為什么歐洲列強(qiáng)在將其帝國(guó)主義擴(kuò)張到全世界方面如此成功，但在歐洲本身的征服和統(tǒng)一方面卻遠(yuǎn)沒(méi)有那么成功？

Skanda Veera
, A student of Indian knowledge
In the global human evolution, there would be phases when one civilization becomes dominant, and then it collapses. The rise and fall is a continuing phenomenon, and while there are evolutionary causes for the rise, the seeds of collapse often times would be present in the way the rise happened and is sustained.
The mode of European rise, which happened through organized expansion and subjugation of other civilizations, by itself means such a rise has to end some time and others would rise in protest and in resistance to subjugation. Europeans did have conflicts among themselves and competition for colonies and hegemony, but the space was vast for them to conquer and they could spend enough energies in expansion instead of fighting among themselves. There was never a case that Europe would unite to conquer the world. So there is no wonder such a thing did not “succeed” (it was not attempted).
In one sense, it is the American hegemony that is uniting Europe as a counter force, though it cannot be the second biggest pole.

在全球人類(lèi)的進(jìn)化過(guò)程中，總會(huì)有這樣的階段：一個(gè)文明成為主導(dǎo)，然后它就崩潰了。崛起和衰落是一個(gè)持續(xù)的現(xiàn)象，雖然崛起有進(jìn)化發(fā)展的原因，但崩潰的種子往往存在于崛起的發(fā)生和持續(xù)的進(jìn)程中。
歐洲人的崛起方式是通過(guò)有組織的擴(kuò)張和征服其他文明來(lái)實(shí)現(xiàn)的，這本身就意味著這種崛起必須在某個(gè)時(shí)候結(jié)束，其他國(guó)家也會(huì)在抗議和抵抗征服的過(guò)程中崛起。歐洲人之間確實(shí)有沖突，也有對(duì)殖民地和霸權(quán)的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)，但他們可以征服的空間很大，讓他們可以把足夠的精力用于對(duì)外擴(kuò)張，而不是相互爭(zhēng)斗上。從來(lái)沒(méi)有出現(xiàn)過(guò)歐洲會(huì)聯(lián)合起來(lái)征服世界的情況。因此，難怪這樣的事情沒(méi)有"成功"（因?yàn)闆](méi)有嘗試過(guò)）。
從某種意義上說(shuō)，是美國(guó)的霸權(quán)主義在迫使歐洲聯(lián)合起來(lái)，作為一種對(duì)抗的力量，盡管它已經(jīng)無(wú)法成為第二大極。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

Stilicho
, Lawyer
You’ve answered the question without realising it.
Basically European powers developed their military and technological craft as a result of near constant, viscous war against each other - Europe was a crucible of war and technology. Then they turned their craft against the world and realised just how far they had come…

你已經(jīng)在不知不覺(jué)中回答了這個(gè)問(wèn)題。
基本上就是歐洲列強(qiáng)發(fā)展了他們的軍事和技術(shù)工藝，因?yàn)樗麄儽舜酥g幾乎不間斷地進(jìn)行著戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)--歐洲是戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)和技術(shù)的熔爐。然后他們把他們的技術(shù)轉(zhuǎn)向世界，并意識(shí)到自己有多牛瓣......

Ernest W. Adams
, School taught me to hate history, but now I love it.
The simple answer is that people they colonized didn't have firearms. The other Europeans did. It was a lot easier for the British to defeat the Mri than the French.
However, there were definitely times when one European power conquered another. The Spanish held the Netherlands for a while. Napoleon conquered huge chunks of Europe, but he overreached himself and couldn't hold it. The UK occupied Ireland. Sweden, Norway, Denmark and Finland were united at different times.

