In Pride and Prejudice (1813), an evergreen (永葆活力的) novel, Jane Austen wrote a story that has some sad truths to tell on the way to its happy ending.

Austen's tales belong to the world of the late 18th­century England. They are filled with characters like those she knew: young women who are trying to find a way to be happy, usually through marriage, in a world dominated (统治) by men.

Two bachelors, charming Mr Bingley and sour Mr Darcy, come to Netherfield Park where they immediately become the focus of unmarried young women of the community. Jane Bennet and Mr Bingley soon fall in love, but Jane's sister Elizabeth finds that she can't get on with Mr Darcy at all. It seems to the reader that they are opposites in every way, he all prides and she all prejudices.

Of course, Elizabeth and Darcy must end up together: everyone knows that opposites attract. But before that happens there are many obstacles to overcome, and not only for the two main characters. Jane and Bingley's romance does not run smoothly, while young Lydia and her lover, the ne'er­do­well (不成器的) Mr Wickham, cause a scandal (丑闻) that threatens the social standing of the Bennet family.

The quality that draws people to this book is its lightness of touch. We care for the characters and wish for their happiness. But Jane Austen does not tell us that one character is bad and that another is good. She does not preach (说教) to us. She uses irony (讽刺); that is, she manages to convey what she thinks by saying nearly the opposite of what she means.

The most famous example of this is the opening sentence of the novel: “It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune must be in want of a wife.” The sentence is funny and witty (诙谐的) because in reality it is the other way around: the real truth is that a single woman with no money needs a husband.

Funny, but serious too. It is not a joke that women like Elizabeth and Jane had no money  and couldn't be independent. It is not amusing that they had so little choice in life while the men had the run of everything. Pride and Prejudice communicated this truth even as it amuses and entertains us.

On May 28,1923, the top lawyer in the U.S. said women could casual trousers(便装裤子). Up until that time it was not acceptable for American women to wear trousers.

 Even with this change, however, people still considered women in trousers a shocking idea. Today, though, times have changed, and it becomes common for women to wear trousers. What made this item of clothing acceptable?

In New York City around 1850, some ladies started to fight for women’s rights and dress reform （改革）. Some of them wore full-cut trousers known as “ bloomers”（灯笼裤）under their skirts. The special-looking trousers were named for Amelia Bloomer, their strongest supporter. However, they were heavily criticized by most people. While some women wanted to be free of their heavy skirts, they didn’t like the bloomers. Yet these early trousers were a glimpse(一瞥) of the future as women continued pushing for equal rights.

When men went off to fight in World War I, women’s roles changed. They were forced to take jobs that were traditionally performed by men. As women began working in factories and fields, they discovered that skirts weren’t convenient. So they wore trousers at work.

Women once again performed traditional male jobs during World War II. Often they would borrow work trousers from their husbands, fathers and brothers. But trousers still weren’t acceptable outside of work.

Hollywood began to change that concept(观念)，though. When stars Katharine Hepburn and Grace Kelly appeared wearing trousers, Many fashionable ladies copied the look. However, most women during the 1940s and 1950s still preferred to wear dresses and skirts.

 In the 1950s teenage girls chose rolled-up blue jeans for casual wear. In the 1960s,they chose bell-bottom jeans, and in the 1970s, designer jeans. In the 21^st century, women feel free to wear different types of trousers most of the time. From bloomers to business suits, women and their trousers have come a long way.

Kong Zi , also called Confucius (551-479 B.C) , and Socrates (469-399 B. C) lived only a hundred years apart , and during their lifetimes there was no contact between China and Greece, but it is interesting to look at how the world that each of these great philosophers came from shaped their ideas , and how these ideas in turn ,shaped their societies.

Neither philosopher lived in times of peace, though there were more wars in Greece than in China. The Chinese states were very large and feudal, while the Greek city-states were small and urban. The urban environment in which Socrates lived allowed him to be more radical than Confucius. Unlike Confucius, Socrates was not asked by rules how to govern effectively. Thus, Socrates was able to be more idealistic, focusing on issues like freedom, and knowledge for its own sake. Confucius, on the other hand, advised those in government service, and many of his students went out to government service.

Confucius suggested the Golden Rule as a principle for the conduct of life:” Do not do to others what you would not want others to do to you.” He assumed that all men were equal at birth, though some had more potential than others, and that it was knowledge that set men apart. Socrates focused on the individual, and thought that the greatest purpose of man was to seek wisdom. He believed that the superior class should rule the inferior(下层的)classes.

For Socrates, the family was of no importance, and the community of little concern. For Confucius, however, the family was the centre of the society, with family relations considered much more important than political relations.

Both men are respected much more today than they were in their lifetimes.

For decades, archaeologists have wondered : Who or what killed the most famous boy king in history? Some experts thought that 19-year-old Tutankhamen had died in a hunting accident. Others said that he was murdered by a blow of the head.

    Two years of DNA testing and CT scans may have finally solved the mystery of Tut's death. The teen pharaoh(法老），), scientists in Egypt now believe, was the victim of malaria(疟疾）, complicated by a bone disorder.

    Even at his best, King Tut was no symbol of strength. "He was a weak boy who had a deformed foot and who needed a stick to walk," researcher Carsten Pusch told National Geographic.

    Shortly before Tut died, in about 1324 B. C. , he may have broken his leg in a fall, the study's authors say. Because of a weak immune system, the pharaoh's leg couldn't heal, and a malarial infection (感染)）finished him off.

    Tut was forgotten soon after his death. So why does he attract us today? In 1922, an archaeologist uncovered a group of royal tombs in Egypt’s Valley of the Kings. Thieves had stolen most of the graves.

    Only Tut's was untouched. Egypt fever swept the globe as workers unloaded the dazzling treasures, hidden for more than 3,200 years, which had been meant to accompany the young pharaoh to the afterlife. In 1972, Tut's treasures began a series of tours around the world, giving millions of people a chance to view his golden burial mask and other relics up close.

   Through it all, Tut's star will continue to bum bright, experts say. As author Jon Manchip White wrote, "The Pharaoh who in life was one of the least respected of Egypt's kings has become in death the most famous. "