Extra Information & Clarifications Sources for all my videos are in the bibliography of my scripts all available to download for FREE on my Patreon. www.patreon.com/mlaser?filters[tag]=script Throughout history, guilds had many different names in both Latin and other languages. For example, In latin they were known as gild, collegium, ministerium, universitas, officium, magisterium, artificium, etc. In English you had gilds, crafts, liveries, brotherhoods, fraternities, mysteries, (many of these words derived from latin as well) etc. For simplicity sake I will only use the word guild in this video. 0:00 The manuscript pictures of cities in this video (like the animated picture at the start) come from the Cambridge version of the Nuremberg Chronicle. The manuscript picture of artisans in this video like tailors come from Chants royaux sur la Conception, couronnés au puy de Rouen de 1519 à 1528. Pictures coming from other manuscripts will be specified in this comment. 1:00 This was poorly worded. The Fall of 'Western' Rome 'coincided' with the beginnings of the migration period. 4:48 Bibliothèque nationale de France MS Français 2092 fol. 20v. 9:02 Even though extremely uncommon some guilds did not require apprenticeships. Some guilds you could just straight up join as a member without having been an apprentice. 13:54 You could, however, get another masters of the higher faculties, after completing a masters of the lower faculties. Think of it as a masters that you can get only ones you already have a masters. You basically become a master of masters. This doesn't give you a higher status in the guild, you're still a master, but it could help your social standing within the guild. This is why later the idea of a doctorate became a thing, in order to make things less complicated. 15:02 Abb. 17: Linhardt Sigel, Landauer Band I (1610), Seite 60v. 15:08 My mistake. Some European monarchies did regulate some consumable product standards in the middle ages but this was very minimal. 15:08 Abb. 8: Jorg Prewmaister, Mendel Band I (1437), Seite 60. 17:10 There is even a surviving document from a Lunenburg guild stating that all members must be ‘authentic, right, German, and not Slavic’. In France and Italy Moors, Berbers, and sub-saharan Africans were excluded from guild membership. A 16th century document from a Valencian cobblers guild stated that ‘[excluded are] mulattoes of the color of quince marmalade, because of the protests and disturbance which would result from the sight of such persons mingling with honorable and well dressed people’. Spanish guilds went even a step further and excluded everyone who did not have a certificate of ‘purity of blood’ stating they were 100% Spanish and nothing else. This increase in ethnic barriers to entry from the 16th century onwards is a great example of how ethnicity wasn’t seen as so important in the middle ages but became to increase in importance starting in the 16th century. Sources for all this are in the footnote of the script which you can download for free on my patreon. 17:21 This number includes the rare all female guilds of which we know of only 45 existing out of the c. 100,000 guilds that we know of existing. 50% of these female guilds were centred around some sort of textile/clothing occupation. 17:30 Women would often help their husbands in their work but they rarely were allowed to actually partake in the "work environment". i.e. No guild membership, no what was considered "proper work" (like hammering in smithies for example), only "supportive work" like working the bellows in smithies, stuff like that.
2:04 Food spelled as 'Fod' Great video though, I'd be interested in seeing a video on similar institutions across the world (particularly in West, South, Southeast, and East Asia) and how they differed from the European styles of collegium, gilds, and later guilds.
It would be so much cooler if my union would call itself the Janitors Guild a shield with a mop and broom on it perhaps a spray bottle where a helmet would go
@@Gulitize how are they the opposite especially since many unions run apprentice programs, etc.? Of course, it could be mentioned that the guilds controlled both the capital and means of production rather than merely representing the means of production as modern unions do. This, of course, was a pre-capitalist, but largely corporate society -- meaning that the rights of the individual was often represented by some kind of group of people like belonging to a monastery or town or a guild that would enumerate those rights via a charter and lobby on your behalf. E.P. Thompson explains how this split between capital and the means of production occurred between the late 18th and mid 19th centuries in "The Making of the English Working Class". This split happened when the large masters could afford to industrialize while the small masters could not as the economic sands shifted beneath their feet and destroyed their livelihoods. Traditional apprenticeship educations ground to a halt as did the need for as much skilled labor.
My sister's union is called "The Baker's Guild" translated. Many old crafts in my country still have the old guilds. Unfortunately electricians are a bit too new, so we only have "The Danish Electricians Association"
I always find it somewhat amusing when people talk about *masterpieces* as works of mind-boggling, nearly unachievable quality, that only some few greatest creators created once in theirs lives. When the term originally ment a competent piece of work in given craft, required for a craftsman to make, to become a master in their guild. Technically all of the people with university master's degrees already made "masterpieces" when writing their thesis. I doubt that many of them would call them that. I certainly wouldn't. 😅
The connotation certainly has changed to a much more attainable standard, but the standards weren't basic competency. It was full competency. That you had mastered your craft. Even if it wasn't necessarily your best work ever.
As a craftsman (bespoke shoemaker) connected to the Orthopaedic Shoemakers Guild (an "Innung" which is just a more modern word denoting a guild) in Germany and a former history teacher I can say with some assurance that a modern "guild", while not as intrusive as some medieval ones where, is still a profoundly medieval organisation, headed by an "Obermeister" ("Supreme Master" - sounds a bit cultish😂) and organising teaching seminars for members, running it's own trade schools and being strongly involved in setting the curriculum required to be mastered in order to be allowed the participation in a Journeyman examination which, also quite medieval, requires not only to pass an academic examination but also the creation of a journeyman piece ("Gesellenstück") in my case a bespoke pair of shoes made to certain standarts as well as befitting medicinal requirements (as well as being aesthetically pleasing) to be created within two strictly timed work days and under observation as well as subject to a closed evaluation by a commitee of masters. So... there still *are* these structures and they *do* create closed associations by definition. In other words: not really a thing of a distant past. Best regards Raoul G. Kunz
In Germany the guilds were often very strict. Like you could only make swords or you could only make armor. And to become a journeyman. You would have to present your work to a master counsel. Rather than just be approved by your master.
reading between the lines it also seems like another reason would be a good deal of old fashion extortion too. “If you dont join our guild, or you dont stop selling at a better price then us, or if you buy from someone else maybe someone will come over and break your workshop…. hypothetically of course”.
On the flip side organizations also worked to protect yourself from these threats. Many small time businesses could easily get ruined by one ambitious man in the same field who was an extortionist. But, organizations strong enough to literally hire armies would not be under such threats.
You can see this somewhat in new York where a couple of the older business guys actually miss having the mob around cuz they were well protected and the mob was pretty much a better insurance policy than actual insurance@@alecshockowitz8385
I'd say that, much like a lot of things in history, guilds went from good to critical to a burden over time. Their greatest contribution in my mind was something not mentioned in this video - they provided a competing power to the nobles. While a guild may or may not have been influential enough to stop the most powerful dukes, it was more than enough to make most nobility think twice before crossing them. You can see this very clearly in the Villani chronicles where guilds have a major say in the affairs of northern Italy in a mostly equal standing with the nobility. While the guilds were hardly meritocratic, most of them at least had an idea that you only get to be in charge if you demonstrate some amount of competence, and that is quite the idea in the age of hereditary nobility.
An even bigger effect than the meritocratic one is that the interests of a guild involved production and trade rather than warfare. This allowed the view of economics to shift from a fixed amount of "good things" to be protected or stolen by those with the strength and cunning to do so, to a system that could be grown exponentially. This mentality shift made the industrial revolution possible!
I would love to see a follow up on this about the breakdown of the guild system in the early modern period. At best I've only heard other historians explain that the guilds were unable to enforce their privileges on an increasingly large number of "black market" craftsmen.
Read E.P. Thompson and "The Making of the English Working Class." Black market goods had very little to do with it while the economic demand for manufactured goods did (often in factories created by richer guild members aka the large masters who were able to control capital while the small masters ended up losing their livelihoods).