，學(xué)校曾讓我討厭歷史，但現(xiàn)在我愛(ài)它。
簡(jiǎn)單的答案是，被他們殖民的人沒(méi)有槍支。而其他歐洲人有。英國(guó)人打敗毛利人要比打敗法國(guó)人容易得多。
然而，絕對(duì)有過(guò)一個(gè)歐洲國(guó)家想征服另一個(gè)國(guó)家的時(shí)候。西班牙人曾一度占領(lǐng)了荷蘭。拿破侖征服了大部分的歐洲，但他高估了自己，沒(méi)能守住它。英國(guó)占領(lǐng)了愛(ài)爾蘭。瑞典、挪威、丹麥和芬蘭在不同時(shí)期曾聯(lián)合起來(lái)過(guò)。

Benjamin Kirk
, Interested in History and Geopolitics
Because it’s damn Easier Conquering Technologically Behind Societies in some distant Continent that conquering other, Equally Advanced European Nations

，對(duì)歷史和地緣政治感興趣的人
因?yàn)檎鞣硞€(gè)遙遠(yuǎn)大陸上技術(shù)落后的社會(huì)比征服其他同樣先進(jìn)的歐洲國(guó)家要容易得多。

Dan Vasii
Right you are, but it must be specified that technological advancement took place more or less simultaneously for the European powers, so none was advantaged by a significant development in technology (except for British empire, that due to its circumstances, was the place of Industrial Revolution).

你說(shuō)得對(duì)，但必須說(shuō)明的是，歐洲列強(qiáng)的技術(shù)進(jìn)步或多或少是同時(shí)發(fā)生的，所以沒(méi)有一個(gè)國(guó)家因技術(shù)的重大發(fā)展而獲得優(yōu)勢(shì)（除了大英帝國(guó)，由于其環(huán)境，它是工業(yè)革命的地方）。

Bill Bogg
More precisely it was the Atlantic-facing European powers whose ships became adapted to rough seas and could undertake the vast sea voyages. The Mediteranean powers still used galleys which relied primarily on oarsmen and could not cope with the Atlantic. The Grimaldi pirates (still rulers of Monaco) did manage to sack Southampton in the early thirteenth century using galleys but I don't know of any succesful use after that time. Spain still used a few in the Spanish Armada (1588). In the Mediterrranean they could still be effective to quite a late date as shown by Don John's victory at Lepanto in 1471 .

更準(zhǔn)確地說(shuō)，是面向大西洋的歐洲大國(guó)的船只適應(yīng)了波濤洶涌的海面，可以進(jìn)行大量的海上航行。地中海大國(guó)仍然使用主要依靠槳手的大帆船，無(wú)法應(yīng)對(duì)大西洋的情況。格里馬爾迪的海盜（兼摩納哥的統(tǒng)治者）確實(shí)在13世紀(jì)初使用大帆船洗劫了南安普頓，但我不知道在那之后還有沒(méi)有成功的案例。西班牙在西班牙無(wú)敵艦隊(duì)（1588年）中仍然使用了一些。在地中海地區(qū)，它們?cè)谙喈?dāng)晚期的時(shí)候仍然可以發(fā)揮作用，1471年唐-約翰在萊龐托的勝利就說(shuō)明了這一點(diǎn)。

Colin Riegels
, History geek
Actually European powers are pretty good at uniting themselves.
Germany, France, Italy, Britain, Spain, Russia, Greece - all were fragmented groups which slowly coalesced into the current nation states over the passage of time. Some managed that sooner than others. But Germany and Italy only really united into broadly their form in the late 1800s from much smaller territories and city states.
Conversely, despite the commonly held perception, they actually weren’t terribly good at extending imperialism overseas. Only the British managed to do it on any kind of scale, and then they all pretty much gave it all back again (except for Russia - even then that was in Asia). If you contrast that with, say the United States, China or Russia (Asian bit) - when they engaged in Imperialist expansion they kept what they took, and they still retain it to this day.

