Sometime in the middle of the 15th century, a well-to-do merchant from London buried more than 6, 700 gold and silver coins on a sloping hillside in Surrey. He was fleeing the War of the Roses and planned to return during better times. But he never did. The coins lay undisturbed until one September evening in 1990,when local resident Roger Mintey chanced upon them with a metal detector, a device used to determine the presence of metals. Mintey's find—much of which now sits in the British Museum—earned him roughly $ 350,000, enough to quit his job with a small manufacturer and spend more time pursuing lost treasure. But digging up the past is controversial in Britain. In many European countries, metal detectorists, or people using metal detectors, face tough regulations. In the U. K., however, officials introduced a scheme in 1997 encouraging hobbyists to report their discoveries(except for those falling under the definition of treasure, like Mintey's find, which they are required to report)—but allowing them to keep what they find, or receive a reward. Last year, a hidden store was uncovered in a field outside Birmingham. It consists of more than 1,500 gold and silver objects from the seventh century and was valued at more than $ 4.5 million. While local museums hurry to raise enough money to keep the find off the open market, it sits in limbo, owned by the Crown but facing claims by the landowner and the metal detectorist who found it. The find marks the latest battleground in the increasingly heated conflict between the country's 10, 000-20,000 metal detectorists and the museum workers determined to protect its precious old objects. Supporters say the scheme stems the loss of valuable information about precious old objects, while opponents argue that metal detectorists don't report everything. The debate centers on the larger question of who owns the past. "There's been a slow move over the centuries that precious old things belong to us all," says Professor Christopher Chippindale of Cambridge University. But in Britain at least, the temptation of buried treasure could change all that.
单选题 According to the first paragraph, the coins in Surrey were( ).
【正确答案】 D
【答案解析】解析:事实细节题。题干大意:通过第一段可以得知萨里郡的钱币( )。文章第一段前两句讲到:15世纪中期的某一天,一名来自伦敦的很有成就的商人将超过6700枚金币和银币埋在了萨里郡的一个斜坡上。他是为了躲避玫瑰战争,并打算在形势好转的时候再来取回他的钱币的。这些内容表明,这些钱币是在战争期间被一个商人留下的,即选项D的内容。
单选题 What do we know about Roger Mintey?
【正确答案】 D
【答案解析】解析:事实细节题。题干大意:我们可以知道关于罗杰·敏特的什么?本题可以用排除法,A项“他发明了金属探测器”,文中没有提到;B项“他拥有一个作坊”,文中只说他在作坊工作,没有说他是作坊的所有者:C项“他为大英博物馆工作”,文中没有提到;文中第一段第四句讲到“一个名叫罗杰·敏特的当地人碰巧用金属探测器发现了这些钱币”,所以答案为D。
单选题 In the U. K., metal detectorists( ).
【正确答案】 C
【答案解析】解析:事实细节题。题干大意:在英国,金属探测者( )。文章第二段第三句讲到“政府准许他们保留他们的发现或者是上报他们的发现进而得到政府的奖励”。据此可知,金属探测者可以保留他们的发现,即选项C的内容。
单选题 As for the find outside Birmingham, it is still unclear( ).
【正确答案】 C
【答案解析】解析:事实细节题。题干大意:对于在伯明翰郊区发现的宝藏,它们仍未明确的是( )。文章第二段第六句中的“it sits in limbo”的意思为“这些物件的归属一直未有定论”;接下来的句子讲到“……这些物件虽然为王室所有,但是宝藏所在的土地所有者和宝藏的探测者也在主张他们的权利”。这足以表明:谁拥有这些物件仍未明确,即选项C的内容。
单选题 According to Professor Christopher Chippindale, buried treasure( ).
【正确答案】 A
【答案解析】解析:理解推断题。题干大意:根据克里斯托弗·齐本德尔教授的陈述,被埋的宝藏( )。文章最后一段提到,克里斯托弗·齐本德尔教授表示“几个世纪以来一直存在珍贵的老物件属于公众的说法”,即选项A的内容。