Navigation – Plan du site
Familles laborieuses. Rémunération, transmission et apprentissage dans les ateliers familiaux de la fin du Moyen Âge à l’époque contemporaine en Europe
Apprentissage, transmission et travail dans les ateliers familiaux

Between home and workshop. Regional and social mobility of apprentices in 18th and 19th centuries Vienna

Annemarie Steidl

Résumé

This paper deals with regional mobility as well as with duration and stability of apprenticeships in Viennese artisan workshops. Until now, these questions have not received much attention among historians. The Viennese materials allow for differentiation among various craft branches, as well as to include gender aspects in the case of silk-weavers. The world of artisans was a world in motion and the study of Viennese apprentices in the 18th and 19th centuries permits key insights for investigations into social and regional mobility and stability. In preindustrial times, most of the young apprentices were born outside urban centers and had to move to town before starting their training. In addition, an apprenticeship was not only a training in artisan skills but more or less a period of assimilation into a new environment : an artisan household in the city, and the social and cultural milieu of small scale production.

Haut de page

Texte intégral

  • 1 See for example Moch 1992.
  • 2 Ehmer 1997 ; Ehmer 2004.
  • 3 For a more detailed discussion, see Steidl 2003a ; Steidl 2007.

1Historically, the world of small enterprises has been a world in motion. Over the last few decades, the perseverance and flexibility of pre-industrial institutions and mentalities, of cultural and institutional frameworks in the 18th and 19th centuries have become central themes in historical research. In the last decades, research in social history has called attention to the extraordinary high extent, as well as the rich diversity, of spatial and social movements in pre-industrial Europe1. The historical study of artisans and small-scale production provides key insights for an investigation into mobility and stability. My starting point is that artisan trades should not be interpreted as some kind of fossilized relic from the past. Rather, they should be understood as a flexible and ultimately very efficient means of regulating social mobility and dynamism2. This paper wants to give an example of the high flexibility of urban artisans in the case of apprentices in Viennese artisan workshops in the 18th and 19th centuries by looking at their regional and social mobility. Many of the young men, and in the case of silk weavers also young women, moved from their parents’ household to Vienna before starting their artisan career, and not all of them finished their training and entered a new phase of high mobility as journeymen3.

  • 4 Ehmer 1997, p. 175.

2As the capital of the Habsburg Empire, Vienna was, in the period under study, its most important economic center and home of numerous small and large workshops and enterprises. It is then very well suited for a detailed study of artisan mobility. Any exploration of Viennese artisans has to take into account the prominent position of the city within Central Europe as well as the peculiarities of the Austrian guild system. Since the beginning of the 18th century, the city experienced rapid population growth : Vienna’s inhabitants, including its suburbs, grew from 113,000 people in 1710 to 232,000 at the end of the 18th century and reached about 350,000 people during the first half of the 19th century. Thus, it was by far the largest and the most rapidly growing urban center in the German-speaking world and in all Central Europe4.

  • 5 Baryli 1980, p. 17-21 ; Ehmer 1984, p. 78-105 ; Ehmer 2000, p. 166.

3Artisans formed an important part of Vienna’s population; probably one third of all inhabitants were engaged in crafts or trades either as independent masters, journeymen, apprentices, or as their family members. In 1820, Vienna and its suburbs counted 159 trade corporations, of which 150 were civic guilds and nine were privileged communities. Out of a total of 306,000 dependent laborers, counted by the census of 1869, between half and three quarters were apprentices and journeymen in crafts and trades5. During the 18th century, the Habsburg governments developed a type of «state guild organization», in which guilds and the apprenticeship system were directed and protected by the state. This system was in existence until the abolition of the guilds in the second half of the 19th century.

  • 6 Cerman 1993 ; Steidl 2003a, 77-88.

4Vienna’s small-scale production was characterized by a great variety of economic and social conditions, where different kinds of production and degrees of economic success all came under the umbrella terms of « crafts » and « trades » (Handwerk und Gewerbe). These various modes of production coexisted simultaneously with each other : workshops of guild masters or artisans with a special license, domestic industry, manufactories, and, after 1803, even factories. It can be characterized as teamwork between artisans and protoindustrial production, dominated by the putting-out system, but also with centralized manufactories. For example, in the silk weaving trade newly established manufactories during the 18th century were centralized production plants, mostly for the spinning and weaving of simpler silk and velvet goods, run by entrepreneurs6. Essentially, entrepreneurs, guild masters, and silk weavers with a special license all produced the same goods. In guild records, the terms entrepreneur or guild master were used arbitrarily, and independently of the size of the workshop or manufactory and of their economic success.

  • 7 Deutsch 1909, p. 108-109.
  • 8 Blümml and Gugitz 1927, p. 158.
  • 9 Bucek, 1974, p. 58-60.
  • 10 Deutsch 1909, p. 108-109.

5Only Vienna’s silk weaving workshops and manufactories officially employed female apprentices, while a regular training period of girls in other crafts and trades was not documented in the guild records. And even in silk weaving, female laborers were most common in the newly established manufactories, while most workshops which were run by guild masters engaged predominantly men. According to a survey, 662 journeymen and 341 male apprentices were engaged in Vienna’s 236 silk weaving workshops in the 1770s, while the number of women was rather low : 90 skilled female laborers and 124 female apprentices7. In silk weaving, girls received a regular training and were certified upon the successful completion, similar to the male apprentices, but women were not allowed to tramp as journeymen or to run their own workshops as independent masters, with the exception of silk weaver’s widows. In the economic boom period during the first decades of the 19th century, women outnumbered men as laborers in the silk industries. In 1792, 1,400 journeymen, 200 male apprentices and 500 female laborers were engaged in Vienna’s silk production. By 1813, the number of journeymen rose to 6,000, and more than 800 young boys were training in the workshops, while the number of female workers had increased to nearly 8,000. Until the 1850s, silk production employed nearly twice as many women as men8. One of the most successful Viennese entrepreneurs was Andrä Paul Hebenstreit. In 1788, more than 300 male and female laborers worked in his manufactory in various activities on 94 looms9. The silk weaver’s widow Elise Falzorgerin engaged the highest number of women in her workshop : besides 6 journeymen, 21 skilled female workers and 31 girls as apprentices were recorded in the middle of the 18th century10.

Regional Mobility

  • 11 See for example Reininghaus 1981, p. 98-148 ; Bräuer 1982 ; Elkar 1983, p. 85-116 ; Lenger, Reith (...)
  • 12 See King 1997 ; Moch 1997, p. 44.

6Migration was an essential element of the social reproduction of urban crafts and trades. Until the end of the 19th century, the artisan world was a world of spatial movement because the labor force for workshops was largely recruited from outside urban centers. During the early modern period, and particularly in the 18th and 19th centuries, the majority of apprentices and masters and at least three-quarters of the journeymen consisted of migrants11. Spatial mobility has always been an extremely selective procedure. Migration routes were closely connected to a multiplicity of relationships and interactions between people : individuals have commonly made – and make – decisions within the context of the society they live in. People act within a set of networks defined by the state, neighborhoods, friendships, family, occupation, religion, and culture; the individual’s entry into these networks and the specific use that he or she makes of them will vary according to the historical period, geographical location, gender, social status, and age12.

  • 13 Rappaport 1989, p. 294.
  • 14 Vošahlíková 1994, p. 273.
  • 15 Smith 1973, p. 160.