事實(shí)上，歐洲大國(guó)很善于統(tǒng)一自己。
德國(guó)、法國(guó)、意大利、英國(guó)、西班牙、俄羅斯、希臘--所有這些原本都是零散的團(tuán)體，隨著時(shí)間的推移慢慢凝聚成現(xiàn)在的民族國(guó)家。有些國(guó)家比其他國(guó)家更早實(shí)現(xiàn)了這一點(diǎn)。但是，德國(guó)和意大利只是在19世紀(jì)末才從更小的領(lǐng)土和城市國(guó)家中真正統(tǒng)一起來(lái)，形成了如今大致的形式的。
相反，盡管人們普遍認(rèn)為如此，但他們實(shí)際上并不擅長(zhǎng)將帝國(guó)主義擴(kuò)展到海外。只有英國(guó)人成功地做到了，然后他們又都幾乎把它們?nèi)客鲁鰜?lái)了（除了俄羅斯--不過(guò)也只保留了亞洲的部分）。如果你與美國(guó)、中國(guó)或俄羅斯（亞洲部分）進(jìn)行對(duì)比，你會(huì)發(fā)現(xiàn)，當(dāng)他們進(jìn)行帝國(guó)主義擴(kuò)張時(shí)，他們保留了他們所奪取的東西，并且他們至今仍保留著這些。

Paul Irving
Spain had an empire stretching from California to Patagonia, plus the Philippines, before there was a British empire. Portugal had coastal Brazil & a string of coastal territories from Morocco to Taiwan before there was a British empire.
These weren't insignificant. They were unprecedented in their spread.

在大英帝國(guó)出現(xiàn)之前，西班牙有一個(gè)從加利福尼亞到巴塔哥尼亞的帝國(guó)，加上菲律賓。在大英帝國(guó)出現(xiàn)之前，葡萄牙擁有巴西沿海和從摩洛哥到臺(tái)灣的一系列沿海領(lǐng)土。
這些并不是微不足道的。它們的擴(kuò)張是前所未有的。

Emil Perhinschi
, trained historian, writing software since 1999
Q: “Why were European powers so successful at expanding their imperialism all over the world, but far less successful in conquering and uniting themselves?”
The success of the European powers in conquering the world is grossly overrated.
There are maps showing how Spain controlled that much territory and England that much territory, but those were for the use of their European rivals, telling them not to interfere in those parts of the world. Actual boots on the ground and real control was something totally different.
Spain “owned” a large part of North America but their presence there was very thin, and the same was true about the larger parts of their South American territories.
France had “Louisiana” but they actually controlled only a few bits of land on the coast.
British Canada was a few towns in the East and a few trading posts in the Hudson bay and treaties with other European powers about who owned the rest. Those treaties determined what areas were colored as “British” on the map, not actual presence on the ground.
1800 - G. de L'ISLE - Carte d'Amérique
The maps of the time had very large blank parts even on claimed territories. The coasts were better known but not terribly well, and the large navigable rivers were explored, but most of the rest were conjecture and guesswork. Exploration expeditions were still sent out even close to 1900. The Russians were still exploring their North even right before the Great War and still discovering large islands :-).

問(wèn)："為什么歐洲列強(qiáng)在將其帝國(guó)主義擴(kuò)張到全世界方面如此成功，而在歐洲自身的征服和統(tǒng)一方面卻遠(yuǎn)沒(méi)有那么成功？"
歐洲列強(qiáng)在征服世界方面的成功被嚴(yán)重地高估了。
有很多顯示西班牙控制了那么多的領(lǐng)土，英國(guó)控制了那么多的領(lǐng)土的地圖，但這些地圖都是給他們的歐洲對(duì)手看的，告訴他們不要干涉世界上的那些地方。但是這跟真的有士兵駐扎在上面和真正的控制是完全不同的東西。
西班牙"擁有"北美洲的一大部分，但他們?cè)谀抢锏拇嬖诜浅伪?，他們?cè)谀厦乐薜念I(lǐng)土大部分也是如此。
法國(guó)擁有"路易斯安那"，但他們實(shí)際上只控制了海岸邊的幾塊土地。
英屬加拿大只是在東部有幾個(gè)城鎮(zhèn)，在哈德遜灣有幾個(gè)貿(mào)易站，并與其他歐洲國(guó)家簽訂了關(guān)于誰(shuí)擁有其余地區(qū)的條約。這些條約決定了哪些地區(qū)在地圖上被標(biāo)為"英國(guó)"，而不是在地面上真的有英國(guó)軍隊(duì)的實(shí)際存在。