I'd also be interested in how guilds were impacted by the Black Death and the sudden drop in the labor supply, and subsequent rise in overall quality of life for the common laborer, whose labor was suddenly far more scarce and thus more valuable.
I'd also like to see someone point out that fascism is basically going back to the guild system and how guilds are anti capitalist and anti any stable economy. It's basically just protectionism and an oligopolly.
@@baph0met that's a bit of a ridiculous statement. First off, fascism isn't anti-capitalist. Second, the whole pre-capitalist economic system of the Middle Ages was protectionist in nature. Only a hardcore libertarian would say that the guild system was "anti-capitalist" without realizing the evolution from the corporate medieval economy to mercantilism to capitalism.
@@gavinrogers5246 Fascism is anti capitalist. If you use the actual definition of capitalism aka free market economy and not the stupid capitalism definition where it's just that private property exists. Both Mussolini and Gentile were hardcore anti capitalists, and both were socialists before becoming fascists, or the new wave socialists as they called themselves. Fascism is corporatism, corporatism is syndicalism and syndicalism is socialism. It is no secret that the majority of syndicalists at that time wholeheartedly supported Mussolini.
I know you likely won't see this. But I check back here weekly looking for new videos! I only do that with a select few channels. Where I am chomping at the bit for a new video to drop!
The modern equivalent you could argue are professional organizations such as the American Medical Association or the ABA for law which the state has given a monopoly on who is allowed to practice within those professions and to set standards.
"People of the same trade seldom meet together even for merriment and diversion but the conversation ends at a conspiracy against the public." Civilization IV engraved that quote in my mind, first thing that popped into my mind at the start of the (excellent, as always) video.
Dude…the history of the university system arising out of the guild system was so enlightening. Lower levels of education were kind of tacked on and mostly copied and modified the university system…so all of that really does carry into the modern day in some form. Amazing amazing stuff man.
Thank you. I'm a historian and I love learning from other historians. I was watching my favorite channel: oversimplified. He recommended you're channel. I'm happy when I find real history channels! So thank you and you earned a new follower 💯
I am from India and here we read about large Trade guilds from ancient times which often had members as far as South East Asia. Unfortunatley they all disappeared after the Turkic invasions of 12th Century.
Nice ! I want to learn Indian history can you provide some guild's name from ancient India and early medieval India, it will be helpful. Also their Extension Operation internationally.
@@Omega-mr1jg I am also from India but not from the south India. And the main problem is Indian education system about history is not taught well in deep. Even many Higher education like colleges and universities don't provide a well chronological events and thus even for colleges reasearch and archeology becomes difficult. You can obtain deeper information only by your own research. This is the reason why history was ingnored by many Indians and was forgotten and in place of history mythology was taught as history until Britishers and Europeans came with their historical and archeological interest (which was sparked by newly invented field of Egyptology) and found many historical ruins and progressed archeology and historical chronology till it became an academic field. Although lack of deeper obersevation in Indian universities and historical research centres and archeology is massive (because of less history being presented in lower educational institutions such as schools), There are certain history professors, scholars in India who are interested in research by their own means and they have provided many fascinating historical facts of India in depth on online platform which I have learnt. But again you've to be careful while researching your own while taking sources from these scholars as some scholars are biased and provide historical lies such as P. N. Oak who invented some false historical Theories. So personal research is the only way you may get deeper information about Indian history.
@@Omega-mr1jg BTW check Indian Oriental Research Institute which in Pune City and their website and if you're able to visit there it'll be more better. And also be up to date with history professors and scholars about their theories and fact check them by yourself.
I found you because of oversimplifieds war of the bucket video where he mentioned you doing a ton of the research he used! I'm do glad to have discovered you!
Great video! I was originally under the impression that most of the urban population worked for some sort of guild, but you mentioned that that wasn't the case. How was the rest (the majority) of the urban population employed, then?
Well, majority of free city male population did. Keep in mind in the middle ages most of European population were peasant farmers living in the countryside. Women were often doing "supportive" work for their men whether that be their fathers, brothers, or husbands. Peasants (who were supposed to be the rural population doing farm work) usually only lived in cities because they were tied to a lord somehow so they mostly did butler type work. Nobility didn't really do work, and some knights lived in cities but their job was to be a knight. Lastly priests and religious orders like the friars were their own separate thing in medieval cities. As for the amount of people not classified as non-free citizens in medieval European cities I have no idea about that (and what they did exactly), as I am sure it all fluctuated from kingdom to kingdom and city to city.
If I had to guess, a lot of people were engaged in manual labor and jobs that didn't require as much training as whatever guildwork might cover and thus could be easily replaced with what we would call scabs, with the large polity of people involved creating social tensions that would make forming a guild of say dockworkers unfeasible or impractical. It's hard to get unions going even today, and guilds as the equivalent in the medieval age were the privilege of the educated, enriched, or both.
Love your video! Do you have any plans on making a video about glass industries in medieval Europe such as in Bohemia or Venice in the future? Would love to see you discussing it.
Probably not. That's a very niche topic. And, yes, I do make videos on very niche topics sometimes but I must be very interested in them to justify it and sorry but glass industries are just not that interesting to me.
The system itself was good, there is a reason why some parts still survive to this day. The one negative flaw was the idea of having a legal monopoly, which is the root of problems such as limiting production and nepotism. Not making such arrangement legal at all (as it binds everyone to a contract they did not agreed to) would have pushed guilds toward even higher quality or cost-efficiency products, due to competition.
Whether guilds were a good thing, or a bad thing, I do not know, but what I do know is that the guild of Millers was truly the best Guild. True Roman bread for true Romans.
Thank you for this video. This is the most comprehensive video on medieval guilds I have found on youtube. I've been studying them recently for various larps I'm doing. This and many of your other videos is extremely useful for this.
As soon as you mentioned that Journeymen were also referred to as Bachelors, I was wondering if that's where the names of the degrees in higher education came from. Knowing that universities were once guilds explains a lot.
Interesting on the edge they gave europe, it is worth noting similar organisations existed in china. For example the chinese for bank can be roughly translated to 'silver guild' due to their origins. Though perhaps as a wide spread due to the tendency of dynasties to run state workshops. Unfortunately I don't know as much as i'd like on guilds in east asia.
That is the first time I hear a comparisson between guilds and the University structure in the Middle Ages. Even though it does sound convincing, i'd still like to know, where you got that information. Also the Doctorate was implemented, if not directly in universities, in teaching institutions of the church. E.g. around 1373 John Wyclif was promoted to "Doctor Theologiae" at Cambridge. So I would love to see your sources for this.
You know you can just download the script and see the sources for yourself, not that complicated. Plus, I never said doctorate didn't exist I just said it wasn't deemed as something higher than a masters, which it wasn't. It was first a licence, from the church, to teach, which anyone deemed smart enough could get for a fee and initially wasn't issued by universities. In fact, there was a whole power struggle between universities and the church over teaching but that's a whole other story. Doctorate was also used as a title of recognition of excellence but for all intents and purposes all the people given doctoral epithets (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scholastic_accolades) were still at the rank of a master in terms of the guild structure. Therefore, as I said, "the idea of a doctorate being higher than a masters didn't exist". People with doctorates were primarily masters, that was the most important title at the time. Some people today call the masters of the higher faculties, that is the degree you could get only after already having a masters, a doctorate but in reality, at the time, it was still called just a masters. You basically got a higher masters but it didn't change your standing in the university, you were still just a master.
@@MLaserHistory ok I didn't hear that "the idea of a Doctorate as something more than a master's was a later development; sorry for that. And yes the whole struggle between the Church and the Universities is a topic on itself. I am myself currently researching heretical movements in the Late MA and basically everything the Universities produced that questioned the authority of the Pope was labled heretical.
All I can say is: Guilds were a thing. They aren't inherently good or bad, the component members are which influences the outward façade of the guild in q. for the time being.
