Chapter XXXIII: Education and Art in the Seventeenth Century

AS we have seen in the second volume, after the Reformation many efforts were made to extend the elements of Education to the people. Though the nation was disturbed touching forms of Church polity, and often torn by civil war and persecution, yet the parish and elementary schools increased in number during the century, while the number of adventure-schools which appeared throughout the kingdom humbly praying for liberty to teach, indicates a growing and pretty general desire among the people to partake of the benefits of education. Thus there were signs that the mass of ignorance was slowly but surely yielding to the influences of civilisation. Still, the vagrant habits of many persons, the severe oppression of a portion of the people, and many other obstacles, required a long time to elapse ere they could be thoroughly overcome or a complete system of national education established.

The legislature, the church, and the local authorities, all endeavoured to promote the education of the people. In 1616 the Privy Council enacted that there should be a school established in every parish of the kingdom, and the Act was to be carried into effect with the concurrence of the burghs. But this Act was not fully carried out, and so ten years later the Government ordered a report to be drawn up on the state of the parishes throughout the kingdom, from which it appeared that the majority of the parishes were then without regular schools. Parliament in 1633 ratified the Act of Council, and further enacted that the bishops, with the consent of the majority of the parishioners, might impose a rate upon the possessors of land for establishing and supporting the parish schools. In 1641 the subject came again before Parliament in the form of an overture, which, among other points concerning schools and education, stated that “every parish should have a reader and a school wherein children are to be taught in reading and writing, and the grounds of religion, according to the laudable acts both of church and parliament before enacted.” One of the articles in the overture on the schools was to this effect: “The Assembly would supplicate the parliament that for youths of the finest and best spirits of the Highlands and Borders, maintenance may be allowed as to bursars, to be trained in the Universities.” Again, in 1645, Parliament ordered “that there be a school founded, and a schoolmaster appointed in every parish not already provided.” For this purpose the proprietors in every congregation were enjoined to meet and to provide a suitable building for a school, and modify a salary to the schoolmaster, which should not be under one hundred merks or above two hundred annually. A rate was to be imposed by the proprietors to maintain the schools and pay the schoolmasters; but if they could not agree among themselves to settle the matter, then in that case, the presbytery were to nominate twelve honest men within its bounds, who should be empowered to execute the work of establishing a school, which should be as valid as if the proprietors had done it themselves.¹ But troubles came fast and thick upon the party then at the head of affairs, and this Act was not put into operation.

¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume V., pages 21,
367; Volume VI., page 216.

In 1696 Parliament anew enacted that a school and schoolmaster should be established in every parish not already provided “by advice of the proprietors and the minister of the parish.” As in the Act of 1645, they were enjoined to provide a suitable building for a school, and settle a salary to a schoolmaster, which should not be under one hundred merks (five pounds and eleven shillings) sterling, or above two hundred merks (eleven pounds, two shillings, and twopence.) The proprietors were to pay a share of the rate according to their valued rent within the parish, “allowing each of them relief from his tenants of the half of his proportion for settling and maintaining of a school and payment of the schoolmaster’s salary.... If the proprietors, or a majority of them, shall not meet, or being met and shall not agree among themselves, then in that case, the Presbytery shall apply to the commissioners of supply of the shire, who, or any five of them, shall have power to establish a school, and settle and modify a salary for the schoolmaster, and to rate and lay on the same upon the proprietors according to their valued rent, which shall be as valid and effectual as if it had been done by the proprietors themselves. And because the proportion imposed upon each proprietor will be but small, therefore for the better and more ready payment thereof, it is ordained that if two terms’ proportions run in and the third unpaid, then those that so fail in payment shall be liable in double of their proportions then resting, and in the double of every term’s proportion that shall be resting thereafter, until the schoolmaster be completely paid, and that without any defalcation.”¹ From this date the parish system of primary schools became established and continued without interruption, excepting in some parts of the Highlands, where parishes were so large as to render the act inoperative; but ultimately other means of providing elementary education in those remote quarters of the kingdom were adopted.

¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume X., page 63.

Throughout this period there were elementary schools in many of the towns distinct from the grammar or burgh schools. But it must be observed that the grammar schools from an early period enjoyed a monopoly of teaching certain branches, as they were protected more or less strictly until recent times. Education like trade and everything else was subject to the spirit and the influences of the age, and a few examples of the modes of protection in this field may be interesting to many. In 1668, the town council of Edinburgh stated that it was illegal for any person to teach Latin or grammar within the city, except the masters of the high school, and that none residing in the town might send their children to be taught without the gates; nevertheless, several persons were teaching within the city, “to its public loss, and to the overthrow of the high school.” And therefore the council “ordained that no person upon any pretence whatever teach grammar within the city except at the schools of Leith, Canongate, and the readers’ school of West Port; and that no inhabitant send their children to any other place within the liberties of the city; and anyone teaching in contempt of this act shall be imprisoned, and parents sending their children elsewhere shall pay quarterly to the master of the high school as much as his other scholars.”¹ Yet “the adventure schools seemed to have gained ground on the high school in the course of 1684, when the doctors appeal for augmentation, because of the number of private schools which, if suppressed, will become their mortal enemies, slandering them to all concerned.”²

¹ _Burgh Records of Edinburgh._

² Grant’s _History of the Burgh Schools of Scotland_, page 136.