1800年--紀(jì)堯姆·德利畫(huà)的《美洲地圖》。
即使在有宣稱(chēng)的領(lǐng)土上，當(dāng)時(shí)的地圖也有很大的空白部分。人們對(duì)海岸線(xiàn)比較了解，但也并不是十分清楚，對(duì)可通航的大河也進(jìn)行了探索，但其余大部分都是猜想和臆測(cè)。即使在接近1900年的時(shí)候，還是得派探險(xiǎn)隊(duì)去勘察。俄國(guó)人甚至在世界大戰(zhàn)前仍在探索他們的北方，并仍在新發(fā)現(xiàn)一些大的島嶼 :-)。

Brad Miller
, Classical self-education. History & Creative Writing in English, Many Over 23 Years (1907)
False premise. It wasn’t “all over the world”. There were three factors that came into play. and at least two of them had to be met for the Europeans to succeed.
(1) A lower population density.
(2) A lower technology
(3) A lower level of organization.

這個(gè)問(wèn)題的前提就錯(cuò)了。并沒(méi)有在"全世界"都成功。有三個(gè)因素在起作用。而且至少要滿(mǎn)足其中兩個(gè)因素，歐洲人才能成功：
(1) 較低的人口密度。
(2)較低的技術(shù)。
(3) 較低的組織水平。

Arden Tom McClure
, Coordinator of Career and Skills Education (2017-present)
Because Europe was broken up geographically by mountains and seas, which made each area easier to defend, making all those areas competitive. Also they early on developed trade to get things that they couldn’t get or make easily. Notice that the areas conquered were much farther behind technologically and were initially empires themselves which means the locals had already largely eliminated the competition.
The Americas were all Stone Age, Paleolithic to Neolithic, and lacking beasts of burden. That meant the Europeans had a substantial technological advantage.
In Africa, the Africans were in a decline due to losing their major export, and were economically more splintered, while Europeans were in the ascent. But notice the Africans began to catch up much faster than the Europeans did after the fall of the Roman Empire. But the only successful colonization was carried on against stone-age peoples, never those who already had metal technology.

因?yàn)闅W洲在地理上被山脈和海洋分割開(kāi)來(lái)，這使得每個(gè)地區(qū)更容易防御，使所有這些地區(qū)都具有競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力。同時(shí)他們很早就發(fā)展了貿(mào)易，以獲得他們不容易得到或制造的東西。請(qǐng)注意，被征服的地區(qū)在技術(shù)上要落后得多，而且最初本身也是帝國(guó)，這意味著當(dāng)?shù)厝艘呀?jīng)在很大程度上消除了競(jìng)爭(zhēng)。
美洲都還處于石器時(shí)代，從舊石器時(shí)代到新石器時(shí)代，而且缺乏野獸。這意味著歐洲人有很大的技術(shù)優(yōu)勢(shì)。
在非洲，非洲人因失去主要出口而走下坡路，經(jīng)濟(jì)上更加分裂，而歐洲人正處于上升期。但請(qǐng)注意，在羅馬帝國(guó)滅亡后，非洲人的追趕速度比歐洲人要快得多。但唯一成功的殖民化是針對(duì)石器時(shí)代的人進(jìn)行的，而不是那些已經(jīng)擁有金屬技術(shù)的人。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

Glen Roper
I wouldn’t call the Americans Stone Age or Neolithic just because they didn’t have beasts of burden except the Llama in Peru. They were more advanced in some parts of civilization than the Europeans. Huge cities existed in most parts of America. The biggest weapon the Europeans had were diseases. 80% to 90% of the original Americans died by disease and not any Europeans weapons

