Editing Guild (section)

== Women in guilds ==

=== Medieval period ===
Women's participation within medieval guilds was complex and varied. On one hand, guild membership allowed women to participate in the economy that provided social privilege and community. On the other hand, most trade and craft guilds were male-dominated and frequently limited women's rights if they were members, or did not allow membership at all. The most common way women obtained guild membership was through marriage.<ref name="kowaleski">Kowaleski, Maryanne, and Judith M. Bennett. "Crafts, Gilds, and Women in the Middle Ages: Fifty Years after Marian K. Dale." Signs, vol. 14, no. 2, 1989, pp. 474–501. {{JSTOR|3174558}}. Accessed 29 Nov. 2023.</ref> Usually only the widows and daughters of known masters were allowed in. Even if a woman entered a guild, she was excluded from guild offices. While this was the overarching practice, there were guilds and professions that did allow women's participation, and the medieval era was an ever-changing, mutable society—especially considering that it spanned hundreds of years and many different cultures. There were multiple accounts of women's participation in guilds in England and the Continent. In a study of London [[silkwoman|silkwomen]] of the 15th century by Marian K. Dale, she notes that medieval women could inherit property, belong to guilds, manage estates, and run the family business if widowed. The ''Livre des métiers de Paris (Book of Trades of Paris)'' was compiled by [[Étienne Boileau]], the Grand Provost of Paris under King [[Louis IX of France|Louis IX]]. It documents that 5 out of 110 Parisian guilds were female monopolies, and that only a few guilds systematically excluded women. Boileau notes that some professions were also open to women: surgeons, glass-blowers, chain-mail forgers. Entertainment guilds also had a significant number of women members. [[John, Duke of Berry]] documents payments to female musicians from Le Puy, Lyons, and Paris.<ref name="guildswomen" /> In [[Rouen]] women had participated as full-fledged masters in 7 of the city's 112 guilds since the 13th century.<ref name="hafter" /> There were still many restrictions. Medieval Parisian guilds did not offer women independent control of their work.<ref name="Crowston" />

Women did have problems with entering healers' guilds, as opposed to their relative freedom in trade or craft guilds. Their status in healers' guilds were often challenged. The idea that medicine should only be practiced by men was supported by some religious and secular authorities at the time. It is believed that the Inquisition and witch hunts throughout the ages contributed to the lack of women in medical guilds.<ref name="guildswomen">"GUILDS, WOMEN IN" in "Women in the Middle Ages", Greenwood Press 2004, pp. 384-85</ref>

In medieval [[Cologne]] there were three guilds that were composed almost entirely of women, the yarn-spinners, gold-spinners, and silk-weavers. Men could join these guilds, but were almost exclusively married to guildswomen. This was a required regulation of the yarn-spinners guild. The guildswomen of the gold-spinners guild were often wives of guildsmen of the gold-smiths.<ref name="pia">Pia, M. "The Industrial Position of Woman in the Middle Ages." The Catholic Historical Review, vol. 10, no. 4, 1925, pp. 556–60. {{JSTOR|25012124}}. Accessed 25 Nov. 2023.</ref> This type of unity between husband and wife was seen in women's guild participation through the medieval and early modern periods; in order to avoid unpleasant litigation or legal situations, the trades of husband and wife often were the same or complementary.<ref name="loats" /> Women were not restricted to solely textile guilds in medieval Cologne, and neither did they have total freedom in all textile guilds. They had limited participation in the guilds of dyers, cotton-weavers, and guilds in the leather industry. They did enjoy full rights in some wood-working guilds, the guilds of coopers and turners. Women also seemed to have extensively engaged in the fish trade, both within and outside of the guild. The butcher and cattle-trade guilds also listed women among their ranks. In practically all of these guilds, a widow was allowed to continue her husband's business. If she remarried to a man who was not a member, she usually lost that right.<ref name="pia" />

