Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T04:48:49.176Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

One counter and your own account: redefining illicit labour in early modern Antwerp

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2010

BERT DE MUNCK
BERT DE MUNCK*
Affiliation:
Centre for Urban History, University of Antwerp, FLW-FDGES, S.D.310, Grote Kauwenberg 18, 2000 Antwerpen, Belgium
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

This article examines the problem of illicit labour from the perspective of transformations in the (local) distribution channels. Rather than large masters circumventing the guilds’ rules regarding labour market entry or large merchants shifting from a Kauf to a Verlag system, early modern manufacturing guilds in Antwerp confronted mercers and wholesalers who entered into production without being masters. In response, the guilds extended their rules, so that their regulations actually matured in the course of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Rather than (labour market) deregulation and proto-industrialization, the issue was the disappearance of the straightforward link between production and retailing, tied together by mastership.

Type
Research Article
Information
Urban History , Volume 37 , Issue 1 , May 2010 , pp. 26 - 44
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 For recent status questionis and extensive references, see Farr, J.R., Artisans in Europe, 1300–1914 (Cambridge, 2000)Google Scholar; Haupt, H.-G. (ed.), Das Ende der Zünfte. Ein europäischer Vergleich (Göttingen, 2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Lis, C., Lucassen, J., Prak, M. and Soly, H. (eds.), Guilds in the Early Modern Low Countries. Work, Power and Representation (London, 2006)Google Scholar.

2 Richardson, G., ‘A tale of two theories: monopolies and craft guilds in medieval England and modern imagination’, Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 23, 2 (2001), 217–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and idem, ‘Guilds, laws, and markets for manufactured merchandise in late medieval England’, Explorations in Economic History, 41 (2004), 1–25.

3 E.g., Munro, J., ‘Industrial protectionism in medieval Flanders: urban or national?’, in Miskimin, H.A., Herlihy, D. and Udovitch, A.L. (eds.), The Medieval City (New Haven, 1977), 229–67Google Scholar; and idem, ‘Urban regulation and monopolistic competition in the textile industries of the late-medieval low countries’, in Aerts, E. and Munro, J. (eds.), Textiles of the Low Countries in European Economic History (Louvain, 1990), 41–50Google Scholar.

4 S.L. Kaplan, ‘Les corporations, les “faux-ouvriers” et le faubourg St. Antoine au XVIIIe siècle’, Annales. ESC (Mar.–Apr. 1988), 353–78; Thillay, A., Le faubourg Saint-Antoine et ses ‘faux ouvriers’. La liberté du travail à Paris aux XVIIe et XVIIIe siècles (Paris, 2002)Google Scholar.

5 Sonenscher, M., Work and Wages. Natural Law, Politics and the Eighteenth-Century French Trades (Cambridge, 1989), 130–48Google Scholar; Lis, C. and Soly, H., ‘Different paths of development. Capitalism in the Northern and Southern Netherlands during the middle ages and the early modern period’, Review, 20 (1997), 211–42Google Scholar; idem, ‘Export industries, craft guilds and capitalist trajectories’, in Lis et al. (eds.), Guilds, 107–32.

6 See Farr, Artisans, 43 and 285; Hoffmann, P.R., ‘Winkelarbeiter, Nahrungsdiebe und rechte Amtsmeister. Die “Bönhaserei” als Forschungsproblem der vorindustriellen Gewerbegeschichte und deren Bedeutung für das frühneuzeitliche Handwerk am Beispiel Lübecks’, in Jeggle, C. and Häberlein, M. (eds.), Vorindustrielles Gewerbe. Handwerkliche Produktion und Arbeitsbeziehungen in Mittelalter und früher Neuzeit (Konstanz, 2004), 183–210Google Scholar; idem, ‘In defence of corporate liberties: early modern guilds and the problem of illicit artisan work’, Urban History, 34 (2007), 76–88.

