《君主论·第四章·大流士的王国何以不叛》第4节
But it is impossible to hold with such tranquillity states constituted like that of France. Hence arose those frequent rebellions against the Romans in Spain, France, and Greece, owing to the many principalities there were in these states, of which, as long as the memory of them endured, the Romans always held an insecure possession; but with the power and long continuance of the empire the memory of them passed away, and the Romans then became secure possessors. And when fighting afterwards amongst themselves, each one was able to attach to himself his own parts of the country, according to the authority he had assumed there; and the family of the former lord being exterminated, none other than the Romans were acknowledged. When these things are remembered no one will marvel at the ease with which Alexander held the Empire of Asia, or at the difficulties which others have had to keep an acquisition, such as Pyrrhus and many more; this is not occasioned by the little or abundance of ability in the conqueror, but by the want of uniformity in the subject state.
注释摘要
马基雅维利在这一节里继续推进他对两种统治模式的比较，但把战场从土耳其和法国搬到了罗马的征服史上。他的论证逻辑很清楚：像法国那样由世袭贵族分治的王国，被征服之后绝不可能平静地保有。西班牙、高卢（大致相当于今天的法国和比利时一带）、希腊这些地区之所以不断反叛罗马，根源就在于它们原本并不是一个高度统一的王国，而是由众多拥有自己臣民和古老血统的领主、城邦或部族拼合…