Craft gilds history and information

7/27/2019 Craft gilds history and information

1/26

'^A^ iiirJ:-

\y> for the protectionof ancient ButlICKAI-T C.ILD,

; P4Pr^J? PF^n nT TNFKvx. W . crNNINGHAM, :>.

'A 7?11 u riiirtccnth A/fiWal MecffhcS,Vi,.V0Vl8 1937 jCN

I[CO mk HU1^ 6476lin CR /-


2/26


3/26

H paperONCRAFT GILDS,

Thk Rkv. \V. dNMNGHAM, D.D.,Ai tkt TkirtefHth Annual Meeting of the Society for the

Protectiom of Ancient Buildings.

Tnerc is, as I understand it, a double object in the workof this Society ; it interests itself in the preservation ofancient buildings, {)artly because they arc monuments whichwhen once destroyed can never be replaced, and whichbear record of the ages in which they were made and themen who reared them ; and in this sense all that survivesfrom the past, good and bad, coarse or refined, has anabiding value. But to some folks there seems to be a cer-tain pedantry in gathering or studying things that areimportant merely because they arc curiosities, a certainfancifulness in the frame of mind which concentiatetattention on the errors of printers, or the sports of nature, orthe rubbish of the past. And much which has been preservedfrom the past is little bolter tiian rubbish, as the poet feltwhen he wrote

:

** Rome disappoints mc much ; I hardly as yet understand, butRubhtshy scrm'4 the worM that most exactly \vor: ci sua it.All \h s, and all i^'s.All \\


4/26

2 Annual Meeting,Still, the view Clougli takes is very superficial ; there is a

real human interest about even the rubbish heaps of thepast if we have knowledge enough to detect it ; the dulnessis in us who fail to recognise the interest which attaches totrifles from the past or to read the evidence they set before us.

But there is another reason why the vestiges of bygonedays claim our interestnot as mere curiosities, but as inthemselves beautiful objects, excellently designed and skil-fully fashioned. There are numberless arts in which themen of the past were adepts ; their skill as builders is patentto all, but specialists are quite as enthusiastic over the workthat was done by mediaoval craftsmen in other departments.Their wood-carving, and working in metals, the purity oftheir dyes, the beauty of their glass, these are things whichmove the admiration of competent critics in the presentday. Machinery may produce more rapidly, more cheaply,more regular work, of more equal quality, and perhaps ofhigher finish, but it is work that has lost the delicacy andgrace of objects that were shaped by human hands and bearthe direct impress of human care, and taste, and fancy. Wemay be interested in the preservation of the relics of the past,not merely as curiosities from bygone ages, but as examplesof beautiful workmanship and skilled manipulation to whichthe craftsmen of the present day cannot attain.

Most Englishmenall those whose opinions are formedby the newspapers they readare so proud of the vastprogress that has been made in the present century, thatthey do not sufficiently attend to the curious fact that thereare many arts that decay and are lost. In this country itapptratd that the art of gUss-making was introduced more


5/26

Dr, Cunningham. 3than once, ind completely died Ottt tgain ; the sane it pro-bably true of cloth dressing and of dyeing. It seenu toroe a very carious problem to examine what were the causeswhich led to the disappearance of these particular indus-tries. In each single case it b probably a very conplicatedproblem to dbtinguish all the factors at workwhat werethe social or economic conditions that destroyed this orthat useful art once introduced ? But into such questions ofdetail I must not attempt to enter now. I wish to directyour attention to-day to a more general question, to anattempt to give a partial explanation, not of failure here andthere, but of conspicuous success. In the thirteenth andfourteenth and fifteenth centuries a very high degree ofskill was attained, not in one art only, but in many. It isat least worth while to look a little more closely at onegroup of the conditions which influenced the work of thetimes, and examine the organisations which were formedfor controlling the training of workmen, for supervising themanner in which they lived, and mainuining a high standardol quality in the goods produced. There is no need toidealise the times when they were formed, or the men whocomposed them ; the very records of craft gilds show thatthe nediseval workman was quite capable of scamping hiswork and getting drunk when opportunity tempted him.But the (act remains that a very great deal of first-ratework was done in many crafts, for portions of it still sur-vive, and I cannot but believe that some of the credit isdue to the gilds which set themselves to rule each craft, sothat the work turned out should be a credit to thoae whomade it.