7A regular artisan training, which included the years as apprentices and as journeymen, was already institutionalized in the late Middle Ages and was in existence in nearly the same form until the end of the 19th century. Enrolment as an apprentice, confirmed by registering in a special book, was the usual way to start such a career. Additional to the acquisition of new skills, the apprenticeship served as a means of absorbing guild customs. For boys and girls, coming from a rural background, the years as apprentice served as well as a period of assimilation into a new urban environment13. A Bohemian born locksmith describes in his autobiography about his apprenticeship in 19th century Vienna that it was usual for young boys from his village to tramp to the capital in order to start an artisan career and to improve their German14. « Young men whose horizons had been limited to their families and home towns were given the chance to enjoy broader contacts and experiences [...] »15.

  • 16 See Ehmer 1988, p. 232-238 ; Schofield 1987, p. 253-266 ; Alexander and Steidl 2012.
  • 17 Ehmer 1997, p. 185.
  • 18 Reith 1989, p. 7-8.

8In preindustrial Europe, young people migrated in high numbers; being regionally mobile was no exception for girls and boys at the age of 12, 13 or 1416. The beginning of an artisan career was usually accompanied with a change of residence from the parents’ home to the household of the master and his wife. For example, in trades with high numbers of artisans and workshops, such as the cabinetmakers, less than half of the apprentices were born in Vienna and the surrounding countryside, while, in the first half of the 18th century, almost a third had travelled hundreds of kilometers from Alpine regions to Vienna17. Already in preindustrial times, various crafts and trades started to spread from urban areas to the countryside, and even in smaller villages butchers, bakers, or shoemakers opened workshops. However, the right to train apprentices still remained exclusive to urban masters. Therefore, young people from mostly rural regions who intended to achieve an apprenticeship in crafts or trades had to be highly mobile  : they had to move to town18.

  • 19 Reith 1989, p. 10.
  • 20 Ehmer 1994, p. 81.

9The tradition of moving into the master’s household during the apprenticeship displays an astounding continuity in 19th century Vienna19. In 1857 and 1869, three quarters of all apprentices still lived in their masters’ households, and only a few resided as subtenants or had their lodgings with their parents or other relatives20. As most of the Viennese apprentices in the 19th century were migrants from Bohemia or Moravia, without their parents or relatives, they had to take their lodging in the master’s households.

Tab. 1 - Country of origin of Viennese apprentices, 1790-1862.

Country chimney sweeps silk weavers purse makers butchers
  1790-1856 1790-1862 1790-1854 1790-1819
  1861-1862     1844-1858
  n % n % n % n %
                 
Vienna 68 14.3 4335 69.1 60 63.2 1277 67.5
Lower Austria 91 19.2 664 10.6 11 11.6 353 18.7
Other Alpine prov. 16 3.4 242 3.9 1 1.1 37 2.0
Bohemian Lands 65 13.7 771 12.3 18 19.0 136 7.2
Galicia, Bukovina 5 1.1 3 0.0 - - 2 0.1
Hungary 14 3.0 86 1.4 2 2.1 55 2.9
Other Habsburg 23 4.9 41 0.7 - - - -
                 
Bavaria 8 1.7 42 0.7 1 1.1 21 1.1
Other German terr. 2 0.4 70 1.1 2 2.1 11 0.6
Switzerland 163 34.4 8 0.1 - - - -
Other regions 19 4.0 16 0.3 - - - -
                 
Total 474 100 6278 100 95 100 1892 100

Source : Chimney sweeps – Viennese Municipal Archive, Guilds/Books, 42/5; silk weavers – Viennese Municipal Archive, Guilds/Books, 50/22, 23, 25, 57; purse maker – Viennese Municipal Archive, Guilds/Books, 54/9; butchers – Viennese Municipal Archive, Guilds/Books, 15/7 and Landesinnung der Wiener Fleischhauer, Aufding- und Freisprechbuch 1844-1858; see also A. Steidl, Auf nach Wien!, p. 156.

  • 21 Glettler 1972 ; Steidl 2003a, p. 67-70.

10Besides the common fact of spatial mobility, nearly every craft had its own area of recruitment, and the young people often stemmed from different areas. Until the 19th century, geographically larger recruitment areas have gotten more concentrated, and in most crafts and trades the majority of apprentices originated from provinces inside Habsburg territories, as can be seen in tab. 1. More than 60 percent of the apprentices of Viennese silk weavers, purse makers, and butchers, who started their career between 1790 and 1862, were born in Vienna and another 10 – 19 percent in surrounding areas of Lower Austria. Apprentices in butcher workshops had the regionally most limited origin  : nearly all of them were born inside Habsburg territories. This is no surprise, since butcher workshops were common in both urban and rural areas, and therefore young boys did not have to go far to find a master for their training. In comparison to the butchers, among the purse maker and silk weaver apprentices were higher numbers of boys and girls – in case of the silk weavers – whose birthplaces were in the Bohemian Lands. Their mobility patterns confirm the overall increase of people from these provinces who moved to Vienna during the 19th century21.

  • 22 Reketzki 1952, p. 138-139 ; Steidl 2009.

11Migration networks shaped the recruitment regions of apprentices. The birthplaces of apprentices in Viennese chimney sweep workshops represent the intense relationships and communication networks which sometimes lasted for several generations. Migrants from Alpine regions in Switzerland, from Ticino and Grisons with an Italian-speaking majority population, dominated the craft since their first guild statutes were confirmed in Vienna at the end of the 17th century. More than a third of all boys who started an apprenticeship, during the period under study, were born in one of the two Swiss cantons. They were either related or known in the former neighborhood of the masters, who had arrived earlier from Switzerland to set up a workshop in Vienna22.

  • 23 Similar networks can also be found for the case of artisans in 17th century London : « Similarly, (...)
  • 24 Zatschek 1959, p. 374-375.

12A permanent network among special areas was also one of the prerequisites for establishing links among single workshops and certain regions in and outside the Habsburg Empire23. In his study of the Viennese carpenters, Heinz Zatschek discovered that it was common practice for future apprentices to migrate in groups from their places of origin to Vienna. For example, at the end of the 17th century, the Viennese carpenter Lambrecht Prändll, born in Tyrol, hired two boys from Innsbruck and one each from Hall, Innichen, and Brixen – all places in the former province of Tyrol. In the first half of the 18th century, five apprentices from Sillian in Tyrol finished their training in the workshop of the carpenter Christoph Hernecker; three of them were named Hernecker24. Similar examples, of masters who hired mainly apprentices who were related or stemmed from similar regions of origin can be found in many Viennese crafts ; however, this should not lead to hasty conclusions that this was a common practice in all urban workshops.

Social Mobility

  • 25 See for example Prösler 1954 ; Stürmer 1979 ; Wesoly, 1985.
  • 26 Reith 1989, p. 1-27 ; Schlenkrich 1995.

13A regular training period and high stability of an apprenticeship were major assumptions of traditional historical research25. Indeed, the cohabitation of masters and their families with apprentices and journeymen was an efficient way of dealing with an unsteady labor market. However, the high level of dependency of apprentices on their masters did not necessarily result in stability and successful completion of their training. Some results lead to the conclusion that an apprenticeship was by no means a period of lower mobility26. Indeed, not all apprentices finished their training in the same workshop where they had started and, of course, not all of them successfully completed their apprenticeship, as can be seen in tab. 2.

  • 27 Steidl 2003a, p. 252-261.
  • 28 Steidl 2003b.