我不會(huì)僅僅因?yàn)樗麄兂嗣佤數(shù)拿乐揆勚鉀](méi)有馱獸，就稱(chēng)他們?yōu)槭鲿r(shí)代或新石器時(shí)代的美洲人。他們?cè)谀承┓矫娴奈拿鞅葰W洲人更先進(jìn)。在美洲的大部分地區(qū)都有巨大的城市。歐洲人的最大武器是疾病。80%到90%的原始美洲人死于疾病，而不是任何歐洲人的武器。

Arden Tom McClure
But huge cities also existed in Europe. The Americas were Neolithic because they still had not developed smelting metals. Their tools were stone and wood. And most of Americas were just entering in to static or settled agriculture as opposed to slash and burn agriculture where every few years the village was moved to a new location so the soil would not be depleted.
Yes the Native American built some impressive cities but we also know other Neolithic and even Daly metal age peoples built cities and impressive stone monuments elsewhere in the world. The Native Americans also engaged in GENO.... and slavery and devastating wars of conquest it was not some golden age or advanced civilization. They were just human without being humane.

但歐洲也有大城市。美洲是新石器時(shí)代，是因?yàn)樗麄冞€沒(méi)有發(fā)展出冶煉金屬的能力。他們的工具是石頭和木頭。大多數(shù)美洲人剛剛進(jìn)入靜態(tài)或定居農(nóng)業(yè)，之前每隔幾年就把村莊搬到一個(gè)新的地方，這樣土壤肥力就不會(huì)被耗盡。
是的，美洲原住民建造了一些令人印象深刻的城市，但我們也知道其他新石器時(shí)代甚至戴利金屬時(shí)代（注：查不到是什么時(shí)代，懷疑是拼錯(cuò)了）的人在世界其他地方也建造了城市和令人印象深刻的石頭紀(jì)念碑。美洲原住民也參與了種族滅絕和奴隸制以及毀滅性的征服戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)，這不是什么黃金時(shí)代或先進(jìn)的文明。他們也只是沒(méi)有什么人性的人類(lèi)。

Pablo Djankowicz Ruizinowitz
, History major, interested in tid-bits about WWII
Precisely because these European nations had the power to project themselves to other regions of the world after 1492, and to establish extensive overseas colonial empires. They were just too militarily powerful to vanquish and keep them from rebelling once conquered. That’s the reason no single European power could unify them all.
When there were stabs at bringing Europe under one ruler—like when the Spanish Habsburgs tried to unite with the Austrian Habsburgs to create a giant Habsburg empire that spanned Europe in the 1500s, or when France tried to conquer all of Europe in the early 1800s—the other nations rebelled like nothing else. Enormous, bloody wars thus resulted.
This need to rebel had little to do with the fact that European nations were different from each other, culturally and linguistically. The cultural and linguistic differences between someone living in Guangdong Province in southern China when compared to a northern Chinese person living in Heilongjiang Province are just as deep and wide as between a southern Italian and a Swede or a Dane.
It’s just that historically China has for the past 2,000 years reunited after brief periods of political disunity. As a result that Guangdong person is used to the idea of being united under one political entity with that Heilongjiang person. These culturally and linguistically distinct people don’t put up a fight when there’s a political power that seeks to centralize and unite China, in other words. And that historical experience of unity has not occurred in Europe (though the E.U. has for the past 40 years tried to cultivate it in the younger generations of Europeans, especially with the Erasmus program in E.U. colleges and universities).