6/26

Annual McetinL^

Herein, as it seems to nic, lies ihe secret of the import-ance of the craft gilds during the period of their usefulactivity. They were managed on the principle that honourable thing was convenable ; that honesty wasthe best policy ; the good of the trade meant its high repu-tation for sound work at fair prices. It has got anothermeaning to our ears ; a time when trade is good means atime when it is more possible than usual to sell any sortof goods at high prices, and the craft gilds in their laterdays were contaminated by this lower view of industry.The ancient anecdote of the Edinburgh glazier who wascaught breaking the windows of peaceful inhabitants for**the good of the trade, may illustrate the modern senseof the phrase, while the conduct of the stalwart citizen

who thrashed him within an inch of his life, and said atevery blow it's all for the good of the trade, was incloser accord with the disciplinary character of mediaevalrules.

I trust I have said enough to justify my selection of thistopic as one which is not unfitting the attention of thissociety ; the subject is a very wide one, and I think thetreatment may be somewhat less diffuse if I draw most ofmy illustrations from a single centre of industry, and speakchiefly of the craft gilds of Coventry. It is a town which Ivisited recently, and where, through the kindness of theTown Clerk and Mr. W. G. Fretton, the antiquary, I wasable to make good use of the few hours I had to spendIt may be convenient too, to arrange the matter under thefollowing heads :

I. The introduction of craft gilds.


7/26

Dr, CmmimgkMm. SII. The objects and poven of mtdtmrii craft gilds.III. The resufdution of craft gilds.I. There is a certain amount ofassumptioQ in talking about

the introduction of craft gilds, because it suggests the beliefthat they were not a native development. Tbewoid gild is,after all, a very vague term, much like our word association,and though we can prove the existence of many gildsbefore the Conquest,at Cambridge and Exeter and else-where,their laws contain nothing that would justify us inregarding them as craft gilds. It is much more probable,though Dr. Gross, the greatest living authority on the subject.speaks with considerable reserve, that the hall where themen of Winchester drank their own gild, or the land of theknights' gild at Canterbury, belonged to bodies which hadsome sopervision over the trade of the townin fact, wereearly gilds merchant. But I know of no hint in any ofthe records or histories of the period before the NormanConquest, that can be adduced to show that there were anyMsodadons of craftsmen formed to control particular in-dustries. The earliest information which we get aboutsuch groups of men comes from London, where, as we learn,Henry I. granted a charter to the Weavers. It is prettydetr that by this document some authority was given to theweavers to control the making of cloth (and it possiblyinvolved conditions which affected the import of cloth).It is certain that there was a long continued strugglet>etween the weavers* gild and the dtixens, which came to apeaceful close in the lime of Edward I. There wereweavers' gilds also in a considerable number of other townsin the reign of Henry II. ; Beverley, Marlborough, and


8/26

6 Annual Meeting,Winchester may be mentioned in particular, as the ordinancesof these towns have survived, and there are incidentalreferences which seem to show that the weavers, and thesubsidiary crafts of fullers and dyers had, even in the twelfthcentury, considerable powers of regulating their respectivetrades. The evidence becomes more striking if we arejustified in connecting with it the cases of other towns,where we find that regulations had been enforced withregard to cloth, and that the townsmen were anxious to setthese regulations aside, and buy or sell cloth of anywidth.So far what we find is this ; while we have no evidence

of craft gilds before the Conquest, we find indications of avery large number of gilds among the weavers and the sub-sidiary callings shortly after that date. But there is afurther point ; so far as we can gather, weaving before theConquest was a domestic art ; we have no mention ofweavers as craftsmen ; the art was known, but it waspractised as an employment for women in the house ; butin the time of the Conqueror and of his sons there was aconsiderable immigration of Flemings, several of whomwere particularly skilled in weaving woollen cloth ; theysettled in many towns in different parts of the country, andit seems not unnatural to conclude that weaving as an inde-pendent craft was introduced from the Continent soon afterthe Nornvan Conquest.