14Data from several Viennese guilds offer some general information on this question. While up to 80 percent of the bookbinders finished their training in the second half of the 18th century, more than half of the locksmith apprentices gave up and never achieved the status of journeyman. Similar high rates of termination were common among the silk weavers; however, gender seems to have been an important factor for the smooth progress of an apprenticeship. While more the 40 percent of the male silk weavers did not complete their apprenticeship between 1830 and 1903, only 14 per cent of the young women stopped their training27. Although data on the individual reasons for ending an artisan career are rare, we can assume that apprenticeships of girls and boys were terminated for different reasons. The duration of an apprenticeship was usually shorter for girls than for boys ; therefore, it was easier for the girls to pass it. Women did not have the same occupational opportunities as men. While male workers had a wide range of urban employment sectors to earn their money, women, besides domestic service, were mostly limited to textile work28. Therefore, it was much harder for female laborers to find employment in other sectors of the city economy.

Tab. 2 - Stability of apprenticeships in Viennese crafts in 18th and 19th centuries.

crafts period incorp. apprentices terminations
      n %
         
bookbinder 1750-1804 385 77 20.0
cooper 1861-1862 115 25 21.7
haberdasher 1824-1857 1831 477 26.1
butcher 1844-1863 1330 372 28.0
chimney sweep 1740-1867 716 203 28.4
embroiderer of pearls 1665-1865 338 106 31.4
cabinet maker 1814-1840 121 43 35.5
purse maker 1709-1854 347 137 39.5
silk weaver 1810-1903 4677 1958 41.9
locksmith 1785-1803 945 538 57.0

Source : H. Skvarics, Die Migrationsgeschichte der Wiener Buchbinder von 1750 bis 1800 (Dissertation Thesis), Wien, 1996, p. 48; WStLA, Innungen/Bücher, 68/10; WStLA, Innungen/Bücher, 41; Landesinnung der Wiener Fleischhauer, Aufding- und Freisprechbuch 1844-1862, calculated by Heinz Berger; WStLA, Innungen/Bücher, 42/4, 5, calculated by Heinz Berger; F. Bauer, Die Zunft der Gold- und Perlsticker in Wien (unpublished seminar paper), Wien; H. Zatschek, 550 Jahre jung sein. Die Geschichte eines Handwerks, Wien, 1958, p. 107; WStLA, Innungen/Bücher, 54/9; WStLA, Innungen/Bücher, 50/22, 23, 25, 57; F. Schembor, Geschichte des Wiener Schlosserhandwerks von 1683 bis 1830 (unpublished manuscript), Wien; see also A. Steidl, Silk Weaver and Purse-Maker Apprentices in Eighteenth- and Nineteenth-Century Vienna, in B. De Munck, S. L. Kaplan, and H. Soly (ed.), Learning on the Shop Floor. Historical Perspectives on Apprenticeship, New York-Oxford, 2007, p. 146.

  • 29 Zatschek 1958, p. 43 ; regulations for the lengthening of an apprenticeship can also be found in o (...)
  • 30 Zatschek 1949, p. 162.
  • 31 Menzel 1972, p. 58.
  • 32 Mielke 1990, p. 215-216.
  • 33 Thiel 1911, p. 101.
  • 34 Grießinger, Reith 1986, p. 153 ; in 16th century London paying off years of apprenticeship was als (...)

15The duration of an apprenticeship was either shortened or lengthened for a number of reasons. Young artisans might have completed their training after a shorter period of time than given in the guild regulations. Even so, it was beneficial for masters to lengthen the training period and to keep the apprentices as cheap laborers. Some boys and their parents were excused from paying for their apprenticeship if they were willing to pass some extra years of training and to stay on for lower wages. It was during the 17th century that the practice of extra years became more and more common29. On the other hand, sons of masters were privileged, their apprenticeship tended to be shorter in duration. The Viennese guild of the cartwrights fixed the duration of the apprenticeship according to the body-height of the boys. Small and weak apprentices had to train for a longer period30. Likewise, an apprenticeship in a workshop of a Viennese bookbinder depended on the age and body-height of the boys31. The chimney sweeps preferred younger apprentices for their ability to climb up narrow chimneys32. On the contrary, prospective producers of leather clothes (Gollermacher) had to be 16 or 17 years old, because of the hard and toilsome work33. An analysis of apprentices in German crafts in the 18th century concludes  : « The higher the money for the apprenticeship the shorter the period of training »34.

  • 35 Viennese Municipal Archive, Handwerksartikeln für die Seiden-, Schleier- und Dünntüchelmacher, geg (...)
  • 36 In Lyon, a silk weaver’s workshop normally consisted of three or four female apprentices, one male (...)
  • 37 Deutsch 1909, p. 96.

16In most Viennese crafts and trades the duration of an apprenticeship was specified as three to five years ; in a few exceptional cases it could last up to six or seven years. In 1740, the guild statutes of the silk weavers demanded a six-year term, and master artisans who paid for the clothing of their apprentices were given the freedom to keep them for another year35. A comparison between the duration of apprenticeships of male and female artisans in fig. 1 shows gender differences. While training periods of girls usually lasted for two to four years, the duration of male apprenticeships shows a much wider range and was markedly longer – up to six and even seven years. Typically, the production of raw silk, spinning, and coiling was female work. Women also found employment as additional workers at the looms (Lazzezieherinnen). During the expansion of Vienna’s silk industry, female laborers became common in more and more activities of the finishing process ; by the 1750s, women’s work was widespread in almost every production step. Since even skilled women usually worked for lesser wages than male apprentices and journeymen, the silk weaver masters and entrepreneurs were interested in increasing the number of female laborers. As silk producers could reduce the production costs, the mercantilistic state benefited from the low prices of silk. Following the example set by silk weaver’s workshops in France and Italy, women were allowed to work on looms, and the Habsburg government encouraged the Viennese artisans to engage more female workers36. Some artisans were even given special support by the government, such as Andre Jonas, who originated from Lyon, received Viennese citizenship, and became a member of the Viennese guild in 1791. In addition, the Habsburg government granted him a loan of 2,000 guilders on the condition that he employed mostly women at his looms37.

Fig. 1 - Comparison of the duration of male and female apprenticeships in Viennese silk weaver’s workshops, 1830-1903

Fig. 1 - Comparison of the duration of male and female apprenticeships in Viennese silk weaver’s workshops, 1830-1903

Source : Viennese Municipal Archive, Guilds/Books, 50/22, 23, 25.

17Although masters in silk weaving had to pay wages already in the 18th century, the wage cost of a trained apprentice was much lower than that of a journeyman. If young artisans were trained in a shorter period than was specified in the guild statutes, it was a benefit for masters to keep those cheaper laborers instead of hiring journeymen. On the other hand, boys from poor families could also get some profit from the lengthening of their apprenticeships. Young artisans who were willing to devote extra years to their training for fewer wages than journeymen were discharged from paying the usual apprenticeship fees. Since male apprentices claimed much higher wages after completing their training than skilled female workers, artisan masters were much more interested in lengthening the term of male apprentices.

  • 38 For the history of the Dessinateurschule see Braun-Rohnsdorf 1954, p. 4206-4211.

18Female apprentices were usually trained how to weave silk and velvet and after a relatively short period they were engaged as cheap laborers. While women dominated in larger manufactories, female laborers in the workshops of guild masters were mostly limited to the fabrication of raw silk, spinning, and coiling. In addition to the usual skill of weaving, apprenticeships of male artisans could involve more than just weaving, since their career might reach the peak as heads of their own workshops. Especially the sons of the most prestigious Viennese masters – such as Beywinkler, Mestrozzi, or Hebenstreit – received specific qualifications as pattern drawers. A special school for pattern drawing, the so-called Dessinateurschule, was founded in Vienna in the middle of the 18th century38.

