『新东方在线托福阅读』为托福考生准备了ETS托福TPO/Official 41 Passage 3阅读练习：According to paragraph 3, what was a major problem with Renfrew’s model?真题题目及答案解析，TPO/Official 41 Passage 3阅读原文范文音频翻译

托福TPO/Official 41 Passage 3阅读原文According to paragraph 3, what was a major problem with Renfrew’s model?题目答案及解析-新东方托福官方网校手机版

易货贸易是数千年来的一种基本贸易机制；它通常是不定时发生的，并且基于互惠的概念，它涉及个人或群体之间商品或物品的相互交换。

Bartering was a basic trade mechanism for many thousands of years; often sporadic and usually based on notions of reciprocity, it involved the mutual exchange of commodities or objects between individuals or groups.

这些商品在社会中的重新分配掌握在酋长、宗教领袖或家族群手中。

Redistribution of these goods through society lay in the hands of chiefs, religious leaders, or kin groups.

这种重新分配是酋长制的一个基本要素。

Such redistribution was a basic element in chiefdoms.

从重新分配到正式贸易的转变——通常基于可能涉及固定价格，甚至货币的受监管商业——与日益增长的政治和社会复杂性密切相关，因此与古代国家的发展密切相关。

The change from redistribution to formal trade—often based on regulated commerce that perhaps involved fixed prices and even currency—was closely tied to growing political and social complexity and hence to the development of the state in the ancient world.

在20世纪70年代，许多考古学家认为贸易在古代国家的崛起中扮演了重要的角色。

In the 1970s, a number of archaeologists gave trade a primary role in the rise of ancient states.

英国考古学家科林·伦弗鲁将米诺斯文明在克里特岛和整个爱琴海令人瞩目的盛行归因于贸易往来的加强，以及橄榄和藤蔓种植对当地社区的影响。

British archaeologist Colin Renfrew attributed the dramatic flowering of the Minoan civilization on Crete and through the Aegean to intensified trading contacts and to the impact of olive and vine cultivation on local communities.

随着农业经济变得更加多样化，当地的粮食供应可以在当地和更远的地方购买，由此产生了深远的经济相互依存关系。

As agricultural economies became more diversified and local food supplies could be purchased both locally and over longer distances, a far-reaching economic interdependence resulted.

最终，这导致了米诺斯统治者在其宫廷组织和控制的奢侈品和基本商品的重新分配制度。

Eventually, this led to redistribution systems for luxuries and basic commodities, systems that were organized and controlled by Minoan rulers from their palaces.

随着时间的推移，自给自足的社区被相互依赖（的社区）所取代。

As time went on, the self-sufficiency of communities was replaced by mutual dependence.

出于对长途贸易的兴趣，贸易和礼物交换带来了一些文化上的同质性，甚至可能导致了盗版。

Interest in long-distance trade brought about some cultural homogeneity from trade and gift exchange, and perhaps even led to piracy.

因此，在一个复杂的正反馈过程中，贸易和互动的加强以及专业手工艺的蓬勃发展，导致了以宫廷为基础的更加复杂的社会，宫廷是新的米诺斯文明的经济中心。

Thus, intensified trade and interaction, and the flowering of specialist crafts, in a complex process of positive feedback, led to much more complex societies based on palaces, which were the economic hubs of a new Minoan civilization.

伦弗罗的模型做了一些假设，现在这些假设已经被人们忽略不计了 。

Renfrew’s model made some assumptions that are now discounted.

例如，他认为，引进驯化的藤蔓和橄榄可以大幅扩大耕种的土地，并有助于推动复杂社会的出现。

For example, he argued that the introduction of domesticated vines and olives allowed a substantial expansion of land under cultivation and helped to power the emergence of complex society.

现在，许多考古学家和古植物学家对这一观点提出了质疑，他们指出，现有的种植藤蔓和橄榄的证据表明它们只存在于青铜时代晚期。

Many archaeologists and paleobotanists now question this view, pointing out that the available evidence for cultivated vines and olives suggests that they were present only in the later Bronze Age.

