Chapter XXII: Education and Art in the Sixteenth Century (1)

EDUCATION has long been a subject of interest; and there is nothing more important in a civilised nation than its system of educational establishments. An educational system, like all other human institutions, must in some degree conform to the laws of social organisation and progress, if it would maintain the complement of its influence upon the mind of the nation. It is not enough that an educational system should maintain its efficacy according to a stereotyped standard, it should also take account of changing circumstances, and accommodate itself to the requirements and the wants of a highly artificial and progressive society. It was in this that many of the knotty questions connected with national education arose. The chief difficulty to a just and wise reform sprang out of the conservative interests, class prejudice, hereditary pride, and narrowness of sympathy; or on the part of some, a fear, not unreasonable, that the ancient landmarks might be altogether obliterated. In every nation where a comparative degree of civilisation and freedom has been attained, there will always be persons and parties who cling with extreme tenacity to whatever is old and established, as if the least change or modification of an institution was certain to derange the order of the universe; while other parties may be more inclined to move onward and to improve the existing institutions, to bring them more into harmony with circumstances and the realised results of the age. The great revolution which we have been attempting to explain in the preceding chapters, is a grand exemplification of these conflicting tendencies of parties; and when the demand for reasonable and necessary reform is obstinately resisted and withheld, it requires no prophet to announce that the consequences must be ruinously disastrous.

In the first volume some notices of the early schools of the country were given;¹ and in this chapter it is proposed to present a brief history of the origin of the parish schools, and other educational institutions of the kingdom. Before the Reformation in Scotland, there were at least two classes of schools, besides the universities: one of these was called the “lecture-school,” in which the children were taught to read the vernacular language; the other was the grammar schools, in which the Latin language was taught, and these were attached to the monasteries and to the burghs. Prior to the Reformation, however, the first class of schools were not numerous. At the beginning of the sixteenth century there were schools in Edinburgh for the instruction of children, and in which there were female teachers; but there were some early indications of a disposition to give the grammar schools a monopoly of teaching. In 1520 the town council of Edinburgh, on grounds which they deemed sufficient, enacted that no inhabitant of the town should put their children to any particular school in the burgh, but to the principal grammar school, “to be taught in any science, except only grace-book, primar, and plain duty,” under a fine of ten shillings.²

¹ Macintosh’s _History of Civilisation in Scotland_, Volume I.,
pages 148, 245, 465‒468.

² _Burgh Records of Edinburgh_, Volume I., pages 76, 193;
_Burgh Records of Aberdeen_, Volume I., pages 97, 98, 107.

We have seen, that after the Reformation strenuous and worthy efforts were made to extend the means of education to the people. Where regular schools were not erected, the readers in the churches often supplied the deficiency, by teaching the youth to read the catechism and the Bible. The reformed clergy took a warm interest in the education of the people, by exerting themselves to establish parish schools; and the Church courts were untiring in their exertions to forward the cause of popular education.¹ At the annual visitation of the parishes by the presbyteries, the state of the schools always formed a subject of inquiry; the qualifications of the teachers were examined; and where no schools existed, means were employed to establish them. The parochial schools of Scotland were not originated by the act of Council in 1616, which was ratified by parliament in 1633. Long before that time the Church courts had a “common order” touching the rate to be raised for the salary of the teacher, the fees to be paid by the scholars, and many other regulations for the organisation of the primary schools. In this way many schools were erected before the close of the sixteenth century. There was often reference to the trial and inspection of schoolmasters in the register of the Church courts, and regulations for providing means to educate the children of the poor. Although it is undoubted that many schools were founded and in operation during the later part of the century, it would be a mistake to suppose that every parish had a school,² as there were many and great difficulties to be overcome ere a popular system of education could be organised to such a point of completeness.

¹ _Book of the Universal Kirk_, pages 17, 33, 60, 108, 279,
311, 415, 432, 693, 737, 965.

² _Records of the Presbytery of Haddington._

After the Reformation, in all the schools the children were learned to read the catechism, the prayers, and parts of the Bible; and even to rehearse the catechism and portions of Scripture from memory. It was common to instruct the boys in manly exercises and sports, to develop their bodies and limbs, by the practice of archery, fencing, running, leaping, wrestling, swimming, and other games.¹

¹ “And by our master we were teached to handle the bow for
archery, the club for golf, the batons for fencing; also to
run, to leap, to swim, and to wrestle.” Melville’s _Diary_,
pages 16, 17, 21.

All the chief towns in the kingdom had grammar schools before the Reformation; it is unnecessary, however, to give an account of each, and only a general description of their character, and the aim of the instruction afforded in them, and the changes which the Reformation introduced, will be presented. With comparatively few exceptions, the whole of the educational institutions of Scotland were under the control of the Church, both before and after the Reformation; and it is only recently that the control of the Church in education was limited to special branches, and altogether excluded from others.

In the first half of the sixteenth century there were sometimes two or more grammar schools in Edinburgh, as the Canongate had one from an early period. The magistrates exercised authority over these schools, although the abbot of Holyrood had the right of nominating the head masters. The town council paid the master of the grammar school various sums of money and fees annually; and they also attended to the building and repairing of the schools. In 1555 there was a school for teaching French in Edinburgh, and that year the town’s treasurer paid ten marks to the master of the French school; and French seems to have been occasionally taught as a branch of education in the grammar schools.¹

¹ _Burgh Records of Edinburgh_, Volume II., pages 179, 271,
281, 292, 210, 241, 318; Melville’s _Diary_, page 17.

In 1521, John Marschall, master of the grammar school of Aberdeen, asked the provost to tell him of whom he held the school, and the answer was, that he held it under the appointment of the magistrates of the burgh. This, however, was not exactly correct; for in 1537 the Chancellor of the diocese of Aberdeen claimed the right of appointing the master of the grammar school, and nominated Robert Skene to that office, and requested the town council to accept him. The master of the grammar school claimed a monopoly of teaching in the city, both before and after the Reformation. In 1529, Mr. John Bisset, the master of the grammar school, received from the town council the sum of ten pounds Scots yearly to help to pay his board, till they promoted him to a benefice. The council, in 1542, unanimously ordered that the master of the grammar school should have forty shillings for his wages from the humblest persons, who received him and the bishop on St. Nicholas day, and every honest man to give him at their pleasure. Four years later, Hugh Munro, the master of the grammar school, by the order of the council, was to get ten pounds yearly; and, at the same time, the citizens were requested to give him the accustomed wages on St. Nicholas day. Hugh Munro had a wife and a family, and thus it seems, he was not in priest’s orders. In 1550 he resigned, and the council then nominated Mr. James Chalmer to the office of master of the school, and presented him to the Chancellor to be admitted according to the usage of bygone times. It is evident that the grammar schools of the burghs were partly under the magistrates. But it seems to have been the policy of the Church to allow the local authorities and the citizens to have as much of the management of the schools as would cause them to take an interest in these establishments.¹

¹ _Burgh Records of Aberdeen_, Volume I., pages 97‒98, 107,
120, 122, 151, 186, 231, 272, 277; Volume II., pages 90, 154.

The grammar schools of Glasgow, Dunfermline, Perth, Stirling, Linlithgow, Dundee, and others, had attained to some importance. Andrew Simson was master of the grammar school of Perth from 1550 to 1560, and it was reported that he had sometimes three hundred boys under his charge. He was the author of a Latin grammar, which kept its ground in the schools of Scotland till the eighteenth century, when it was superseded by Ruddiman’s grammar. On the eve of the Reformation, Ninian Winzet, the opponent of Knox, held the post of master of the grammar school of Linlithgow; and in one of his works he complained bitterly that “so little respect has ever been paid to the grammar schools.”

The chief subject taught in these schools was the Latin language. The amount of information imparted to the scholars was very limited. It consisted of the matters connected with the Roman Catholic religion, and of portions of Latin authors, which were read and explained. After the Reformation these institutions were taken under the charge of the Protestants; but the teaching of grammar and the Latin language still continued to be their distinguishing characteristic.

At the time of the Reformation, the grammar school of Edinburgh was taught by William Robertson, who continued to adhere to the Roman Catholic faith; and the magistrates had much difficulty in removing him from office, as his appointment was vested in the abbot of Holyrood. In the month of April, 1562, the town council requested Lord James Stuart to deal with his brother, Lord Robert, abbot of Holyrood, for ejecting Mr. Robertson from the school; and the council proposed to grant the post of master to the most learned man that could be found. The council also expressed a desire to have a college built within the burgh for regents, and suggested that the Queen might be persuaded to grant to the town the yards and rents of the friars and the altarages of the kirk. The master of the grammar school, however, was not to be so easily removed as had been supposed. He was then ordered to produce his right, and a long process of disputes between him and the council ensued. He insisted that his fee should be paid; and in 1565, owing to the Queen interposing in his favour, the council was obliged to pay him for the year 1566. Though at last, Robertson was superseded by another master, yet as late as 1580 he interfered with the grammar school of the Canongate, and interrupted the teaching for three months.¹

¹ _Burgh Records of Edinburgh_, Volume III., pages 131‒132,
139, 141‒145, 149, 193, 196‒197, 215.

The council and the deacons of the crafts united in their endeavours to find a qualified master for their grammar school. In July, 1568, the council ordered their treasurer to ride to St. Andrews for Thomas Buchanan. At a meeting of the council in August, after long reasoning with this learned man, concerning the instruction of the youth of the town, knowing him to be an able and qualified teacher, they resolved to appoint him on the following terms:――“For the first year, in case it be known to them that the said Thomas, with the fifty merks they have granted him of yearly pension, with the fees of the bairns, which is four shillings each, be not worth three hundred merks for the first year or thereby, they shall cause their treasurer to give him other fifty, which shall be one hundred merks for the first year, and each year thereafter according to their appointment.” He entered on his duties in February, 1569, but he left the situation in July, 1570.¹ The citizens of Edinburgh manifested a keen interest in education, and their persistent efforts were at last rewarded.

¹ _Burgh Records of Edinburgh_, Volume III., pages 157, 250,
251‒252, 259.