  • 39 Samtverfertigungsordnung aus dem Jahre 1763, in Codes Austriacus, VI., Wien, 1752, p. 415-519 ; Bu (...)
  • 40 Braun-Ronsdorf 1954, p. 4182 ; Ziak 1979, p. 120 ; Blümml and Gugitz 1927, p. 151-190.

19Women working at silk looms formed an alarming competition for journeymen. Guild statutes, which were confirmed by the government, fixed the wages of journeymen. According to the statutes of 1763, journeymen were paid by piecework ; the earning for an ell of floral velvet was fixed at 40 Kreuzer, while the weaving of an ell of so-called Hamburger Plüschsammet was only paid with 10 to 14 Kreuzer. According to these wage levels, a hard working journeyman should be able to make 4.5 to 6 guilders a week39. From the 18th century, silk weaver apprentices earned about half the wages of journeymen and the wages of skilled female laborers must have been between the payment for apprentices and journeymen. The lower earnings for women suppressed journeymen wages and, therefore, protest was formed, and the Viennese journeymen went on strike in 1756. Two additional strikes were organized in 1770 and 1792 against women working on the looms40.

  • 41 See Schlenkrich 1995, p. 102-111 ; Eggers 1987, p. 143-152 ; Keller 1987 ; Lenger 1988, p. 30-31.
  • 42 Grießinger and Reith 1986, p. 151 ; Grießinger 1981, p. 59 ; some apprentices returned to their fa (...)

20Whether it was four or eight years of training, not all of the Viennese apprentices completed their term. What were the main reasons for terminating an artisan apprenticeship? Apprentices, running away from their masters’ households, have often been mentioned in historical studies41. An apprenticeship was embedded in a master-servant relationship. The artisan household functioned according to its hierarchical structure, and apprentices, together with servants, were the lowest members of that hierarchy. Opportunities for apprentices to stand up to the power of masters, their wives, and journeymen were marginal, although the young trainee’s parents, with whom they were often still in contact, could use their supervisory authority and object to ill treatment in the masters’ households42. However, other examples show just the opposite – that parents used their authority to persuade the young people to stay with the master.

  • 43 For example, the guild statutes of the Viennese butchers recorded in 1819 : « Insbesondere wird je (...)
  • 44 On more information about journeymen’s protest, see Grießinger 1981.

21Sharing the same household characterized the relationship between the master’s family and his subordinates. It was not a relationship without conflicts, as rights and obligations were unevenly distributed. Apprentices had to perform daily domestic work, carrying water or looking after the children of the master couple, who often ill-treated their young subordinates. Life could be hell in an artisan household, where bad food and inadequate lodging caused daily conflicts. On the other hand, masters placed confidence in unknown boys while incorporating them into their households, where they had opportunities to deceive or rob the master’s family. Daily conflicts among apprentices and masters were not unusual in pre-industrial societies, as is documented by special paragraphs in the guild statutes and complaints by the public authorities43. While journeymen founded their own powerful associations, apprentices usually were unorganized and their protests were individual and limited44. The termination of an apprenticeship was often the only way to defend against the arbitrariness of masters.

  • 45 Eggers 1987, p. 143-152 ; Ehmer 1991, p. 178.
  • 46 Viennese Municipal Archive, Brief von Bürgermeister und Rath der Stadt Wien an die bürgerlichen Se (...)
  • 47 Viennese Municipal Archive, Brief von Johann Hilbert an den Wien Magistrat, 16. April 1790. Guilds (...)
  • 48 Viennese Municipal Archive, Ratschläge und verschieden Akten 1849 – 1863, Guilds/Documents, 50/17, (...)
  • 49 Viennese Municipal Archive, Brief des Magistrats der k.k. Haupt- und Residenzstadt Wien an die bür (...)

22Officially, apprentices could issue a public complaint against their masters. The most important reason for complaints was the reproach of physical punishment45. However, public authorities admonished the guilds not to maltreat their subordinates. In 1775, the mayor and the council of Vienna sent a letter to all crafts and trades organizations complaining about ill-treatments of apprentices. Another public admonition in 1845 argued again masters who maltreated apprentices46. Although it was rather unusual that artisan masters were judged for their malpractice in public, some of the apprentices chose the legal way. In 1790, the father of the silk weaver apprentice Franz Hilbert wrote a letter to the Viennese town council in which he complained about the master Jakob Bernklau treating his son in a nearly inhuman way. He asked the council if it would be possible for his son to complete his apprenticeship in another workshop47. And in 1849, two silk weaver apprentices wrote a letter of complaint about their master Adam Kostner. They also asked for permission to finish their apprenticeship in another workshop48. Another complaint about the silk weaver Alois Zettin in 1844 led to the guild barring him from training further apprentices49.

  • 50 Viennese Municipal Archive, Guilds/Books, 54/9 and 50/25.
  • 51 A short note in the book of enrolment says : « wurde auf sein ersuchen mit Einverständnis des Lehr (...)

23Besides running away, which either interrupted or ended the apprenticeship, there were other reasons for ending an artisan career. Masters could dismiss their apprentices, like the purse-maker Erhard Hölzl, who parted with his apprentice Franz Joseph Gnauß in 1716 because of his dishonest behavior, or the apprentice Leonhard Gittner, who was discharged by the silk weaver Josef Jakobi in 1853 because of his incompetence50. Diseases and physical disability could also lead to a cancellation of an apprenticeship contract. The purse maker Joseph Lezanzky, apprenticed in the workshop of Eduard Schlösser, ended his training in 1835 with assent of the master because of physical disability. Likewise the silk weaver Achatz Zettel had to give up his artisan career in 1816 because of problems with his eyes51.

  • 52 Viennese Municipal Archive, Guilds/Books, 50/22, 23, 25, 57 and 41.
  • 53 Steidl 2000, p. 320-347.

24Although running away was the main cause of termination, it did not necessarily end an artisan career. Not all of the apprentices escaped from masters’ households; there were other means of protection, and sometimes even the lowest members of the hierarchy could gain their rights. One way was to finish the apprenticeship in another workshop, as did 13 percent (888) of the silk weaver apprentices from 1791 to 1903. Similarly, more than 22 per cent (413) of all the young haberdashers who started their apprenticeships between 1824 and 1857 finished their term with another master52. Although only scanty information is available, it can be assumed that the reasons for the movement were manifold. For example, apprentices also had to find a new instructor if a master died. Only in the Viennese silk weavers’ guild did widows, who carried on the workshop of their deceased husband, have the permission to engage apprentices, although these boys and girls had to finish the last months of their apprenticeship in a male guild master’s workshop53.

  • 54 Enquete der Niederösterreichischen Handels- und Gewerbekammer über die Wünsche des Handels-, Gewer (...)
  • 55 Steidl 2003a, p. 78-85; Thiel 1911, p. 435.
  • 56 Schlenkrich1995, p. 112-113.

25Extremely scanty information is available concerning the future careers of apprentices who terminated their training period. The Gewerbeenquete from 1868 mentioned that many young artisans were able to use their skills after a very short period of training ; in other words, they could earn their living in crafts and trades without finishing their apprenticeships54. Even in the first half of the 18th century, only a minority of Viennese independent artisans were guild members; according to the commercial census of 1736, only 32 per cent of the independent artisans were incorporated55. To supply the demand of Vienna’s citizens a high number of small-scale producers was needed. Therefore, in such a big city, there always existed options to operate in crafts and trades without legal permissions. The majority of the Viennese artisan recruits in the 18th and 19th centuries were migrants from Central Europe. Many of them re-migrated to their point of origin after terminating an apprenticeship, either as journeyman or as artisan without guild membership. Outside urban areas, in small villages, the possibility to work as ‘freelancer’ was high56.

