Question

read this passage from chapter 5 of the prince.
there are, for example, the spartans and the
romans. the spartans held athens and thebes,
establishing there an oligarchy: nevertheless they lost
them. the romans, in order to hold capua, carthage,
and numantia, dismantled them, and did not lose
them. they wished to hold greece as the spartans
held it, making it free and permitting its laws, and did
not succeed. so to hold it they were compelled to
dismantle many cities in the country, for in truth there
is no safe way to retain them otherwise than by ruining
them. and he who becomes master of a city
accustomed to freedom and does not destroy it, may
expect to be destroyed by it, for in rebellion it has
always the watchword of liberty and its ancient
privileges as a rallying point, which neither time nor
benefits will ever cause it to forget. and whatever you
may do or provide against, they never forget that
what is machiavelli’s primary purpose in writing this
passage?
○ to inform readers about the history of rome and
sparta and how they built their empires
○ to inform readers about the fates of the cities
conquered by the spartans and the romans
○ to persuade readers that a conquering prince must
destroy a former republic if he hopes to hold it
○ to persuade readers that a republic will remember
freedom and someday rebel against a conqueror

Explanation:

The passage uses historical examples (Spartans losing Athens/Thebes, Romans keeping conquered cities by dismantling them) to argue a practical rule for rulers. It concludes that destroying a formerly free city is the only safe way to retain control, which is a persuasive directive for conquering princes, not just a historical account.

Answer:

to persuade readers that a conquering prince must destroy a former republic if he hopes to hold it