In the year 1578, the High School of Edinburgh was erected on the ground where the monastery of the Black Friars had stood. This school soon took a high position among the educational establishments of the kingdom. It was fortunate in having at its head two excellent teachers in succession, who laid the foundation of its reputation. Hercules Rollock was appointed Master of the High School of Edinburgh in 1584, and filled this post for eleven years, and, by his energy and example, and the success of his teaching, he contributed much to raise the character of the school. Alexander Hume, the next head master, was appointed in 1596. He was a good classical scholar, and proved to be a very acceptable teacher. He was the author of a Latin grammar, which the Privy Council, in pursuance of an Act of Parliament, ordered to be used in all the schools of the kingdom. This injunction, however, was frustrated by the action of some of the bishops, and by the opposition of Ray, who succeeded him in the High School.¹ In the year 1598, a set of rules was framed for the High School by a committee of learned men, and were intended to regulate the mode of teaching and the government of the youth; but I will return to this matter when I come to describe the method of teaching and the subjects taught.

¹ _Ibid._; _Crawfurd’s History of the University of Edinburgh_,
pages 19‒20, 64; _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_,
Volume IV., pages 157, 374; _Register of the Privy Council_.

After the Reformation, the Grammar School of Glasgow was taught by Thomas Jack, who had the reputation of being well qualified for the task. He was the author of a work entitled “Onomasticon Poeticum,” published at Edinburgh in 1592. It contains an explanation of the proper names which occur in the writings of the ancient poets, and composed in Latin verse, with the view of being committed to memory by the boys. He left the school of Glasgow in 1574, and became minister of the parish of Eastwood. Jack was succeeded by Patrick Sharp, who held the office of master of the Grammar School till 1582; and he was afterwards appointed principal of the University of Glasgow. Sharp was succeeded by John Blackwood, who held the post of master of this school for thirty years.¹

¹ _Burgh Records of Glasgow_, pages 99, 243, 246, 310, 311.

About the beginning of the seventeenth century the Town Council of Glasgow was much occupied with the building of a new Grammar School. In May, 1600, they ordered the master of work to go with two craftsmen, a mason and a wright, to inspect the school and to ascertain what repairs it required. But at a meeting of the council in August the same year, it was “condescended that in respect that there was nothing more profitable, first to the glory of God, next to the well of the town, than to have a good grammar school;” and, seeing that it was altogether ruinous and must be entirely rebuilt, they resolved to prosecute the undertaking till it was finished.¹

¹ _Ibid._, pages 208, 210, 216, 217, _et seq._ There were
schools in Glasgow for teaching English, or reading in the
Scottish dialect.

Touching the method of teaching and the books used by the teachers, some interesting information has been preserved. In 1575 the Lords of the Privy Council deemed it expedient for the upbringing of the youth of the kingdom, that there should be only one form of grammar taught in all the schools; and that this important end might be attained by common consent, the council ordered letters to be sent to the most learned schoolmasters――“Mr. George Buchanan, or Peter Young, preceptors to the King’s majesty, Mr. Thomas Buchanan, Mr. William Robertson, Mr. Andrew Simson, Mr. James Carmichael, and Mr. Patrick Auchinlek ――schoolmasters of Stirling, Edinburgh, Dunbar, Haddington, and St. Andrews, requesting them to appear personally before the Regent and Council at Holyrood, on the 10th of January, to give their advice concerning the form of Grammar that should be used in all the Schools of the realm hereafter; thus at once to show their desire to promote so necessary a work, and to manifest their loyalty.”¹ It does not appear that this order directly led to the production of such a Latin grammar as was desired; but in the latter half of the century there were at least four different Latin grammars written by Scotsmen――Simson’s, Duncan’s, Carmichael’s, and Hume’s; and several attempts were made by Parliament and by the Privy Council, to cause the same grammar to be used in all the schools of the kingdom.²

¹ _Register of the Privy Council_, Volume II., page 78.

² _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume IV., pages 157,
371; _Register of the Privy Council_.

As before observed, the aim of these schools was to impart to the pupils a knowledge of the Latin language, as it was then the medium through which Greek, theology, and ancient literature was universally taught. That this method involved an excessive degree of labour in order to reach its end, is quite evident; nor was the result obtained at all commensurate to the waste of energy; and that it was so long followed, is only another illustration of the strength and power of habit.

In the year 1598 the Town Council of Edinburgh adopted a set of rules framed by one of the Senators of the College of Justice, six advocates, the Principal of the university, and three of the ministers of the city, for regulating the mode of teaching, and the management of the scholars in the High School. The school was divided into four classes, each to be taught by a separate master, one of whom was the rector. The boys passed from master to master at the end of each year; the subjects and the books to be taught, as well as the mode of teaching, were minutely specified. No boy was to be admitted to the school till he had learned to read English perfectly, and all the common schools were strictly prohibited from teaching Latin. The following is a part of the rules: ――“They think it best and expedient that there be four learned and godly men appointed regents to teach the grammar school of Edinburgh, in all time coming by four several classes in the following manner: ――The first class, the regent thereof shall teach the first and second rudiments of Dunbar, with the Colloquies of Corderius; and on Sunday the catechism platatine. The second regent shall teach the rules of the first part of Pelisso, with Cicerois familiar epistles; and to make some version thrice in the week; and to teach them on Sunday the foresaid catechism lately set out in Latin, with Ovid de tristibus. The third regent shall teach the second part of Pelisso, with the supplement of Erasmus Sintaxis Terence, the Methamorphoris of Ovide, with Buchanan’s psalms on Sunday. The fourth regent shall teach the third part of Pelisso, with Buchanan’s Prosodia, Taleus figures, and rhetoric figure, constructions, Thome Linacri, Virgelius, Salustius, Cesaris Commentaria, and florus Ovidij epistole, and the heroic psalms of Buchanan on Sunday. Each of the foresaid regents shall teach their class in separate apartments, and to this effect the High School shall be divided into four houses.

