English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

1 his article^ is an out-growth of an earlier one, "Paired in Ceremony" which discussed recognizable similarities between particular rituals in late Medieval academic guilds and craft guilds. There the components of the ritual of inception, in the academic guild, and reception, in the craft guild, were examined in detail. Despite their eventually different names, inception and reception were, in each case, the rituals by which the guild determined individuals to be eligible for mastership (through prerequisites) and embraced the eligible candidates within the guild as masters (through ceremony). The two guilds' rituals were clearly composed of an analogous assortment of elements, and hence are appropriately seen as paired in terms of their ceremony. There are, however, clear indications that over the course of the Medieval and Renaissance periods not all of the analogous components of the two ceremonies were simultaneously present nor had the same importance for each type of guild at the same point in time. The particular focus in this article is the question of whether guilds of the Middle Ages and Renaissance really, that is, more than ceremoniously, determined who could function as a master. Was guild recognition through the inception or reception ritual the only means by which one became acknowledged as competent and able to pursue one's profession in the particular areas ofacademic or craft performance? The tack taken to attempt to answer this question will derive from the earlier discussion of mastership rituals. The rituals themselves, it is posited, can provide clues to the importance of the guilds in defining effective mastership, particularly through an analysis of the relative prominence of each ritual's different components. What is at issue is change in the relative strength of the guild to assert itself vis-à-vis external authority in determining the significance of guild mastership. The general conclusion to be reached is that both the University and the craft guild controlled, to degrees varying over time, the responsibility for determining both those who could hold the title of master.

Master by Any Other Means