7 Ehmer, J., ‘Traditionelles Denken und neue Fragestellungen zur Geschichte von Handwerk und Zunft’, in Lenger, F. (ed.), Handwerk, Hausindustrie und die Historische Schule der Nationalökonomie. Wissenschafts- und gewerbegeschichtliche Perspektiven (Bielefeld, 1998), 19–77, 65–73, esp. 66Google Scholar.

8 Thanks to the guilds ‘la communauté n'est pas complètement débordée par ce que nous appelons le marché’. Kaplan, S.L., ‘L'apprentissage au XVIIIe siècle: le cas de Paris’, Revue d'histoire moderne et contemporaine, 40, 3 (1993), 436–79, at 436CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

9 Duplessis, R.S., Transitions to Capitalism in Early Modern Europe (Cambridge, 1997), 35–6, 110, 113, 118, 120–1, 126–8, 225Google Scholar. Also Farr, Artisans, 276–97.

10 See n. 5; also Lis, C. and Soly, H., ‘Subcontracting in guild-based export trades, thirteenth–eighteenth centuries’, in Epstein, S.R. and Prak, M. (eds.), Guilds, Innovation, and the European Economy, 1400–1800 (Cambridge, 2008), 81–113Google Scholar.

11 E.g., Thijs, A.K.L., De zijdenijverheid te Antwerpen in de zeventiende eeuw (Brussels,1969), 79–83Google Scholar; and idem, Van ‘werkwinkel’ tot ‘fabriek’. De textielnijverheid te Antwerpen (einde 15de–begin 19de eeuw) (Brussels, 1987), 236–43.

12 Cf. Deceulaer, H., Pluriforme patronen en een verschillende snit. Sociaal-economische, institutionele en culturele transformaties in de kledingsector in Antwerpen, Brussel en Gent, 1585–1800 (Amsterdam, 2001), 155Google Scholar; Riello, G., A Foot in the Past. Consumers, Producers, and Footwear in the Long Eighteenth Century (Oxford, 2006), esp. ch. 4Google Scholar. Also Van Damme, I., Verleiden en verkopen. Antwerpse kleinhandelaars en hun klanten in tijden van crisis (ca. 1648-ca. 1748) (Antwerp, 2007), 237Google Scholar.

13 Totalling about 30 guilds and some 50 ordinances.

14 Some of these sources were collected during my Ph.D. research on apprenticeship in Antwerp guilds. See De Munck, B., Technologies of Learning. Apprenticeship in Antwerp from the Fifteenth Century to the End of the Ancien Régime (Turnhout, 2007)Google Scholar.

15 In 1738 my sample of guilds contained only 16.2% of the total number of masters at that time (511 out of 3,150 masters (mercers excluded), see Smekens, F., Verzamelde geschriften (Borgerhout, n.d.), 62–7 (Bijlage II. Ambachten. Toestand in 1738))Google Scholar, but the two most important industries in numerical terms (textiles and tailoring) were included via existing literature, especially Thijs, Van ‘werkwinkel’ tot ‘fabriek’, and Deceulaer, Pluriforme patronen. Moreover, in most of the juridical proceedings craft guilds confronted individual mercers or the mercers’ guild, being the most important group of all in numerical terms (1,500 to 2,500 members, see Blondé, B. and Greefs, H., ‘Werk aan de winkel: de Antwerpse meerseniers: aspecten van kleinhandel en verbruik in de 17de en 18de eeuw’, in De lokroep van het bedrijf: handelaars, ondernemers en hun samenleving van de zestiende tot de twintigste eeuw. Liber amicorum Roland Baetens (Antwerp, 2001) (Bijdragen tot de geschiedenis, 84:1–3), 211–13)Google Scholar.