“And that there may be the better harmony between the four regents in their procedure and teaching, and that they may the better answer for their duty, discharges simpliciter masters or other persons whatsoever from teaching of any rudiments or any other book in Latin in any of their lecture schools. So that the first regent may be the more answerable in grounding, and instructing them in rudiments. It is always provided in favour of lecture schools, that none shall be received in the said first class but he who can read first perfectly the English with some writ; and the first regent shall in no ways be suffered to teach any one the first A. B. C.

“The fourth regent shall be Principal of the school and of the regents, and have the oversight of them all, namely, he shall see and animadvert that every one of the regents keep their own hours in the manner and form of teaching presently set down, and that each of them continually await all the day long upon the school in teaching and examining their bairns. That all the regents, the Principal as well as the other three inferiors, each of them teach their own class, and that each of them use correction upon their own disciples, except in great and notorious faults, then all the four to be assembled in a house and have the Principal regent to punish the same.”

Regarding the fees――“It has been thought good to make the fees and quarter payments of the regents in this manner――The first and second regents shall have quarterly each thirteen shillings and fourpence, the third fifteen shillings, and the fourth twenty shillings.”

“Their salaries, the first and second regents each twenty pounds; the third forty merks; and the Principal two hundred merks. The same day the provost, bailies, and council, discharged all masters, regents, and teachers of bairns in their grammar schools of all creaving and receiving of any bleyis silver of their bairns and scholars; as also of any bent silver, except fourpence at a time only.”¹

¹ _Burgh Records of Edinburgh._ For comparison it may be
noticed that the Town Council of Aberdeen, in 1579, resolved
to give the master of the grammar school a yearly pension
of fifty merks――“for bringing up, teaching, and instructing,
the bairns and scholars thereof, in virtue, learning,
letters and good manners.” _Burgh Records of Aberdeen_,
Volume II., page 24.

Passing to the universities, the next and the highest educational institutions of the kingdom, we naturally begin with the earliest. Additions were made to the University of St. Andrews early in the century. Near the church of St. Leonards, within the precincts of the Abbey, there was an hospital for the reception of pious strangers, who came on pilgrimage to visit the relics of St. Andrews; and the patrons resolved to convert it into a college, “for training up poor scholars in learning and the arts, to the glory of God and the edification of the people.” The foundation charter of St. Leonard’s college was executed in 1512, by John Hepburn, prior of the abbey, and confirmed by the Archbishop, and his father James IV. The prior and conventual chapter were the patrons of this college, and retained the power of visiting and correcting it; and the teachers were always taken from the monastery. The college was intended for the support and education of twenty poor scholars. The Principal was appointed to lecture twice in the week on Scripture or theology to the priests, the regents, and others who chose to attend.¹

¹ Dr. M‘Crie’s _Life of Melville_, Volume I., pages 219‒222.

The college of St. Mary was begun under the direction of Archbishop Beaton, who obtained a papal bull in 1537 authorising him to erect the buildings. The branches authorised to be taught in it were grammar, logic, theology, medicine, canon and civil law; and within the establishment divine offices were to be performed, and a common table provided for the members from the rents and benefices annexed to the institution. The building was begun by Archbishop Beaton, and carried on by his successor the Cardinal; but the college was not completed till 1554, when Archbishop Hamilton obtained a papal bull empowering him to alter the arrangements made by his predecessors. According to Hamilton’s foundation of the new college, there were to be four principal teachers, called respectively, the provost, the licentiate, the bachelor, and the canonist; eight students of theology, three teachers of philosophy, and two of rhetoric and grammar. A pretty full course of studies was prescribed; and there was to be lectures on the Bible, the canon law, logic, ethics, physics, and mathematics; and minute rules were laid down for the order and regulation of the institution. The teachers, regents, and students, had to wear caps after the Parisian fashion; and all the students, the nobles, as well as the bursars, had to wear gowns bound round them with a girdle, but the bursars were to add to this a black hood. There were then three colleges at St. Andrews.¹

¹ _Records of St. Andrew’s University._

The defence of the Roman Catholic faith was a special end of the erection of all the colleges in the kingdom; but how far they contributed to this, it is not difficult to discover. There can be no doubt that the Scottish Universities aided the revolutionary movement; as the carefully calculated system of instruction yielded results little suspected by those who originated it. During the heat of the Reformation struggle, the number of students at the universities diminished; but many of the masters and regents of the colleges embraced the reformed opinions.

Everything relating to the Roman Catholic faith and worship, in any way connected with the laws and practice of the universities, was removed as soon as possible, after the establishment of the Reformation. Yet the modes of teaching philosophy and the arts were little changed; and even in the theological faculty some of the old forms of teaching were retained.