正是因?yàn)檫@些歐洲國(guó)家在1492年后有能力將自己的力量投射到世界其他地區(qū)，并建立廣泛的海外殖民帝國(guó)，才沒(méi)有對(duì)內(nèi)進(jìn)行征服統(tǒng)一。他們?cè)谲娛律咸珡?qiáng)大了，就算一時(shí)被征服，也無(wú)法阻止他們叛亂。這就是沒(méi)有一個(gè)歐洲大國(guó)能夠統(tǒng)一他們的原因。
當(dāng)有人試圖將歐洲置于一個(gè)統(tǒng)治者之下時(shí)，比如西班牙哈布斯堡家族在15世紀(jì)試圖與奧地利哈布斯堡家族聯(lián)合，建立一個(gè)橫跨歐洲的巨大的哈布斯堡帝國(guó)，或者法國(guó)在19世紀(jì)初試圖征服整個(gè)歐洲時(shí)，其他國(guó)家就會(huì)不顧一切地反抗。巨大的、血腥的戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)由此產(chǎn)生。
這種反叛的產(chǎn)生與歐洲國(guó)家在文化和語(yǔ)言上彼此不同的事實(shí)沒(méi)有什么關(guān)系。生活在中國(guó)南方廣東省的人與生活在黑龍江省的中國(guó)北方人之間的文化和語(yǔ)言差異，就像南方的意大利人與瑞典人或丹麥人之間的差異一樣深刻和廣泛。
只是在歷史上，中國(guó)在過(guò)去的2000年里，在經(jīng)歷了短暫的政治不統(tǒng)一之后又總是重新統(tǒng)一起來(lái)。因此，廣東人已經(jīng)習(xí)慣了與黑龍江人統(tǒng)一在一個(gè)政治實(shí)體之下的想法。換句話(huà)說(shuō)，當(dāng)有一個(gè)政治力量試圖集中和統(tǒng)一中國(guó)時(shí)，這些在文化和語(yǔ)言上不同的民族并不反抗。而這種統(tǒng)一的歷史經(jīng)驗(yàn)并沒(méi)有在歐洲出現(xiàn)過(guò)（盡管在過(guò)去的40年里，歐盟一直試圖在歐洲人的年輕一代中培養(yǎng)這種經(jīng)驗(yàn)，特別是在歐盟高校推行的伊拉斯謨項(xiàng)目）。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

Bruce Jurin
, Lot of reading, play wargames
During the major period of imperialism, the Europeans had developed military technology, and to some degree an efficient organization to deliver supplies, reinforcements etc., to defeat less technologically advanced countries.
However if facing each other, this advantage didn’t exist so wars were difficult.

在帝國(guó)主義的主要時(shí)期，歐洲人已經(jīng)發(fā)展了軍事技術(shù)，并在一定程度上建立了有效的組織來(lái)運(yùn)送物資、增援等，以擊敗技術(shù)上不太先進(jìn)的國(guó)家。
然而，如果面對(duì)同樣的歐洲國(guó)家，這種優(yōu)勢(shì)并不存在，所以戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)很困難。

Richard Stephens
, BA History & History (2003)
The map of Europe has changed massively over time.
Celtic Briton, England’s septarchy, Norman conquest, united England, occupation of Wales, then Ireland, eventually the submission of Scotland and then to the Irish independence creating the current UK in 1922
That’s just one island group. There was the unification of Spain, France’s borders change with Germany and Belgium independence. The Netherland’s secede from Spain. Scandinavia constantly changes who control what. Germany unifies in 1870 and so does Italy. Poland gains land from Germany in 1918, Russian Empire breaks up, the separate kingdoms of Turk-Ottoman Empire become separate states, unify as Yugoslavia and separate again. Turkey is created, Austro Hungary amalgamate and separate. Stalin reoccupies former Russian empire, then separate again.
It could be argued that the current Imperialism in Europe is the EU that mainly benefits Germany and France and that the expansion of the EU has created greater wealth in these two countries.