Institutions analogous to craft gilds appear to have existedin some of the towns of Northern France time out of mind,and some can apparently trace a more or less shadowy con-nection with the old Roman Collegia. Putting all these


9/26

Dr. Cunningkmi^ 7niittert together, it appeart that cimft orguiitatioo firttfthoirt itielf ID EagUnd in connexion with a trade whichwai probably intro(*uced from abroad ; and it teemt notiropoatible that the Continenial artisans brought not only aknowledge of the art of weaving but certain habiu oforganitttion with them.Some tort of oiganisation was probably necestary for

police and fiscal purposes if for none others. Town life wasa curiously confused chaos of conflicting authority ; inLondon each ward was an independent unit, in Chester andNorwich the intermingling of jurisdictions seems verypusaling. The newcomers were not always welcomed bythe older ratepayers, and they might perhaps find it con-venient to secure a measure of sfatus by obtaining a royalcharter for their gild. Just as the Jews or the Hansardswere in the dty and yet not citizens, but had an inde-pendent footing, so to some extent were the weavers situated,and apparently for similar reasons ; they seem to have hadsia/Ms as weavers, which they held directly from the Kmg.which marked them out from other townsmen, and whichpossibly delayed their complete amalgamation with the otherinhabitants.

There is yet another feature about these weavers' gildsthe business in which they are engaged was one which wasfirom an early time regulated by royal authority. KingRichard I. issued aa assiae of cloth defining the length andbreadth which should be manufactured.* The predte objectof these regulations is not dear ; they may have been made in

Richaid C UoKvdca, aolb SsriM, iv. jj.


10/26

8 Annual Meeting,the interests of the English consumer ; they may have beenmade in the interest of the foreign purchaser, and the reputa-tion of English goods abroad ; they may have been framed inconnexion with a protective policy, of which there are somesigns. But amid much that is uncertain these three thingsseem pretty clear :

1. That there were no craft gilds before the Conquest2. That there were many craft gilds in connexion, with

the newly introduced weavers' craft in the twelfth century.3. That they exercised their powers under royal authority

in a craft which was the subject of royal regulation.So far for weavers ; I wish now to turn to another craft

in which we hear of craft gilds very earlythe Bakers.There is a curious parallelism between these two callings.In the first place baking was, on the whole, a domesticart before the Conquest, not a separate employment ; inthe next place, it was a matter of royal regulation ; theKing's bakers doubtless provided the Court supplies, andthe gave their experience for the framing of the assize ofbread, under Henry II. and under King John.* It may, Ithink, be said thatm both of the trades in which gilds were firstformed, there was felt to be a real need for regulation as tothe quality of the goods sold to the public ; and it alsoappears that this regulation was given under royal authority.So far the fact seems to me to be pretty clear ; and it is atleast more than probable that the form of associationadoptedanalogous as it was to associations already exist-ing on the Continent had come over in the train of the

* Cambridge University Library, Mm i. 27.


11/26

Dr. Cunningham, 9Conqueror. These few remarks may suffice io jostificatiooof the phrase the '* inUoductsoo d craft gilds.

