Guilds and the organisation of urban populations during the principate

Ancient historians long preferred not to compare Greco-Roman professional associations to the guilds of pre- and early modern Europe. From Waltzing to Finley and after, the orthodox view was that collegia were social and religious clubs; important for the emotional well-being of their members, occasionally acting as social support groups, but not protective or regulatory agencies for their members’ economic interests. Only recently have some scholars begun to doubt this view. Occupational collegia defined themselves through the professional identities of their members. Like all voluntary associations they were multi-dimensional communities that strengthened trust and cooperation by stimulating norms of good behaviour and sanctioning trespassers. They directed collective action and pooled resources. Even if economic motives were not a primary concern, these were important assets for members. Roman collegia never enjoyed the formal privileges and powers that some medieval guilds had. They were never a formal part of public administration and received no delegated authority from it. As collective agents, however, collegia had a great potential for effective performative action. Their appeal or resistance to the enforcement of public regulations carried weight. So did their praise of public officials who acted magnanimously and scrupulously in the exercise of their duties. This paper studies how collegia fit in the institutional fabric of Roman towns. I will begin by analysing how Roman guilds structured Roman citizen populations. Starting from the mythical stories about the origins of the professional association in early Rome, I will proceed to analyse how the ideals contained in these stories related (or not) to social reality in the first and second century CE. The second part studies how professional associations in the late first and second century CE acquired a public persona through the services they provided to the state and local communities. The last section studies how guilds empowered their members and—most of all—their own officers, who in the case of important guilds gained informal power and influence. I will argue that Roman cities from the early second century onwards relied on professional guilds to function. While officers of important guilds were never formally a part of administration they had considerable influence