The historian [[Alice Clark (historian)|Alice Clark]] published a study in 1919 on women's participation in guilds during the medieval period. She argued that the guild system empowered women to participate in family businesses. This viewpoint, among others of Clark's, has been criticized by fellow historians, and has sparked debate in scholarly circles. Clark's analysis of the period is that things change during the early modern period, specifically the 17th century, and become more stifling for women in guilds. She also posits that domestic life drove women out of guild participation.<ref name="Crowston">Crowston, Clare. "Women, Gender, and Guilds in Early Modern Europe: An Overview of Recent Research." International Review of Social History, vol. 53, 2008, pp. 19–44. {{JSTOR|26405466}}. Accessed 19 Nov. 2023.</ref>

=== Early modern period ===

==== Decline thesis ====
Many historians have done research into the dwindling women's participation in guilds. Studies have provided a contradictory picture. Recent historical research is usually posed in rebuttal to Alice Clark's study on the economic marginalization of women in the 17th c., and has highlighted that domestic life did not organize women's economic activities. The research has documented women's extensive participation in market relations, craft production, and paid labor in the early modern period.<ref name="coffin" /> Clare Crowston posits that women gained more control of their own work. In the 16th and 17th centuries, rather than losing control, female linen drapers and hemp merchants established independent guilds. In the late 17th century and onward, there was evidence of growing economic opportunities for women. Seamstresses in Paris and Rouen and flower sellers in Paris acquired their own guilds in 1675. In [[Dijon]], the number of female artisans recorded in tax rolls rose substantially between the years of 1643 and 1750. In 18th c. [[Nantes]], there was a significant growth in women's access to guilds, with no restrictions on their rights.<ref name="Crowston" />

Historian Merry Wiesner attributed a decline in women's labor in south German cities from the 16th-18th centuries to both economic and cultural factors; as trades became more specialized, women's domestic responsibilities hindered them from entering the workforce. German guilds started to further regulate women's participation at this time, limiting the privileges of wives, widows, and daughters. It also forbade masters from hiring women. Crowston notes that the decline thesis has been reaffirmed in the German context by Wiesner and Ogilvie, but that it does not work in looking at the matter from a larger scope, as her expertise is in French history.<ref name="Crowston" />

==== Independent female guilds ====
There were exclusively female guilds that came out of the woodwork in the 17th century, primarily [[Paris]], [[Rouen]], and [[Cologne]]. In 1675, Parisian seamstresses requested the guild as their trade was organized and profitable enough to support incorporation.<ref name="Crowston" /> Some of the guilds in Cologne had been made up almost entirely of women since the medieval period.<ref name="pia" />

=== Women's guild activity ===
Early modern Rouen was an important center of guildswomen's activity. By 1775, there were about 700 female masters, accounting for 10% of all guild masters in the city. A survey that circulated in the late 18th century listed that the Rouen ribbonmakers had 149 masters, mistresses, and widows, indicating its mixed gendered composition. A tax roll of 1775 indicated that their total membership was about 160, with 58 men, 17 widows, 55 wives, and 30 unmarried women.<ref name="hafter">Hafter, Daryl M. "Female Masters in the Ribbonmaking Guild of Eighteenth-Century Rouen." French Historical Studies, vol. 20, no. 1, 1997, pp. 1–14. JSTOR, {{doi|10.2307/286795}}. Accessed 19 Nov. 2023.</ref>

Historians have noted the essential contributions that women made to these guilds. Many scholars have asserted that it would have been impossible for male merchants and craftsmen to start a business, let alone run it, without the help of their wives.<ref name="hafter" />

The oldest women's guild in Paris dealt in linens, including household linens, layettes for babies, and undergarments. There seemed to be a major wealth disparity among its members. The linen workers whose sheds were at the center of [[Les Halles]] caused the guild some trouble. There was a perception that these workers also trafficked in sex as well as linens, which made the guild emphatic about its own morality. On the other end of the social divide, the linen trade was a respectable occupation for married and single women of high social standing.<ref name="coffin">Coffin, Judith G. "Gender and the Guild Order: The Garment Trades in Eighteenth-Century Paris". The Journal of Economic History, vol. 54, no. 4, 1994, pp. 768–93. {{JSTOR|2123610}}. Accessed 21 Nov. 2023.</ref>

