阶级愿意买批量生产的货物，一个市场趋动型经济和一个允许
这个发生的政治体系。

当这就是英国的情况时，其它的国家，比如日本，荷兰
与法国也符合了其中的几条，但它们没有发生工业革命。

“要发生工业革命，
所有的这些因素都是必须的，但不是充份的，”Macfarland说，“毕竟，荷兰
除了煤之外其他都有，而中国也有很多因素。

大部分的历史学家感知到为了解
开工业革命的这把锁，那儿总有一或二个缺失的要素。

”
C．缺失的要素，他提出，在几乎每个厨房的橱柜中都能找到。

茶与啤酒，两个国家最喜欢的饮品，推动了革命。

鞣酸，茶里面的积极成份，和啤酒中的蛇麻草
中的消毒特征-加上两者都是由沸水做成-允许城镇社区近距离地活跃而不用屈
服于水引发的疾病，比如痢疾。

这个理论听起来很离奇，但一旦他开始解释他
结论的推演，怀疑的人也会给予谨慎的佩服。

Macfarlane的案子已经被从显著
的quarters – Roy Porter，著名的医药历史学家，最近写了一本关于他的研究的
积极赞评所支持。

D．M acfarlane已经很长时间想知道工业革命是怎么来的。

历史学家已经发现了一个在18世纪中期的有意思的需要解释的因素。

在大概1650年到1740年之间，在英国的人口大概持平。

但之后就突然就爆发了人口增长。

Macfarlane说；
“婴儿死亡率在二十年中已下降一半，在乡村与城市，和各个阶层都是这样。

这件事的发生可能有四个原因。

是否周边的病毒与细菌有个突然的改变？不可
能。

是否医药科学有了一个飞升？但是它还在Lister的革命前（Joseph Lister是第一个在外科手术中用抗生枝术来预防感染的医生）一个世纪。

是否环境条件有所改善？在农业上对疟疾有所扫除，但收获很少。

直到19世纪全国才普及卫生。

唯一剩下的选项就是食物了。

但是高度与重量数据显示的是下降趋势。

所以食物那时必然是恶化的。

寻求这个孩子死亡率突然下降的努力看来是一无所获啊。

E．这个人口爆炸看来只是发生在了正确的时间来给工业革命提供劳力。

“当你开始向工业革命发展时，让人们一起住得更近是有经济效率的。

”Macfarlane说，“但是然后你会得病，特别是从人类垃圾。

”一些对历史记录的发掘透露了在那时的由水引起的疾病有了一个改变，特别是痢疾。

Malfarlane推断说不管当时英国人喝的是什么，那肯定在规治疾病中很重要。

他说,“我们喝啤酒。

长期以来，英国被蛇麻草中的强烈抗菌物质保护着，而蛇麻草本身是用来保存啤酒而被添加的。

但是在17世纪晚期，麦芽，一种啤酒的基本成份被开始征税，穷人转而喝水和姜啤酒，在1720年，死亡率开始再次拔升。

然后他突然又下降。

这是什么所致？
F．Macfarlane往日本看去，它在同时也发展起了大型城市，也没有卫生措施。

由水带来的疾病在日本人口比在英国更为松到，那是因为在他们的文化中茶的流行吗？MacFarlane然后就注意到了英国茶的历史提供了一个日期上的极其巧合。

直到英国在18世纪早期开展了直接的快速帆船的与中国的贸易前，茶都相对较贵，但是到1740年代时，婴儿死亡率下降时，这种饮料已经很普遍了。

Macfarlane猜说事实是水必须烧开，一同与茶这种净化胃的物质同饮，意味着母亲喂给孩子的奶比原来更为健康。

没有其他的欧洲国家像英国人这样的啜茶，这点，按Macfarlane的逻辑来说，排除了其他国家符合革命的范围外。

G．但是，如果茶只是综合因素之一，为什么日本没有提早有一个自己的饮茶的工业革命呢？Macfarlane注意到即使17世纪日本有大城市，高度文化普及率，甚至一个期货市场，它已通过放弃省力如动物的设备，这种任何工业基础上必须品来拒绝革命。

因此，这个我们现在认为是科技最为发展之一的国家放弃了历史的轮胎向前而进入了19世纪。