  • 57 Viennese Municipal Archive, Guilds/Books, 50/23 and Guilds/Books, 54/9.
  • 58 Holzhey 1965, p. 51.
  • 59 Viennese Municipal Archive, Guilds/Books, 50/23, 25.
  • 60 Bräuer 1996, p. 130.

26Another possibility for runaways was to change one’s profession. In the period under investigation, more than 60 silk weaver apprentices restarted their careers in another craft. Most of the former drop-outs chose another textile trade for the completion of their apprenticeship, such as linen-weaving, or as weavers of ribbons or veils, because of the comparability of the skills. If they restarted their career in a similar profession, they usually did not have to go through the whole period of training. Especially in wartimes, when states increased conscription, service in the army could also be an alternative to earning one’s living. The young silk weaver Georg Franz Kriegs, born in Bamberg, Germany, quit his apprenticeship in the workshop of the Viennese master Johann Kostner in 1815 and joined the army, likewise the purse-maker Joseph Kupfer, who ran away from his master in 176857. In the second half of the 18th century, the public authorities of the Habsburg Empire were in need of young soldiers and sent an order to the guilds : apprentices who wanted to shorten their period of training and join the army should be allowed to do so and should be discharged from paying the full fees58. Between 1811 and 1861, 5 per cent (242) of the enrolled silk weaver apprentices chose the trade of war instead of an artisan career. They only had to pass shorter periods of training and paid a reduced fee of 1 Florin and 30 Kreutzer59. However, the social standing of runaways should not be overestimated. Not all young men who did not finish their apprenticeship had the chance to work in crafts and trades. Former apprentices could likewise end up as beggars, as has been vividly demonstrated in an analysis of Viennese recipients of alms at the end of the 17th century60.

Conclusion

27In preindustrial crafts and trades, regional mobility was not confined to the journeymen’s tramping system. On the contrary, artisans were an extremely mobile group and constituted a high proportion of the people on the move in all stages of their lives. As has been shown for the case of Vienna in 18th and 19th centuries, the majority of apprentices were migrants. Before starting an artisan career, many boys as well as girls had to move from their parents’ residences to the master’s workshop and household. The region of origin differed according to the artisan branch. While butcher apprentices moved rather small distances from Vienna’s surrounding area, young men left the Swiss regions of Ticino and Grisons to start an apprenticeship as chimney sweeps in the Habsburg capital. Long established communication networks were responsible for differences in recruitment areas.

28The question of whether an apprentice successfully finished or dropped out of his or her training period is one of the aspects of duration and stability. The analysis of the Viennese guild materials demonstrated a variety of options to deal with the institution of apprenticeship for masters and apprentices during preindustrial times. However, in some branches nearly half of all young artisans did not finish their training period. Even so, dropouts had possibilities of finishing their apprenticeship in another workshop or of starting a new career in another craft. Some of the young artisans joined the army or ended up as freelancers. Although scanty information is available on future professional histories of young artisans who left Vienna, it would not be a mistake to assume that many returned to their birth places, towns and villages, and made a living in crafts and trades without being a member of an urban guild. Vienna, as the capital of the Habsburg Empire, offered a broad variety of ways to earn one’s living. The high level of instability of apprenticeship was rooted in the big city, where social control was and is much weaker than in rural environments.

  • 61 See for example, Davies 1990 ; Wensky 1980.

29This article also deals with the gendered aspects of artisan work in the case of the Viennese silk weavers. The process of industrialization changed the role of women in the labor market, especially in textile trades. Different establishments of silk production coexisted – artisan workshops, domestic industry, manufactories – in preindustrial Vienna and, after the turn of the 19th century, even factories. Although these girls had chances to start a career as silk weavers, the apprenticeship period differed from that of the male artisans. By the 19th century, the status of young apprentices had shifted towards that of cheap laborers. Crafts and trades with high demand for low-cost workers, such as textile industries, tended to engage more and more apprentices and to lengthen their training period. At its peak, in the first half of the 19th century, silk weaving employed twice as many women than men. Although shifting attention to a unique case such as Vienna’s silk weavers deepens our understanding of gender and labor, we should not draw rash conclusions. On the one hand, silk weaving was a very special trade with a long tradition of women’s work61; on the other hand, continuing industrialization resulted in the spread of new forms of production and increasing possibilities for female labor.

Haut de page

Bibliographie

Alexander - Steidl 2012 = J. T. Alexander, A. Steidl, Gender and the ‘Laws of Migration’ : A Reconsideration of Nineteenth-Century Patterns, in Social Science History, 6, 2, 2012, p. 223-241.

Baryli 1980 = A. Baryli, Gewerbepolitik und gewerberechtliche Verhältnisse im vormärzlichen Wien, in R. Banik-Schweitzer (ed.), Wien im Vormärz, Wien, 1980, p. 17-21.

Blümml - Gugitz 1927 = E. K. Blümml, G. Gugitz, Ein Aufstand der Seidenzeugmachergesellen im Jahre 1792, in E. K. Blümml, G. Gugitz (ed.), Von Leuten und Zeiten im alten Wien, Wien, 1927, p. 151-190.

Bräuer 1982 = H. Bräuer, Gesellenmigration in der Industriellen Revolution, Karl-Marx-Stadt, 1982.

Bräuer 1992 = H. Bräuer, Handwerk im alten Chemnitz. Studien zur Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte des Chemnitzer Handwerks von den Anfängen bis zum Beginn der industriellen Revolution, Chemnitz, 1992.

Bräuer 1996 = H. Bräuer, « ... und hat seithero gebetlet » Bettler und Bettelwesen in Wien und Niederösterreich zur Zeit Kaiser Leopolds I., Wien-Köln-Weimar, 1996.

Braun-Rohnsdorf 1954a = M. Braun-Rohnsdorf, Dessinateurschulen und Mustersammlungen, in Ciba-Rundschau, 114, 1954, p. 4206-4211.

Braun-Ronsdorf 1954b = M. Braun-Ronsdorf, Aus der Geschichte der österreichischen Seidenindustrie, in Ciba-Rundschau, 114, 1954, p. 4182.

Bucek 1974 = M. Bucek, Geschichte der Seidenfabrikanten Wiens im 18. Jahrhundert (1710 – 1792). Eine wirtschafts-kulturhistorische als auch soziologische Untersuchung, Wien, 1974.

Cerman 1993 = M. Cerman, Proto-Industrialization in an Urban Environment : Vienna, 1750 – 1857, in Continuity and Change, 8, 1993, 285, p. 281-320.

Davies 1990 = N. Z. Davies, Zur weiblichen Arbeitswelt im Lyon des 16. Jahrhunderts, in R. van Dülmen (ed.), Arbeit, Frömmigkeit und Eigensinn, Frankfurt/Main, 1990.

Deutsch 1909 = H. Deutsch, Die Entwicklung der Seidenindustrie in Österreich 1660 – 1840, Wien, 1909 (Studien zur Sozial-, Wirtschafts- und Verwaltungsgeschichte, 3).

Eggers 1987 = P. Eggers, Hamburger Handwerkslehrlinge der Schuhmacher und Schiffszimmerer Zunft im 18. und 19. Jahrhundert, in III. Internationales Handwerksgeschichtliches Symposium, 1, Veszprém, 1987, p. 143-152.

Ehmer 1984 = J. Ehmer, Ökonomischer und sozialer Strukturwandel im Wiener Handwerk - von der industriellen Revolution bis zur Hochindustrialisierung, in U. Engelhardt (ed.), Handwerker in der Industrialisierung. Lage, Kultur und Politik im späten 18. bis ins frühe 20. Jahrhundert, Stuttgart, 1984, p. 78-105.

