Apprenticeship has been one of the most critical institutions in economies and societies since antiquity and is still present in many countries. For centuries, generations of young individuals (primarily men) embarked on a contract with a master (usually male). The engagement, which took place involuntarily and through the mediation of relatives and parents, responded to the need to acquire vocational training and to be educated for future life in society. No wonder apprenticeship thus attracted the attention of many scholars. Ever since Adam Smith’s propositions about the harmful effects of apprenticeship, conceived as a means of consolidating the monopoly of guilds and limiting competition, historians and social scientists have debated the positive and negative effects of this institution in terms of education, knowledge transmission, and access to the labor market. In the field of preindustrial economic history, a major ‘revival’ came with S.R. Epstein’s seminal article, which appeared in the Journal of Economic History in 1998. The essay effectively linked the study of craft guilds to apprenticeships and technological change for the following decades, opening a debate between guilds’ positive and negative effects in transferring human capital and many other aspects. The discussion stimulated a revival of research on the subject, which also has resulted in the digitization of sources, the realization of collective projects, and the creation of quantitative databases (which are the basis for several chapters in the book).

The Apprenticeship in Early Modern Europe editors aim to break out of the dualism about the benefits and harms of the guild system, to try to ‘achieve much needed clarity about apprenticeship in its own right’ bearing in mind the diversity of apprenticeship in Europe’ (p. 4). The effort to go beyond the quagmire of the guild debate is highly commendable, and it is a great stimulus for our research agenda. This program can only be achieved, in their view, by tracing the commonalities through a comparative approach that combines norms and practices, identifying all the institutions that supervised apprenticeship (and thus not only the guilds), the contents of the agreements, the forms of remuneration (wages to the apprentice or incentives to the master), the figures involved, the socio-spatial mobility, the welfare function. Nevertheless, the guilds are always present, even if they are not the focus, yet fitting within a broader range of institutions.

The book is organized into ten chapters, plus an introduction that explains the aims and a conclusion that helps put together the rich puzzle presented. While the first chapter, by Joel Mokyr, sets out some critical elements in the micro- and macro-economic debate of the knowledge economy, the other chapters focus on nine case studies. Some chapters are on single cities and towns such as Madrid (Victoria López Barahona and José Antolin Nieto Sánchez), Turin (Beatrice Zucca Micheletto), Venice (Giovanni Colavizza, Riccardo Cella, and Anna Bellavitis), Hollola (Merja Uotila); others offer broader perspectives on entire areas such as Germany (Georg Stöger, Reinhold Reith), the Northern Netherlands (Ruben Shalk), the Southern Netherlands (Bert De Munck, Raoul de Kerf, Annelies De Bie), England (Patrick Wallis), and France (Clare Haru Crowston and Claire Lemercier). From a temporal point of view, the data mostly refer to the eighteenth century (for Turin, 1750-1800; Germany, 1700-1870; Hollola, 1750-1800; France, 1700-1850) or, in one case, to the late sixteenth and seventeenth centuries (Venice, 1582-1665). This detail is not irrelevant because the context is crucial to understanding apprenticeship and its variables, as the chapter on the Southern Low Countries demonstrates well. Thus, the time frame under consideration can influence the extent of some conclusions. Moreover, the eighteenth century represents a period of manufacturing and commercial transformation, which, as the French and the Southern Netherlands cases also show, may have influenced the shape of apprenticeship, its greater or lesser flexibility and openness, and its relationship with other institutions.

All chapters rely on archival research and a variety of primary sources, a strength of the volume that provides solidity and richness for the results. While most of the chapters inevitably use apprenticeship contracts (including databases with more than 5,000 records), we would also underline their use of other sources: censuses, court cases, deeds of other institutions (parishes, orphanages, hospitals), and corporate and urban statutes. This element emphasizes the need, in the study of apprenticeship, to cross-reference several sources, so as to fully understand the functioning of this system and avoid the bias of any single source.

It is not possible to summarize each chapter. Instead, I would like to highlight some common themes. First, systematically, many authors emphasize the ‘flexibility’ of the apprenticeship contract, both within and outside the guild system. Secondly, the chapters reveal the lack of automatism between the end of the apprenticeship term and the craftsman’s future career as a master. Many apprentices did not become masters, as in Madrid and the Northern Netherlands. Third, the variability of the remuneration is also worthy of consideration: while in some cases it is the master who receives payment, primarily young people are set up as the actual wage earners (even if the amount they receive is meager), demonstrating that the system balanced the needs of the master and those of the apprentice. A fourth recurring element is that urban and guild institutions have little capacity to enforce contracts: the main aim was to solve conflicts or renegotiate the agreements on a new basis. The fifth element is geographical mobility: young people in some areas (like England and Germany) find a way to learn a trade or support themselves or their families through apprenticeships. The sixth element is that there were several alternatives to guild apprenticeship, such as charitable institutions, family, and kinship networks. Although difficult to quantify, this phenomenon became important considering the subsequent appeals to the public authority to join the guilds or to be allowed to practice the trade. Finally, the seventh element is the limited role of women within the guilds, though more frequently present in charitable institutions or family networks.

The book provides an exciting array of case studies and a promising purpose: going beyond the guild debate around the beneficial or harmful effects of guild apprenticeship. However, this approach presents come critical issues as well. While trying to work past the guilds debate, the reader is inevitably brought back to it by several articles. The relative absence of guilds toward apprenticeship means that their primary purpose was not to provide adequate skills training, as frequently argued. Furthermore, while it is true that the diverse origin of apprentices is evidence of a non-endogamy in the system, children and relatives of the masters still enjoyed numerous privileges, as pointed out in several essays. The lack of openness toward female apprenticeships in the guilds resulted in the exclusion of women from the most qualified and remunerative trades. The juxtaposition of such diverse cases is a great resource. However, it presents some contrasts regarding institutional access and its effects on the labor market. The flexibility shown in resolving conflicts is incongruous with the often costly recourse to the courts. The low rate of apprenticeship completion in some areas (e.g., England and the Northern Netherlands) contrasts with the high rate in other realities, such as seventeenth-century Venice and early modern Germany. While it is not easy to understand the phenomenon wholly, another essay with a less optimistic perspective – even on periods before the eighteenth century, when guild control was sometimes greater – would have helped to provide a more comprehensive picture.

The book offers several stimulating theses. One of them, concerning the Southern Netherlands, links apprenticeship to the individual’s need for status identification. The chapter shows well how apprenticeship cannot be understood only ‘within the trade’, but in the broader social and political context, in the process that leads the individual to become a freeman. Rules on minimum standards, tests to become a master, and maximum numbers of apprentices per master were introduced out of social and political concerns to distinguish ‘false’ from ‘regular’ masters, to limit unlawful entry into the labor market, and to distribute apprentices over many masters (pp. 237-238). Moreover, the progressive decline is linked to the gap between learning and access to freemen’s status, with significant consequences on the actual number of contract registrations. The chapter by De Munck et al. is meaningful since it links the story of the apprenticeship to the need to certify the presence of individuals within society and the topic of social belonging. This connection with other spheres of society and politics is also present in many other essays that emphasize how individual choices are linked to family and community strategies. Fortunately, this book will stimulate further research and debates rather than ending an important chapter in the historiography of early modern economic and social history.