《君主论·第四章·大流士的王国何以不叛》第3节
The contrary happens in kingdoms governed like that of France, because one can easily enter there by gaining over some baron of the kingdom, for one always finds malcontents and such as desire a change. Such men, for the reasons given, can open the way into the state and render the victory easy; but if you wish to hold it afterwards, you meet with infinite difficulties, both from those who have assisted you and from those you have crushed. Nor is it enough for you to have exterminated the family of the prince, because the lords that remain make themselves the heads of fresh movements against you, and as you are unable either to satisfy or exterminate them, that state is lost whenever time brings the opportunity. Now if you will consider what was the nature of the government of Darius, you will find it similar to the kingdom of the Turk, and therefore it was only necessary for Alexander, first to overthrow him in the field, and then to take the country from him. After which victory, Darius being killed, the state remained secure to Alexander, for the above reasons. And if his successors had been united they would have enjoyed it securely and at their ease, for there were no tumults raised in the kingdom except those they provoked themselves.
注释摘要
马基雅维利在这里展开的是一个非常冷峻的对比：为什么有的国家打进去容易守不住，有的国家打进去难但一旦拿下就稳了。他拿法兰西王国和土耳其苏丹国作为两种统治模式的代表，并最终把这套分析用到亚历山大大帝征服大流士的波斯帝国这件事上。 法兰西式的君主国属于封建等级制，国王的统治并不是直接渗透到每一个臣民，而是透过一层层拥有自主领地和世袭威望的贵族来实施的。这些贵族在…