Ehmer 1988 = J. Ehmer, Gesellenmigration und handwerkliche Produktionsweise, in G. Jaritz, A. Müller (ed.), Migration in der Feudalgesellschaft, Frankfurt-New York, 1988, p. 232-238.

Ehmer 1991 = J. Ehmer, Heiratsverhalten, Sozialstruktur, ökonomischer Wandel. England und Mitteleuropa in der Formationsperiode des Kapitalismus, Göttingen, 1991.

Ehmer 1994 = J. Ehmer, Wohnen ohne eigene Wohnung. Formen des Zusammenlebens in städtischen Unterschichten des 18. und 19. Jahrhunderts, in J. Ehmer, Soziale Traditionen in Zeiten des Wandels. Arbeiter und Handwerker im 19. Jahrhundert, Frankfurt-New York, 1994.

Ehmer 1997 = J. Ehmer, Worlds of Mobility : Migration Patterns of Viennese Artisans in the 18th Century, in G. Crossick (ed.), The Artisan and the European Town, 1500-1900, Aldershot, 1997, p. 172-199.

Ehmer 2000 = J. Ehmer, Tramping Artisans in Nineteenth Century Vienna, in D. Siddle (ed.), Migration, Mobility, and Modernisation, Liverpool, 2000, p. 164-185.

Ehmer 2004 = J. Ehmer, Urbanisation, Migration and Urban Labour Markets in Germany and Austria in the Nineteenth Century, in E. Sonnino (ed.), Living in the City (14th-20th Centuries), Rome, 2004, p. 97-114.

Elkar 1983 = R. S. Elkar, Umrisse einer Geschichte der Gesellenwanderung im Übergang von der frühen Neuzeit zur Neuzeit, in R. S. Elkar (ed.), Deutsches Handwerk im Spätmittelalter und Früher Neuzeit, Göttingen, 1983, p. 85-116.

Fajkmajer 1912 = K. Fajkmajer, Festschrift der Wiener Fleischhauergenossenschaft, Wien, 1912.

Glettler 1972 = M. Glettler, Die Wiener Tschechen um 1900. Strukturanalyse einer nationalen Minderheit in der Großstadt, München-Wien 1972.

Grießinger 1981 = A. Grießinger, Das symbolische Kapital der Ehre. Streikbewegungen und kollektives Bewußtsein deutscher Handwerksgesellen im 18. Jahrhundert, Frankfurt-Berlin-Wien, 1981.

Grießinger, Reith 1986 = A. Grießinger and R. Reith, Lehrlinge im deutschen Handwerk des ausgehenden 18. Jahrhunderts, in Zeitschrift für Historische Forschung, 13, 1986, p. 149-199.

Holzhey 1965 = I. Holzhey, Die Zünfte im Kampf mit den Landesfürsten 1527 – 1832, Graz, 1965.

Hufton 1994 = O. Hufton, Arbeit und Familie, in A. Farge and N. Zemon Davies (eds.), Geschichte der Frauen. Neuzeit 3, Frankfurt/Main, 1994, p. 27-59.

Keller 1987 = K. Keller, Zu materiellen Lebensverhältnissen kleiner gewerblicher Warenproduzenten am Beginn der Übergangsperiode vom Feudalismus zum Kapitalismus (Ende des 15. bis Anfang des 17. Jahrhunderts) - dargestellt am Beispiel von Leder- und Textilgewerbe in Leipzig (Dissertation Thesis), Leipzig, 1987.

King 1997 = S. King, Migrants on the Margin? Mobility, Integration, and Occupations in the West Riding, 1650 – 1820, in Journal of Historical Geography, 23, 1997, p. 284 –303;

Lausecker 1975 = S. Lausecker, Vor- und frühindustrielle Produktionsformen am Beispiel der Seiden- und Baumwollindustrie in Wien 1740 – 1848 (Dissertation Thesis), Wien, 1975.

Lenger 1988 = F. Lenger, Sozialgeschichte der deutschen Handwerker seit 1800, Frankfurt/Main, 1988; R. Reith, Arbeits- und Lebensweise im städtischen Handwerk. Zur Sozialgeschichte Augsburger Handwerksgesellen im 18. Jahrhundert (1700-1806), Göttingen, 1988.

Lenger 1988 = F. Lenger, Sozialgeschichte der deutschen Handwerker seit 1800, Frankfurt/Main, 1988.

Matis 1966 = H. Matis, Über die sozialen und wirtschaftlichen Verhältnisse österreichischer Fabrik- und Manufakturarbeiter um die Wende vom 18. zum 19. Jahrhundert, in Vierteljahresschrift für Sozial- und Wirtschaftgeschichte, 53, 1966.

Menzel 1972 = M. Menzel, Wiener Buchbinder der Barockzeit, Wien-Graz-Köln, 1972.

Mielke 1990 = H.-P. Mielke, Schornsteinfeger, in R. Reith (ed.), Lexikon des alten Handwerks. Vom späten Mittelalter bis ins 20. Jahrhundert, München, 1990, p. 215-216.

Moch 1992 = L. P. Moch, Moving Europeans. Migration in Western Europe since 1650, Bloomington, 1992.

Moch 1997 = L. P. Moch, Dividing Time : An Analytical Framework for Migration History Periodization, in J. Lucassen, L. Lucassen (ed.), Migration, Migration History, History : Old Paradigms and New Perspectives, Bern, 1997, p. 41-56.

Prösler 1954 = H. Prösler, Das gesamtdeutsche Handwerk im Spiegel der Reichsgesetzgebung 1530 bis 1806, Berlin, 1954.s

Rappaport 1989 = S. Rappaport, Worlds within Worlds : Structures of Life in Sixteenth-Century London, Cambridge, 1989.

Reininghaus 1981 = W. Reininghaus, Vereinigung der Handwerksgesellen in Hessen-Kassel vom 16. bis zum frühen 19. Jahrhundert, in Hessisches Jahrbuch für Landesgeschichte, 31, 1981, p. 98-148.

Reith 1989 = R. Reith, Zur beruflichen Sozialisation im Handwerk vom 18. bis ins frühe 20. Jahrhundert. Umrisse einer Sozialgeschichte der deutschen Lehrlinge, in Vierteljahresschrift für Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte, 76, 1989, p. 1-27.

Reketzki 1952 = E. Reketzki, Das Rauchfangkehrergewerbe in Wien. Seine Entwicklung vom Ende des 16. Jahrhunderts bis ins 19. Jahrhundert (Dissertation Thesis), Wien, 1952

Schlenkrich 1995 = E. Schlenkrich, Der Alltag der Lehrlinge im sächsischen Zunfthandwerk des 15. bis 18. Jahrhunderts, Krems, 1995 (Medium Aevum Quotidianum, Sonderband IV.).

Schofield 1987 = R. S. Schofield, Age-Specific Mobility in an Eighteenth-Century Rural English Parish, in P. Clark and D. Souden (eds.), Migration and Society in Early Modern England, London, 1987, p. 253-266.

Smith 1973 = S. R. Smith, The London Apprentices as Seventeenth-Century Adolescents, in Past and Present, 61, 1973, p. 149-161.

Špacek 1994 = K. Špacek, Erinnerungen eines Tischlers, in Vošahlíková 1994, p. 104-105.

Steidl 2000 = A. Steidl, ... Trost für die Zukunft der Zurückgelassenen.“ Die Funktion der Witwenpensionskassen im Wiener Handwerk im 18. und 19. Jahrhundert, in J. Ehmer and P. Gutschner (eds.), Das Alter im Spiel der Generationen. Historische und sozialwissenschaftliche Beiträge, Wien-Köln-Weimar, 2000, p. 320-347.