Funny that one of the first law of the Révolution was to get rid of the guilds/corporations (Loi Le Chapelier in 1791). Members of the Assembly were bourgeois who didn't really like workers associations...
It's a bit more complicated. Considering that the guilds were extremely territorial about their privileges and markets, it was extremely difficult, if not impossible to just start a business like one can in the modern day. Just as modern unions had become fronts for rackets, old guilds could notice you're trying to make a business of your own and then use threats/legal action/obstruction to destroy you and yours. Also, comparing guilds to unions/worker associations is off, considering that guild members were rich urban artisans. In France, they were literally called the bourgeois, from which the term in a Marxist context originates from. So I'd say the destruction of the Guilds was less a suppression of workers and more like a break-up of Standard Oil, but instead of just holding stiffling control of the oil markets, it was the whole economy.
I dont think are many lessons we could use to apply in real world. They were meriotcracies with seniority. A present day comparison would be something like an academic laboratory or research institue, meamwhile more "traditional" labour unions are solely seniority based, but corporate structures are more meritocratic-nepotism mix. Artisanry is mostly dead and reserved to amaeutrer hobbies, and thus reviving guild practices is a lost cause, bcuz you will either recreate a labour union or a coroporation, not a research institute.
They still exist. They are called professional organizations such as your country’s national medical association and Bar association. You require a license from them to be in those professions
None of them are what they seem. Drapers guild, for example, is much more interested in the sky than fabrics. I would imagine the guild you reference was into things like iron maidens
Or a faction of the guild would have specialized in that function while the novices got the front education for the general publics consumption and future assumptions
Another example: Versailles in France. Palace. Known for luxury in the country that created thousands of fur trappers. Versailles was also known for.... prostitutes. France ..for slave trading. Versailles would be pronounced fur sales by Germans. V takes on a f sound. Vir implies a life. Ver. Vir. Fur
@@inquisitive- You would be exactly right, it's from a series of books called Book of the New Sun by Gene Wolfe. They're commonly called the guild of the torturers 🙃
As for whether guilds were good or bad, the question is irrelevant. They were simply a reaction to growing wealth and power, and eventually wore out their usefulness and disappeared.
I guess the question is if they didn't exist, like they didn't in other parts of the world, would Europe still come out ahead economically in the early modern period?
They are very much still alive and well and I would argue that they were the first global corporations and they deliberately staged Europe to be perceived the way we do while maintaining the same power and luxury in every region they had footing...Asia, south America, north America, Africa and on tiny islands, luxury boats and whatever else
That's such a weird take: guilds didn't become "useless" they were simply subverted and destroyed by capitalists and governments. The french during revolutionary and napoleonic times destroyed a lot of guilds. (Those guilds came back in part but never in the same way as before french invasion)
@@bgs2004 at the onset of the pandemic a release was made that only Dutch fishmongers had the right to fish the Atlantic off the coast of MA. Local fisheries were non essentials. They are quietly in control. It leaks out here and there
Is the success of the guilds part of the reason for the Europeans outcompeting Mamluk industry in the mid 14th century. Resulting in the deindustrialization of the Levant for even simple things like paper or soap. As well as more complex industries like glass-making, sugar processing and textiles. All of which the middle east used to export. But now imported and deindustrialised
It seems to me that guilds never really disappeared, and they still exist, or were perhaps reinvented, and it's just that we call and understand them differently: as bodies enforcing trade and industry standards, and simultaneously as large corporations/conglomerates, or even co-ops, or conglomerates/fraternities of co-ops - sort of like industries regulating themselves. I frankly wouldn't mind if we brought them back more formally. Seems in some ways a better system.
Usually the guilds also were responsible for the defense of a town, each guild having to man and equip one tower of the city fortification at their costs. The city did not cash in taxes and than pay soldiers, it was all outsourced to the guilds. Maybe only a small core unit within the city were professional and paid soldiers. And if the guild is armed, you cannot install a tyranny and supress them. That's how democracy more and more evolved, at least on the town level, which was later the model to be expanded to the whole nation.
Well towns were also just inherently hard for kings to control because they had walls and weren't directly dependent on the feudal structure the king was at the head of.
Both of them suck. Unions and companies destroyed the relationship between the master and his labourers within their respective side. Instead of being co-owners of a craft, you are given a commission with no share of the profit. And instead of having a good relationship with your employer, you actively rebel in accordance with outside influence. Even old pirates had a better job dynamic than modern society. Both stemming from French liberals wanting more and merchant's guilds expanding and cracking down.
Henry the first gave them the initial royal charter with exclusive rights but it has not survived so we don't know what it said, while Henry the second was the one who got the money from the guild for expanding their exclusive rights further. Sorry for the confusion, I did word it poorly.
In spite i'm mostly a determinist (let's say 75/25 geography and climate vs the rest) i say guilds are indeed important in the economic development of europe, without them trade and craft become less worth the risks and investment in a world were laws regarding those are as varied as the number of polities of the time. I believe we can see that when comparing places where their influence was heavily curtailed (not to mistake my point with places where they didn't develop or did so very sparsely) vs places in which they flourished. I'm not saying that they birth wasn't a given due to geography and technology but they could have easily been snuffed out way earlier and in much more places so their success wasn't so certain. In the end like most of the feudal structure they probably did overstay their welcome since posterior structures that were partly born from them like stock markets adapted better to the changes.
Cool to finally learn the full meaning of apprentice, journeyman and master. Does this imply that Santa's pop culture title as "master toymaker" was maybe originally used to infer that he was a master in the guild sense?
Adam Smith did not say trade associations should be prohibited, only that governments should not facilitate them since this would likely lead to an increase in prices.
To me, I say without enough of an academic background and a Scandinavian bias, Guilds seem like precursors to both large conglomerates of corporations and worker unions. The first of which I dislike, and the latter I like a lot. Also regarding the latter I see the likeness of the large guilds covering a variety of similar professions as umbrella organisations for smaller ones resonate with the large unions doing the same thing for smaller unions in my country (SE).
The big difference is that unions are non-discriminatory, not in the sense that unions have no issues with discrimination, but that they are by design made to accept anyone who is interested and in fact actively try to expand. That's definitely what makes unions much better than medieval guilds, though otherwise they can definitely provide similar services like training, insurance, banking, professional magazines and so on. I think it's interesting that in modern Nordic society unions are a central pillar that both offer vast benefits beyond what is just inherent to a union, similar to the role Guilds played in medieval society.
It really depends on what product the guild was making. For example, clothes, a necessary good in Europe. If a guild had a monopoly on clothes in some big city and decided to decrease production of normal clothes and put their efforts towards luxury clothing that would be really really bad, since they'd be taking more money from people who need that money to live in the form of more expensive clothing. If a guild focused, for example, on wine then decreasing production wouldn't really matter, as they'd just be taking more money from people who already have a lot of it, and giving it to people who'll probably use it more productively than the people buying wine themselves.
@@ShadowGricken What I meant to say is price gouging is okay as long as you do it to luxuries, but luxuries are mainly consumed by rich people so I guess you are sort of correct.
Are you going to talk about your PhD in any of your videos? If not, I wonder what it is about. Also, what was it like applying for the PhD. Did you have to show that you had published papers or just the master’s thesis. What was the master’s thesis!