In 1686, the town of Wigton ordered that no other school but the burgh one should be permitted there, except for girls to learn sewing, under a fine on the teachers of ten pounds quarterly, and five groats on parents for each child. The town council of Banff, in 1688, prohibited private schools within the burgh under the penalty of banishment. In 1693, the council of Edinburgh ordered the doors of private schools to be closed; while, in 1698, the council of Stirling ordained that no child above six years of age should be taught in any school but the grammar school, no private school was to be permitted. The town council of Selkirk, in 1721, having appointed an English master, prohibited all other persons from teaching English to boys within the burgh.¹

¹ Grant’s _History of the Burgh Schools of Scotland_, pages
138‒140; _Burgh Records of Banff_; _Burgh Records of
Stirling_.

The English or primary schools in the burghs were partly under the control of the magistrates, and their sanction had to be obtained before a teacher could open a school. In March, 1636, the town council of Aberdeen discovered that three women had opened a school without asking or receiving a license from the council, and that they were teaching their scholars to read, and thus injuring the masters of the English schools, who had been authorised and admitted by the council; therefore, the council prohibited these women from keeping a school for teaching the children, excepting only schools for “learning the bairns” to sew and weave, and no further; “and that with the licence of the council, sought and obtained, and in no other way.”¹ In 1658, William Findlay applied to the council for liberty to teach an English school, stating that he had been a teacher in John Brown’s school, that he thought himself capable of conducting an English and writing school, and that he was very anxious to do it, if their honours should see fit to authorise him. The council, having considered his application, granted him a licence to open a school in the Green or Shoregate, “for teaching the young ones and children of the inhabitants of this burgh, during the council’s pleasure, and his good service in that charge.”²

¹ _Burgh Records of Aberdeen_, Volume III., page 98.

² _Ibid._, Volume IV., page 176.

The council of Glasgow, in 1639, enacted that there should be four English schools in the city, with a writing school, “and the masters of these schools to be admitted by the council, and to receive instructions from them touching the school hours and other matters, and this act to be proclaimed by sound of drum.” But in 1654, eight teachers had taken up Scots schools without authority in the city, and they then humbly supplicated the magistrates to be allowed to continue them, while two others prayed that they might be permitted to open new Scots schools. After consideration, the magistrates authorised them, on condition that they conducted themselves religiously, praying morning and evening in the schools, exacting only certain fees, and instructing all poor children without fees, whose parents or friends required them to do this; while it was declared that the opening of ♦schools without the authority of the magistrates “was against all reason, and contrary to precedent, and to what had been heretofore observed.” In 1663, fourteen persons, male and female, were authorised to keep Scots schools in Glasgow.¹

♦ “scheols” replaced with “schools”

¹ _Burgh Records of Glasgow_, page 397; Grant’s _History of the
Burgh Schools of Scotland_, page 385.

In 1662, the town council of ♦Aberdeen concluded that the English and reading schools of the burgh had been for several years much neglected and abused, owing to there being too many licenced to teach, who were incapable of teaching. But the council, having now brought John Gormak from Edinburgh, a highly qualified teacher of reading and writing, to assume the duties of teaching in the city, and that the schools may be better regulated and the youth better instructed in future, “resolved to have a school for teaching the young ones in reading and in writing; and that Robert Webster, who also has the liberty of the school, continue it for teaching and instructing the children in reading and arithmetic; and John Moubray to have the liberty of a school for teaching the children of Footdee and the Castlegate; prohibiting all other persons from keeping any English schools for reading, writing, or arithmetic, within this burgh, except such women as the council shall permit, for instructing children in the grounds of reading.” The same year, the council admitted Barbara Mollison as teacher of the school founded by the Lady of Rothiemay, “in this burgh, for teaching the young ones in reading, writing, and sewing.”¹

♦ “Aberbeen” replaced with “Aberdeen”

¹ _Burgh Records of Aberdeen_, Volume IV., page 201.

From an early period, French was very generally taught in Scotland, but no other modern language was introduced into the schools until very recent times. In 1635, the town council of Aberdeen authorised Alexander Rolland to open a French school in the city, “for teaching the youth, and such as shall please to come to him, and for that end to put up a sign before his school door, to give notice of his licence, to all who are anxious to learn the French tongue.”¹

¹ _Burgh Records of Aberdeen_, Volume III., page 80.

The Church was invested with the power of visiting and examining all the parish schools of the kingdom, and she manifested a deep interest in their welfare. But the Church also claimed, and generally exercised the right of visiting and examining all the schools in the realm, though, in the case of the burgh or grammar schools, she usually acted in conjunction with the town councils or the magistrates. These visitations of the schools were made at stated times, and helped to sustain their spirit and efficiency.

Thus in 1629, the town council of Aberdeen appointed four men to assist Dr. Forbes, Dr. Dun, Dr. Johnston, and Mr. Robert Barron, in the visitation of the Grammar, English, and Music schools of the city, enjoining them to take notice of the form of doctrine and discipline in all of them, and how the masters and the scholars observed the rules and the instructions set down for their guidance. “And wherein they find any of the masters deficient, either in doctrine or discipline, to report this to the council, with their proposals as to how all such defects should be remedied, to the end that the magistrates may order reformation, according to an act formerly drawn up. It was also commanded that the laws of all the schools should be printed and affixed in every school, that neither master nor scholar may pretend ignorance.”¹ In 1652, the council of Peebles ordered the school to be visited, and the minister to be informed thereof. The town council of Jedburgh, in 1656, ordered visitations of the school to be made twice a year, in May and November, “in order that the master and assistant shall be tried, concerning the soundness of their judgment in matters of religion, their ability as teachers, the honesty of their conversation, and the fidelity with which they discharge their duties, so that the proficiency of the scholars may be known.”²

¹ _Ibid._, Volume III., pages 14, 26, _et seq._

² _Burgh Records of Peebles_; _Burgh Records of Jedburgh_;
Grant’s _History of the Burgh Schools of Scotland_, page 148.