II. In the Utter part of the twelfth and the begiwiiiig ofthe thirteenth century there was a very rapidof mtmicipal life in England, and the borgesiei intowns obtained much Urger powers of self-governmentthan they had previously possessed. They became respon-sible for their own payments to the Exchequer, and theyobtained larger rightsforregulating theirown aflairs; thetownofCoventry had indeed possessed very considemble municipalprivileges from the time of Henry I., but it shared in thegeneral progress a century later, and the new requirementswere nurked by new developments. I have tried to showhow the earlier craft gilds were formed under royal autho-rity, but as the powers of local self-government increasedand were consolidated, there was no need, and there was,perhaps, less opportunity, for direct royal interference inmatters of internal trade. We thus find a new order ofcraft gilds springing up^they were called into being, likethe old ones, for the purpose of regulating tradebut theyexercised theirpowers under municipal, and not under royalauthority.tl One craft gild of this type which still exists, and whichis said to have been formed by the authority of the leet inthe sixth year of King John, is the Bakers' Gild at Coven-try ; it still consisu of men who actually get their living bythis trade, for it does not appear to have received so manylove brothers as to destroy the original character of thebody ; it still has its hallor, at Irast, roomend chestwhere the records are kept.||Therc are. probably not many

A a


12/26

lo Afttiual Mcetittfr,

other bodies in the kingdom that have so long a history, andthat have altered so little from their original character dur-ing all those centuries. None of the other Coventry gilds,so far as I know, can at all compare with it. The weaverswere apowerful body there in later times, but I doubt if there isany evidence of the existence of this and the alliedtrades in Coventry before the fourteenth century; wemay, perhaps, guess that it was one of the places wherethis trade settled under Edward III. But, apart from thequestion of origin, the Bakers have a unique position. Ofsome half-dozen other crafts which still maintain a formalexistence, none can trace their history back beyond the timeof Edward III., their members have no interest in the craftwhich they were empowered to regulate, and a tin box in asolicitor's office is the only outward and visible sign of theirexistence. Such are the Walkers and Fullers, the Shearmenand Weavers, the Fellmongers, the Drapers, the Mercers,and the Clothiers. Of the Tanners I cannot speak sodecidedly, as during a hurried visit to Coventry I had noopportunity of examining their books.

In looking more closely at the powers of mediaeval craftgilds, it is necessary to distinguish a little ; a craft gild wasa gild which had authority to regulate some particular craftin a given area. I do not, therefore, want to dwell on thefeatures which were common to all gilds, and which can betraced m full detail in the admirable volume edited by thelate Mr. Toulmin Smith for the Early English Text Society.I desire to limit consideration to the powers that were specialto craft gilds. Like other gilds they had a religious side, insome cases strongly developed, and the members engaged in


13/26

Dr, CunmniFham, XI

acu ol wonhip, etpecuUy in gooudod prayoi andfor dqMited bfcthreo. Like other gilds they had

the chanu:ter of a friendly society, and gave loans to needybrethren, or bestowed alms on the poor. Like other gilds theyhad their feasts, when the brethren drank their gild, anJ theyhad hoods, or livery, which they wore at their assemblies.Like other gilds they took their share in dvic festivities andprovided pageants at considerable cost ; but all these com*mon bonds, important as they were in cementing men intoa real fellowship, and in calling forth such diflferent interestsand activities among the members, were of a pious, social,or chariuble character. There was no reason why suchaiMciations should not be multiplied on all sides; evenwhen a gild consisted of men who followed the same craftit was not a craft gild. The case of the journeymen uilonin London who assembled at the Black Friars Church maybe taken as conclusive on this point. A gild was not a craftgild unless duly empowered to regulate a particular craftit might be called into existence for this purpose, or anexisting gild might be empowered to exercise such functions,much as the brotherhood of S. Thomas^ Becket was changedinto the Mercers* Company. The important thing about acraft gild was that it had been empowered to exerciseauthority in a given area and over certain workmen, asthe weavers* gilds had been empowered by charterfrom Henry L, and as the bakers were empowered bythe Court Leet at Coventry, in the sixth year of KingJohn.Two poinu were specially kept in view in framing any