At St. Andrews the regular length of the course was four years, though it was usually finished in three and a half. The session began on the 1st of October, and continued throughout the year, except the months of August and September. All the scholars who entered for the first time were placed under the tuition of a regent, who carried them through the whole curriculum. He assembled his class three hours every day, and read and explained the books of Aristotle; beginning with dialectics, then ethics and physics, concluding the course with arithmetic and mathematics, and the highest branch of philosophy, to wit, metaphysics. In the progress of the course, the students were often engaged in disputations and declamations, both before their class, and publicly before the university. The Principal occasionally read public lectures on what was deemed the higher branches of philosophy, which were attended by the advanced students.¹

¹ _Records of the University of St. Andrews_; Melville’s
_Diary_, pages 24‒28.

About the middle of the third year of the course, the students that had obtained an attestation of regular attendance and good behaviour from the regent and the Principal of the college, were then admitted to enter on trials for the degree of bachelor. Every year the faculty elected three of the regents as examiners; and in their presence the candidates determined a question in logic or morals in a connected discourse, and answered the questions proposed on any of the branches, which they had studied under their regents. The examiners reported to the faculty, and those who passed were confirmed by the dean, and the rest sent to a lower class. At the end of the course they were examined in all the subjects taught, and candidates for graduation had to defend a thesis, which had before been affixed to the gates of the different colleges. They were divided into circles, and their names arranged in the order of merit, but with a ♦preference to persons of rank; then the degree of Master of Arts was solemnly conferred by the Chancellor of the university, in the name of the Trinity.¹

♦ “perference” replaced with “preference”

¹ _Statutes of St. Andrews University_, 1570, and previous
regulations. When receiving the degrees of bachelor and
master of arts, the graduates paid certain sums of money
to the purse of the university, to the dean, and to other
officials; those that were too poor, undertook to give what
was due to the public fund as soon as they were able. An old
law enacted that each student, including the bursars, was
bound to give his regent annually, for three years, a Scots
noble, which in later times was made to answer to a pound
Scots.――_Ibid._, 1561, 1579, 1583.

The _First Book of Discipline_ sketched a scheme for remodelling the three universities, but it was not adopted. In vain the Reformers recommended it to the aristocracy, and argued for its acceptance with all their powers of persuasion; in vain they urged, “if God shall give your wisdoms grace to set forward letters in the way prescribed, ye shall leave wisdom and learning to your posterity――a treasure more to be esteemed than any earthly treasure ye are able to amass for them, which, without wisdom, are more likely to be their ruin and confusion than help and comfort.”¹

¹ Knox’s _Works_, Volume II., pages 213‒221.

Naturally the Reformation had more or less affected the teaching staff of all the universities, and to a much greater extent the funds on which they were supported. The University of Glasgow was nearly ruined by the change of religion. As several of its professors were maintained by their livings in the Church, and, as they adhered to the old religion, there were no salaries for the Protestant professors, its small revenue was also partly alienated, and unjustly seized. If the Principal of the college, John Davidson, had not embraced the reformed opinions, and continued his academical labour, indeed the institution might have been utterly extinguished. As it was, Queen Mary in 1563, granted to the College of Glasgow some houses, lands, and annual rents, which had formerly been held by the friars, to found bursaries for five poor scholars. The same year a petition was presented to the Queen and the Lords of the Articles, “in the name of all that within this realm are desirous that learning and letters may flourish.” This petition stated that the patrimony of some of the foundations in the colleges, especially those of St. Andrews, were wasted; and the sciences that were most necessary, the tongues and humanity, were very imperfectly taught in them, which was equally injurious to the people, to their children, and to posterity. The petitioners therefore earnestly requested that measures should be taken to remedy these matters. Parliament appointed a committee to visit the universities, and to report their opinions, as to the best mode of improving the state of education. No report from the committee is preserved. But there is a scheme for the University of St. Andrews, which was drawn by Buchanan, who was one of the Commissioners.¹ Buchanan took a very keen interest in all matters connected with education; and he had a leading hand in the many schemes proposed after the Reformation. But the unsettled state of public affairs, divided aims, and especially the lack of funds, made it impossible to carry into effect the national system of education proposed in the Book of Discipline. Along with the other Reformers and friends of education, Buchanan did all that he could in the circumstances; and the very inspiration of his name as a scholar, and his life-long devotion to learning, was itself a powerful influence on education in Scotland. Although it does not appear, that he had high administrative abilities, still his example was great, and produced a marked effect. The civil war, however, put a stop for a time to these educational reforms.

¹ _Records of the University of Glasgow_; _Report of the
University Commissioners, 1826‒27 and 1836‒7_, Volume II.,
pages 236, 237; _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_,
Volume II., page 544. The plan of education proposed for
the University of St. Andrews was printed in Dr. Irving’s
_Memoirs of Buchanan_, appendix iii. It gave too exclusive
attention to the learned languages, though in some respects
it was a marked improvement on the existing mode of teaching.

