GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 1990-08 > 0651084039


From: Kay Allen AG <>
Subject: Re: Age of competency
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 1990 09:40:39 -0700


Renia wrote:
>
> Kay Allen AG wrote:
>
> > Comments interspersed.
> >
> > Renia wrote:
> > >
> > > People will argue about the degree of literacy during this period, but as an
> > > apprentice, it is more likely that this boy was of a lower class family, and was
> > > probably unable to read or write.
> >
> > If so, why was the stipulation for minimal education not included?
>
> I have not heard that such stipulation was always the case. I think it rather depends
> on the individual circumstances, rather than be taken as a general rule. Judging by the
> number of illiterate persons in later times who were masters of their trade, (trade-
> note - not profession) it would not surprise me in the least.

To reiterate, this was not England proper, but the Puritan Plymouth
Colony where literacy was more valued.

Kay Allen AG

>
> Renia
>
> > Kay Allen AG
> > >
> > > Renia
> > >
> > > Kay Allen AG wrote:
> > >
> > > > Ordinarily, I would agree, but I don't think that a child of that age
> > > > would have been judged competent, legally, to have signed his own
> > > > apprenticeship papers on his own account. Or is this an incorrect
> > > > assumption?
> > > >
> > > > Kay Allen AG
> > > >

This thread: