阅读题求大神解！

rebeccahanyyUID: 3249400

In the early 1950's, historians who studied preindustrial Europe (which we may define here as Europe in the period from roughly 1300 to 1800) began, for the first time in large numbers, to investigate more of the preindustrial European population than the 2 or 3 percent who comprised the political and social elite: the kings, generals, judges, nobles, bishops, and local magnates who had hitherto usually filled history books. One difficulty, however, was that few of the remaining 97 percent recorded their thoughts or had them chronicled by contemporaries. Faced with this situation, many historians based their investigations on the only records that seemed to exist: birth, marriage, and death records. As a result, much of the early work on the nonelite was aridly statistical in nature; reducing the vast majority of the population to a set of numbers was hardly more enlightening than ignoring them altogether. Historians still did not know what these people thought or felt.
One way out of this dilemma was to turn to the records of legal courts, for here the voices of the nonelite can most often be heard, as witnesses, plaintiffs, and defendants. These documents have acted as “a point of entry into the mental world of the poor.” Historians such as Le Roy Ladurie have used the documents to extract case histories, which have illuminated the attitudes of different social groups (these attitudes include, but are not confined to, attitudes toward crime and the law) and have revealed how the authorities administered justice. It has been societies that have had a developed police system and practiced Roman law, with its written depositions, whose court records have yielded the most data to historians. In Anglo-Saxon countries hardly any of these benefits obtain, but it has still been possible to glean information from the study of legal documents.
The extraction of case histories is not, however, the only use to which court records may be put. Historians who study preindustrial Europe have used the records to establish a series of categories of crime and to quantify indictments that were issued over a given number of years. This use of the records does yield some information about the nonelite, but this information gives us little insight into the mental lives of the nonelite. We also know that the number of indictments in preindustrial Europe bears little relation to the number of actual criminal acts, and we strongly suspect that the relationship has varied widely over time. In addition, aggregate population estimates are very shaky, which makes it difficult for historians to compare rates of crime per thousand in one decade of the preindustrial period with rates in another decade. Given these inadequacies, it is clear why the case history use of court records is to be preferred.

7.  The passage would be most likely to appear as part of  关键词法
(A) a book review summarizing the achievements of historians of the European aristocracy
(B) an essay describing trends in the practice of writing history
(C) a textbook on the application of statistical methods in the social sciences
(D) a report to the historical profession on the work of early-twentieth-century historians
(E) an article urging the adoption of historical methods by the legal profession

苏梳眠UID: 2717864

先去搜下前人的解释~

rebeccahanyyUID: 3249400

苏梳眠 发表于 2012-7-19 22:26
先去搜下前人的解释~

哭，没有找到！求版主解答！

zy3854UID: 3316828

我觉得吧                  首先ABD全排除  3段都有提到方法   但是本文后半部分分析了法律卷宗对调查欧洲一般阶层的状态，所以选E

流星之盼UID: 3332303

同觉得选E，最后一句说明了文章的目的啊

rebeccahanyyUID: 3249400

zy3854 发表于 2012-7-27 17:51
我觉得吧                  首先ABD全排除  3段都有提到方法   但是本文后半部分分析了法律卷宗对调查欧洲一 ...

我也选E的，答案是B

咖啡盐UID: 2973669

好长的阅读啊....看了就不想读了...TuT