The General Assembly of 1642 appointed a committee to consider the time and manner of visiting schools, and the best and most orderly course for teaching grammar. And in 1645, the Assembly, with the aim of advancing learning and good order in grammar schools, enacted that every grammar school should be visited twice in the year by visitors appointed by the presbytery and kirk-session in landward parishes, by the town council and ministers in burghs, and by the universities where there are any, always with the consent of the patrons of the school, in order that the diligence of masters, and the proficiency of scholars may be ascertained, and deficiency censured.¹ The Presbyteries, generally, were painstaking and careful in assisting to conduct these examinations.

¹ _Acts of the General Assembly._

In 1659, the town council of Aberdeen, considering that the quarterly visitation of the grammar and music schools of the city, appointed by the former acts, if rightly conducted, would tend to promote the learning of the youth, approved the following regulations, together with the laws of the school adopted in 1636: 1. That there should be four solemn visitations of the grammar school every year, one at the beginning of every quarter, at which the scholars should be tried in making themes, interpreting and analysing authors, and making verses, which will take up one day, if rightly done. 2. That the master of the grammar school should keep a register of visitations, in which should be entered “the laws of the school,” printed about the year 1636, and also the act of council approving these regulations; and the scholar who at the quarterly visitation gains the prize, should with his own hand insert his name in the register, mentioning whether he gained it by making a theme or a verse, or analysing authors, and also recording the date of the visitation, which must be done by _nonas idus calendus_, the master helping those of the lower classes to enter it correctly, and the prizeman’s name to be affixed above his class till the next visitation. 3. That each scholar in the school should have an antagonist, who as near as possible should be his equal, for stirring up emulation, and neither to receive help in his trials at the visitation. 4. The masters should keep the themes of the present visitation until the next quarterly visitation, that their proficiency may be observed. 5. Those who make the best verse and the best theme should each have a prize, after it appears by examination to be their own composition. 6. At every quarterly visitation there should be public acting, short recitations and declamations before the visitors, that the scholars may learn boldness and vivacity in public speaking. 7. When two or more are equal in making a theme or in any other point of trial, they may be put to an extempore trial for ascertaining the order of merit; but the visitors must be careful not to discourage the unsuccessful competitor, who should also receive a word of public commendation when the prize is given to the victor. 8. That the visitors should test the scholars on the grounds of religion by asking some questions of the Shorter Catechism, and to ascertain if they understood them.¹

¹ _Burgh Records of Aberdeen_, Volume IV., pages 180‒182.

The Town Council of Aberdeen passed an act for redressing abuses which had arisen in the Grammar School in 1671. The scholars were interrupted in their learning by being changed from one teacher to another too often, as the assistant teachers were changed from one class to another every quarter, therefore it was settled that all the assistant teachers should begin with the scholars they received at each of the four quarters of the year, and carry them on continuously till they were fit for entering the master’s class. “Seeing that in the three years’ time, the scholars coming in May and in August cannot be so far advanced as those who came in autumn and at Candlemas, their teacher having delivered up the autumn scholars to the master’s class, he may begin to receive the new class in the elementary branch at the same time, and also perfect the rest of his former classes, and always as he receives a new class every quarter so he may give off the class of his former course every quarter to the master’s class, and so every third year each teacher of the school is to receive the scholars of a whole year, and at the four general quarters go up with his own scholars to the master’s class. And if any boy through neglect or dullness of understanding fall short of his fellows, by the advice of the visitors or with consent of his parents, he ought to descend under the master that teaches next to that class.” The mode of exercising discipline being defective, it was enjoined that the head master and the assistant teachers should exercise discipline every twenty-four hours upon the scholars under their respective charges. The master and teachers had been in the habit of not attending to their duty till eight in the morning, therefore it was enacted that one of the teachers should be in the school every day at six in the morning, and the head master and the rest of the teachers should be in the school every day before seven, that the scholars might not be idle when they came. It was ordered that one at least of the teachers should attend the scholars when they were at their play, to keep them in the usual playgrounds, and see that they did not hurt each other.¹

¹ _Ibid._, pages 270‒272.

In 1700 the council of Aberdeen, the principal and regents of Marischal College, and the ministers of the city, framed a set of rules for the government of the Grammar School. It was resolved that a solemn visitation of the school should be held annually in the beginning of October, at which the scholars were to be examined, and prizes awarded to the most deserving. Besides this, there should be three other visitations at intervals of three months conducted by members of the council, the ministers of the burgh, and one or two of the regents of the College. Further, two or more of the magistrates should visit the school on the first Tuesday of every month and inquire how the rules and the discipline of the school were observed. At the same time they appointed the method of teaching grammar and the classical authors, and enjoined that they should be diligently pursued.¹

¹ _Burgh Records of Aberdeen_, Volume IV., page 327.

