Quote Originally Posted by Voidmonster View Post
But the ambiguity I was referring to was less to do with deciphering the individual entries, but what's meant by them in the context of the time. For instance, Samuel Dicken took 12 years to serve a 7 year apprenticeship. I know it was common for them to take longer, but it always raises the question of 'why?'.

Dicken is also listed as having two apprentices. Am I misremembering that the guild law at the time limited masters to a single apprentice? In any event, that whole 'round 1800 timeframe is, of course, when the Cutler's Company was sinking itself in nepotism anyhow.
It's definitely 'mason' Zak - I have seen the record written in full.

7 years was the minimum period of apprenticeship, usually up to the age of 21 when the apprentice could be elected to the cutlers guild, ie become a 'Freeman'. In earlier times 8 and 10 year apprenticeships were common, but even as late as 1814 there were still 10 year apprenticeships being recorded. I suspect that some satisfied their masters expectations sooner than others - that's life!

However, not all freeman had served formal apprenticeships, which makes the records less than helpful. For instance, sons of freemen could be taught by their fathers and become freemen themselves without ever having served a formal apprenticeship. The same held for paupers - the parish would make a cutler take in an orphan or pauper (some actively sought paupers for the fee they were given was attractive), and at the age of 21 he could become a Freeman automatically, even if he had never been taught the trade.

This also reflects on the number of apprentices a master could have - he was allowed his bona-fide apprentice as well as the pauper. After an apprentice had served five years, the master could take another, so we could have three or more apprentices. The only stipulation was that the master had to give food and lodging. Leader tells a humorous story of two young apprentices who were sick of eating the poor gruel served up by the masters wife - it was common to only give what was necessary to enable them to work, then to preach the bible at them! The apprentice was not allowed to marry during his term, either. All work and no play.

In 1791 an Act was passed that enabled outsiders to buy their Freedom for £20 - they didn't even have to know the first thing about the cutlery trade! This Act was a direct consequence of the Freemans Revolt of 1784-1791. Similar revolts had led to the French Revolution and the British Government, seeing Sheffield as 'the most radical town in Britain' passed the Act. The Act also limited the amount of apprentices a master could have. The final restrictions - and fees - imposed on Freemen was abolished by a further Act in 1814. The flood of entrants led to the guild not granting any freedoms nor registering any marks between 1814 and 1822.

Not all apprenticeship-served men took their Freedom. Some went into other trades, some preferred to be 'journeymen' working for other masters. Journeymen were forbidden to take apprentices, though.

Regards,
Neil