I will probably do an "update" style video, on my second channel (www.youtube.com/@MLaserRandom), about my PhD experience after the first school year ends so at some point in the summer. My master's dissertation was about the evolution of the Avaro-Slavic relations from the mid 6th century to the end of the 8th century. My PhD on the other hand isn't in medieval history but in public history. I am doing a PhD on current state of audio-visual communication of history online and comparing it to the audio-visual communication of history before the internet, so like TV history documentaries. I am basically researching the state of online history communication which has not been done before. Since I was switching from medieval history to public history my PhD application was a bit special. I didn't have any "official" publications. I had one piece that I self published because no outlet wanted to publish it since it was attacking current academia and it's ignorance of history communicators (www.academia.edu/104179121/History_Communicators_and_Academia_Why_Should_Academia_Employ_History_Communicators). On average, however, as long as you're not applying to the top schools like Harvard, Princeton, Oxford, Cambridge, etc. most universities will not expect you to have any published materials when you apply for PhD. The reason why I managed to get into Cambridge without being published was because I have this UA-cam channel and I am the founder and president of the online history creator group. This means my real world experience in my proposed PhD topic is very substantial and so I was given a pass on not having any publications. On top of that I already had a degree from a prestigious uni (Oxford) which certainly played a role, and I have, prior to applying, talked to my current PhD supervisor, whom I have met at a Public History conference in London. So I was known in the space as I attended conferences. Bottom line is put yourself out there. Communicate with potential supervisors, go to conferences, and try to at least publish something. Even if you don't get anything published just to have a paper that you tried to publish that you can showcase to your potential supervisor saying "I am trying to get this published" will be a huge plus.
@@MLaserHistory Thanks for that and for replying to most, if not all, of your comments. I read the paper, and it was actually very enjoyable to read. Maybe too enjoyable for the average academic! I thought it was weird that one of the reasons it was rejected was that it was not researched properly, as it appeared to be thoroughly researched. One more question, if you do not mind. If you were trying to get a paper published before you do a PhD, how would you go about doing it? Would you try to adapt your master's thesis into a paper, for example, or try to write a totally different paper? In fact, I am trying to write a niche history paper myself at the moment.
guilds facilitating information: the guilds were charging for the privilege, and limiting who got to learn and who was allowed to teach ; apprenticeship was paid, not free, and lasted far longer than it was needed to learn the trade Europe developed and stopped being a backwater for the Middle East when the guild monopolies were broken or ignored, such as when in the Netherlands lumber mills were set up outside the influence of the guilds.
Such a cool video. Sounds to me like guilds were a good thing, until they weren't. They played a net positive role for social and economic progress through the positive attributes that you outline, which in that era, outweighed the negative. By the time we got the Adam Smith's era (and probably well before that, but I'm not equipped with the knowledge to discriminate such details), they had outlasted their utility, as Adam Smith pointed out. New ideas about how to organize the relationship between the state, society, and economic development were emerging, and guilds did not fit into this evolving framework. Just some thoughts sparked by watching this wonderful video. The main sort of thing it gets me thinking about is the evolving relationship between commercial/economic activity and state power.
How enforced were the rules concerning familial ties and ethnic membership? According to the paper "Access to the Trade: Monopoly and Mobility in European Craft Guilds in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries" (you can google the paper, it's free on the internet), in the majority of guilds between 1600 to 1800, only a minority of masters were the kin of masters or from the local area. In the majority of guilds surveyed, the majority of masters were outsiders (not related through blood ties with local masters or from the local area). This would not make any sense if the rules concerning familial ties and ethnic membership were enforced stringently. I suspect that in practice most guilds made exceptions most of the time and that the rules for who could be a master were mostly just guidelines. It seems that the only real limitation was the need to submit a masterwork - any other requirement could be waved by the guild for practicality sake.
That paper is still very much debated. For one, they didn't take into account ethnicity. There isn't a single mention of ethnicity. They also mention nationality and gender only as things that need further research. Their entire argument hinges on geographical difference as in people out of town vs people in town. However, most arguments against guilds don't make geographical arguments of exclusivity rather than exclusivity based on social as in class differences, ethnic difference as in Slavic, Baltic, Wallach, and gender differences. All of these the paper does not address in a meaningful way. A German from Hamburg would have been welcomed in a German guild in Plzen were as a Slav in a Hamburg guild not so much. Their research into familial ties is, however, interesting but I'd like to see larger data sets. For masters they only looked at 27 different towns and excluded merchant guilds which played a big part in European guilds. For masters all together they looked at only 72 guilds which pales in comparison to the book 'The European Guilds: An Economic Analysis' by Sheilagh Ogilvie which looked at around 100,000 guilds across Europe.
You mentioned how some people consider the guild system to be one of the main reasons for europe becoming more economically advanced compared to the rest of the world. But why didn't guilds exist in those places then? It seems to me that guilds are an inevitable product of urbanisation, so they should have existed in other places as well. Did guilds exist in other places but with different powers and rights compared to those in europe?
Yes, Byzantium retained the Roman collegium system, although heavily changed since the Roman Principate. It seems the Byzantine collegia, over the course of the middle ages, started to operate more like Western Guilds than ancient Roman collegia.
Think of them more akin to a professional association. This would be for example the American Medical Association which creates the requirements for who gets to be a doctor or the BAR association for who gets to be a Lawyer. You cannot be in these professions legally without being licensed through them or a foreign equivalent they recognize.
Extra Information & Clarifications
Sources for all my videos are in the bibliography of my scripts all available to download for FREE on my Patreon. www.patreon.com/mlaser?filters[tag]=script
Throughout history, guilds had many different names in both Latin and other languages. For example, In latin they were known as gild, collegium, ministerium, universitas, officium, magisterium, artificium, etc. In English you had gilds, crafts, liveries, brotherhoods, fraternities, mysteries, (many of these words derived from latin as well) etc. For simplicity sake I will only use the word guild in this video.
0:00 The manuscript pictures of cities in this video (like the animated picture at the start) come from the Cambridge version of the Nuremberg Chronicle. The manuscript picture of artisans in this video like tailors come from Chants royaux sur la Conception, couronnés au puy de Rouen de 1519 à 1528. Pictures coming from other manuscripts will be specified in this comment.
1:00 This was poorly worded. The Fall of 'Western' Rome 'coincided' with the beginnings of the migration period.
4:48 Bibliothèque nationale de France MS Français 2092 fol. 20v.
9:02 Even though extremely uncommon some guilds did not require apprenticeships. Some guilds you could just straight up join as a member without having been an apprentice.
13:54 You could, however, get another masters of the higher faculties, after completing a masters of the lower faculties. Think of it as a masters that you can get only ones you already have a masters. You basically become a master of masters. This doesn't give you a higher status in the guild, you're still a master, but it could help your social standing within the guild. This is why later the idea of a doctorate became a thing, in order to make things less complicated.
15:02 Abb. 17: Linhardt Sigel, Landauer Band I (1610), Seite 60v.
15:08 My mistake. Some European monarchies did regulate some consumable product standards in the middle ages but this was very minimal.
15:08 Abb. 8: Jorg Prewmaister, Mendel Band I (1437), Seite 60.
17:10 There is even a surviving document from a Lunenburg guild stating that all members must be ‘authentic, right, German, and not Slavic’. In France and Italy Moors, Berbers, and sub-saharan Africans were excluded from guild membership. A 16th century document from a Valencian cobblers guild stated that ‘[excluded are] mulattoes of the color of quince marmalade, because of the protests and disturbance which would result from the sight of such persons mingling with honorable and well dressed people’. Spanish guilds went even a step further and excluded everyone who did not have a certificate of ‘purity of blood’ stating they were 100% Spanish and nothing else. This increase in ethnic barriers to entry from the 16th century onwards is a great example of how ethnicity wasn’t seen as so important in the middle ages but became to increase in importance starting in the 16th century. Sources for all this are in the footnote of the script which you can download for free on my patreon.
17:21 This number includes the rare all female guilds of which we know of only 45 existing out of the c. 100,000 guilds that we know of existing. 50% of these female guilds were centred around some sort of textile/clothing occupation.
17:30 Women would often help their husbands in their work but they rarely were allowed to actually partake in the "work environment". i.e. No guild membership, no what was considered "proper work" (like hammering in smithies for example), only "supportive work" like working the bellows in smithies, stuff like that.