As to the subjects taught in the grammar schools and the method of teaching, there seems to have been a gradual improvement. In the higher class of schools the course extended to five years. At the High School of Edinburgh in 1640 the order of teaching was as follows:――For the first half of the first year the scholars were taught the principles of grammar “in vernaculo sermone,” at the same time learning the Latin names of everything on earth and in heaven; and during the second half they had daily to repeat a certain portion of grammar, and learn particular sentences relating to life and manners. The first half of the second year they daily repeated certain parts of grammar, especially as laid down by Despauter,¹ translating it into English, and at the same time reading Cordery’s Colloquies; while, during the second half, they were taught daily the Syntax of Erasmus, the masters teaching and the scholars learning in the Latin language. Throughout the third year they repeated daily a portion of etymology and syntax, being exercised in reading Cicero’s De Senectute and De Amicitia, Terence’s Comedies and Elegies, Ovid’s Tristia, Buchanan’s Psalms, and Cicero’s Epistles, reading the same _clara voce_. The fourth year, for the first month they repeated daily what they had already learned, being taught Buchanan’s Prosody, Despauter’s Select Rules, and Buchanan’s Epigrams and Poetry. During the rest of the year they were exercised in poetry and in the practice of the rules of grammar, reading Virgil, Ovid’s Metamorphoses, Horace, Buchanan’s Psalms, translating Cicero, Cæsar, and Terence, and the beauties of these authors were explained to them. The fifth year they studied the rhetoric of Tully, and the compendious rhetoric of Cassander, read Cicero’s Orations, the short speeches in Sallust, Virgil, and Lucan, and were at all times enjoined to read audibly and distinctly, and declaim.²

¹ A notable Flemish grammarian, who flourished from 1460 to
1520, and whose grammar long continued to be used in our
schools.

² Chalmers’ _Life of Ruddiman_, pages 88‒90; Grant’s _History
of the Burgh Schools of Scotland_, page 339. For comparison
of the above course of instruction in this school with the
earlier one adopted in 1598, see the second volume of this
history, pages 404‒5.

The course of the Grammar School of Glasgow and that of Aberdeen also extended to five years, and the class of subjects and the instruction imparted being very similar in these schools, though there were some variations which may be a little further illustrated. In 1685, at the request of the Town Council of Glasgow, the regents of the College and the ministers of the city framed a scheme of teaching for the Grammar School. According to it, the first year the scholars were to be taught the common rudiments of Latin, including the Vocables; the second year the larger half of the first part of grammar, with Cordery’s Colloquies, Erasmus’s Minor Colloquies, and some select epistles of Cicero and Cato. The third year they were to be taught the other half of the first part of grammar, and a short piece of the second, as far as Regimen Genitivi; and for authors they were to have Ovid’s Epistles, Buchanan’s Psalms, especially such of them as are written in elegiac verse, with themes and versions from the best authors. The fourth year they were to learn the rest of Syntax from Regimen Genitivi, repeating the former parts, and reading Cæsar’s Commentaries, Justin’s History, Ovid’s Metamorphoses, and Virgil. The fifth year they were to be perfected in the third and fourth parts of the Latin grammar, and to learn Buchanan’s Epigrams, Jephtes, and Baptistes, and also select parts of Horace and Juvenal, with exercises in poetry, in themes and versions.¹

¹ Grant’s _History of the Burgh Schools of Scotland_, page 338.

The course of instruction in the grammar school of Aberdeen, in 1700, was ordered as follows: “The entrants should read Latin during the first quarter, or longer if the masters thought fit. After this, they should learn the declensions, comparisons, pronouns, conjugations, and the rest of the rudiments, to the constructions, and they should also learn by heart the first four sections of Webberburn’s Vocables, and decline and conjugate them; with the constructions they should have the two last sections of Vocables. With the first part of the grammar they should have Tully, Sulpicius, Distich of Cato, Ovid’s Epistles, Virgil’s Epigrams, and Terentii Andria; and for prose authors, Cordery, Erasmus’s Minor Colloquies, and Cicero’s Minor Epistles; and for sacred prose, Ursin’s Catechism, Dialogi Sacra Sebastiani. With the second part of the grammar, Virgil’s Eclogues and the fourth book of his Georgics, and Ovid’s Metamorphoses, should be used; for prose authors, Curtius, Sallust, and Cæsar’s Commentaries; and for sacred lessons, Buchanan’s Paraphrase of the Psalms. With the third part of the grammar, Virgil’s second and sixth Æneids, and Horace’s Odes; and for prose authors, Cicero’s Offices, and Erasmus’s Minor Colloquies; and for sacred lessons, Buchanan’s ♦Paraphrase continued. With the fourth part of the grammar, some of the select Satires of Horace, the tenth and thirteenth Satires of Juvenal, and some of the Satires of Persius; and for prose authors, Livy’s First Decade, and Buchanan’s History, together with the turning and making of verse, dictates of rhetoric and rules of elegance, to which should be added some practice in composing and resolving orations according to the rules of rhetoric. After Despauter’s Grammar, Kirkwood’s Orthography and Syntax should be learned, with his tract, De Variis Carminum Generibus. Throughout the prose authors, the choicest sentences of each day’s lesson should be dictated in Latin and in English, together with the versions of each day’s lesson, and for each lesson throughout the several factions, a daily conference should be appointed. As to composition, the public arguments should be dictated thrice a week, and besides these the high class should have five arguments more. On Saturday afternoon there should be disputes, repeating of rules and authors publicly by the several classes in turn; and all the rules and questions of the Shorter Catechism should be repeated once a week publicly. In the winter quarter each scholar of the higher class should repeat a fable of Æsop from the public desk before the whole class.” Rules were also adopted for regulating the discipline of the school, the play-days, and the tasks for Sunday.¹

♦ “Paraphase” replaced with “Paraphrase”

¹ _Burgh Records of Aberdeen_, Volume IV., 327‒332.