然而，贸易可能是导致米诺斯克里特岛宫廷经济出现的众多变数之一。

Trade, nevertheless, was probably one of many variables that led to the emergence of palace economies in Minoan Crete.

美国考古学家威廉·拉特杰提出了一个假设，他认为远距离交流的爆炸性增长是中美洲玛雅文明（出现）的根本原因。

American archaeologist William Rathje developed a hypothesis that considered an explosion in long-distance exchange a fundamental cause of Mayan civilization in Mesoamerica.

他认为，低地玛雅人的环境缺乏许多重要的资源，其中包括黑曜石、盐、研磨玉米的石头和许多奢侈的材料。

He suggested that the lowland Mayan environment was deficient in many vital resources, among them obsidian, salt, stone for grinding maize, and many luxury materials.

如果形成了必要的贸易网络，那么所有的这些资源都可以从附近的高地、墨西哥山谷和其他地区获得。

All these could be obtained from the nearby highlands, from the Valley of Mexico, and from other regions, if the necessary trading networks came into being.

这样的联系，以及维持这种联系的贸易远征，不可能由单个村庄来组织。

Such connections, and the trading expeditions to maintain them, could not be organized by individual villages.

玛雅人生活在一个相对统一的环境中，每个社区都面临着同样的资源短缺情况。

The Maya lived in a relatively uniform environment, where every community suffered from the same resource deficiencies.

因此，拉特杰认为，长途贸易网络是通过当地的仪式中心及其领导人来组织的。

Thus, argued Rathje, long-distance trade networks were organized through local ceremonial centers and their leaders.

随着时间的推移，这个组织变成了一个国家，关于这种工作方式的知识是可以出口的，就像陶器、热带鸟类的羽毛、特殊的石材和其他当地商品一样。

In time, this organization became a state, and knowledge of its functioning was exportable, as were pottery, tropical bird feathers, specialized stone materials, and other local commodities.

拉特杰的假设可能部分解释了玛雅国家形成的复杂过程，但有关这个假设的反对意见是，人们可以在低地找到合适的替代原材料。

Rathje’s hypothesis probably explains part of the complex process of Mayan state formation, but it suffers from the objection that suitable alternative raw materials can be found in the lowlands.

也可能是，战争变成了对人口增长和优质农业用地日益稀缺的竞争性反应，并在玛雅国家的出现中发挥了重要作用。

It could be, too, that warfare became a competitive response to population growth and to the increasing scarcity of prime agricultural land, and that it played an important role in the emergence of the Mayan states.

既然我们对古代的交流和商业有了更多的了解，我们就可以明白：因为贸易的任何一个方面都不是文化变化或商业实践演变的首要原因，所以贸易永远不能被视为统一的因素或古代文明的主要推动者。

Now that we know much more about ancient exchange and commerce, we know that, because no one aspect of trade was an overriding cause of cultural change or evolution in commercial practices, trade can never be looked on as a unifying factor or as a primary agent of ancient civilization.

许多不断变化的变量影响着古代贸易，其中包括人们对商品的需求。

Many ever-changing variables affected ancient trade, among them the demand for goods.

此外，还有运输的物流、贸易网络的规模以及社会和政治环境。

There were also the logistics of transportation, the extent of the trading network, and the social and political environment.

错综复杂的市场网络沿着明确的路线输送物资供应。

Intricate market networks channeled supplies along well-defined routes.

两端的当局可能会对利润进行调节，反馈到源头，为进一步的交易提供激励。

Authorities at both ends might regulate the profits fed back to the source, providing the incentive for further transactions.

市场组织可能存在，也可能不存在。

There may or may not have been a market organization.

大量的长途贸易是复杂社会的结果，而不是原因。

Extensive long-distance trade was a consequence rather than a cause of complex societies.

The word “notions” in the passage is closest in meaning to

According to paragraph 1, what development occurred as political and social complexity increased?

The word “diversified” in the passage is closest in meaning to

According to paragraph 2, which of the following controlled the systems of redistribution of goods in ancient Crete?

According to paragraph 2, Renfrew believed that one effect of long-distance trade in the Aegean was

According to paragraph 3, what was a major problem with Renfrew’s model?

According to paragraph 4, which of the following was true about ancient Mayan communities?