In France, special provisions had to be made in order to assure that woman could move relatively freely in the textile guilds of Paris and Rouen. They used a special legal formula, the privilege of the ''marchande publique''. This legal device made certain that a woman had the right to participate on her own behalf in the economy, and thus did not require references to her husband's resources or possible involvement. If a woman did not join a guild first, she was required to obtain her husband's permission in order to receive the status of ''marchande publique''. If she did join a guild, the status was conferred automatically. The privilege of ''marchande publique'' allowed a woman to participate in business as a legal adult, sign contracts, go to court, and borrow money.<ref name="hafter" />

In [[Amsterdam]], seamstresses acquired an independent guild in 1579. In several other cities of the [[Netherlands]], they obtained subordinate positions in the tailors' guilds during the late 17th and 18th centuries.<ref name="Crowston" />

Frenchwomen provided vocational training to apprentices. In apprenticeship contracts the names and trades of spouses would both appear.<ref name="loats">Loats, Carol L. "Gender, Guilds, and Work Identity: Perspectives from Sixteenth-Century Paris." French Historical Studies, vol. 20, no. 1, 1997, pp. 15–30. JSTOR, {{doi|10.2307/286796}}. Accessed 25 Nov. 2023.</ref> The trades were usually the same or closely related.<ref name="sewell">Sewell, William H. "Social and Cultural Perspectives on Women’s Work: Comment on Loats, Hafter, and DeGroat". French Historical Studies, vol. 20, no. 1, 1997, pp. 49–54. JSTOR, {{doi|10.2307/286798}}. Accessed 26 Nov. 2023.</ref> In earlier research, lack of contracts led scholars to believe that women and girls never received official training, and instead learned their trade at home. This was debunked with Clare Crowston's research on parish schools in France. Instead of apprenticeships, girls could receive an alternative form of vocational training from these schools. Students entered at around eight for two years of education, and were segregated by gender. Boys studied primarily religion, reading, writing, and mathematics; girls learned many of the same topics as well, but a significant portion was devoted to learning needlework. These schools were intended to enrich the vocational training that girls learned, so that they could go on and earn a living. According to Crowston, the most important religious community that offered such training were the Filles de Saint-Agnès, which offered instruction in four trades: linen work, embroidery, lace, and tapestry-making. The school provided all of the tools necessary for girls to learn, and also allowed students to choose which best suited them. Although this was far different than the model of apprenticeship practiced by guilds, the sisters referred to their students as apprentices.<ref name="Crowston" />

In July 1706, a group of women, members of the Parisian wigmakers, went to Versailles in order to petition [[Louis XIV]] to remove a stifling tax that had been levied on wigs that same year. The tax was removed in mid-July 1706 although historians do not believe that the guildswomen were the sole reason as to why.<ref name="gayne" />

==== Division of labor ====
When French seamstresses attained guild privileges in 1675, their corporate privilege extended to clothing for women and children. When they entered guilds, seamstresses in Paris, Rouen, and [[Aix-en-Provence]] acquired the right to make articles of clothing for women and children, but not for men or boys over age eight. This division reappeared in every French city where seamstresses entered guilds.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Crowston |first1=Clare |title=Fabricating women: the seamstresses of Old Regime France, 1675-1791 |date=2001 |publisher=Duke University Press |pages=2–3 }}</ref>

==== Underground business ====
Due to the political, legislative, and social power of many guilds during the medieval and early modern periods, any economic activity that encroached on guild purview was considered criminal activity. The black market was used to get around regulations set by the guild for membership, for the goods they produced, and to circumvent expensive fees and taxes that may be imposed by governments. Illegal work did not pass unnoticed by authorities at the time, and are documented by police reports and guild complaints. Guild officers were able to arrest people who were working in the trade without guild credentials, and could use municipal law enforcement to aid them in the arrest. Guilds often did take people to court for illegal work. In 18th c. [[Lyon]], about half of the defendants were men, and half were women. Daryl Hafter notes that many of the female defendants were practicing trades where they were either completely barred from guild membership, or had austere restrictions within the guild. As joining a guild was expensive, this explains why poorer men would turn to illicit craft.<ref name="hafter2">HAFTER, DARYL M. "Women in the Underground Business of Eighteenth-Century Lyon." Enterprise & Society, vol. 2, no. 1, 2001, pp. 11–40. {{JSTOR|23699806}}. Accessed 2 Dec. 2023.</ref> Clandestine artisans were seen as a severe encroachment on guild rights, liberties, and exclusivity. Many guilds feared that this would affect economic stability.<ref name="hoffman" />