But in 1572 the town council of Glasgow granted lands, houses, and rents to their college, which was called a new foundation. It was, however, only sufficient to support fifteen persons. Andrew Melville was appointed Principal of the University of Glasgow in 1574, and by his energy and talents contributed much to raise the institution. He proceeded to work with great earnestness, and resolved to conduct a class himself through what he deemed a complete course of study.¹ His method, and the subjects which he led the class through have been minutely detailed by his nephew, James Melville. He began by teaching his class the principles of Greek grammar, rhetoric, and logic, using the dialects of Ramus. Once the students were engaged in these fascinating subjects, he read with them the best classical authors, pointing out their beauties, and thus illustrated the principles of logic and rhetoric. He next treated geography and mathematics, using the arithmetic and geometry of Ramus, the tables of Hunter, and the astrology of Aratus. Moral philosophy followed; and he read the ethics and politics of Aristotle; Cicero’s offices, paradoxes, and Tusculan questions, and some of Plato’s dialogues: in physics, he commented on some parts of the works of Aristotle and Plato. At last, entering upon the subjects of his own special department, he taught the Hebrew grammar; first cursorily, and then by a more searching examination of its principles, accompanied with a praxis upon the Psalter and the books of Solomon. Proceeding to the Chaldee and Syriac, he read the parts of the Books of Ezra and Daniel which are written in Chaldee, and the Epistle of the Galatians in the Syriac version. He also went through the common heads of divinity, following the order of Calvin’s Institutes; and gave lectures on the different books of the Bible. This course was completed in six years. During all this time, Melville met his class twice every day, including Sunday, besides holding occasional discussions after dinner and supper with such as were present.²

¹ _Report of the University Commissioners_, Volume II., pages
237‒239; Melville’s _Diary_, pages 48, 49.

² Melville’s _Diary_, pages 48‒50.

Andrew Melville was a man of great energy and ability, and enthusiastically attached to his profession. In 1575 his nephew, James Melville, began a class in the College of Glasgow: and he states that he was the first regent in Scotland, who read the Greek authors to his class in the original. In 1577, Andrew Melville attempted to appoint permanent teachers to the different departments of study; while the revenue of the university was augmented, and its privileges anew confirmed by a royal charter, called a new erection.¹

¹ _Ibid._, pages 53, 54; _Records of the University of Glasgow_.

The leaders of the Reformed Church were fully aware that the universities greatly needed more reform. The General Assembly in 1576 appointed Commissioners to visit and examine the state of the University of St. Andrews; and the following year parliament appointed a committee to visit all the universities of the kingdom, but it seems to have done nothing; and the General Assembly which met in 1579 presented a petition to the Government, urging the necessity of reforming the University of St. Andrews, and nominated Commissioners to act along with those whom the Council might appoint. The Council at last named Commissioners, and gave them ample powers; they were authorised to remove superstition, disqualified persons, and, if necessary, to change the form of study, and the number of professors and regents, to join or divide the faculties, and generally to make such arrangements in the universities as should “tend to the glory of God, the profit of the nation, and the upbringing of the youth in the sciences which are needful for the continuance of religion.” They found that all the colleges had departed from their original foundations, and that the foundations themselves disagreed in many ways with the true religion, and were not nearly up to “that perfection of teaching which this learned age craves.”¹

¹ _Book of the Universal Kirk_; _Acts of the Parliaments of
Scotland_, Volume III., page 98.

The Commissioners introduced the following in St. Salvator’s College: a Principal, and four ordinary regents of humanity and philosophy were instituted. The first regent was to teach the Greek grammar; to exercise the students in Latin composition during the first half year of the course, and in Greek the second half. The second regent was to teach rhetoric and elocution, illustrating them by examples from the best Greek and Roman authors; this class had also an hour every day for Latin composition, and during the last half of the session they had to declaim an oration once every month in Latin and Greek alternately. The third regent was to teach the most useful parts of Aristotle’s logic, ethics, and politics, all in Greek, and the offices of Cicero in Latin. The fourth regent was to teach as much of the physics as was necessary, and the motions of the sphere. On Sunday a lesson on the Greek New Testament had to be read in all the four classes. There were also to be regents in mathematics, and law, who were to lecture on four days of the week. The Principal of the college himself was to act as professor of medicine. Similar arrangements were adopted in St. Leonards, except that in it there was no classes for mathematics and law; and the Principal, instead of teaching medicine, was to expound the philosophy of Plato.

St. Mary’s, or the New College, was limited to the study of theology, and the languages connected with it. It was to have five instructors, and a course of study extending to four years. The chief subjects embraced in the course were the Hebrew, the Chaldee, and the Syriac languages, in connection with the books of the Old Testament. One regent was to explicate the New Testament during the whole course. The Principal himself, the fifth instructor, was to lecture on the system of divinity during all the time of the course. Public disputations were to be held every week, declamations once a month; and, at three different times during the course, a solemn examination was to be held, at which “every learned man should be free to dispute.” The regents and masters then in office were ordered to remove without delay; the Commissioners elected those whom they thought best qualified for teaching. They enacted that when a vacancy occurred in the future, it should be filled by an open competitive trial; and vacancies in the other two colleges were to be filled up in the same way. Regulations were made to prevent the revenue of the university from being diverted to improper purposes. At the end of every four years, there was to be a royal visitation of the university to inquire into the effects of this reformation, and to see that the regulations were observed.¹

¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, VIII., pages 178‒182;
Dr. M‘Crie’s _Life of Melville_, Volume I., pages 241‒244.

This scheme of educational reform indicated, that its authors were anxious to promote the study of the higher literature, and the various branches of learning inseparably associated with Christian theology and religion. The new plan, however, was not fully carried into effect. In the College of St. Salvador and St. Leonards, the act of parliament touching the number of regents was not carried out.