歐洲的地圖隨著時(shí)間的推移發(fā)生了巨大的變化。
凱爾特不列顛，英格蘭的王權(quán)，諾曼的征服，統(tǒng)一英格蘭，占領(lǐng)威爾士，然后是愛(ài)爾蘭，最后是蘇格蘭的臣服，然后是愛(ài)爾蘭的獨(dú)立，在1922年建立了現(xiàn)在的英國(guó)。
這還只是一個(gè)島國(guó)上面的演義。類(lèi)似的還有西班牙的統(tǒng)一，法國(guó)與德國(guó)邊界的改變，比利時(shí)的獨(dú)立。尼德蘭從西班牙的獨(dú)立。斯堪的納維亞半島不斷改變的主控國(guó)。德國(guó)在1870年統(tǒng)一，意大利也是如此。波蘭在1918年從德國(guó)獲得土地，俄羅斯帝國(guó)解體，從土耳其-奧斯曼帝國(guó)的獨(dú)立出來(lái)的王國(guó)成為獨(dú)立的國(guó)家，統(tǒng)一為南斯拉夫，然后再次分離。土耳其成立，奧匈帝國(guó)的合并和分離。斯大林治下重新占領(lǐng)前俄羅斯帝國(guó)領(lǐng)土，然后再次分離。
可以說(shuō)，目前歐洲的帝國(guó)主義是歐盟，它主要有利于德國(guó)和法國(guó)，歐盟的擴(kuò)張為這兩個(gè)國(guó)家創(chuàng)造了更大的財(cái)富。

James Quantrill
, former History Teacher
Although European nations have a common heritage of Western civilization their ethnic and national divisions ran and run deep.
For example France and England, perhaps, should have been united, given that the Normans came from France before taking over England. Instead there was a long period of warfare over the French possessions of the English (although now of Norman descent) kings. Gradually the conflict became a nationalistic one as well as a dynastic one. The English kings even eventually came to speak English rather than French.
There were, over the centuries various balances of power. Sometimes someone would try to overthrow that balance; Napoleon is a good example, and later, Hitler. Britain played a role in ensuring such a thing did not happen as it was felt not to be in its interest.
Despite the separate nations a number of European powers were strong enough to expand outwardly. Sometimes this led to more wars with European rivals and sometimes it was a safety valve.

盡管歐洲國(guó)家擁有西方文明的共同遺產(chǎn)，但他們的民族和國(guó)家分裂卻一直在進(jìn)行，而且根深蒂固。
例如，鑒于諾曼人在占領(lǐng)英格蘭之前來(lái)自法國(guó)，法國(guó)和英格蘭也許應(yīng)該統(tǒng)一。然而相反，為了爭(zhēng)奪英國(guó)（雖然現(xiàn)在是諾曼人的后裔）國(guó)王在法國(guó)的屬地，雙方發(fā)生了長(zhǎng)期的戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)。漸漸地，沖突變成了民族主義的沖突，也變成了王朝的沖突。英國(guó)國(guó)王甚至最終開(kāi)始講英語(yǔ)而不是法語(yǔ)。
幾個(gè)世紀(jì)以來(lái)，出現(xiàn)了各種權(quán)力的平衡。有時(shí)有人會(huì)試圖推翻這種平衡；拿破侖就是一個(gè)很好的例子，后來(lái)還有希特勒。英國(guó)在確保這種事情不會(huì)發(fā)生方面發(fā)揮了作用，因?yàn)榻y(tǒng)一的歐洲被認(rèn)為不符合其利益。
盡管有著許多不同的國(guó)家。一些歐洲大國(guó)還是強(qiáng)大到足以向外擴(kuò)張。有時(shí)這導(dǎo)致了與歐洲對(duì)手的更多戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)，有時(shí)則是一個(gè)安全閥。

John Flynn
, lives in Belfast Born and International Traveler.
The Imperialism is now long gone so the statement depends on your definition of ‘successful’ as ultimately empires failed.
European powers after a long time of trying to conquer each other with varying degrees of success and such successes for variable periods of time (short occupation to very long periods) eventually decided on the European unx and have for the most part united their interests while preserving their respective cultures and sovereignties.