14/26

12 Annual Meeting,

goods supplied ; and, second, the due training of men toexecute their work properlyadmirable objects certainly.The machineiy which was organised for attaining theseobjects was also well devised ; the men who were thoroughlyskilled, and were masters in the craft, had the duty of train-ing apprentices, and the wardens had the right of examininggoods exposed for sale, and of making search in houseswhere the trade was being canicd onagain, an excellentarrangement where it could be satisfactorily carried out.And on the whole it seems as if the scheme had workedwell, for this simple reasonthat while it was maintained, somuch work of excellent design and quality was executed.I wish to lay stress on this, because the historian of craftgilds is apt to overlook it. When craft gilds appeared on thestage of history, it was because something was out of gear-ing, and the institution was working badly. One is apt toinfer that since they worked badly whenever we hear ofthem, they also worked badly when we do not ; but I aminclined to interpret the periods of silence differently, andto regard them as times when the organisations were wiselymanaged, and when the craft gilds enjoyed the proverbialhappiness of those who have no history.There were, however, three different dangers of disagree-

ment, and possible quarrel: (i) Between a craft gild on onehand and the municipal authorities on the other; (2)between one craft gild and another ; (3) between differentmembers of a craft gild.

I. It is obvious that the gilds, if they were to exercise anyreal authority, required to have exclusive powers within agivendistrict ; it is also obvious that these exclusive powers


15/26

f^ f^r.unin^kam. 13

might be misused, so as to be mischievoos to theof the goods ; a craft gild might uke adranUge oC itsmooopoly to the gain of the members and the impoverish*tQg of the cttixens. The feeling of the citizens would be thatthe goods supplied by the members of the gild were bad andwere dearat the price. It was therefore of the first importancethat the citizens should be, in the last resort, able to controlthe gild, and resume the privileges which their officers ex-ercised. There is a well-known case, which is detailed inMr. Toulmin Smith's book, which shows how the tailors ofExeter enjoyed a charter from the Crown, and how muchtrouble they gave to the local authorities under Edward IV.;but it was a matter of common complaint that in manyplaces the gilds had charters from great men whichexempted them from proper control.* Even in Coventry,where there does not appear to have been interference fromwithout, it was necessary for the leet to keep a tight handon the ctvSi gilds. An ordinance of 8 Henry V. runs as>llows :~^Also that no man of any craft make laws orother ordinance among them but it be overseen by the

mayor and his council ; and if it be reasonable ordinanceand lawful it shall be affirmed, or else it shall be correctedby the mayor and his peers. t*^ At a later date wehave another entry of the same kind:^*'Also that themayor, warden, and bailiffs, taking to the mayor cighlor twelve of the General Council, to come afore thenthe wardens of all the crafts of the city with their ordin-ances, touching their crafts and their artidea, and the

Rol. FaiL. II. 331* t Ltd Book* L IJ.


16/26

14 Anutial Meeting.

points that be lawful, good, and honest for the city beallowed them, all other thrown aside and had force none,and that they make new ordinances against the laws inoppression of the people, upon pain of imprisonment. Insome other towns the craftsmen had to yield up theirix)wers annually and receive them back again from themunicipal authority ; this was the case with the cordwainersat Exeter,* but the Coventry people did not insist onanything so strict.

2. The difficulties between one craft gild and anothermight arise in various ways ; as time went on or tradedeveloped there was an increasing differentiation of employ-ment, and it was not always clear whether the original gildhad supervision over all branches of the trade. Thus inLondon the weavers' gild claimed to exercise supervision overthe linen as well as over the woollen cloth manufactures, andthis claim was insisted on on the ground that the two tradeswere quite distinct. In Coventry the worsted weavers, thelinen weavers, and the silk weavers were one body, in latertimes at any rate, though the arts cannot be precisely similar.In other cases there was a question as to whether differentprocesses involved in the production of one complete articleshould be reckoned as separate crafts or not Thus theFullers were organised in independence of the Shearmen in1438 ; andduringthefifteenth century thesub-division of gildsappears to have gone very rapidly at Coventry, as there weresomething like twenty-three of them at that time ; at the sametime from the repeated power which is given to the Fullers

Toulmin Smith, ** English Gilds, p. 332.


