《君主论·第四章·大流士的王国何以不叛》第1节
Considering the difficulties which men have had to hold to a newly acquired state, some might wonder how, seeing that Alexander the Great became the master of Asia in a few years, and died whilst it was scarcely settled (whence it might appear reasonable that the whole empire would have rebelled), nevertheless his successors maintained themselves, and had to meet no other difficulty than that which arose among themselves from their own ambitions. I answer that the principalities of which one has record are found to be governed in two different ways; either by a prince, with a body of servants, who assist him to govern the kingdom as ministers by his favour and permission; or by a prince and barons, who hold that dignity by antiquity of blood and not by the grace of the prince. Such barons have states and their own subjects, who recognize them as lords and hold them in natural affection. Those states that are governed by a prince and his servants hold their prince in more consideration, because in all the country there is no one who is recognized as superior to him, and if they yield obedience to another they do it as to a minister and official, and they do not bear him any particular affection.
注释摘要
马基雅维利在这一节要回答的是一个看似矛盾的现象：亚历山大在短短数年内征服了亚洲，死后这个尚未稳固的帝国却没有叛乱，他的继业者们竟然保住了江山。这引出了一个政治分析的核心问题——为什么有些征服容易守住，有些则极其困难。他的答案不在于统治者的个人才能，而在于被征服国家的内部结构，这是一个典型的马基雅维利式思路，把目光从个人转向制度。 他提出了一组影响深远的分类…