Though provision was made for teaching Greek in some of the grammar schools, it was not generally taught in these schools during the seventeenth century. There are some notices of the teaching of Greek in the schools; thus in the high school of Edinburgh, a class was established for teaching the rudiments of Greek, in 1614. In 1625, 1642, 1656, the masters of the grammar school of Stirling promised to teach all the scholars both Latin and Greek grammar. The town council of Aberdeen, in 1661, authorised Mr. William Aidy to teach scholars in the Greek tongue at such hours as should not interfere with the teaching of the grammar school. In 1663, Latin and Greek were taught in the school of Dumfries. As indicated before, Latin, and its classic writers, formed the chief subject-matter in the higher grammar schools. But in most of the smaller grammar or burgh schools, English was taught, including even reading, spelling, and writing. Throughout this period, however, there is little mention of the teaching of arithmetic, or any branch of mathematics, geography, or drawing; and, indeed, in these and other cognate branches of knowledge the nation as yet was not far advanced.¹ From about the end of the seventeenth century onward the subject of navigation was assiduously taught in the schools of the chief seaport towns of Scotland. In 1673, the master of the Scots school at Ayr was enjoined to teach the children to paint, but there was little teaching of drawing anywhere.

¹ _Burgh Records of Aberdeen_, Volume IV.; _Burgh Records
of Stirling_; Grant’s _History of the Burgh Schools of
Scotland_, page 332.

The town councils throughout the kingdom frequently encouraged and rewarded their school teachers. In 1620, the master of the grammar school of Paisley was made a burgess and freeman of the burgh, and in 1632, the assistant teacher, for his encouragement, was made a burgess without paying any composition; and again, in 1685, the master of the grammar school was admitted a burgess gratis, on account of his service to the town, and for his encouragement. In 1677, the master of the grammar school of Ayr was made a burgess and guild brother “for the good service which he had done in attending on the scholars in the school.” The town council of Aberdeen, in 1632, granted to David Wedderburn, master of the grammar school, the sum of two hundred merks Scots, for printing his grammar, lately published, which he had dedicated to the council.

During the century some interest was manifested in the teaching of music. In a considerable number of the schools music was taught as a subordinate branch of education, and there were also, in different places, separate schools for teaching the vocal and instrumental forms. In 1624, the town council of Glasgow arranged with James Sanders to teach all the children of the burgh who should be sent to his music school, allowing him ten shillings each quarter, and three shillings and fourpence for his assistant. Then the provost and magistrates prohibited all other schools from teaching music in the city, unless they were licensed by the council. But in 1638, their music school had decayed, “to the disgrace of the city, and the regret of all honest citizens;” the council, therefore, with the consent of James Sanders, appointed Duncan Burnett to teach the music school. In 1669, the council agreed to give the teacher of music three hundred and fifty merks annually, and the bishop of Glasgow also was to give one hundred pounds Scots. In 1691, the music master was to receive fourteen shillings monthly for teaching one hour daily, and for writing the thirteen common tunes and some psalms, fourteen shillings; and further, the magistrates allowed him one hundred pounds Scots yearly.¹ The town council of Stirling, in 1620, granted to the teacher of music an annual salary of twenty pounds, with six shillings and eightpence quarterly, for every scholar of the town learning music; and in 1694, the precentor of the burgh was appointed to keep a public school for teaching singing and playing. Frequently the master of the song school was also English or rather Scots master, and taught the children reading and spelling, and sometimes writing and grammar. In 1621, the master of the music school of Dunbar was also the English master of the town school. Shortly before the Restoration, the music school of Elgin was converted into an English school, music, however, being still taught.²

¹ _Burgh Records of Aberdeen_, Volume III., page 50; _Burgh
Records of Paisley_; _Burgh Records of Ayr_; _Burgh Records
of Glasgow_, pages 354, 388, _et seq._

² Grant’s _History of the Burgh Schools of Scotland_, pages
381‒382.

In 1636, the town council of Aberdeen admitted Andrew Melville to be master of the music school. He had already been a teacher of music for eighteen years, and the council thought he had produced sufficient evidence of his qualifications in the art. They, therefore, appointed him master of the music school, to teach the art of singing and playing, stipulated that he should find a properly qualified assistant, to instruct and attend to scholars, and also to take up the psalms in both the churches of the city, at preaching and at prayers, evening and morning, on week-days and Sunday. In 1666, the council agreed to give Thomas Davidson, the master of the music school, a salary of two hundred and fifty merks annually, with school fees. The council, in 1675, issued a notice inviting persons expert in the science of music to compete for the office of master of the song school; and this brought an application from a Frenchman, who had been teaching music in Edinburgh with much success. The council engaged him for one year, or longer if they thought fit, at an annual salary of two hundred pounds, and thirty shillings quarterly from each scholar. His hours for teaching were fixed from seven to nine, and ten to eleven, in the forenoon, and from two to three in the afternoon.¹

¹ _Burgh Records of Aberdeen_, Volume IV., pages 212, 226,
292‒293. In 1682, the town council of Aberdeen granted John
Forbes, printer, one hundred pounds Scots, as a gratuity,
in recognition of his merit in publishing a book for the
instruction of the young, which he dedicated to the provost
and council. _Ibid._, page 302. The council, in 1643, granted
John Row four hundred merks Scots, in consideration of his
having taught the Hebrew tongue, and published a Hebrew
Dictionary, which he dedicated to the council. _Ibid._,
Volume III., pages 165, 248.

Passing to the Universities of Scotland, we cannot record that they exhibited any marked advance in the seventeenth century. There was scarcely any improvement or change in the regular methods of imparting knowledge, but some additional subjects were introduced. Amidst the ecclesiastical and political wars under which the nation groaned, letters, science, philosophy, and art, could not be expected to bloom and ripen. Nevertheless, it is encouraging to find that in spite of adverse circumstances, much violence, suffering, and poverty, many of the people continued to take a lively interest in the diffusion of the higher education.