In [[Paris]], the Barber-Wigmaker & Bath Provider Guild struggled against illicit wigmaking and styling. In this case, illicit wigmaking flourished in order to circumvent the expensive wig tax. Women and girls could enter this guild. Illicit wigmakers operated throughout the 18th c., and made continuous contributions to the industry.<ref name="gayne">Gayne, Mary K. "Illicit Wigmaking in Eighteenth-Century Paris". Eighteenth-Century Studies, vol. 38, no. 1, 2004, pp. 119–37. {{JSTOR|30053631}}. Accessed 2 Dec. 2023.</ref>

Judith Coffin posits that the number of clandestine linen drapers, seamstresses, and tailors, kept pace and probably outstripped the numbers from those guilds. Clandestine workers, male and female, worked in garret shops and rooms under guild jurisdiction. Not all non-guild work was illegal, too. A non-guild artisan could work directly for the crown, or in the "free zones" that were beyond the reach of the guild officers. Clandestine workers in the needle trade were often employed by larger merchant manufacturers. Guild members were also enmeshed in illegal labor, either carrying it out, or hiring those who did illegal work. Nearly everyone was in violation of guild statutes.<ref name="coffin" /> Masters of the guild would often hire illegal workers to do specific and low-paying parts of the job. In the case of the Wigmakers, it was hair-weaving, the most labor-intensive aspect of the craft. Hair weavers arranged pinches of hair side by side and interlaced them in intricate patterns between six silk threads extended on two wooden rods. Women called ''tresseuses'' seemed to perform a substantial amount of this work outside masters' shops.<ref name="gayne" />

Despite the guilds' fear of illegal craft, underground business often helped guilds survive. The creation of materials was often illicit, or outsourced from other locales. Masters hired non-guild workers to do high-intensive tasks and paid less, while at the same time denigrating their work. In many cities, guild masters purchased discounted materials and hired cheap labor to reduce costs. In Lyon, the underground silk economy thrived, and was a significant portion of the economy. It was made up of mostly female artisans whose work paralleled that of the legitimate trade. The female artisans were important to the guild as they were highly skilled in craft procedures that the guild heavily relied upon, and were essential to production. But they also worked for male entrepreneurs outside of the guild and frequently collaborated with each other to set up their own businesses. In an effort to curb this illicit activity, guildmasters wrote bylaws forbidding men and women to work outside of the guild. The buttonmakers guild of Lyon also complained about illicit work and theft from the non-guild female workers whom they hired. They also took it upon themselves to teach girls the buttonmaking trade, which was the real problem, as their instruction imparted the "mystery" of guild secrets to non-guild members which undermined the guild.<ref name="hafter2" />

In the mid-17th c., [[Lübeck]] experienced political conflicts as guilds petitioned the councils to ban clandestine work not only in the city but in rural areas. They were outraged that members of the upperclass in Lübeck would employ rural craftsmen at the expense of the city guild. A lot of their anger spurred from the fact that they were part of the council who had sworn to uphold the guild.<ref name="hoffman">HOFFMANN, PHILIP R. "In Defence of Corporate Liberties: Early Modern Guilds and the Problem of Illicit Artisan Work." Urban History, vol. 34, no. 1, 2007, pp. 76–88. {{JSTOR|44613682}}. Accessed 2 Dec. 2023.</ref>

Early modern Lyon continued to have a thriving underground economy into the late 18th century. In 1780, the hatters' guild complained that women and girls who sheared skins for the industry had established an underground manufacture 25 years earlier, and that it was still sustained. These women were the wives of hatters or girls who were hired day by day, and who were not content to be so dependent on the guild. The women were accused of theft of materials, buying stolen materials for cheap, and selling them for larger amounts. What was most surprising was the response from the government, which had previously always stood with guilds even at the economy's expense. A royal edict of 1777 formed a corps of these female workers, giving them legitimacy.<ref name="hafter2" />{{Integralism}}