Sophisters and Bacchelers of Arte, thereunto resorting by

statute.

"One Mathematical Reader, to read the arte of Arithmeticke, of Geometrie or Cosmographie or of Astronomy, in such sorte as is fit for his auditory, being also of Sophisters and Bacchelers of Arte."

In the statutes of Elizabeth, the lecturer in Philosophy is directed to give instruction in the Problemata, Ethics and Politics of Aristotle; in Pliny or in Plato. The lecturer on Dialectics is to teach the Elenchi of Aristotle or the Topica of Cicero. The lecturer on Rhetoric is to explain Quintilian, Hermogenes, or some part of the Rhetorical Treatises of Cicero.

Originally, attendance at these lectures was strictly required, but towards the close of the century we find that they were already becoming superseded by the college course of instruction. About the middle of the seventeenth century the attendance became so unsatisfactory that the Professors, in some instances, discontinued their lectures, and their professorships became almost sinecures.

By the above statutes both the duration and the character of the curriculum of study were also definitely fixed. In apportioning out the time allotted to the different subjects, a seven years' course of study was required before the degree of Master of Arts could be taken. These seven years were divided into the Quadriennium of Undergraduateship and the Triennium of Bachelorship. In the Quadriennium the first year was devoted to Rhetoric; the second and third to Logic; the fourth to Philosophy. In the Triennium the student was still required to attend the public lectures on Philosophy, and to these were added public lectures on Astronomy, Perspective, and Greek.

Indications of

On the above scheme certain modifications were brought a progressive about in the seventeenth century, of which we shall here- quiry.

spirit of en

between the

the Crown.

after have occasion to speak, but the subjects enumerated will serve to shew to what an extent the studies of an earlier period still occupied the foremost place. Already, however, a far more unshackled spirit of enquiry was arising. Of this the great work of Hooker bears evidence on behalf of the sister University; and the Republic of Bodin (a work which furnished valuable suggestions to the author of the Esprit des Lois) is known to have formed the subject of lectures in our own, a treatise which could hardly have become known to our English youth without begetting a far more liberal conception of political science than had hitherto been attained1.

There is yet another point which it seems desirable to notice before we close our preliminary remarks. One of the first results of the English Reformation had been that the highest authority in reference to ecclesiastical government Closer relations was vested in the Crown; the recognition therefore of the University and royal prerogative in the Church was henceforth a part of political faith and jealously guarded from invasion by the reigning power. To this cause must, in fact, be attributed that watchfulness of the Crown over the Universities observable from this time, a solicitude which, while professing the encouragement of learning, aimed, in the words of Huber, at "diffusing rather a moral influence than an intellectual cultivation." Nor can it be denied that this vigiThe Puritans. lance was necessary. The Puritan party throughout the realm, and more particularly the Marian exiles, who had returned full of the teachings of Geneva, held widely dif ferent views respecting Church government from those which distinguished what we may henceforth term the Episcopalian party. To this element of dissension was added the openly professed Calvinism of the Puritan

1 Hallam's Literature of Europe, III. 570, 571,

? Huber, II. 33.

section, as opposed to those leanings towards Arminianism which, though not distinctly avowed by the Church, were visible in the teachings of more than three-fourths of her clergy and found favour with the supreme power. To discourage Puritanism, as a species of disloyalty, hence became a primary object with the Crown in the two great seminaries of the Church; the Puritans in turn lost no opportunity of inveighing against State interference and an episcopal form of government. Their dislike of a StateChurch was surpassed, however, by their detestation of Rome. For a long time all the ability of Elizabeth and her ministers seemed no more than sufficient to cope with treason at home and invasion from abroad, and upon the stability of her reign depended not only the Puritans' hopes of preserving whatever toleration they had obtained, but also the acquirement of that further religious liberty on which they were intent. It was thus that they were induced to give their support to a government which discouraged them, and that a large section of the more moderate Puritan party remained for the present within the pale of a Church which they were bent on reforming, and submitted to a ritual which they disliked, and listened to doctrines which they disavowed, in the hope that the reforms which had been initiated in a former reign might be completed under more favourable auspices. But though Puritanism lay under the royal disfavour and bold offenders were often punished with summary severity, it must be admitted that the bearing of the Puritan party, in the Universities at least, is hardly that of a down-trodden and persecuted sect. On the contrary, we believe that a careful study of the history of this period will tend considerably to modify the impressions which some historians, from a too picturesque treatment of their subject, have created respecting the general position of the Puritan party during the

in the

University.