Steidl 2003a = A. Steidl, Auf nach Wien! Die Mobilität des mitteleuropäischen Handwerks im 18. und 19. Jahrhundert am Beispiel der Haupt- und Residenzstadt, Wien, 2003 (Sozial- und Wirtschaftshistorische Studien, 29).

Steidl 2003b = A. Steidl, Die Entwicklung der Wiener Seidenverarbeitung und der Anteil weiblicher Arbeitskräfte im 18. und 19. Jahrhundert, in Günter Hödl, Fritz Mayrhofer and Ferdinand Opll (ed.), Frauen in der Stadt, Linz, 2003, p. 151-181 (Schriftenreihe der Akademie Friesach, 7).

Steidl 2007 =A. Steidl, Silk Weaver and Purse-Maker Apprentices in Eighteenth- and Nineteenth-Century Vienna, in B. De Munck, S. L. Kaplan, H. Soly (eds.), Learning on the Shop Floor. Historical Perspectives on Apprenticeship, New York-Oxford, 2007, p. 133-157.

Steidl 2009 = A. Steidl, Rege Kommunikation zwischen den Alpen und Wien. Die regionale Mobilität Wiener Rauchfangkehrer, in Histoire des Alpes – Storia delle Alpi – Geschichte der Alpen, 14, 2009, p. 25-40.

Stürmer 1979 = M. Stürmer (ed.), Herbst des Alten Handwerks. Zur Sozialgeschichte des 18. Jahrhunderts, München, 1979.

Thiel 1911 = V. Thiel, Gewerbe und Industrie, in Alterthumsverein zu Wien (ed.), Geschichte der Stadt Wien (redigiert von Anton Mayer, Bd. IV.), Wien, 1911.

Vošahlíková 1994 = P. Vošahlíková (ed.), Auf der Walz. Erinnerungen böhmischer Handwerksgesellen, Wien-Köln-Weimar 1994.

Wadauer 2000 = S. Wadauer, Diese Frage kommt mir oft wie ein Gespenst vor. Alter und Generationsbeziehungen in der Autobiographik von Handwerkern, in in J. Ehmer and P. Gutschner (eds.), Das Alter im Spiel der Generationen. Historische und sozialwissenschaftliche Beiträge, Wien-Köln-Weimar, 2000, p. 348-382.

Wareing 1980 = J. Wareing, Changes in the Geographical Distribution of the Recruitment of Apprentices to the London Companies 1486-1750, in Journal of Historical Geography, 6, 1980, p. 241-249.

Wensky 1980 = M. Wensky, Die Stellung der Frau in der stadtkölnischen Wirtschaft im Spätmittelalter, Köln, 1980.

Wesoly 1985 = K. Wesoly, Lehrlinge und Handwerksgesellen am Mittelrhein. Ihre soziale Lage und Organisation vom 14. bis 17. Jahrhundert, Frankfurt/Main, 1985.

Zatschek 1949 = H. Zatschek, Handwerk und Gewerbe in Wien. Von den Anfängen bis zur Erteilung der Gewerbefreiheit im Jahre 1859, Wien, 1949.

Zatschek 1958 = H. Zatschek, 550 Jahre jung sein. Die Geschichte eines Handwerks, Wien, 1958.

Zatschek 1959 = H. Zatschek, Tiroler Handwerker in Wien, in Beiträge zur geschichtlichen Landeskunde Tirols, 207, 1959.

Ziak 1927 = K. Ziak, Des Heiligen Römischen Reiches größtes Wirtshaus. Der Wiener Vorort Neulerchenfeld, Wien, 1979.

Haut de page

Notes

1 See for example Moch 1992.

2 Ehmer 1997 ; Ehmer 2004.

3 For a more detailed discussion, see Steidl 2003a ; Steidl 2007.

4 Ehmer 1997, p. 175.

5 Baryli 1980, p. 17-21 ; Ehmer 1984, p. 78-105 ; Ehmer 2000, p. 166.

6 Cerman 1993 ; Steidl 2003a, 77-88.

7 Deutsch 1909, p. 108-109.

8 Blümml and Gugitz 1927, p. 158.

9 Bucek, 1974, p. 58-60.

10 Deutsch 1909, p. 108-109.

11 See for example Reininghaus 1981, p. 98-148 ; Bräuer 1982 ; Elkar 1983, p. 85-116 ; Lenger, Reith 1988.

12 See King 1997 ; Moch 1997, p. 44.

13 Rappaport 1989, p. 294.

14 Vošahlíková 1994, p. 273.

15 Smith 1973, p. 160.

16 See Ehmer 1988, p. 232-238 ; Schofield 1987, p. 253-266 ; Alexander and Steidl 2012.

17 Ehmer 1997, p. 185.

18 Reith 1989, p. 7-8.

19 Reith 1989, p. 10.

20 Ehmer 1994, p. 81.

21 Glettler 1972 ; Steidl 2003a, p. 67-70.

22 Reketzki 1952, p. 138-139 ; Steidl 2009.

23 Similar networks can also be found for the case of artisans in 17th century London : « Similarly, John Wareing went to London from Bugbrooke in Northamptonshire as an apprentice in 1655 and in the period 1666 – 74 he took four apprentices. One came from Bugbrook and the others came from Kislingbury, Harpole and Ravensthorpe, which are 3,4 and 13 km distance from Bugbrooke respectively. The connection between the Stationer´s Company was particularly effective in recruiting from Cumberland and North Wales in the sixteenth century and from Northamptonshire and Oxfordshire in the seventeenth ». See Wareing 1980, p. 247.

24 Zatschek 1959, p. 374-375.

25 See for example Prösler 1954 ; Stürmer 1979 ; Wesoly, 1985.

26 Reith 1989, p. 1-27 ; Schlenkrich 1995.

27 Steidl 2003a, p. 252-261.

28 Steidl 2003b.

29 Zatschek 1958, p. 43 ; regulations for the lengthening of an apprenticeship can also be found in other German-speaking countries, see for example Bräuer 1992, p. 69.

30 Zatschek 1949, p. 162.

31 Menzel 1972, p. 58.

32 Mielke 1990, p. 215-216.

33 Thiel 1911, p. 101.

34 Grießinger, Reith 1986, p. 153 ; in 16th century London paying off years of apprenticeship was also common, see Rappaport 1989, p. 321.

35 Viennese Municipal Archive, Handwerksartikeln für die Seiden-, Schleier- und Dünntüchelmacher, gegeben vom Bürgermeister und Rat der Stadt Wien, 12.2.1740. Guilds/Documents, 50/23, nr. 1.

36 In Lyon, a silk weaver’s workshop normally consisted of three or four female apprentices, one male apprentice, the master, and his wife. It can be estimated that in the 18th and 19th centuries the silk weaving trade employed five times more women than men ; Hufton 1994, p. 35 ; Matis 1966, p. 443.

