《君主论·第二十一章·君主如何博得尊崇》第6节
“Guilds or societies,” “in arti o in tribu.” “Arti” were craft or trade guilds, cf. Florio: “Arte . . . a whole company of any trade in any city or corporation town.” The guilds of Florence are most admirably described by Mr Edgcumbe Staley in his work on the subject (Methuen, 1906). Institutions of a somewhat similar character, called “artel,” exist in Russia to-day, cf. Sir Mackenzie Wallace’s “Russia,” ed. 1905: “The sons . . . were always during the working season members of an artel. In some of the larger towns there are artels of a much more complex kind— permanent associations, possessing large capital, and pecuniarily responsible for the acts of the individual members.” The word “artel,” despite its apparent similarity, has, Mr Aylmer Maude assures me, no connection with “ars” or “arte.” Its root is that of the verb “rotisya,” to bind oneself by an oath; and it is generally admitted to be only another form of “rota,” which now signifies a “regimental company.” In both words the underlying idea is that of a body of men united by an oath. “Tribu” were possibly gentile groups, united by common descent, and included individuals connected by marriage. Perhaps our words “sects” or “clans” would be most appropriate.
注释摘要
这段注释旨在为《君主论》第二十一章末尾那个简短的建议提供社会史与语文学的支撑。马基雅维利告诫君主，要借助节庆与聚会，亲近城中的“行会或社团”，既展示慷慨与亲和，又绝不可减损君主的威严。注释者敏锐地指出，这句平淡的劝诫在意大利原文里用的是“in arti o in tribu”，浓缩了文艺复兴城市独特的社会组织形态，于是用一整段注释来廓清二者的实指。 所谓“…