reign of Elizabeth. There was undoubtedly unjust legislation which bore hardly upon them, but of the positive execution of the penalties thereby enforced we hear less than we should have reason to expect. Nearly all Elizabeth's ministers, Cecil, Leicester, Knolles, Bedford and Walsingham had Puritanical sympathies, and lent their party substantial aid. Cecil, especially, than whom few men living probably better understood the state of parties in the University, was throughout his life a steady supporter of the

Their boldness Calvinistic party in Cambridge. Thus encouraged, Puritanism shewed a bold front in the University, and throughout the reign of Elizabeth we find repeated instances of some contumacious divine rising in the pulpit of St Mary's3

1 Sir Walter Mildmay's sympathies were notorious. When he founded Emmanuel College he is said to have been openly taxed by Elizabeth in the following fashion: "Well, Sir Walter, so you have been founding a College for Puritans !" a reputation which the College long retained.

2 Burleigh, when at Cambridge, was a student of St John's College, and was, we are told, "no less distinguished by the regularity of his life, than by an uncommonly diligent application to his studies. He made an agreement with the bell-ringer to call him up at four o'clock every morning, and this sedentary life brought on a humour in his legs. Dr Medcalf, at this time Master of the College, was his principal patron, and frequently gave him money to encourage him; but the strong passion he had to excel 'his contemporaries, and to distinguish himself early in the University, was the chief spur to his endeavours. At sixteen he read a sophistry lecture, and at nineteen a Greek lecture, not for any pay or salary, but as a gentleman for his pleasure, and this at a time when there were but few who were masters of Greek either in that College or the University." Peck's Desiderata.

3 As sufficient proof of this important feature I quote the following instances, as given in Cooper and elsewhere1. In 1565 one George Withers, M.A. of Corpus, preached a sermon wherein he urged the destruction of all such painted windows in the University as were of a superstitious character (especially those which contained inscriptions relating to prayers for the dead). Whereupon," says Baker, "followed a great destruction of them and the danger of a greater by some zealots." Withers

66

1 Cooper's Annals of Cambridge, Vol. II. 215. MS. Baker, 31, 55.

to denounce, in language remarkable neither for good taste nor moderation, Episcopalianism, ritualism, popish ceremowas ultimately forbidden by the Archbishop to preach1." In 1572 Wm. Chark, fellow of Peterhouse, preached a Latin sermon before the University at St Mary's, wherein he asserted that the states of bishops, archbishops, metropolitans, patriarchs and popes, were introduced into the Church by Satan." On refusing to "revoke his errors some Sunday in St Mary's Church," Chark was expelled the University and his College2. In 1573 John Millen, M. A., fellow of Christ's College, preached the morning sermon at St Mary's, "wherein he condemned in strong terms the ordination of ministers as used in the Church of England, and especially of such as could not preach. He also denounced as abominable idolatry the observance of saints' days and fasting on the evens of such days." He was cited before the Vice-chancellor, and, on his refusal to retract, expelled the University 3. In 1587 H. Gray preached a sermon at St Mary's, wherein he asserted that the Church of England maintained Jewish music, and that to play at cards or dice was to crucify Christ; inveighed against dumb dogs in the Church, and mercenary ministers; insinuated that some in the University sent news to Rome and Rheims, and asserted that the people celebrated the nativity as ethnicks, atheists, and epicures 4." In the same year we read that "William Perkins, fellow of Christ's, in a commonplace delivered in the chapel of that College, condemned the practice of kneeling when the sacrament of the Lord's Supper was received, and of turning the face to the east." On being summoned before the Vice-chancellor, he made an explanation which was accepted 5. In 1595 William Barrett, M.A., fellow of Gonville and Caius College, in a Latin sermon at St Mary's, appears to have been induced to retort on the Puritan party; he "preached against the doctrines of Calvin with some sharp and unbecoming speeches of that reverend man and other foreign learned Puritans, exhorting the auditors not to read them." He was compelled to make a public recantation". In 1596 the Rector of Shepehall in Herts, preaching at St Mary's, asserted (1) “That the use of humanity and humane arts and profane authors in sermons was altogether unprofitable and unlawful; (2) That not the tenth part of the ministers of the Church of England were able ministers or teachers, but dumb dogs; (3) That a curate being no preacher was no minister, nor did edify more than a boy of eight years old might do7." Strype, speaking of Cartwright,

1 Cooper's Annals, II, 215.

3 Ibid. II. 319.

5 Ibid. II. 430. 7 Ibid. 11. 566.

2 Ibid. II. 312.

4 Ibid. II. 429.

6 Ibid. II. 529.