16 For Antwerp, see Thijs, Van ‘werkwinkel’ tot ‘fabriek, 372–3, 398–9 (cloth dressers, fullers and yarn twisters); Deceulaer, Pluriforme patronen, 294 (hosiery makers); Lis, C. and Soly, H., ‘De macht van “vrije arbeiders”: collectieve acties van hoedenmakersgezellen in de Zuidelijke Nederlanden (zestiende-negentiende eeuw)’, in Lis, C. and Soly, H. (eds.), Werken volgens de regels. Ambachten in Brabant en Vlaanderen, 1500–1800 (Brussels, 1994), 15–50 (hat makers)Google Scholar; and De Munck, B., ‘Meritocraten aan het werk. Deregulering van de arbeidsmarkt bij de Antwerpse timmerlieden in de 18de eeuw’, in Blondé, B., De Munck, B. and Vermeylen, F. (eds.), Doodgewoon. Mensen en hun dagelijks leven in de geschiedenis. Liber Amicorum Alfons K.L. Thijs (Antwerp, 2005), 87–106 (carpenters and masons)Google Scholar.

17 E.g., City Archives Antwerp (hereafter CAA), Guilds and Crafts (hereafter GC) 4267, 27 Jun. 1718, fols. 68–9; GC 4267, 23 Aug. 1754 (extract), arts. 12, 16 and 17 (masons); GC 4028, 7 Oct. 1536, fols. 17–18 (cloth dressers).

18 A separate trial piece for journeymen has been documented for Antwerp, with the cloth dressers, the masons and the carpenters. Scholliers, E., ‘Vrije en onvrije arbeiders, voornamelijk te Antwerpen in de 16de eeuw’, Bijdragen voor de geschiedenis der Nederlanden, 11 (1956), 285–322, at 288, 291–2Google Scholar; and CAA, GC 4341, 31 Mar. 1543, arts. 5–6.

19 E.g., Deceulaer, Pluriforme patronen, 284–5.

20 CAA, GC 4488, 24 Feb. 1454, art. 2.

21 CAA, GC 4002, 25 Oct. 1582, art. 25. If they stayed longer than six months, they had to pay £1 10s (art. 26), which was the same as newly registered apprentices (art. 11).

22 CAA, GC 4112, 30 Jan. 1606, fols. 94v–95; GC 4112, 24 Nov. 1603, fols. 86v–87v.

23 Cf. De Munck, Technologies, ch. 4. The practice of forsaking future mastership in return for a lower registration fee for apprentices seems to have been rare in the Southern Netherlands. One exception in CAA, GC 4487, account book gold and silversmiths, fol. 35 (account 1564–65).

24 CAA, GC 4112, 3 Dec. 1477, fols. 39r–43v, arts. 16 and 33; GC 4112bis, p. 50 (copy); GC 4112, 24 Nov. 1603, fols. 86v–87v; GC 4112, 30 Jan. 1606, fols. 94v–95r (shoemakers); GC 4334, fols. 1ff; GC 4335, 14 Jun. 1497, fol. 2v; GC 4334, fol. 22; GC 4335, 24 Dec. 1519, fols. 26vff; GC 4334, fol. 22v, GC 4335, 4 Jun. 1522; GC 4334, fols. 71r–72v; GC 4335, 25 Mar. 1621, fols. 92v–94r (cabinet makers).

25 See, e.g., Thijs, Van ‘werkwinkel’ tot ‘fabriek’, 219–57; Deceulaer, Pluriforme patronen, 162–3; De Munck, ‘Meritocraten’.

26 See n. 10.

27 They had to pay a certain income fee or recurrent tax then. E.g., Prims, F., ‘Het kleermakersambacht’, Antwerpiensia, 10 (1936), 357–8 (tailors)Google Scholar; CAA, GC 4017, n.d., art. 7 (fullers); GC 4267, 21 Aug. 1458, fol. 4 (masons); GC 4341, 31 Mar. 1544, arts. 13–14 (carpenters).

28 CAA, GC 4267, 22 Mar. 1725, fol. 70 (masons); GC, 4345, 23 Feb. 1767, fol. 83, art. 1; GC 4343, Account 1700–03; GC 4343, Account 1711–12 (carpenters).

