A STEAM-ENGINE moves. The question is asked, How is it moved? —
蒸汽机运动起来了。问题是，它是怎么动的？ —

A peasant answers, It is the devil moving it. —
一个农民回答道，是魔鬼在推动它。 —

Another man says, The steam-engine moves because the wheels are going round. —
另一个人说，蒸汽机是因为车轮在转动而运动的。 —

A third maintains that the cause of the motion is to be found in the smoke floated from it by the wind.
一个第三个人坚持认为运动的原因是被风吹动的烟雾。

The peasant’s contention is irrefutable. To refute him some one must prove to him that there is no devil, or another peasant must explain that it is not a devil, but a German who moves the steamer. —
农民的观点是无可辩驳的。要驳斥他，就必须向他证明魔鬼不存在，或者另一个农民必须解释说那不是魔鬼，而是一个德国人在推动蒸汽机。 —

Then from their contradictory views they see that both are wrong. —
然后从他们相互矛盾的观点中，他们看到两者都是错误的。 —

But the man who says the cause is the movement of the wheels refutes himself, seeing that having once entered on the path of analysis, he ought to proceed further and further along it; —
但是说车轮运动是原因的人反驳了自己，因为一旦进入分析的路径，他应该越走越远； —

he ought to explain the cause of the wheels moving. —
他应该解释车轮运动的原因。 —

And he has not to stop in his search for a cause till he finds the ultimate cause of the movement of the steam-engine in the steam compressed in the boiler. —
他在寻找原因时不得停下，直到找到蒸汽机运动的最终原因，即锅炉中压缩的蒸汽。 —

As for the man who explained the movement of the steam-engine as due to the smoke being blown back from it, he has simply noticed that the wheel explanation was insufficient, and pitching on the first accompanying symptom, gave that out as his cause.
至于将蒸汽机运动解释为烟雾被吹回的那个人，他只是注意到车轮解释是不够的，然后选择了第一个相关症状作为他的原因。

The only conception which can explain the movement of the steamer is the conception of a force equal to the movement that is seen.
唯一能解释蒸汽机运动的观念是与所见的运动相等的力量的观念。

The only conception by means of which the movements of nations can be explained is a conception of a force equal to the whole movement of the nations.
唯一能解释国家运动的观念是与整个国家运动相等的力量的观念。

Yet under this conception there are included by various historians forces of the most various kinds, and all unequal to the movement that is seen. —
然而，在这个观念下，不同历史学家包括各种各样的力量，都不能与所见的运动相等。 —

Some see in it a force directly pertaining to heroes, as the peasant sees the devil in the steam-engine. —
有些人认为这是与英雄直接相关的力量，就像农民认为蒸汽机里有魔鬼。 —

Others, a force resulting from several other forces, like the movement of the wheels; —
其他人认为这是由几种其他力量的结果，就像车轮的运动。 —

a third class, intellectual influence, like the smoke.
第三类，智力影响力，就像烟雾一样。

So long as histories are written of individual persons—whether they are C? —
只要还有人们写个体的历史——不论是卡萨尔还是亚历山大，或者是路德还是伏尔泰——而不是所有参与事件的人的历史，就不可能在没有对人们驱使活动朝着一个目标的力量的概念的情况下描述人类的运动。 —

sars and Alexanders, or Luthers and Voltaires—and not the history of all, without one exception, all the people taking part in an event, there is no possibility of describing the movement of humanity without a conception of a force impelling men to direct their activity to one end. —
而历史学家所熟悉的唯一这种概念就是权力。 —

And the only conception of this kind familiar to historians is power.
这种概念是目前阐释历史材料时唯一可以操作的工具；

This conception is the sole handle by means of which the material of history, as at present expounded, can be dealt with; —
而那些像巴克尔那样摒弃这一工具而没有发现与历史材料处理的其他方法的历史学家只是在抛弃处理历史的最后机会。 —

and the historian who should, like Buckle, break off this handle, without discovering any other means of dealing with historical material, would only be depriving himself of the last chance of dealing with it. —
历史学家为了解释历史现象而不可避免地诉诸权力这一事实，在描述人类普世历史和文化史的著作中表现得最为明显。 —

