REVENGE is a kind of wild justice; which the more man’ s nature runs to, the more ought law to weed it out. For as for the first wrong, it doth but offend the law; but the revenge of that wrong, putteth the law out of office. Certainly, in taking revenge, a man is but even with his enemy; but in passing it over, he is superior; for it is a prince’s part to pardon.

And Solomon, I am sure, saith, It is the glory of a man, to pass by an offence. That which is past is gone, and irrevocable; and wise men have enough to do, with things present and to come; therefore they do but trifle with themselves, that labor in past matters. There is no man doth a wrong, for the wrong’s sake; but thereby to purchase himself profit, or pleasure, or honor, or the like. Therefore why should I be angry with a man, for loving himself better than me? And if any man should do wrong, merely out of ill-nature, why, yet it is but like the thorn or briar, which prick and scratch, because they can do no other. The most tolerable sort of revenge, is for those wrongs which there is no law to remedy; but then let a man take heed, the revenge be such as there is no law to punish; else a man’s enemy is still before hand, and it is two for one. Some, when they take revenge, are desirous, the party should know, whence it cometh. This is the more generous. For the delight seemeth to be, not so much in doing the hurt, as in making the party repent. But base and crafty cowards, are like the arrow that flieth in the dark. Cosmus, duke of Florence, had a desperate saying against perfidious or neglecting friends, as if those wrongs were unpardonable; You shall read (saith he) that we are commanded to forgive our enemies; but you never read, that we are commanded to forgive our friends. But yet the spirit of Job was in a better tune: Shall we (saith he) take good at God’s hands, and not be content to take evil also? And so of friends in a proportion. This is certain, that a man that studieth revenge, keeps his own wounds green, which otherwise would heal, and do well. Public revenges are for the most part fortunate; as that for the death of Caesar; for the death of Pertinax; for the death of Henry the Third of France; and many more. But in private revenges, it is not so. Nay rather, vindictive persons live the life of witches; who, as they are mischievous, so end they infortunate.

復仇乃一種原始的公道，人之天性越是愛討這種公道，法律就越是應該將其鏟除；因為首先犯罪者只是觸犯了法律，而對該罪犯以牙還牙則使法律失去了效用。無可否認，若一個人對其仇敵施加報復，那他與被報復者不過是半斤八兩；而若是他不念舊惡，寬大為懷，那他就比對手高出一等，因高抬貴手乃貴人之舉。

筆者確信，所羅門曾言：“寬恕他人之過失乃寬恕者之榮耀。”過去的已經(jīng)過去，且一去不返，而聰明人總是努力著眼于現(xiàn)在和將來的事情，所以對過去耿耿于懷著無非是在捉弄自己罷了。世間并無為作惡而作惡之人，作惡者之所以作惡皆為要獲得名利享樂或諸如此類的東西。既然如此，我為何要因人愛己勝過愛我而對其發(fā)怒呢？而且即便有人純?nèi)皇浅鲇趷盒远鲪海且膊贿^像荊棘藜枯一般，刺扎戳鉤皆因其沒別的本事。最可原諒的一類報復是針對那些沒有法律懲治的罪行而施行的報復，但此時報復者須當心，得讓自己的報復行為也因沒法懲治而逍遙法外，不然報復者的仇敵依然占便宜，因為受傷害的比例是二比一。有人復仇時想要仇敵知曉這復仇來自何方。這樣復仇更為雍容大度，因為更痛快的報仇似乎不在于使仇敵皮肉受到傷害，而是要讓其悔不當初；不過卑怯而狡猾的懦夫則往往想要暗中施放的冷箭。佛羅倫薩大公科西莫①曾用極其強烈的言辭譴責朋友的背信棄義或忘恩負義，他似乎認為這類惡行不可饒恕。他說，你可以在《圣經(jīng)》里讀到基督要我們寬恕仇敵的教誨，但你絕不會讀到要我們寬恕朋友的訓喻。但迄今為止還是約伯的精神高一格調(diào)，他說：“我們怎能只喜歡上帝賜福而抱怨上帝降禍呢？”將此例推及朋友，亦有此問。毋庸置疑，念念不忘復仇者只會使自己的創(chuàng)傷新鮮如初，而那創(chuàng)傷本來是可以愈合的。報公仇多半會為復仇者帶來幸運，如為消撒大帝之死而復仇，為佩爾蒂納之死而復仇，以及為法王亨利三世之死而復仇等等。但報私仇卻不會有這般幸運；與此相反，欲報私仇者過的是巫師一般的生活，他們活著時于人有害，死去則可嘆可悲。