帝國(guó)主義現(xiàn)在早已不復(fù)存在，所以這種說(shuō)法取決于你對(duì)"成功"的定義，因?yàn)樽罱K帝國(guó)都會(huì)失落。
歐洲列強(qiáng)經(jīng)過(guò)長(zhǎng)時(shí)間的相互征服，取得了不同程度的成功，而且這種成功的時(shí)間不一（從短期占領(lǐng)到非常長(zhǎng)的時(shí)間），最終決定成立歐盟，并在大多數(shù)情況下將其利益統(tǒng)一起來(lái)，同時(shí)保留了各自的文化和主權(quán)。

David Paul Evans
, A passion for British and military history
I'm not entirely sure the premise of the question is true. If you look at the current borders of Europe, there are only a handful of countries that weren't either smaller states that United into larger ones (e.g. Germany, Italy), or countries that were part of larger Empires, or both, and often for long periods. For example pretty much all of Eastern Europe was part of the Austro-Hungarian, Russian or Ottoman empires until WW1. Only in the west was the map of Europe in the late 19th century (height of imperialism) closer to today's borders, but overall there were less than half the number of European countries there are today. So intra-European imperialism peaked at roughly the same time as extra-European imperialism.

我不完全確定這個(gè)問(wèn)題的前提是正確的。如果你看一下歐洲目前的邊界，只有少數(shù)幾個(gè)國(guó)家不是由較小的國(guó)家合并成的較大的國(guó)家（像德國(guó)、意大利那樣），或者之前曾屬于較大帝國(guó)的一部分，或者兩者都是，而且往往是長(zhǎng)期的。例如，幾乎所有的東歐國(guó)家在一戰(zhàn)前都是奧匈帝國(guó)、俄羅斯帝國(guó)或奧斯曼帝國(guó)的一部分。只有西部地區(qū)在19世紀(jì)末（帝國(guó)主義的鼎盛時(shí)期）的歐洲地圖更接近于今天的邊界，但總體而言，當(dāng)時(shí)歐洲國(guó)家的數(shù)量還不到今天的一半。因此，歐洲對(duì)內(nèi)的帝國(guó)主義與歐洲對(duì)外的帝國(guó)主義大致在同一時(shí)間達(dá)到頂峰。

Jeff Swann
, Manager (2013-present)
In Spain, the Spanish crown united several different kingdoms on the Iberian peninsula over the course of several centuries.
Several hundred fractious German principalities were united in the German empire during the 19th century.
The Italian principalities formed into a national state in the 19th century.
France even had a similar period of national integration in the early 19th century where they got rid of all traditional feudal divisions of the kingdom and created new units of national administration, encouraged everyone in France that spoke a dialect to learn French, etc.
In a sense, all four of these powers did unify themselves.

在西班牙，西班牙王室在幾個(gè)世紀(jì)的時(shí)間里統(tǒng)一了伊比利亞半島的幾個(gè)不同的王國(guó)。
在19世紀(jì)，幾百個(gè)分裂的德意志公國(guó)被統(tǒng)一為德意志帝國(guó)。
意大利各公國(guó)在19世紀(jì)形成了一個(gè)民族國(guó)家。
法國(guó)甚至在19世紀(jì)初也有過(guò)類(lèi)似的民族融合時(shí)期，他們擺脫了所有傳統(tǒng)的封建王國(guó)的劃分，建立了新的國(guó)家行政單位，鼓勵(lì)法國(guó)所有講方言的人學(xué)習(xí)法語(yǔ)，等等。
從某種意義上說(shuō)，這四個(gè)大國(guó)的確都統(tǒng)一了自己。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

David Meagher
, BS Political Science, The University of Tennessee (1981)
Usually when one power has a better military technology it can take over a lesser equipped military power. But the European powers shared mostly the same technology. For a brief time, the Mongols had better military technology and swept European powers before them. But when opposing powers share the same technology, its hard to cleanly win.

通常情況下，當(dāng)一個(gè)大國(guó)擁有更好的軍事技術(shù)時(shí)，它可以接管一個(gè)裝備較差的軍事大國(guó)。但歐洲列強(qiáng)大多共享相同的技術(shù)。在一個(gè)短暫的時(shí)期內(nèi)，蒙古人擁有更好的軍事技術(shù)，于是橫掃了他們面前的歐洲列強(qiáng)。但當(dāng)對(duì)立的大國(guó)共享相同的技術(shù)時(shí)，就很難干凈利落地取得勝利。