29 CAA, GC 4334, fols. 1ff; GC 4335, 14 Jun. 1497, fol. 2v; GC 4334, fols. 65r–66v; GC 4335, 28 Apr. 1621, fol. 83vff, art. 9; Deceulaer, Pluriforme patronen, 109, 137, 144–5, 300.

30 CAA, GC 4334, 10 Dec. 1543, fols. 23v–24v; GC 4335, fol. 30r–v (cabinet makers); GC 4028, 20 Sep. 1696, p. 123, arts. 7, 8 and 10 (cloth dressers); GC 4341, 19 Dec. 1657 (carpenters).

31 E.g., CAA, GC 4264, 7 Mar. 1543 (1544) (tinsmiths and plumbers); GC, 4262, 7 Sep. 1521, fols. 1–2 (oil pressers); GC 4255, 17 Jan. 1595, arts. 6ff (hat makers).

32 A master piece was first mentioned in 1497 for the cabinet makers, in 1523 for the tinsmiths, in 1524 for the gold and silversmiths, in 1528 for the linen weavers (small weavers and tick weavers in the seventeenth century), in 1543 for the carpenters, in 1583 for the shoemakers and tanners and in 1639 for the twiners. CAA, GC 4334, 14 Jun. 1497, art. 2, fol. 1v; GC 4335, fol. 1 (copy); GC 4264, 12 Nov. 1523; GC 4488, 24 Nov. 1524; GC 4341, 31 Mar. 1543, arts. 5–6; GC 4112, 18 Apr. 1583, fol. 62v; F. Prims, Geschiedenis van Antwerpen, 10 vols. (Antwerp, 1927–49), vol. VII, 2nd book, 48, and VIII, 2nd book, 76; Thijs, Van ‘werkwinkel’ tot‘ fabriek’, 99. The cloth dressers prescribed a master piece in 1536, although this may have already been defined before. CAA, GC 4029, 7 Oct. 1536, art. 3. Additional trials were prescribed also with the ‘Viergekroonden’ in 1674 (stone cutters, slaters and road pavers); CAA, GC 4267, 17 Mar. 1674.

33 E.g., CAA, GC 4334, 6 Aug. 1515, fols. 7v–9v; GC 4112bis, 13 Sep. 1774, pp. 192–7, art. 7.

34 CAA, GC, 4262, 7 Sep. 1521, fols. 1–2 (oil pressers); GC 4264, 1 Mar. 1543 (1544); GC 4004, 4 Jul. 1651, fols. 42v–43v (pewterers and plumbers); GC 4488, 24 Jan. 1543, fols. 76r and 78r (gold and silversmiths); GC 4017, 30 May 1576, fols. 333ff (cloth cutters); GC 4255, 17 Jan. 1595, arts. 6ff (hat makers); GC 4028, 20 Sep. 1696, art. 1 (cloth dressers).

35 CAA, Notary's Archives Antwerp (herafter N) 45, fol. 168 (1701); N 1303, fols. 49, 199 (1747); N 4402, fol. 24 (1749); N 2913, 9 Feb. 1752; GC 4490, 6 Mar. 1781. Sometimes they founded a company, typically among family members: CAA, N 2787, fol. 66 (1669); N 764, fol. 35 (1721).

36 Schlugleit, D., De Antwerpse goud- en zilversmeden in het corporatief stelsel (1382–1789) (Wettern, 1969), 242–8Google Scholar.

37 I limit myself to some examples here: CAA, GC 4488, fols. 76r and 78r; GC 4485, no. 1, 24 Jan. 1543, fols. 11r–12v; GC 4485, no. 2, 9 Feb. 1557, fol. 13r–v; GC 4001, fols. 187v–188r (gold and silversmiths); GC 4003, 21 Jan. 1621, fol. 26 (silk weavers); GC 4337, 19 Jul. 1694, fol. 36 (cabinet makers); Deceulaer, Pluriforme patronen, 162. See also Thijs, Van ‘werkwinkel’ tot ‘fabriek’, 327–35.