The necessity of the conception of the exercise of power to explain the phenomena of history is most strikingly shown by the very writers of universal history and the history of culture, who, after professedly rejecting the conception of power, inevitably resort to it at every step.
就人类问题来说，历史科学一直像是流通中的货币——纸币和金属币。

Historical science in relation to the questions of humanity has hitherto been like money in circulation—paper notes and metal coins. —
各个民族的历史回忆录和历史都像是纸币。 —

The historical memoirs and histories of separate peoples are like paper money. —
这些纸币可以流通并被接受，发挥作用而不对任何人造成伤害，甚至还可能有用，只要不出现他们的价值的问题。 —

They may pass and be accepted, doing their part without mischief to any one, and even being useful, so long as no question arises as to their value. —
只要忘记英雄意志如何产生事件这个问题，缇耶尔的历史将变得有趣、有教育意义，而且不乏一定的诗意。 —

One has only to forget the question how the will of heroes produces events, and Thiers’s histories will be interesting, instructive, and will, moreover, not be devoid of a certain poetry. —
一直以来，历史科学对人类问题的探讨就像流通中的货币——纸币和金属币，而那些宣称抛弃了权力这一概念的普世历史和文化史的著作在每一步上都不可避免地回到了这一概念。 —

But just as a doubt of the stability of paper money arises, either because from the ease of making it, too much is put into circulation, or because of a desire to replace it by gold, so a doubt of the real value of history of this kind arises either because too many such histories appear, or because some one in the simplicity of his heart asks: —
但是，正如对纸币稳定性的怀疑一样，要么是因为它容易制造，导致过多投放流通，要么是因为希望用黄金取而代之，对这种历史价值的怀疑也会产生，要么是因为出现了太多这样的历史，要么是因为有人在心灵的纯洁中问道： —

By what force did Napoleon do that?—that is, wishes to change the current paper for the pure gold of a true conception.
拿破仑是靠什么力量做到那一切的？也就是说，希望将当前的纸币换成纯粹的真实构想的黄金。

The writers of general history and the history of culture are like men who, recognising the inconvenience of paper money, should decide to make instead of paper notes, jingling coin of metal not of the density of gold. —
总历史和文化历史的撰稿人好比认识到纸币的不便之处后，决定制作出代替纸币的、金属而非金子密度的当当的金币。 —

And such coin would be jingling coin, and only jingling coin. —
而这样的金币将只是金属当当的金币，只不过是现成的当当金币。 —

A paper note might deceive the ignorant; but coin not of precious metal could deceive no one. —
纸币可以欺骗无知者，但是非贵金属金币不会骗到任何人。 —

Just as gold is only gold when it is of value, not only for exchange, but also for use, so the writers of universal history will only prove themselves of real value when they are able to answer the essential question of history: —
正如黄金只有在有价值的情况下才是黄金，既用于交换，也用于使用，所以普遍历史的作者只有在能够回答历史的本质问题时才能证明自己具有真正的价值： —

What is power? These historians give contradictory answers to this question, while the historians of culture altogether evade it, answering something quite different. —
权力是什么？这些历史学家对这个问题给出了矛盾的答案，而文化历史学家则完全回避了这个问题，回答了完全不同的问题。 —

And as counters in imitation of gold can only be used in a community of persons who agree to accept them for gold, or who are ignorant of the true character of gold, so do the historians who do not answer the essential questions of humanity serve for some objects of their own as current coin at the universities and with that crowd of readers—fond of serious reading, as they call it.
正如只有在同意接受它们作为黄金或者对黄金的真实性一无所知的一群人身上，以金属制造的仿金当当仅能在这些人共同使用的情况下才能使用，那些没有回答人类根本问题的历史学家只能作为一种通行的金币在大学和那些喜欢严肃阅读的读者中服务。