2:04 Food spelled as 'Fod'
Great video though, I'd be interested in seeing a video on similar institutions across the world (particularly in West, South, Southeast, and East Asia) and how they differed from the European styles of collegium, gilds, and later guilds.
Increasing Fod Supply
The last part with Adam Smith calling for extreme government intervention was amusing
I'm not one of your Patreon members; however, I'm a grad student of medieval history and I would really like your David Delacroix source, please.
@@gavinrogers5246 read the pinned comment
It would be so much cooler if my union would call itself the Janitors Guild a shield with a mop and broom on it perhaps a spray bottle where a helmet would go
Guilds aren't unions though, they are the opposite.
@@Gulitize Doesn't change the fact that it would be cool.
@@Gulitize how are they the opposite especially since many unions run apprentice programs, etc.? Of course, it could be mentioned that the guilds controlled both the capital and means of production rather than merely representing the means of production as modern unions do. This, of course, was a pre-capitalist, but largely corporate society -- meaning that the rights of the individual was often represented by some kind of group of people like belonging to a monastery or town or a guild that would enumerate those rights via a charter and lobby on your behalf. E.P. Thompson explains how this split between capital and the means of production occurred between the late 18th and mid 19th centuries in "The Making of the English Working Class". This split happened when the large masters could afford to industrialize while the small masters could not as the economic sands shifted beneath their feet and destroyed their livelihoods. Traditional apprenticeship educations ground to a halt as did the need for as much skilled labor.
My sister's union is called "The Baker's Guild" translated. Many old crafts in my country still have the old guilds. Unfortunately electricians are a bit too new, so we only have "The Danish Electricians Association"
In Hollywood some unions are called guilds
I always find it somewhat amusing when people talk about *masterpieces* as works of mind-boggling, nearly unachievable quality, that only some few greatest creators created once in theirs lives. When the term originally ment a competent piece of work in given craft, required for a craftsman to make, to become a master in their guild. Technically all of the people with university master's degrees already made "masterpieces" when writing their thesis. I doubt that many of them would call them that. I certainly wouldn't. 😅
God, yeah, my master's dissertation was so bad lol :D
It is a really good example of how the connotations of a word can change.
You are amused that languages evolve over time? What an odd thing to be amused about
The connotation certainly has changed to a much more attainable standard, but the standards weren't basic competency. It was full competency. That you had mastered your craft.
Even if it wasn't necessarily your best work ever.
@@Kylephibbsky True.
As soon as you said universities were guilds, I thought of bachelor and master degrees. That's pretty funny!
yeah the second universities were brought up everything just clicked and i had a bit of an "oh shit" moment
If you have a master's degree, you can officially say that you created a masterpiece (your thesis or discretion). 😉
As a craftsman (bespoke shoemaker) connected to the Orthopaedic Shoemakers Guild (an "Innung" which is just a more modern word denoting a guild) in Germany and a former history teacher I can say with some assurance that a modern "guild", while not as intrusive as some medieval ones where, is still a profoundly medieval organisation, headed by an "Obermeister" ("Supreme Master" - sounds a bit cultish😂) and organising teaching seminars for members, running it's own trade schools and being strongly involved in setting the curriculum required to be mastered in order to be allowed the participation in a Journeyman examination which, also quite medieval, requires not only to pass an academic examination but also the creation of a journeyman piece ("Gesellenstück") in my case a bespoke pair of shoes made to certain standarts as well as befitting medicinal requirements (as well as being aesthetically pleasing) to be created within two strictly timed work days and under observation as well as subject to a closed evaluation by a commitee of masters.
So... there still *are* these structures and they *do* create closed associations by definition.
In other words: not really a thing of a distant past.
Best regards
Raoul G. Kunz
8:43 "you are indeed very skillful in your craft sir skywalker, but we cannot grant you the title of Master"
This is outrageous !
This is unfair!
What about the Ottoman raid on the byzantines
How can you be on the guild council, and not be a master?
@@menib7574It is an important region. One that we cannot afford to lose
In germany the apprenticeship system also has the hirarchy of apprentice- journeyman - master.
There are definitely still remnants, whether direct or not, of medieval guilds all around Europe.
Same with many places in the US, I mean the structure honestly just makes sense.
In Germany the guilds were often very strict. Like you could only make swords or you could only make armor. And to become a journeyman. You would have to present your work to a master counsel. Rather than just be approved by your master.
reading between the lines it also seems like another reason would be a good deal of old fashion extortion too. “If you dont join our guild, or you dont stop selling at a better price then us, or if you buy from someone else maybe someone will come over and break your workshop…. hypothetically of course”.
On the flip side organizations also worked to protect yourself from these threats.
Many small time businesses could easily get ruined by one ambitious man in the same field who was an extortionist.
But, organizations strong enough to literally hire armies would not be under such threats.
You can see this somewhat in new York where a couple of the older business guys actually miss having the mob around cuz they were well protected and the mob was pretty much a better insurance policy than actual insurance@@alecshockowitz8385
I'd say that, much like a lot of things in history, guilds went from good to critical to a burden over time.
Their greatest contribution in my mind was something not mentioned in this video - they provided a competing power to the nobles. While a guild may or may not have been influential enough to stop the most powerful dukes, it was more than enough to make most nobility think twice before crossing them. You can see this very clearly in the Villani chronicles where guilds have a major say in the affairs of northern Italy in a mostly equal standing with the nobility.
While the guilds were hardly meritocratic, most of them at least had an idea that you only get to be in charge if you demonstrate some amount of competence, and that is quite the idea in the age of hereditary nobility.
Yeah, the competing power thing is a good point I probably should have mentioned.
An even bigger effect than the meritocratic one is that the interests of a guild involved production and trade rather than warfare. This allowed the view of economics to shift from a fixed amount of "good things" to be protected or stolen by those with the strength and cunning to do so, to a system that could be grown exponentially. This mentality shift made the industrial revolution possible!
I would love to see a follow up on this about the breakdown of the guild system in the early modern period. At best I've only heard other historians explain that the guilds were unable to enforce their privileges on an increasingly large number of "black market" craftsmen.
Read E.P. Thompson and "The Making of the English Working Class." Black market goods had very little to do with it while the economic demand for manufactured goods did (often in factories created by richer guild members aka the large masters who were able to control capital while the small masters ended up losing their livelihoods).
I'd also be interested in how guilds were impacted by the Black Death and the sudden drop in the labor supply, and subsequent rise in overall quality of life for the common laborer, whose labor was suddenly far more scarce and thus more valuable.
I'd also like to see someone point out that fascism is basically going back to the guild system and how guilds are anti capitalist and anti any stable economy. It's basically just protectionism and an oligopolly.
@@baph0met that's a bit of a ridiculous statement. First off, fascism isn't anti-capitalist. Second, the whole pre-capitalist economic system of the Middle Ages was protectionist in nature. Only a hardcore libertarian would say that the guild system was "anti-capitalist" without realizing the evolution from the corporate medieval economy to mercantilism to capitalism.
@@gavinrogers5246 Fascism is anti capitalist. If you use the actual definition of capitalism aka free market economy and not the stupid capitalism definition where it's just that private property exists. Both Mussolini and Gentile were hardcore anti capitalists, and both were socialists before becoming fascists, or the new wave socialists as they called themselves. Fascism is corporatism, corporatism is syndicalism and syndicalism is socialism. It is no secret that the majority of syndicalists at that time wholeheartedly supported Mussolini.
I know you likely won't see this. But I check back here weekly looking for new videos! I only do that with a select few channels. Where I am chomping at the bit for a new video to drop!
The modern equivalent you could argue are professional organizations such as the American Medical Association or the ABA for law which the state has given a monopoly on who is allowed to practice within those professions and to set standards.