17/26

Dr. Cunningham. 15

to fonn t fellowihip of their own,* it appears that theyfrom time to time re-abforbed by the parent gild. Perhaps aaeven better illustration of the difficulty of defining the pre-cise proceties which certain gilds might supervise would befound in the history of the leather trades in LondonTanneniCordwainers, Saddlers, and so forth. But enough may havebeen said to show how easy it was for disputes to arise be-tween one or more craft gilds as to their respective powers.

3. There were also disputes within the gilds betweendifferent members.

{a) There was at least some risk of ma 1 vers it ionof funds by the Master of the craft gild ; and strictregulations were laid down by the Fellmongers and Cappersas to the time when the amounts were to be rendered andpassed, but a much greater number of the ordinances dealwith the respective duties of masters and apprentices andmasters and journeymen.

(i) The question of apprenticeship was ot primary impor-tance* as the skill o( the next generation of workmendepended on the manner in which it was enforced. Thereare a good many ordinances of the Coventry Cappers ini5aa No one was to have more than two apprentices at atime, and he was to keep them for seven years, but there wasto be a month of trial before sealing ; nobody was to takeapprentices who bad not sufficient sureties that be wouldperform his covenant. If the apprentice complained thathe had not sufficient *' finding, and the master was in

LMCBook,t 400t Mays, i$4T. QwHedbr Mr. FncIoo, Mcm*ffkb of F^Ukn' GdM. pac* >


18/26

l6 Annual Mcdinff,fault, the apprentice was to be removed on the third com-plaint, and the master was handicapped in getting anotherin his place. Once a year the principal master of the craft wasto go round the city and examine every man's apprentice,and see they were properly taught. The Clothiers, in regu-lations which I believe to be of about the same date, thoughthey are incorporated with rules of a later character, had asystem of allowing the apprentice to be turned over toanother master if his own master had no work, so that hemight not lose his timethis was a system which was muchabused in the eighteenth century : the master was to teachthe apprentice truly, and two apprentices were not to workat the same loom unless one of them had served for fiveyears. No master was to teach any one who was not appren-ticed, and he was to keep the secrets of the craft ; this wasa provision which constantly occurs in the ordinances.Some such exclusive rule was necessary if they were tosecure the thorough competence, in all branches of the art,of the men who lived by it. In the case of the CoventryClothiers there is an exception which is of interest ; themaster might give instruction to persons who were notapprenticed as *' charity to poor and impotent people fortheir better livelihood.

(c) The limitation of the number of apprentices, thoughit was desirable for the training of qualified men, was fre-quently urged in the interests of the journeymen. Therehad been frequent complaint on the part of journeymen thatthe masters overstocked their shops with apprentices, andthat those who had served their time could get no employ-ment from other masters, while they also complained that


19/26

Dr. Ctinningham, 17

unnccesiarj obsUdcf were put in the way of their doingwork on their own tccountOne or two illustrations of these points may be given from

the Coventry crafts ; the Fullers in 1 560 would not allowany jotumeyman to work on his own account. TheClothiers in the beginning of the sixteenth century or-dained that none shall set any journeyman on work till he isfairly parted from his late master, or if he remains in his latemaster's debt ; journeymen were to have ten days' notice, orone cloth to weave before leaving a master ; their wageswere to be paid weekly if they wished it, and they were tomake satisfiurtion for any work they spoiled. Similarly theCappers in 1520 would not allow journeymen to work intheir houses.Some of the most interesting evidence in regard to the

grievances of the journeymen comes from the story of adispute in the weaving trade in the early part of thefifteenth century. '* The said partiesboth masters and** joomeymenon the mediation of their friends, and by*' the mandate and wish of the worshipful Mayor, entered into a final agreement The rules to which they agreedthrow indirect light on the nature of the points in dispute.It was evidently a time when the trade was developingrapidly, and when an employing class of capitalists andclothiers was springing up among the weavers. It wasagreed that any who could use the art freely might have asmany loont, both linen and woollen, in hit cottage, andabo have as many apprentioei at he liked Eveqr cottageror Journeyman who withed to become a matter might do toin paying twenty shillings. Besides this, the Journeymen