About the beginning of the century, the magistrates and council of Glasgow manifested a keen interest in the preservation of the rights of their University. And in 1630, the town council, upon a petition from the principal and the regents of the University for assistance to erect a new building, agreed to contribute a sum of one thousand merks when the building was commenced, and another thousand merks to purchase books for increasing the number of volumes in the library. Later in the century, we find the council still taking a warm interest in the College.¹ The town council of Aberdeen, in 1634, granted four hundred merks to the masters and regents of King’s College, to help to repair the crown of the College, which had lately been broken down by a tempest. In 1642, the council granted four hundred merks to aid in repairing the College of the burgh. The same year the council commanded that all the bursars admitted into the College of the burgh should diligently attend all the public lectures and lessons of the several professors, during the time that they received the benefit of their bursaries. The town council also appointed Mr. John Row to teach Hebrew in the College of the burgh. Dr. Robert Dun bequeathed his books to the College, and the town council was careful to see them placed in the library, and entered in a catalogue. In 1694, the council gave a contribution of five hundred merks for the observatory of Marischal College.²

¹ _Burgh Records of Glasgow_, pages 217‒223, 245, 275, 336,
340, 345, 351, 352.

² _Burgh Records of Aberdeen_, Volume III., pages 26, 59, 67;
Volume IV., pages 169, 199, 232, 315.

As observed in the last volume, each dominant party in the government eagerly sought to impose their views upon the universities. When the Covenanting party gained the ascendancy, it was resolved, in 1639, that all masters and teachers of universities, colleges, and schools, and all scholars at the passing of their examination for degrees, should subscribe the Covenant, and this resolution was carried out by a commission of visitation between 1639 and 1642.¹ One of the proposals touching the universities which the General Assembly presented to Parliament in 1641, was to the following effect:――That in order to remove and to prevent abuses in the universities, to promote piety and learning, it was very requisite and highly expedient that a constant intercourse and correspondence should be kept up between all the universities and colleges of the kingdom. And, therefore, it should be ordained that a meeting of commissioners from all the universities and colleges should be held once every year, at such time and place as should be agreed upon, who should consult and determine upon their common affairs, and the best means of advancing the end above specified; and who also, or some of their number, should represent to parliament, and to the General Assembly, what should be necessary and best for the universities. Another item was, that special care should be taken that all the chairs in the universities, and more especially the chairs of divinity, should be filled with the ablest men, and the best affected to the Reformation and the order of the Church.²

¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume V., pages
291‒293.

² _Ibid._, Volume V., page 367.

It was not merely the doctrines and political opinions taught in the universities that were affected by the changes and the revolutions in the government, but even the funds of these institutions were greatly affected, being often diminished and sometimes a little increased. The general seizure of Church property and funds at the Reformation has been already explained. The portion that belonged to the universities was, like the rest, generally diverted from its purpose, notwithstanding the efforts made to recover it; but without enlarging on this, it may be well to state a few facts. In 1641, parliament passed an act, granting the revenues of the bishopric and the priory of St. Andrews to the University of St. Andrews; that is, the income of the dismissed primate of Scotland was now to be transferred to the principal, the regents, and the professors of the University of St. Andrews. Accordingly, the Estates appointed a commission for the visitation of the Colleges of St. Andrews, to distribute the above fund among the principals, professors, and other members of the University, assigning due proportions to each of the three Colleges. The commission was also empowered to order the course of studies, to rectify what was wrong, to recommend what was best for training the students in religion and in learning, and to report their proceedings to the Estates.¹

¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, pages 382, 448‒450,
483, 498‒499.

In 1641, the King and parliament granted to the University of Glasgow the temporality of the bishopric of Galloway, and ordered that the name and the memory of this bishopric should be suppressed and extinguished. The same year the Estates passed an act assigning the revenues of the bishopric of Aberdeen to the Colleges of Old and New Aberdeen. Cromwell, as we have seen, had to listen to some scathing preaching against himself in Glasgow; and though the majority of the professors and masters of the University submitted, with much reluctance to his government, still, Oliver and his council renewed all its immunities and privileges, adding that of printing bibles and all kinds of books relating to the liberal sciences or licensed by the University. The Protector further confirmed all former foundations, mortifications, and donations made in favour of the University, and particularly those of the bishopric of Galloway, adding thereto, for seven years to come, the vacant stipends of the parishes which had been in the patronage of the bishop of Galloway, also in perpetuity, the revenues of the deanery and sub-deanery of Glasgow. This last gift, however, was under several restrictions, by which the University could not obtain possession of the subjects during Cromwell’s rule; however, as his acts were rescinded at the Restoration, it fell to the ground.¹

¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume V., page 566;
Dr. Reid’s _Account of the University of Glasgow_.

At the Restoration, the universities were as far as possible made subservient to the government and its principles. When Episcopacy was re-established, the funds which the universities were receiving from the revenues of the bishoprics, as above indicated, were at once withdrawn. This crippled them for some time. At this time there were eight chairs in the University of Glasgow, but three of them had to be given up, and the five which remained were reduced to very low salaries, while the College buildings remained in an unfinished condition. According to the report of a visitation appointed by parliament in 1644, an annual sum of three thousand nine hundred and forty-one pounds Scots should speedily be provided for the University, otherwise it would quickly decay and go to ruin; for it had a great load of debt, and many chairs wanting which it should have, but cannot for want of revenue. In this state, however, it continued till after the Revolution. In 1693, however, each of the Scotch universities received a grant of three hundred pounds annually out of the bishops’ rents in Scotland. They continued to struggle on, but none of them have yet become very rich institutions.¹

¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume VII., page 498.
Dr. Reid’s _Account of the University of Glasgow_.