38 CAA, GC 4002, 22 Nov. 1574, fols. 64–5; Schlugleit, De Antwerpse goud- en ziversmeden, 74–5, 110–11.

39 See, e.g., GC 4002, 25 Oct. 1582, arts. 30–4; GC 4477, 9 Nov. 1605, art. 4 (diamond cutters); Schlugleit, De Antwerpse goud- en zilversmeden, 139ff, 242–8; CAA, Process dossiers (hereafter P), A 562, 1651–52; GC 4485, no. 2, 9 Feb. 1557, fol. 13r–v; GC 4002, 22 Nov. 1574, fol. 64v (gold and silversmiths); GC 4264, 1 Mar. 1543 (1544) (pewterers and plumbers); GC 4101, 5 Nov. 1590, fols. 38–40 (wood breakers); GC 4255, 17 Jan. 1595 (hat makers); GC 4042, 3 Aug. 1622, art. 26 (camlet dyers). This is similar to the prohibition for tailors to live in second-hand dealers’ or stocking makers’ premises. Prims, ‘Het kleermakersambacht’, 361–2.

40 CAA, GC 4028, 7 Oct. 1536, fol. 18 (cloth dressers); GC 4002, 22 Nov. 1574, fol. 65r (gold and silversmiths). See also GC 4485, no. 3, fol. 14v; GC 4112, 24 Nov. 1603, fols. 86v–87v; GC 4112, 30 Jan. 1606, fols. 94v–95r (shoemakers).

41 Schlugleit, D., Geschiedenis van het Antwerpsche diamantslijpersambacht (Antwerp, 1935), 44–5, 84–5; 145–7Google Scholar.

42 Prims, Geschiedenis van Antwerpen, vol. IX, 2nd book, 78.

43 CAA, GC 4001, 8 Feb. 1404, fol. 3r (shoemakers); GC 4001, 1 Sep. 1421, fol. 17r (shipmasters); GC 4001, 18 Oct. 1424, fol. 39v (wood breakers); GC 4001, 1 Mar. 1434, fol. 12 (blacksmiths); GC 4001, 20 Aug. 1428, fol. 49r (coopers); GC 4001, 6 Nov. 1436, fol. 1r (carpenters); GC 4267, 21 Aug. 1458, art. 2 (masons); GC 4273, 10 Nov. 1436, fol. 30r (second-hand dealers).

44 E.g., CAA, GC 4001, 8 Feb. 1404, fol. 3r (shoemakers); GT 4001, 6 Nov. 1436, fol. 1r, art. 2 (carpenters); GC 4001, 20 Aug. 1428, fol. 49 (cabinet makers and coopers); GC 4352, 1 Mar. 1434, fol. 12v (blacksmiths).

45 CAA, GC, 4265, Duplicque (n.d.), arts. 7–10 and 16.

46 CAA, GC 4265, Duplicque, art. 27.

47 CAA, GC 4265, Duplicque; GC 4002, 25 Aug. 1572, fol. 30v.

48 CAA, GC 4114, Corte instructie ende redenen van scheijdinghe voor. . ., n.d., art. 14.

49 See De Munck, B., ‘La qualité du corporatisme. Stratégies économiques et symboliques des corporations anversoises du XVe siècle à leur abolition’, Revue d'histoire moderne et contemporaine, 54, 1 (2007), 116–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

50 CAA, P A 562, 1651–52.

51 CAA, GC 4028, 20 Sep. 1696, art. 10 (cloth dressers); GC 4485, 4 Oct. 1688, fols. 33r–v (gold and silversmiths).

52 CAA, GC 4114, 15 Jul. 1697.

53 Schlugleit, D., ‘De zilverhandel van de Meerse en de ordonnantiën van de goudsmeden te Antwerpen in de zestiende eeuw’, Bijdragen tot de geschiedenis, 30 (1939), 51Google Scholar.