Andrew Melville was translated from Glasgow to St. Andrews, and appointed Principal of St. Mary’s College in 1580. After being installed, he delivered his inaugural oration, and began to lecture on theology. He went through the course of lectures and teaching with much energy and ability. His lectures excited unusual interest in the university, and were attended by some of the regents of the other colleges, as well as by the class of theological students. Yet Melville met with many difficulties in carrying out the new regulations, and his own ideas of educational reform.¹ It has always been proverbially difficult to reform old corporations; owing to various well known influences, and the wisest reforms are often rendered almost nugatory. An outside and powerful agent often sought to control the teaching in the universities; as so many political crisis occurred, each dominant party at the head of the Government deemed it necessary to apply their tests, and to purge the educational institutions, and thus the field of culture and the forms of religious thought were narrowed within the walls of the universities.

¹ Melville’s _Diary_, pages 83‒86, 122‒128; _Life of Archbishop
Adamson_.

The first attempt to purge the University of Aberdeen was made by the General Assembly in January, 1561, when Knox and the leading Reformers held a conference with Alexander Anderson, the Principal, John ♦Lesly, the canonist, and others. This meeting produced no definite result, and it seems that King’s College remained unreformed till 1569. In that year the Commission of the General Assembly, led by Sir John Erskine of Dun, Superintendent of Angus, and the Regent, accompanied by some of the members of the Privy Council, proceeded to Aberdeen, and, having called before them Mr. Alexander Anderson, Principal, Mr. Alexander Galloway, sub-principal, and the three regents of the College, they were then asked to subscribe this declaration:――“We whose names are underwritten, do ratify and approve, from our very hearts, the Confession of Faith, together with all other Acts concerning our religion, given forth in the Parliaments held at Edinburgh, the 24th day of August, 1560, and the 15th day of December, 1567, and join ourselves as members of the true Kirk of Christ, whose visible face is described in the said Acts; and shall, in time coming, be participant of the sacraments, now most faithfully and publicly ministered in the said Kirk, and submit us to the jurisdiction and discipline thereof.” As they showed no signs of compliance with the requisition of the Commission, they were then called before the Regent and Lords of Council; but “they contemned his Grace’s admonitions, and declined to subscribe the said articles.” Consequently the Principal, sub-principal, and the three regents, were deprived of their offices, ordered to remove from the College, and prohibited from teaching publicly or privately in any quarter of Scotland.

♦ “Leslie” replaced with “Lesly” for consistency

Alexander Arbuthnot was immediately appointed Principal of the reformed University, and James Lawson, sub-principal, and new regents were introduced. The office of canonist was abolished. Arbuthnot introduced the study of Greek into the College, and, following the views of his associate, Andrew Melville, he made an effort to limit each regent or professor to one department of study, instead as had been the practice formerly for each regent to take his class through all the branches taught during the four years of the curriculum. Unfortunately the records of the University under Arbuthnot’s presidency have been lost, and no lists of the number of students or graduates now exist for this period. It appears, however, that the new system had either not been completely established, or it had fallen into disuse, shortly after Arbuthnot’s death, as the lists of intrants from 1601 onwards show that a regent taught the same students from the first to the fourth year.¹

¹ _Fasti Aberdonenses_, page 27, _et seq._; _Book of the Kirk_,
page 142.

We have seen that the citizens of Edinburgh took a warm interest in education, and they were exceedingly anxious to have a college in the capital. In 1579, the Town Council resolved to commence the building on the piece of ground where Darnley met his fate. Owing, however, to the opposition of some parties, the undertaking was for a time suspended; but in 1581 the work was pushed forward with energy. It was not a new and regularly designed structure, as it was patched up partly by repairing the old houses upon the spot, and partly by the erection of others upon the most economical plan. A royal charter was granted in 1582, authorising the foundation of the college, and confirming the rights of the Town Council, with the advice of the ministers of the city, as the patrons of the institution, conferring on them “full freedom to elect the best qualified persons that could be found for the discharge of the duties of the institution, with power to instal and remove them as should be deemed expedient; and prohibiting all other persons from teaching these sciences within the burgh, unless with the permission of the magistrates and council.”¹

¹ _Register of the Privy Council_, Volume II., pages 528‒529;
_Burgh Records of Edinburgh_, Volume III., pages 105‒106,
132, 163; Crawfurd’s _History of the University of
Edinburgh_, page 1‒16.

The patrons intended the students to lodge within the college and to reside there during the course of their study. This was the custom in the other Scottish universities, and was continued till a much later period. In King’s College at Aberdeen, by a regulation of the Senatus in 1753, all the students had to live within the college gates. The second section of the statutes enacted by the Senatus of King’s College, touching the lodging of the students, after stating that the practice of the students living and eating in private houses had been attended with bad results, proceeded thus:――“Therefore, the masters have decreed that for the future all the students shall lodge in rooms within the college, and eat at the college table during the whole session, and that no student whatsoever shall be exempted from obedience to this statute without a dispensation from the Principal or sub-principal, who are empowered to grant such dispensations, for weighty reasons to be therein expressed.” At the same time we find the following interesting statute:――“That students may have the benefit of those parts of education which are not reckoned academical, such as dancing, writing, book-keeping, French, etc., without losing time in attending Masters at a distance from the college, the sub-principal and regents shall appoint proper rooms in the college, and proper hours, when these things may be taught, and shall bespeak masters of the best characters and qualifications for instructing those who chose to attend them.” As directly applicable to the later part of the sixteenth century, I may transcribe what James Melville said about similar matters in connection with his own education at St. Andrews, between 1569 and 1573. “Moreover, in these years I learned my music, in which I took great delight, of one Alexander Smith, a servant to the Principal of our college, who had been trained up among the monks in the abbey. I learned of him the gamut and plain song, and many of the trebles of the psalms.... I loved singing and playing on instruments passing well, and would have gladly spent time when the exercise thereof was within the college; for two or three of our condisciples played tolerably well on the virginals, and other instruments. Our regent also had the spinet in his chamber, and learned something, and I after him.”¹

¹ _Diary_, page 29.