After the Revolution, of course, the universities had to be purged, and in 1690, parliament passed an act authorising the visitation of all the educational establishments of the kingdom. A long list of commissioners were named in the act, and empowered to proceed, and to see that no person disaffected to the government, or otherwise disqualified, should be permitted to remain in any of the universities or schools, upon the ground of its being necessary “for the advancement of religion and learning, the good of the Church, and the peace of the kingdom, that the universities, colleges, and schools be provided and served with pious, able, and qualified principals, professors, regents, masters, and others bearing office therein, well affected to their Majesties, and the established government of Church and State.” Therefore it was enacted that henceforward “no professors, principals, regents, masters, or others bearing office in any university, college, or school, in this kingdom, be permitted to continue in the exercise of their functions, but such as shall acknowledge and profess, and subscribe, the Confession of Faith, ratified by this parliament; and also swear and subscribe the oath of allegiance to their Majesties: and withal shall be found of a pious, loyal, and peaceable conversation, and of good and sufficient literature and abilities for their respective employments; and submitting to the government of the Church now settled by law.”¹

¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume IX., pages
163‒164.

In 1695, the commissioners of the universities had arrived at the conclusion that none of the text-books should be of foreign origin. “They tell the commissioners of parliament that it is altogether dishonourable to the universities, and the famed learning of the nation, that a course of philosophy should be made the standard of authority, which none belonging to the universities have composed. They criticise the existing books and systems of logic and philosophy. The existing courses of philosophy are either not intended and suited for students, or they are in themselves objectionable. The course that runs the fairest is, ‘Philosophia Vetus et Nova,’ which is done by a popish author, and bears marks of that religion; but therein the logics are barren, the ethics erroneous, and the physics too prolix. Henry Moir’s ethics cannot be admitted; they are grossly Arminian, particularly in his opinion ‘de libero arbitrio.’ The determinations and pneumatology of De Vries are too short. Le Clerc is merely sceptical and Socinian. For Cartesius, Rohault, and others of his gang, besides what may be said against their doctrine, they all labour under this inconvenience ――that they give not any sufficient account of the other hypotheses, and the old philosophy, which must not be ejected.”¹

¹ _Printed Muniments of the University of Glasgow_, Volume II.,
page 531.

In accordance with this conclusion, the University of St. Andrews was ordered to draw up the logics and general metaphysics; to that of Edinburgh was given the pneumatology; to Glasgow, the general and special ethics; and to the two Colleges of Aberdeen the general and special physics. The treatises were written and placed before the commissioners of parliament in 1697, who were empowered to revise them. Two of these productions were printed in London in 1701. The one produced in Edinburgh is entitled “An Introduction to Metaphysics,” and contains fifty-six pages; the other from St. Andrews, “An Introduction to Logic,” of the same size. But no more was heard of the project, and it produced no practical effect on the course of university education. In short, these compends, and the views which they expressed, may be regarded as the closing words of the regenting system, and of the older method of philosophical teaching in the Scotch universities. The leading peculiarity of this method has been pointed out in the previous volume.¹ The professorial system was finally instituted in Glasgow in 1727: it was introduced there by Melville in 1577, but regenting was resumed in 1642; in Edinburgh in 1708; in St. Andrews, 1747; but in Aberdeen the regenting continued till 1754.

¹ Mackintosh’s _History of Civilisation in Scotland_, Volume
II., page 407, 416.

The chief point of difference between this system and that of the regents is the limiting of the teaching of the professor to a special subject, out of the many subjects which the regent had to teach. Then in the newer system, the professor is not usually restricted to the teaching of specific books, but may arrange and develop his subject as he thinks fit, and in his lectures contribute what he can to its progress. Thus the professorial system allows the instructor full freedom to exert his powers in presenting the various points and relations of his subject, as well as its special exposition and practical applications. But the mode of instruction in the universities will be fully explained in the next volume, in connection with the history of Scottish philosophy.

In what is usually termed the fine arts, Scotland long remained behind other modern nations. Indeed the circumstances of the nation were exceptionally unfavourable to the growth of art. There was too much internal strife, too few of the elements of wealth, too little culture or love of refinement, or elevated ideal feeling, among the Scotch aristocracy, to prompt and encourage art; even though the Scots naturally possessed aptitude for art, the conditions for its encouragement and realisation did not exist. Hence the seventeenth century produced only one eminent Scottish artist, George Jamesone.

George Jamesone, a son of Andrew Jamesone, master mason, was born in Aberdeen about the year 1588, and was the first Scottish painter who attained to historic character. He received his early education at the Grammar School of Aberdeen. On leaving the school in 1601, it seems probable that he studied for some time at Marischal College. At the age of eighteen years he probably had fixed on his calling, and commenced to try his hand and eye in drawing and painting. Strictly speaking, he could have had no teacher, and only a few primitive examples to stimulate him. Little is known of Jamesone’s early career as an artist. “Who first encouraged the young artist with the responsibility of perpetuating their features on canvas or panel we do not know, but a test of his quality as a faithful painter would quickly justify their trust in him, and induce that current of popularity which never forsook him, but went on ever broadening till his death.... Jamesone’s merit in a great measure, consists in this, that without examples worthy of mention, without a master of any kind, and, probably, with very poor materials――with nothing, in short, but his own sense of the beautiful, and a strong determination to arrest it by his brush――he reached such a degree of excellence.... Ten years, then, of assiduous work brought their legitimate rewards of improvement and appreciation.... Something like a fatality seems to exist in obliterating almost every historical proof of Jamesone’s early career and movements. It follows us when we seek to verify the tradition that he went to Antwerp and entered the study of the famous Rubens, where he met, among others, the brilliant Vandyck, the prince of portrait painters. But whilst there is no positive evidence, there is at the same time no moral doubt. The only doubt on the subject of his having studied abroad is as to the date.” It seems probable that Jamesone went abroad in 1618, and returned home about the year 1620.¹

¹ Bullock’s _Life of Jamesone_, pages 36‒45. 1885.