"People of the same trade seldom meet together even for merriment and diversion but the conversation ends at a conspiracy against the public."
Civilization IV engraved that quote in my mind, first thing that popped into my mind at the start of the (excellent, as always) video.
Thats an Adam Smith quote by the way
Dude…the history of the university system arising out of the guild system was so enlightening. Lower levels of education were kind of tacked on and mostly copied and modified the university system…so all of that really does carry into the modern day in some form. Amazing amazing stuff man.
Thank you. I'm a historian and I love learning from other historians. I was watching my favorite channel: oversimplified. He recommended you're channel. I'm happy when I find real history channels! So thank you and you earned a new follower 💯
I am from India and here we read about large Trade guilds from ancient times which often had members as far as South East Asia. Unfortunatley they all disappeared after the Turkic invasions of 12th Century.
Nice ! I want to learn Indian history can you provide some guild's name from ancient India and early medieval India, it will be helpful. Also their Extension Operation internationally.
@@JohnWick_897id also like to know about this as I may write an article about it!
@@Omega-mr1jg I am also from India but not from the south India. And the main problem is Indian education system about history is not taught well in deep. Even many Higher education like colleges and universities don't provide a well chronological events and thus even for colleges reasearch and archeology becomes difficult. You can obtain deeper information only by your own research. This is the reason why history was ingnored by many Indians and was forgotten and in place of history mythology was taught as history until Britishers and Europeans came with their historical and archeological interest (which was sparked by newly invented field of Egyptology) and found many historical ruins and progressed archeology and historical chronology till it became an academic field.
Although lack of deeper obersevation in Indian universities and historical research centres and archeology is massive (because of less history being presented in lower educational institutions such as schools), There are certain history professors, scholars in India who are interested in research by their own means and they have provided many fascinating historical facts of India in depth on online platform which I have learnt.
But again you've to be careful while researching your own while taking sources from these scholars as some scholars are biased and provide historical lies such as P. N. Oak who invented some false historical Theories.
So personal research is the only way you may get deeper information about Indian history.
@@Omega-mr1jg BTW check Indian Oriental Research Institute which in Pune City and their website and if you're able to visit there it'll be more better.
And also be up to date with history professors and scholars about their theories and fact check them by yourself.
This was super interesting and informative. Thanks for making it!
I found you because of oversimplifieds war of the bucket video where he mentioned you doing a ton of the research he used! I'm do glad to have discovered you!
To this day, most barber shops does not work on Mondays because of the guilds.
Do you intend on making a video about early modern guilds and their eventual decline ?
maybe maybe but I am not committing to anything this time around :D
Great video! I was originally under the impression that most of the urban population worked for some sort of guild, but you mentioned that that wasn't the case. How was the rest (the majority) of the urban population employed, then?
Well, majority of free city male population did. Keep in mind in the middle ages most of European population were peasant farmers living in the countryside. Women were often doing "supportive" work for their men whether that be their fathers, brothers, or husbands. Peasants (who were supposed to be the rural population doing farm work) usually only lived in cities because they were tied to a lord somehow so they mostly did butler type work. Nobility didn't really do work, and some knights lived in cities but their job was to be a knight. Lastly priests and religious orders like the friars were their own separate thing in medieval cities. As for the amount of people not classified as non-free citizens in medieval European cities I have no idea about that (and what they did exactly), as I am sure it all fluctuated from kingdom to kingdom and city to city.
If I had to guess, a lot of people were engaged in manual labor and jobs that didn't require as much training as whatever guildwork might cover and thus could be easily replaced with what we would call scabs, with the large polity of people involved creating social tensions that would make forming a guild of say dockworkers unfeasible or impractical. It's hard to get unions going even today, and guilds as the equivalent in the medieval age were the privilege of the educated, enriched, or both.
The connection with universities is really interesting
Love your video! Do you have any plans on making a video about glass industries in medieval Europe such as in Bohemia or Venice in the future? Would love to see you discussing it.
Probably not. That's a very niche topic. And, yes, I do make videos on very niche topics sometimes but I must be very interested in them to justify it and sorry but glass industries are just not that interesting to me.
"A faithful member of the merchant's guild."
Babe wake up, M. Laser History posted a new video
Love this channel always a highlight to see an upload
The system itself was good, there is a reason why some parts still survive to this day. The one negative flaw was the idea of having a legal monopoly, which is the root of problems such as limiting production and nepotism. Not making such arrangement legal at all (as it binds everyone to a contract they did not agreed to) would have pushed guilds toward even higher quality or cost-efficiency products, due to competition.
Wake up babe new mlazerhistory video dropped
Whether guilds were a good thing, or a bad thing, I do not know, but what I do know is that the guild of Millers was truly the best Guild. True Roman bread for true Romans.
Thank you for this video. This is the most comprehensive video on medieval guilds I have found on youtube. I've been studying them recently for various larps I'm doing. This and many of your other videos is extremely useful for this.
One of the best videos I saw in a while. It's incredible. A very organic understanding of the growth of European society and hegemony.
Very interesting, thank you! I love the idea of scissorsmiths, especially considering they were an ancient tool, quite the specialty.
As soon as you mentioned that Journeymen were also referred to as Bachelors, I was wondering if that's where the names of the degrees in higher education came from. Knowing that universities were once guilds explains a lot.
Interesting on the edge they gave europe, it is worth noting similar organisations existed in china. For example the chinese for bank can be roughly translated to 'silver guild' due to their origins. Though perhaps as a wide spread due to the tendency of dynasties to run state workshops. Unfortunately I don't know as much as i'd like on guilds in east asia.
That is the first time I hear a comparisson between guilds and the University structure in the Middle Ages. Even though it does sound convincing, i'd still like to know, where you got that information. Also the Doctorate was implemented, if not directly in universities, in teaching institutions of the church. E.g. around 1373 John Wyclif was promoted to "Doctor Theologiae" at Cambridge. So I would love to see your sources for this.
You know you can just download the script and see the sources for yourself, not that complicated. Plus, I never said doctorate didn't exist I just said it wasn't deemed as something higher than a masters, which it wasn't. It was first a licence, from the church, to teach, which anyone deemed smart enough could get for a fee and initially wasn't issued by universities. In fact, there was a whole power struggle between universities and the church over teaching but that's a whole other story. Doctorate was also used as a title of recognition of excellence but for all intents and purposes all the people given doctoral epithets (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scholastic_accolades) were still at the rank of a master in terms of the guild structure. Therefore, as I said, "the idea of a doctorate being higher than a masters didn't exist". People with doctorates were primarily masters, that was the most important title at the time. Some people today call the masters of the higher faculties, that is the degree you could get only after already having a masters, a doctorate but in reality, at the time, it was still called just a masters. You basically got a higher masters but it didn't change your standing in the university, you were still just a master.
@@MLaserHistory ok I didn't hear that "the idea of a Doctorate as something more than a master's was a later development; sorry for that. And yes the whole struggle between the Church and the Universities is a topic on itself. I am myself currently researching heretical movements in the Late MA and basically everything the Universities produced that questioned the authority of the Pope was labled heretical.
good luck with the research
All I can say is: Guilds were a thing. They aren't inherently good or bad, the component members are which influences the outward façade of the guild in q. for the time being.
Funny that one of the first law of the Révolution was to get rid of the guilds/corporations (Loi Le Chapelier in 1791). Members of the Assembly were bourgeois who didn't really like workers associations...
It's a bit more complicated. Considering that the guilds were extremely territorial about their privileges and markets, it was extremely difficult, if not impossible to just start a business like one can in the modern day. Just as modern unions had become fronts for rackets, old guilds could notice you're trying to make a business of your own and then use threats/legal action/obstruction to destroy you and yours.
Also, comparing guilds to unions/worker associations is off, considering that guild members were rich urban artisans. In France, they were literally called the bourgeois, from which the term in a Marxist context originates from. So I'd say the destruction of the Guilds was less a suppression of workers and more like a break-up of Standard Oil, but instead of just holding stiffling control of the oil markets, it was the whole economy.