The Town Council of Edinburgh in 1583 appointed Robert Rollock to take charge of the youth in the new institution, who had been acting as a regent of philosophy in the University of St. Andrews. In October the magistrates issued a proclamation requesting those that desired to be taught in the college to present themselves before one of the bailies, and enrol their names. A considerable number appeared, and with them Rollock began the first year of the course. Many of them, however, were too deficient in the Latin language for entering on the subjects contemplated in the college. He recommended Duncan Narne as one of the regents of philosophy, and proposed that Narne should take those that were deficient in Latin, and prepare them for a new Bajan class the next session, when those under his own charge would be in the second year of their course. This plan was followed, so during the first session of the college, which lasted from October, 1853, till the end of August, 1584, there were only two classes and two instructors. During the second session there was no more, but the two regents proceeded with their classes.

In the winter of 1586 Rollock was appointed Principal of the college; he continued, however, to teach his class to the end of the course. When the fourth session was opened, the teaching staff consisted of the Principal and two regents, each having one class. In August 1587, the first graduation took place, Principal Rollock conferred the degree of Master of Arts on the students of the fourth year, educated by himself――the number who graduated was forty-seven. After this Rollock resigned the post of regent, and was appointed teacher or professor of divinity, an office which continued to be attached to the Principalship of the college till 1620. In 1589 a fourth regent of philosophy was appointed, and in 1597 Mr. John Ray was elected regent of humanity. The college now had six instructors――a professor of divinity, four regents of philosophy, and a regent of humanity. At this strength the teaching staff of the institution remained for many years.¹

¹ _Burgh Records of Edinburgh_; Crawfurd’s _History of the
University of Edinburgh_, pages 30‒31; Dalziel’s _History
of the University of Edinburgh_, chapter 1.

Rollock in his method of exposition followed Ramus, and no man knew how to make a better use of this famous philosopher’s dialectics than the first professor of the college of Edinburgh. The writings of Ramus, however, though adopted by Andrew Melville and some of the other regents in the Universities, did not supersede the authority of Aristotle, whose writings were for long the texts of the philosophical teaching imparted by the regents in Scotland. Rollock, according to all accounts, was a very successful teacher, an exceedingly industrious man, and did much to ensure the success, and to raise the character of the new institution. He was cut off in the midst of his arduous work in the forty-third year of his age, in 1598. After his death, the greatest respect was shown to his memory, his body was followed to the grave by a vast concourse of the people, lamenting him with the deepest manifestations of grief. His old pupils and literary friends composed upwards of forty Latin elegies in his praise; and the magistrates of Edinburgh did not forget to provide for his widow and daughter.¹

¹ Charteris’s _Narrative of the life and death of Rollock_;
_Select Works of Rollock_, Volume I., pages 65‒72, 86‒87;
Crawfurd’s _History of the University of Edinburgh_, pages
44‒45.

The salaries of the Principal and the regents of the college of Edinburgh were comparatively small, and not at all calculated to attract a man of great talents and ambition. In 1594 the four regents of philosophy had each one hundred pounds Scots, that is £8 6 shillings 8 pence sterling per annum; even in 1620 the Principal had only five hundred pounds yearly, or £41 14 shillings 4 pence sterling; in consequence of the smallness of their salaries the regents seldom remained long, and vacancies were always occurring.¹

¹ Dalziel’s _History of the University of Edinburgh_.

From the opening of the college of Edinburgh to the end of the sixteenth century, the number of students who graduated in the faculty of arts was about three hundred and twenty-two; the average attendance including the four classes, probably did not exceed one hundred and fifty. The number of students attending St. Andrews in the latter half of the century was about two hundred;¹ and the number of students at the other two Universities was at least, somewhat less than the average at St. Andrews.

¹ Crawfurd’s _History of the University of Edinburgh_;
_Catalogue of the Graduates of the University of Edinburgh_,
1858.

Before leaving this subject, it seems desirable to give some account of the kind of literature and science which was taught in the college of Edinburgh. As it was founded after the Reformation, it may be assumed so far to represent the views of the Protestants, touching learning, literature, and science; this may also enable us to understand the cast of the national mind, when we obtain a glimpse of one of the moulds which so long contributed to form it. As then conceived, the main aim of a liberal education was to acquire a knowledge of the Latin language, as without this it was impossible to read the works of Roman authors, which with the writings of the ancient Greeks, were deemed the only genuine standards of fine composition. Much of the students’ time was occupied in hearing the regents read and explain Latin authors, in translating Latin exercises themselves, and in translating Greek into Latin, and Latin into Greek. When they became adepts at this kind of work, and had learned the rules of formal logic, with the ethics of Aristotle, they were supposed to have received a liberal education.