Jamesone established himself as a portrait-painter in his native city in 1620, and several references to him occur in the Burgh Records. In 1621 he produced a portrait of John Stewart, Earl of Traquair; it is a bust portrait representing the Earl as a man past middle age. From this time onward Jamesone was busily engaged. His early patrons were chiefly local and north country people; and subsequently some of the southern nobles and gentry patronised him. On the occasion of the coronation of Charles I. at Edinburgh in the summer of 1633, Jamesone visited the capital, and was introduced at Court. Charles sat to Jamesone for his portrait, and the King was highly pleased with it. It was said that he presented to the artist a diamond ring from his own hand as a special mark of his approval. The picture of the King was a full length figure, but it is lost. Amongst many other persons of rank whom Jamesone met during his visit to Edinburgh, Sir Colin Campbell of Glenorchy, the chief of the house of Breadalbane, was the most important. Campbell became an appreciative patron and a warm friend of the artist. Sir Colin was a man of culture and an admirer of art. Jamesone painted many portraits for him; and nineteen specimens of the artist’s work are still in Taymouth Castle.

In May, 1635, Jamesone acquired from the town council of Aberdeen a lease of a piece of ground lying along the banks of the Denburn valley, which he laid out as a garden, and erected a summer house in the middle of it.

Jamesone’s usual scale of prices was, for a half length portrait, twenty merks, if he provided a gold-gilded frame the price was twenty pounds. In making arrangements for a list of sixteen portraits for Sir Colin Campbell, Jamesone said in the postscript to his letter:――“If I begin the pictures in July, I will have the sixteen ready about the last of September.” Sixteen portraits in three months was pretty rapid work. It has ♦been calculated that “In full employment, and at his own prices, Jamesone was making a very good annual income of not less than £1000 or £1500 a year.”¹ Considering the position of the nation this was a handsome sum.

♦ “beeu” replaced with “been”

¹ Bullock’s _Life of Jamesone_, pages 91‒93.

In Mr. Bullock’s interesting and valuable work a very careful catalogue of Jamesone’s works is presented, accompanied with much interesting information. The list includes one hundred and eighty-six well authenticated works of Jamesone, and indicates where they were preserved in 1885. Amongst these may be mentioned, a half-length portrait of the Marquis of Montrose, dated 1640; a half-length portrait of General Alexander Leslie, the commander-in-chief of the Covenanters; George, first Marquis of Huntly; George, second Marquis of Huntly; Lord Loudon; Sir Archibald Johnston of Warriston; and a fine portrait of William, sixth Earl Marischal. Jamesone was working for the Haddington family in 1644. In the autumn of that year he died at Edinburgh, and was interred in the Churchyard of Greyfriars.

Jamesone’s style was comparatively simple and uniform. The greater part of his portraits are half-lengths. “The face is a three-quarter, looking to the sitter’s left.” The head is usually somewhat smaller than life-size, which slightly detracts from the dignity of the portraits. The drawing of the face is mannered, though presenting a naturalness of expression; the eyes are well formed and restful; the nose long; and the corners of the mouth slightly turned up. Hands are seldom introduced.¹

¹ Bullock’s _Jamesone_, page 115.

His chief merit lay in portraying the human countenance, and in making it appear as if animated by a soul within; he concentrated his power on the face and the head: he rarely introduced accessories to arrest attention.

It was reported that Michael Wright had been a pupil of Jamesone’s, but there is no evidence of this; and it seems unlikely that he really trained any one to his art. Wright was an artist of some note, and went to London when a youth, and it does not appear that he returned to Scotland. Thomas Murray was born about the year 1666. He studied under John Riley, painter to King William. Murray was an eminent painter of portraits, and was very successful in his profession. He died in 1724. John Scougal had an extensive practice as a portrait painter in Edinburgh in the latter part of the seventeenth century. Three full-length portraits by him, representing William III., Queen Mary, and Queen Anne, are in the Glasgow Collection. He died at Prestonpans in 1730.

The art of architecture showed some progress in the seventeenth century, despite the unfavourable conditions of society. But there is little information as to the names of architects in any branch of the art before the eighteenth century; although the names of certain persons, called masters of works, occasionally occurs in the national and local records. Sir William Bruce was the son of Robert, third baron of Blairhall. He was trained abroad; and appears as architect to Charles II. in 1671. He prepared designs for rebuilding a part and restoring the palace of Holyrood. He had intended the interior of the quadrangle to be finely decorated, but this was not carried out, because “his Majesty thinks the way proposed for the inner court would be very noble, but he will not go to that charge; and therefore his pleasure is that it be plain ashlar, as the front is, with table divisions for storeys; and if that be deemed too great an expense, his Majesty will rest satisfied if it be good handsome rough work, with handsome mouldings for the windows and table divisions for the storeys.” This work was completed in 1679 at a cost of £127,000 Scots. Sir William planned Hopetoun House, Linlithgowshire, which was commenced in 1698, but not completed for several years. He also designed several other mansions and buildings, and died in 1710.¹

¹ _Notes on Early Scottish Architects, in Transactions of the
Architectural Institute of Scotland_, Volume I., pages 64‒67.