i


20/26

l8 Annual Meeting*were allowed to have their own fraternity, but they were topay a shilling a year to the weavers, and a shilling for everymember they admitted.* I On the whole it appears that thejourneymen in this trade obtained a very considerablemeasure of independence, but this was somewhat excep-tional, and on the whole it appears that the grievances anddisabilities under which journeymen laboured had a veryinjurious effect on the trade of many towns, and apparentlyon that of Coventry, during the sixteenth century. There wasa very strong incentive for journeymen to go and set up invillages or outside the areas where craft gilds had juris-diction, and there is abundant evidence t that this sort ofmigration took place on a very large scale. I should l^einclined to lay very great stress on this factor as a principalreason for the decay of craft gilds under Henry VIII., sothat Edward VI. 's Act gave them a death-blow. They nolonger exerted an effective supervision, because in so manycases the trade had migrated to new districts, where therewas no authority to regulate it. \ This is, at any rate, thebest solution I can offer of the remarkable manner in whichcraft gilds disappeared, as effective institutions, about themiddle of the sixteenth century. Their religious side wassufficiently pronounced to bring them within the scope ofthe great Act of Confiscation, by which Edward VI.despoiled the gilds ; but there was an effort made to sparethem then, and I cannot but believe that if they had hadany real vitality a large number would have survived, assome, like the Bakers and Fullers at Coventry, actually did.

' Leet Book, f. 27. f Worcester, 25 H. VIII. c. 18.


21/26

Dr, Cunningham, 19At the tame time it appeart to be tnie that theee cases aresomewhat exceptional and that the craA gilds, as effsdtfeinstitutions for regulating induftrjr, disappeared. Part ofthe evidence for thit opinion comes from Coventry tisdf.for we find that a deliberate and coDsctous effort was madeto resuscitate the gilds in 1584. It is of this resuscitation,involving as it does a previous period of decay, that I nowwish to speak.

III. The disappearance of the craft gilds appears tohave been connected with one of their accidental features,as I may call them their common worship. The attemptedresuscitation at Coventry was due to anotherto the factthat each craft provided a certain amount of pageantry forthe town. I suspect that the so-called ** Mistery plays werethe plays organised by the different misteries orcrafts. TheChester plays, the Coventry plays, and the York plays,* havebeen published, and they present features which force com-parison with the Passion Play which is being given thisyear at Ober Ammergau ; and they were most attractive per-formances. The accounts of the various trading txxiiesshow that these pageants were continued through the six-teenth century ; they were suspended for eight years previousto 1566, and again in 1580 and three following years, whenthe preacher inveighed against the pageants, even though** therewas no Papistry in them ; revived once more in 1 584,they were finally discontinued in 1591.

I have lately seen the originals of the dialogue of theWcftveis* Pageant, with the separate paru writteo out for the

lUently ^dktA by Mki U T. Saith foe Um QaMadoat T. Sharp, **PscnBU*' (1815), ta, 19b aad 19 a.


22/26

20 Annual Meeting,individual actors. During the fifteenth century, these page-ants were performed with much success, and several of thesmaller trades appear to have been united for the purposeof performing some pageant together. In 1566 and in1575 Queen Elizabeth visited Coventry, and the pageantswere performed, and with the view of reviving the diminishedglories of the towns considerable pains were taken to re-organise the old crafts ; thus the Bakers and Smiths joinedin producing a pageant in 1506.* The Fullers appear to havebeen reorganised in 1586, and there was a very distinctrevival of the old corporations about that time. This sameelement, the manner in which the crafts had contributedto the local pageants, was noticeable in connection withthe organisation of the bodies at Norwich ; and I cannot butconnect the resuscitation of some of the Coventry Gildsat this time with the desire to perpetuate these entertain-ments ; certain common lands had been enclosed by the townto bear another part of the expense. Though the interestin the pageants marks the beginning of this revival atCoventry, it yet appears that during the seventeeth cen-tury it continued. There was some general cause atwork connected with the condition of industry whichcalled out a new set of efforts at industrial regulation, butthe power which called these gilds or companies into beingwas no longer merely municipal ; they rely, as in the earliestinstances, on royal or Parliamentary authority. It is by nomeans easy to see what was the precise motive in each case oftheincorporating of new industrial companies in the seventeenth