54 Most apprenticeship terms were rather short in Antwerp, and master pieces were not always due. See Deceulaer, H. and Jacobs, M., ‘Qualities and conventions. Guilds in eighteenth-century Brabant and Flanders: an extended economic perspective’, in Epstein, S.R., Haupt, H.-G., Poni, C. and Soly, H. (eds.), Guilds, economy and society (Seville, 1998), 91–107Google Scholar; and De Munck, Technologies, ch. 1.2 and 2.2.

55 De Munck, Technologies, ch. 1.

56 CAA, GC 4345, 31 Aug. 1761, fols. 57ff; GC 4345, 22 Oct. 1770, fol. 106.

57 This is based on data from the mid-eighteenth century; see De Munck, ‘Meritocraten’.

58 CAA, GC 4001, fol. 53, copy in GC 4030, fol. 53r–v.

59 Cf. Fabri, R., De 17de-eeuwse Antwerpse kunstkast. Typologische en historische aspecten (Brussels, 1991), 115, 137ffGoogle Scholar.

60 Deceulaer, Pluriforme patronen, ch. 5; Blondé, B., ‘Tableware and changing consumer patterns: dynamics of material culture in Antwerp, seventeenth–eighteenth centuries’, in Veeckman, J. (ed.), Majolica and glass from Italy to Antwerp and Beyond: The Transfer of Technology in the Sixteenth – Early Seventeenth Century (Antwerp, 2002), 295–311Google Scholar; Van Damme, I., ‘Changing consumer preferences and evolutions in retailing: buying and selling consumer durables in Antwerp (c. 1648-c. 1748)’, in Blondé, B., Stabel, P., Stobart, J. and Van Damme, I. (eds.), Buyers and Sellers. Retail Circuits and Practices in Medieval and Early Modern Europe (Turnhout, 2006), 199–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Blondé, B. and Damme, I. Van, ‘Een crisis als uitdaging? Kleinhandelsevoluties en verbruiksveranderingen te Antwerpen (ca. 1648 – ca. 1748)’, Tijdschrift voor sociale en economische geschiedenis, 4, 1 (2007), 61–88, esp. 66–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

61 Cf. De Munck, B., ‘Skills, trust and changing consumer preferences. The decline of Antwerp's craft guilds from the perspective of the product market, ca. 1500 – ca. 1800’, International Review of Social History, 53 (2008), 197–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

62 CAA, GC 4002, 25 Oct. 1582, fols. 202–9, art. 15; GC 4001, 5 Nov. 1556, fols. 186v–187 (ribbon makers).

63 Cf. Eymard-Duvernay, F., ‘Conventions de qualité et formes de coordination’, Revue économique, 40 (1989), 329–59Google Scholar; idem, ‘Coordination des échanges par l'entreprise et qualité des biens’, in Orléan, A., Analyse économique des conventions (Paris, 1994), 331–58Google Scholar; Callon, M., Méadel, C. and Rabeharisoa, V., ‘The economy of qualities’, Economy and Society, 31 (2002), 194–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Also Minard, Ph., ‘Les corporations en France aux XVIIIe siècle: métiers et institutions’, in Kaplan, S.L. and Minard, Ph. (eds.), La France, malade du corporatisme? XVIIIe–XXe siècles (Paris, 2004), 39–51Google Scholar.

64 E.g. CAA, GC 4112, 3 May 1593, fols. 74r–75r; GC 4112bis, pp. 86–8 (copy).

65 See De Munck, ‘Skills, trust’; and idem, Technologies, chs. 6.3 and 6.4.

66 E.g., CCA, GC 4477, 24 Jan. and 31 Mar. 1610, art. 2; GC 4477, 21 Mar. 1611, art. 2 (diamond cutters); Thijs, De zijdenijverheid, 79–83; idem, Van ‘werkwinkel’ tot ‘fabriek’, 236–43.