I feel like there are alot of things one might learn from how these guilds operated and how they could help improve our coorporate world today.
I dont think are many lessons we could use to apply in real world. They were meriotcracies with seniority. A present day comparison would be something like an academic laboratory or research institue, meamwhile more "traditional" labour unions are solely seniority based, but corporate structures are more meritocratic-nepotism mix. Artisanry is mostly dead and reserved to amaeutrer hobbies, and thus reviving guild practices is a lost cause, bcuz you will either recreate a labour union or a coroporation, not a research institute.
They still exist. They are called professional organizations such as your country’s national medical association and Bar association. You require a license from them to be in those professions
Excellent video! Thanks!
This was an amazing video, thank you for your work as usual :)
The Order of the Seekers for Truth and Penitence is my favourite guild
Just starting this... Peace! 🌴🌹❤️🔥🌹🙏
None of them are what they seem. Drapers guild, for example, is much more interested in the sky than fabrics. I would imagine the guild you reference was into things like iron maidens
Or a faction of the guild would have specialized in that function while the novices got the front education for the general publics consumption and future assumptions
Another example: Versailles in France. Palace. Known for luxury in the country that created thousands of fur trappers. Versailles was also known for.... prostitutes. France ..for slave trading. Versailles would be pronounced fur sales by Germans. V takes on a f sound. Vir implies a life. Ver. Vir. Fur
@@inquisitive- You would be exactly right, it's from a series of books called Book of the New Sun by Gene Wolfe. They're commonly called the guild of the torturers 🙃
Super interesting, great video.
Where the guilds a good thing or a bad thing?
Well as in all a little bit of column A and a little bit of column B.
Stop your nuance! I only want sensational YES or NO answers with questionable hottakes attached to them!
@@MLaserHistory Then NO XD
@@MLaserHistoryNo answers, only trade offs
Yaaay! Another m laser guild video!!!
As for whether guilds were good or bad, the question is irrelevant. They were simply a reaction to growing wealth and power, and eventually wore out their usefulness and disappeared.
I guess the question is if they didn't exist, like they didn't in other parts of the world, would Europe still come out ahead economically in the early modern period?
@@MLaserHistory I say yes. I think Europe came out ahead because its geography led to do many competing kingdoms and nations
They are very much still alive and well and I would argue that they were the first global corporations and they deliberately staged Europe to be perceived the way we do while maintaining the same power and luxury in every region they had footing...Asia, south America, north America, Africa and on tiny islands, luxury boats and whatever else
That's such a weird take: guilds didn't become "useless" they were simply subverted and destroyed by capitalists and governments. The french during revolutionary and napoleonic times destroyed a lot of guilds. (Those guilds came back in part but never in the same way as before french invasion)
@@bgs2004 at the onset of the pandemic a release was made that only Dutch fishmongers had the right to fish the Atlantic off the coast of MA. Local fisheries were non essentials. They are quietly in control. It leaks out here and there
This was so educational. Bravo ... and thank you!
I never knew that's where universities with their Bachelor's Degrees and Master's Degrees came from 🤯🤯🤯 You learn something new every day.
Is the success of the guilds part of the reason for the Europeans outcompeting Mamluk industry in the mid 14th century.
Resulting in the deindustrialization of the Levant for even simple things like paper or soap. As well as more complex industries like glass-making, sugar processing and textiles.
All of which the middle east used to export. But now imported and deindustrialised
what is your favourit fod? 2:07
perkelt also known as paprikaz
yey new video!
13:14 that blew my mind. Cool how the tradition has endured and evolved
Great video!
17:46 are you member of the Sarcasm Guild
It seems to me that guilds never really disappeared, and they still exist, or were perhaps reinvented, and it's just that we call and understand them differently: as bodies enforcing trade and industry standards, and simultaneously as large corporations/conglomerates, or even co-ops, or conglomerates/fraternities of co-ops - sort of like industries regulating themselves.
I frankly wouldn't mind if we brought them back more formally. Seems in some ways a better system.
Brilliant - thanks!
Usually the guilds also were responsible for the defense of a town, each guild having to man and equip one tower of the city fortification at their costs. The city did not cash in taxes and than pay soldiers, it was all outsourced to the guilds. Maybe only a small core unit within the city were professional and paid soldiers.
And if the guild is armed, you cannot install a tyranny and supress them. That's how democracy more and more evolved, at least on the town level, which was later the model to be expanded to the whole nation.
Well towns were also just inherently hard for kings to control because they had walls and weren't directly dependent on the feudal structure the king was at the head of.
That's not a guild that's job!
its interesting to see how Unions and Company's basically evolved from the same source.
Both of them suck. Unions and companies destroyed the relationship between the master and his labourers within their respective side. Instead of being co-owners of a craft, you are given a commission with no share of the profit. And instead of having a good relationship with your employer, you actively rebel in accordance with outside influence. Even old pirates had a better job dynamic than modern society. Both stemming from French liberals wanting more and merchant's guilds expanding and cracking down.
2:03 FOD SUPPLY!
(dw it's English's fault for having two oo's)
ahh shit :D ou well mistakes happen
an excellent subject, thank you for enlightening us!
very interesting video, thank you for this.
I am in a fraternity and one of the first things they teach us is our roots on medieval guilds and how they worked
Hell yeah, guild posting
Watching your guild videos is making me want to play Skyrim again.
Wow it's incredible how much of this guild system is still intact to this day in unions and universities
Great video
Was it Henry I or Henry II that gave the London weavers their exclusive right? Because you used both in the video.
Henry the first gave them the initial royal charter with exclusive rights but it has not survived so we don't know what it said, while Henry the second was the one who got the money from the guild for expanding their exclusive rights further. Sorry for the confusion, I did word it poorly.
@@MLaserHistory No problem, thanks for the clarification.
Thank you so much! I love the history of the economy.
In spite i'm mostly a determinist (let's say 75/25 geography and climate vs the rest) i say guilds are indeed important in the economic development of europe, without them trade and craft become less worth the risks and investment in a world were laws regarding those are as varied as the number of polities of the time. I believe we can see that when comparing places where their influence was heavily curtailed (not to mistake my point with places where they didn't develop or did so very sparsely) vs places in which they flourished.
I'm not saying that they birth wasn't a given due to geography and technology but they could have easily been snuffed out way earlier and in much more places so their success wasn't so certain.
In the end like most of the feudal structure they probably did overstay their welcome since posterior structures that were partly born from them like stock markets adapted better to the changes.
Cool to finally learn the full meaning of apprentice, journeyman and master. Does this imply that Santa's pop culture title as "master toymaker" was maybe originally used to infer that he was a master in the guild sense?
Adam Smith did not say trade associations should be prohibited, only that governments should not facilitate them since this would likely lead to an increase in prices.
Holy shit? I thought this day would never come!
It always comes. No matter how sever the drought may seem, there is always light at the end of the tunnel, I will always ... come.
Guilds aren't no different than companies today and modern day guilds were be good for the people
To me, I say without enough of an academic background and a Scandinavian bias, Guilds seem like precursors to both large conglomerates of corporations and worker unions. The first of which I dislike, and the latter I like a lot. Also regarding the latter I see the likeness of the large guilds covering a variety of similar professions as umbrella organisations for smaller ones resonate with the large unions doing the same thing for smaller unions in my country (SE).
The big difference is that unions are non-discriminatory, not in the sense that unions have no issues with discrimination, but that they are by design made to accept anyone who is interested and in fact actively try to expand. That's definitely what makes unions much better than medieval guilds, though otherwise they can definitely provide similar services like training, insurance, banking, professional magazines and so on. I think it's interesting that in modern Nordic society unions are a central pillar that both offer vast benefits beyond what is just inherent to a union, similar to the role Guilds played in medieval society.