Fretton, ** Memorials of Bakers' Gild, Mid-England, p. 124.t Sharp, Pageants, 12.


23/26

Dr. Cunningham, 21

centnry. The Colchetier Baymakcn iniroduccd a newtrade* to. periupt. did the Kiddcrmintter Carpet-wcavert,but the movement tt this time tppean to be coooectedwith the fact that industry was becomtog spedallied andlocalised. I am inclined to suspect that the companies ofthe seventeenth century diflfer from the craft gilds of thefifteenth, partly, at least, in this way, that whereas theformer were the local organisations for regulating varioustrades in one town, the latter were the bodies, organised byroyal authority for regulating each industry in that part ofthe country where it could be best pursued. It was at thisdate that the Shcnfield Cutlers were incorporated, andindeed a large number of organisations in diflfercnt towns.Several of the Coventry gilds, noubly the Drapers andt*e Clothiers, were incorporated by royal charters during thethe seventeenth century, and if we turned to a northerntown like Preston, we might be inclined to say that this wasthe real era when associations for industrial regnlatioiiflourished and abounded.It is no part of my purpose to speak of the decay ofthese newly formed or newly resuscitated companies as itoccurred in the eighteenth century. I have endeavouredto indicate the excellent aims which these institutions setbefore them, and the success which attended their eflTorufor a time. At the same time, it is a significant Uxx thatthey (ailed to mainuin themselves as efiective institutions inthe sixteenth century, and when they were resusduted theyfailed to mainuin themselves as useful institutions in theeighteenth. I*artly, as I believe, for good, and partly, aswe here recognise, fur evil, Ixmness habits have so changed


24/26

22 Annual Meeting,that whatever is done for the old objectmaintainingquality and skillmust be done in a new way. The powerwhich we possess of directing and controlling the forces ofnature has altered the position of the ariisan, and madehim a far less important factor in production. The main-tenance of personal skill, the unlimited capacity for workingcertain materials, is no longer of such primary importancefor industrial success as was formerly the case. There isanotherperhaps a greaterdifficulty in the diffusion of awider and more cosmopolitan spirit ; the sympathies of theold brethren for one another were strong, but they wereintensely narrow. No town can be so isolated now, orkindle such intense local attachments as did the cities ofthe Middle Ages. There has been loss enough in thedestruction of these gilds, but we cannot, by looking backupon them, reverse the past or re-create that which has beendestroyed through the growth of the larger life we enjoy to-day. Let us rather remember them as showing what couldbe accomplished in the past, and as pointing towards some-thing we ought to try to accomplish in some new fashionto-day. Whenlwe see that the mediicval workman was aman, not a mere hand ; that in close connexion with hisdaily tasks the whole round of human aspiration could findsatisfaction ; that he was called with others to commonworship, called with others to common feasts and recrea-tions, and encouraged to do his best at his work, we feelhow poor and empty, in comparison, is the life that is ledby the English artisan to-day. But if there is a better andmore wholesome life before the labourer in days to come,if new forms of association are to do the work which was


25/26

Dr. Cmmifigkam. S3done by the gtldt of oldJ we may tnitt that tbotc whooq^anise them will bear in mind not only thebut the failures of the past, and learn to avoid thewhich wrecked craft gilds not once only, but twice


26/26

Documents

Craft gilds history and information