37 Deutsch 1909, p. 96.

38 For the history of the Dessinateurschule see Braun-Rohnsdorf 1954, p. 4206-4211.

39 Samtverfertigungsordnung aus dem Jahre 1763, in Codes Austriacus, VI., Wien, 1752, p. 415-519 ; Bucek 1974, p. 139.

40 Braun-Ronsdorf 1954, p. 4182 ; Ziak 1979, p. 120 ; Blümml and Gugitz 1927, p. 151-190.

41 See Schlenkrich 1995, p. 102-111 ; Eggers 1987, p. 143-152 ; Keller 1987 ; Lenger 1988, p. 30-31.

42 Grießinger and Reith 1986, p. 151 ; Grießinger 1981, p. 59 ; some apprentices returned to their father’s house before they started their journeymen tramping and therefore, did not lose contact to their parents, see Wadauer 2000, p. 348-382 ; a carpenter remembered the admonition of his father in his autobiography : « [...] aber wir müßten bei dem, was wir uns gewählt hatten bleiben, und wehe, wir würden aus der Lehre davonlaufen, an den Ohren würde er uns dorthin zurückführen » [ but we had to stick with the craft we chose, and heaven help us if we would run away from the masters household, he would lead us back pulling our ears]. See Špacek, 1994, p. 104-105.

43 For example, the guild statutes of the Viennese butchers recorded in 1819 : « Insbesondere wird jedem Lehrmeister verbothen, seine Lehrlinge länger als ein Jahr zum Schafhüthen zu verwenden. Dem dawider handelnden Meister soll es das erstemahl bey gesammelten Mittel verwiesen werden, im zweyten Falle aber ist er dem Magistrate anzuzeigen, wo derselbe nach Umständen strenge bestraft, oder der Jungenlehre für unfähig erklärt werden wird ». [In particular, each guild master was forbidden to use apprentices for tending sheep for longer than a year. Masters who violated that rule for the first time were reprimanded in front of the masters meeting ; in a second time, the accused master had to be reported to the city administration. This could, according to circumstances, lead to more severe punishment; some master even lost their permit to train new apprentices]. See Fajkmajer 1912, p. 67 ; in 1835, the authority complained : « [...] Der aufgenommene Lehrling ist nun der Willkür und den Mißhandlungen seines Lehrherrn preisgegeben. Er wird zu den niedrigen häuslichen Arbeiten, zum Last- und Kindertragen und nebenbei zum Aushelfen bei gewerblichen Arbeiten verwendet. Wollen seine Eltern oder Vormünder ihm etwas bessere Behandlung verschaffen, so müssen sie nicht selten während der Lehrzeit das bißchen Vermögen des Lehrlings zusetzen, dessen etwaige Überreste in der Folge noch die Kosten des Aufdingens als Geselle verzehren ». [ The apprentices were exposed to the torture and ill treatment by their masters. The boys were used for minor domestic services, had to carry loads or little children and were only exposed to minor crafts work. If their parents or guardians wanted to support the apprentices and get him better treatment, they most often had to spend the little assets of the apprentices. Hereinafter, the rest of the money was needed for the start as journeyman]. Lausecker 1975, p. 211.

44 On more information about journeymen’s protest, see Grießinger 1981.

45 Eggers 1987, p. 143-152 ; Ehmer 1991, p. 178.

46 Viennese Municipal Archive, Brief von Bürgermeister und Rath der Stadt Wien an die bürgerlichen Seidenzeug- und Brocatmacher vom 16. September 1775. Guilds/Documents, 50/ 24, nr. 6. « Die k.k. Polizei=Oberdirektion hat aus den an dieselbe gelangten Berichten der k.k. Polizei=Bezirks=Direktion die Wahrnehmung gemacht, daß viele Professionisten am hiesigen Platze das ihnen beziehungsweise auf ihre Lehrjungen zustehende Recht der häuslichen Züchtigung in einem solchen Grade mißbrauchen, daß von den Letzteren mehrfache Klagen gegen ihre Lehrherrn geführt werden, bei deren Untersuchung in Folge der beigebrachten wundärztlichen Befunde sich zeigte, daß die Kläger und rücksichtlich die Lehrjungen, statt einer häuslichen Züchtigung, Mißhandlungen erlitten hatten, welche an den Mißhandelten nicht nur Merkmale zurückgelassen, sondern dieselben auch auf gewisse Zeiträume zur Arbeit unfähig gemacht haben. In Folge eines von der hohen Polizei=Hofstelle erlassenen hohen Auftrages ist auf das Benehmen der Gewerbesleute in besagter Beziehung ein besonderes Augenmerk zu richten, und jene, welche sich solcher tirannischer Behandlungen schuldig machen, die Befugniß zur Lehrjunge=Aufdingung zu entziehen ». [According to reports of the official district police departments, the head of the police in the Habsburg Monarchy noticed that many master artisans in the city misused their rights to discipline their apprentices in such ways that boys complained about it several times. Surgeon findings showed that masters did not discipline their subordinates, but mistreated them in such ways that the plaintiffs not only had the characteristics of it and were incapable of work for some time. According to a regulation of the head of the police, special attention should be given to the behavior of artisans, in this respect. Those master who are guilty of such tyrannical treatment of their subordinates, should lose their license to train apprentices]. Viennese Municipal Archive, Brief vom Magistrate der k.k. Haupt- und Residenzstadt Wien an sämtliche Wiener Zünfte, 3. März 1845. Guilds/Documents, 50/ 24, nr. 6.

47 Viennese Municipal Archive, Brief von Johann Hilbert an den Wien Magistrat, 16. April 1790. Guilds/Documents, 50/24, nr. 6.

48 Viennese Municipal Archive, Ratschläge und verschieden Akten 1849 – 1863, Guilds/Documents, 50/17, nr. 11.

49 Viennese Municipal Archive, Brief des Magistrats der k.k. Haupt- und Residenzstadt Wien an die bürgerliche Seidenzeugmacherzunft, 23. Mai 1844. Guilds/Documents, 50/25, nr. 8.

50 Viennese Municipal Archive, Guilds/Books, 54/9 and 50/25.

51 A short note in the book of enrolment says : « wurde auf sein ersuchen mit Einverständnis des Lehrherrn mit Taufschein und Schulzeugnis entlassen », Viennese Municipal Archive, Guilds/Books, 54/9 and Guilds/Books, 50/23.

52 Viennese Municipal Archive, Guilds/Books, 50/22, 23, 25, 57 and 41.

53 Steidl 2000, p. 320-347.

54 Enquete der Niederösterreichischen Handels- und Gewerbekammer über die Wünsche des Handels-, Gewerbe- und Arbeiterstandes im Kammerbezirk bezüglich der Revision des Gewerbegesetzes vom 20. Dezember 1859, Wien, 1868, p. 50.

55 Steidl 2003a, p. 78-85; Thiel 1911, p. 435.

56 Schlenkrich1995, p. 112-113.

57 Viennese Municipal Archive, Guilds/Books, 50/23 and Guilds/Books, 54/9.

58 Holzhey 1965, p. 51.

59 Viennese Municipal Archive, Guilds/Books, 50/23, 25.

60 Bräuer 1996, p. 130.

61 See for example, Davies 1990 ; Wensky 1980.

Haut de page

Table des illustrations

Titre Fig. 1 - Comparison of the duration of male and female apprenticeships in Viennese silk weaver’s workshops, 1830-1903
Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence électronique

Annemarie Steidl, « Between home and workshop. Regional and social mobility of apprentices in 18th and 19th centuries Vienna », Mélanges de l’École française de Rome - Italie et Méditerranée modernes et contemporaines [En ligne], 128-1 | 2016, mis en ligne le 09 mars 2016, consulté le 25 avril 2017. URL : http://mefrim.revues.org/2491 ; DOI : 10.4000/mefrim.2491

Haut de page

Auteur

Annemarie Steidl

Institut für Wirtschaft und Sozialgeschichte - Universität Wien - annemarie.steidl@univie.ac.at

Haut de page

Droits d’auteur

© École française de Rome

Haut de page
  • Logo École française de Rome
  • Revues.org