It really depends on what product the guild was making.
For example, clothes, a necessary good in Europe. If a guild had a monopoly on clothes in some big city and decided to decrease production of normal clothes and put their efforts towards luxury clothing that would be really really bad, since they'd be taking more money from people who need that money to live in the form of more expensive clothing.
If a guild focused, for example, on wine then decreasing production wouldn't really matter, as they'd just be taking more money from people who already have a lot of it, and giving it to people who'll probably use it more productively than the people buying wine themselves.
"Price gouging is okay as long as you only do it to rich people"
@@ShadowGricken What I meant to say is price gouging is okay as long as you do it to luxuries, but luxuries are mainly consumed by rich people so I guess you are sort of correct.
Are you going to talk about your PhD in any of your videos? If not, I wonder what it is about. Also, what was it like applying for the PhD. Did you have to show that you had published papers or just the master’s thesis. What was the master’s thesis!
I will probably do an "update" style video, on my second channel (www.youtube.com/@MLaserRandom), about my PhD experience after the first school year ends so at some point in the summer.
My master's dissertation was about the evolution of the Avaro-Slavic relations from the mid 6th century to the end of the 8th century. My PhD on the other hand isn't in medieval history but in public history. I am doing a PhD on current state of audio-visual communication of history online and comparing it to the audio-visual communication of history before the internet, so like TV history documentaries. I am basically researching the state of online history communication which has not been done before.
Since I was switching from medieval history to public history my PhD application was a bit special. I didn't have any "official" publications. I had one piece that I self published because no outlet wanted to publish it since it was attacking current academia and it's ignorance of history communicators (www.academia.edu/104179121/History_Communicators_and_Academia_Why_Should_Academia_Employ_History_Communicators).
On average, however, as long as you're not applying to the top schools like Harvard, Princeton, Oxford, Cambridge, etc. most universities will not expect you to have any published materials when you apply for PhD. The reason why I managed to get into Cambridge without being published was because I have this UA-cam channel and I am the founder and president of the online history creator group. This means my real world experience in my proposed PhD topic is very substantial and so I was given a pass on not having any publications. On top of that I already had a degree from a prestigious uni (Oxford) which certainly played a role, and I have, prior to applying, talked to my current PhD supervisor, whom I have met at a Public History conference in London. So I was known in the space as I attended conferences.
Bottom line is put yourself out there. Communicate with potential supervisors, go to conferences, and try to at least publish something. Even if you don't get anything published just to have a paper that you tried to publish that you can showcase to your potential supervisor saying "I am trying to get this published" will be a huge plus.
@@MLaserHistory Thanks for that and for replying to most, if not all, of your comments. I read the paper, and it was actually very enjoyable to read. Maybe too enjoyable for the average academic! I thought it was weird that one of the reasons it was rejected was that it was not researched properly, as it appeared to be thoroughly researched. One more question, if you do not mind. If you were trying to get a paper published before you do a PhD, how would you go about doing it? Would you try to adapt your master's thesis into a paper, for example, or try to write a totally different paper? In fact, I am trying to write a niche history paper myself at the moment.
A video on an obscure topic of European politics. Yeah baby, let’s go
Well...in many languages guildhall would be pronounced willed all. Word magic
guilds facilitating information: the guilds were charging for the privilege, and limiting who got to learn and who was allowed to teach ; apprenticeship was paid, not free, and lasted far longer than it was needed to learn the trade
Europe developed and stopped being a backwater for the Middle East when the guild monopolies were broken or ignored, such as when in the Netherlands lumber mills were set up outside the influence of the guilds.
Ain't no party like a Weavers Guild party!
"Fod supply"
Amazing!
@MLaserHistory 2;15 you miss an 'O' in Food (in the video Fod)
Oh that’s why head of colleges are still called masters, interesting
Buying the king for 16 pounds is impressive
so unions kept the medieval world running
Such a cool video. Sounds to me like guilds were a good thing, until they weren't. They played a net positive role for social and economic progress through the positive attributes that you outline, which in that era, outweighed the negative. By the time we got the Adam Smith's era (and probably well before that, but I'm not equipped with the knowledge to discriminate such details), they had outlasted their utility, as Adam Smith pointed out. New ideas about how to organize the relationship between the state, society, and economic development were emerging, and guilds did not fit into this evolving framework. Just some thoughts sparked by watching this wonderful video. The main sort of thing it gets me thinking about is the evolving relationship between commercial/economic activity and state power.
Guilds sound a lot like modern workers' unions.
I always thought guilds were only bad, but after watching this (and being older) I realize they were good for some reasons and bad for others... 😅
as it often is in history
12:11 What about Adventurer guild? 😩
2:10 Increasing “fod” supply? Really?
omg imagine spelling mistakes happening, couldn't be me.
@@MLaserHistory I meant no offence by it, we all do it.
How’s Cambridge going?
That was interesting. So guilds we’re basically Union/corporations like entities
How enforced were the rules concerning familial ties and ethnic membership? According to the paper "Access to the Trade: Monopoly and Mobility in European Craft Guilds in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries" (you can google the paper, it's free on the internet), in the majority of guilds between 1600 to 1800, only a minority of masters were the kin of masters or from the local area. In the majority of guilds surveyed, the majority of masters were outsiders (not related through blood ties with local masters or from the local area).
This would not make any sense if the rules concerning familial ties and ethnic membership were enforced stringently. I suspect that in practice most guilds made exceptions most of the time and that the rules for who could be a master were mostly just guidelines. It seems that the only real limitation was the need to submit a masterwork - any other requirement could be waved by the guild for practicality sake.
That paper is still very much debated. For one, they didn't take into account ethnicity. There isn't a single mention of ethnicity. They also mention nationality and gender only as things that need further research. Their entire argument hinges on geographical difference as in people out of town vs people in town. However, most arguments against guilds don't make geographical arguments of exclusivity rather than exclusivity based on social as in class differences, ethnic difference as in Slavic, Baltic, Wallach, and gender differences. All of these the paper does not address in a meaningful way. A German from Hamburg would have been welcomed in a German guild in Plzen were as a Slav in a Hamburg guild not so much. Their research into familial ties is, however, interesting but I'd like to see larger data sets. For masters they only looked at 27 different towns and excluded merchant guilds which played a big part in European guilds. For masters all together they looked at only 72 guilds which pales in comparison to the book 'The European Guilds: An Economic Analysis' by Sheilagh Ogilvie which looked at around 100,000 guilds across Europe.
You mentioned how some people consider the guild system to be one of the main reasons for europe becoming more economically advanced compared to the rest of the world. But why didn't guilds exist in those places then? It seems to me that guilds are an inevitable product of urbanisation, so they should have existed in other places as well. Did guilds exist in other places but with different powers and rights compared to those in europe?
Was there something similar to guilds in Byzantine?
Yes, Byzantium retained the Roman collegium system, although heavily changed since the Roman Principate. It seems the Byzantine collegia, over the course of the middle ages, started to operate more like Western Guilds than ancient Roman collegia.
@@MLaserHistory then the next question what happened to them under regnum of seldjuk/ottoman turks?
@@Witiok1992 I don't know.
So High Medieval Guilds were kind of like companies, but also like labour unions for the well off?
Think of them more akin to a professional association. This would be for example the American Medical Association which creates the requirements for who gets to be a doctor or the BAR association for who gets to be a Lawyer. You cannot be in these professions legally without being licensed through them or a foreign equivalent they recognize.
@@badart3204 I can see that.
I think its fair to say that Guilds created the urban middle class in the first place that it then safeguarded.
So were the Freemasons a guild, or were they masons not tied to a guild (that is, free)?
A cult with a guild attached, like a business which is a front for money laundering or a front for the mob.
Please make a video on the Inca Empire