What can be inferred from the fact that the Maya lived in a “relatively uniform environment”?

The word “prime” in the passage is closest in meaning to

What is the role of paragraph 5 in relation to paragraph 4?

Which of the sentences below best expresses the essential information in the highlighted sentence in the passage? Incorrect choices change the meaning in important ways or leave out essential information.

According to paragraph 6, all of the following statements about trade in ancient civilizations are true EXCEPT:

Look at the four squares  that indicate where the following sentence could be added to the passage. But demand for locally unobtainable resources was clearly only a part of the story.  Where would the sentence best fit? Click on a square  to add the sentence to the passage.

Directions: 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.

Trade and Early State Formation Bartering was a basic trade mechanism for many thousands of years; often sporadic and usually based on notions of reciprocity, it involved the mutual exchange of commodities or objects between individuals or groups. Redistribution of these goods through society lay in the hands of chiefs, religious leaders, or kin groups. Such redistribution was a basic element in chiefdoms. The change from redistribution to formal trade—often based on regulated commerce that perhaps involved fixed prices and even currency—was closely tied to growing political and social complexity and hence to the development of the state in the ancient world. In the 1970s, a number of archaeologists gave trade a primary role in the rise of ancient states. British archaeologist Colin Renfrew attributed the dramatic flowering of the Minoan civilization on Crete and through the Aegean to intensified trading contacts and to the impact of olive and vine cultivation on local communities. As agricultural economies became more diversified and local food supplies could be purchased both locally and over longer distances, a far-reaching economic interdependence resulted. Eventually, this led to redistribution systems for luxuries and basic commodities, systems that were organized and controlled by Minoan rulers from their palaces. As time went on, the self-sufficiency of communities was replaced by mutual dependence. Interest in long-distance trade brought about some cultural homogeneity from trade and gift exchange, and perhaps even led to piracy. Thus, intensified trade and interaction, and the flowering of specialist crafts, in a complex process of positive feedback, led to much more complex societies based on palaces, which were the economic hubs of a new Minoan civilization. Renfrew’s model made some assumptions that are now discounted. For example, he argued that the introduction of domesticated vines and olives allowed a substantial expansion of land under cultivation and helped to power the emergence of complex society. Many archaeologists and paleobotanists now question this view, pointing out that the available evidence for cultivated vines and olives suggests that they were present only in the later Bronze Age. Trade, nevertheless, was probably one of many variables that led to the emergence of palace economies in Minoan Crete. American archaeologist William Rathje developed a hypothesis that considered an explosion in long-distance exchange a fundamental cause of Mayan civilization in Mesoamerica. He suggested that the lowland Mayan environment was deficient in many vital resources, among them obsidian, salt, stone for grinding maize, and many luxury materials. All these could be obtained from the nearby highlands, from the Valley of Mexico, and from other regions, if the necessary trading networks came into being. Such connections, and the trading expeditions to maintain them, could not be organized by individual villages. The Maya lived in a relatively uniform environment, where every community suffered from the same resource deficiencies. Thus, argued Rathje, long-distance trade networks were organized through local ceremonial centers and their leaders. In time, this organization became a state, and knowledge of its functioning was exportable, as were pottery, tropical bird feathers, specialized stone materials, and other local commodities. Rathje’s hypothesis probably explains part of the complex process of Mayan state formation, but it suffers from the objection that suitable alternative raw materials can be found in the lowlands. It could be, too, that warfare became a competitive response to population growth and to the increasing scarcity of prime agricultural land, and that it played an important role in the emergence of the Mayan states. Now that we know much more about ancient exchange and commerce, we know that, because no one aspect of trade was an overriding cause of cultural change or evolution in commercial practices, trade can never be looked on as a unifying factor or as a primary agent of ancient civilization.  Many ever-changing variables affected ancient trade, among them the demand for goods.  There were also the logistics of transportation, the extent of the trading network, and the social and political environment.  Intricate market networks channeled supplies along well-defined routes.  Authorities at both ends might regulate the profits fed back to the source, providing the incentive for further transactions. There may or may not have been a market organization. Extensive long-distance trade was a consequence rather than a cause of complex societies.