67 Blondé and Greefs, ‘Werk aan de winkel’, 207–29; Van Aert, L. and Van Damme, I., ‘Retail dynamics of a city in crisis. The mercer guild in pre-industrial Antwerp (c. 1648 – c. 1748)’, in Blondé, B. et al. (eds.), Retailers and Consumer Changes in Early Modern Europe. England, France, Italy and the Low Countries (Tours, 2005), 147–50Google Scholar.

68 E.g., Mui, H.-Ch. and Mui, L.H., Shops and Shopkeeping in Eighteenth-Century England (London, 1989), 8–28Google Scholar. Additional references in Van Damme, I., ‘Pendelen tussen revoluties en tradities. Recent historisch onderzoek naar de kleinhandel in de late middeleeuwen en de nieuwe tijd’, Stadsgeschiedenis, 2, 1 (2007), 54–65Google Scholar.

69 B. De Munck and R. Vermoesen, ‘Shops, labour relations and distribution networks. The emergence of retail and the disappearance of producer-retailers in Alost, c. 1650 – c. 1800’, paper for the Third Flemish-Dutch Conference on the Economy and Society of the Low Countries before 1850, Universiteit Antwerpen, 31 Jan. – 1 Feb. 2008.

70 E.g., Thijs, De zijdenijverheid, 77–86; Deceulaer, Pluriforme patronen, ch. 4.

71 See Fabri, De 17de-eeuwse Antwerpse kunstkast. Typologische en historische aspecten, 138.

72 Prims, Geschiedenis van Antwerpen, vol. VIII, 2nd book, 89.

73 CAA, GC 4175, 26 Sep. 1580, art. 36.

74 Superficially this was related to the guilds’ crusades against wares imported from abroad or from the countryside, but in the same ordinance it was forbidden for masters to have more than one workshop or stall, inhibiting large masters from hiring others, perhaps other masters, to sell their products. Van Deun, J., ‘Het Antwerpse tinnegietersambacht in het Ancien Régime’, in Keur van tin uit de havensteden Amsterdam, Antwerpen en Rotterdam (Amsterdam, 1979), 40–2Google Scholar.

75 CAA, GC 4265, Duplicque, art. 12.

76 CAA, GC 4334, fols. 83–5; GC 4335, 5 Nov. 1647; CAA, GC 4004, 5 Nov. 1647, fol. 9r–v; GC 4334, fols. 83–5; GC 4335, fols. 107vff. Also GC 4004, 26 Jul. 1649, fols. 24v–25r; GC 4335, 5 Mar. 1650, fol. 138v; GC 4337, fol. 30.

77 CAA, GC 4356, 29 Apr. 1603, fol. 25.

78 E.g., CAA, GC 4255, 1640.

79 E.g., CAA, GC 4259, 1 Nov. 1730.

80 CAA, GC 4259, 26 Nov. 1663.

81 Some masters among the gold and silversmiths explicitly acknowledged that they did not have a shop, but this might mean that they worked in subcontracting arrangements legally. E.g., CAA, Privilegiekamer 2560, 5th quarter, fols. 196, 209 (1747).

82 CAA, Vierschaar 1355, fol. 225. The ‘shops’ of gold and silversmiths were often situated in the heart of the city centre (Wisselstraat, Grote markt, etc.).

83 CAA, GC 4485, 4 Oct. 1688, fol. 33r–v (gold and silversmiths).

84 See, e.g., CAA, GC 4334, fol. 66; GC 4335, 28 Apr. 1621, art. 13 (copy). Also De Munck, ‘La qualité’.

85 Mitchell, D., ‘Innovation and the transfer of skill in the goldsmiths’ trade in Restoration London’, in Mitchell, D. (ed.), Goldsmiths, Silversmiths and Bankers. Innovation and the Transfer of Skill, 1500–1800 (Stroud, 1995), 15Google Scholar.