|
WE have seen that the
religious turmoil which was violently agitating the south of Scotland since
1546 left Aberdeen untouched till the Reformation in i560. The successors of
Rector Galloway did nothing worthy of record, and there is no evidence of
the extent to which effect was given to the recommendations based upon his
visitation in 1549. In 1561 Principal Anderson and John Leslie
were summoned to appear before the General Assembly to answer charges made
against them in the management of the university. Between them and their
accusers. Knox and others - there were "very sharp and hard disputations"
especially about transubstantiation which ended, as might be expected, in
neither party convincing the other, the only result being that the accused
were ordered to remain in Edinburgh and were forbidden to preach. No further
action was taken till 1569 when the condition of King's College was again
enquired into by a Commission of which the Regent Moray was a member. On
Anderson and four of his staff refusing to sign the Confession of Faith they
were deposed.
The charges brought against Anderson of embezzlement of
college revenues were probably groundless, and were at any rate never
brought to proof during the eight years after he was deposed. One charge,
that of the destruction of university charters, was certainly false, for the
charters are still in existence.
The eight years ending with Anderson's deposition were
disastrous to the university. At Queen Mary's visit in 1562 it is described
as "one College with fifteen or sixteen scholars [By scholars it is almost
certain that we must understand students to be meant. It does not appear
that in Aberdeen scholars meant bursars]." Nor does it seem to have become
more prosperous under Arbuthnot, a man of many excellent qualities, who was
made Principal in 1569, and held that office till 1583. The transference,
twice proposed to him, from academic to ministerial work in Aberdeen and St
Andrews, seems to suggest that he lacked the qualities which the head of a
university should possess, but he had great difficulties to contend with.
There was in Aberdeen a strong party violently opposed to Protestantism, and
the new order of things. He felt that this and the impoverished condition of
the university made his retention of office imperative in the general
interest. It is pathetic to see a man so true to himself, so universally
beloved, and with qualities which in less troublous times would have earned
success, compelled to face difficulties with which only a man of coarser
fibre could grapple. He is one of the comparatively small number of public
men of whom, at that contentious period, allies and opponents alike speak
with respect and affection, " a man of singular gifts of learning, wisdom,
godliness and sweetness of nature." Archbishop Spottiswoode, an
ecclesiastical antagonist, speaking of him says " He was greatly loved of
all men, hated of none, and in such account for his moderation with the
chief men of these parts, that without his advice they could almost do
nothing." It is scarcely possible that a man who could be thus spoken of,
and who was besides the fellow-worker of such an educationist as Andrew
Melville in his schemes for university reform, could have been an
inefficient Principal. However this may be, it is not far from the truth to
say that the condition of King's College was in 1583 much the same as at the
time of Galloway's visitation, remaining practically unchanged for upwards
of thirty years.
We have seen that the first efforts of the Reformers were
in the direction of changes in the university system. A sketch of the
proposals in the Books of Discipline has been given (supra pp. 106-7). By
these proposals, largely fruitless though they were, the character of the
universities was considerably altered. They lost to a large extent their
international stamp in their efforts to adapt themselves to modern local
conditions. Their aim, hitherto mainly ecclesiastical, became largely
educational, but not to the exclusion of the former. Interchange of students
between the Scottish and foreign universities was common during the 16th and
17th centuries. One of the most noteworthy instances is that of Thomas
Dempster (1579-1625) who was a native of Auchterless, and whose career, as
given in his autobiography and in the Dictionary of National Biography, is a
strangely mixed one. He was a man of great ability, vanity, and, if the
Biographical Dictionary is to be trusted, of as great a disregard of truth.
At three years of age he mastered the whole of the Alphabet in one hour. He
entered Pembroke Hall, Cambridge, in his tenth year, and was connected,
either as student or Professor, with at least ten continental universities -
Paris, Rome, Douay, Toulouse, Nimes, Lisieux, de Plessy, Beauvais, Pisa and
Bologna. His first Chair was that of the Humanities in Paris when he was
less than seventeen years of age. He was Professor of Oratory at Nimes, and
of Civil Law in Pisa. He was a man of very violent temper and his whole
career is punctuated by a succession of serious quarrels. The Dictionary
says "he hardly ever allowed a day to pass without fighting with either
sword or fists," adding however that in treating of his career "it is
impossible to distinguish between fact and fiction." He was a man of
exceptional industry, and was knighted by Pope Urban VIII. He published
among other learned works the Historia Ecclesiastica Gentis Scotorum which
is the best known, but is "chiefly remarkable for its extraordinary
dishonesty [Dictionary of National Biography. The description of Dempster
given by the D.N.B. is largely taken from Janus Nicius Erythraeus as quoted
in Irving's edition of the Historia Ecclesiastica, p. iv.]." Even in view of
his undoubted vanity and mendacity, he stands out as a man of by no means
ordinary type.
The interchange between Scottish and foreign universities
fell off considerably for some time, but revived again from increased
facilities in travelling, and continued till the beginning of the 19th
century. Among the last was William Laurence Brown, son of the English
Church minister in Utrecht, who became Professor of Moral Philosophy, Church
History, and the Law of Nature in that University. He was subsequently
appointed to the Chair of Divinity in Marischal College, Aberdeen, and in
1796 became its Principal, and held office till 1830.
Of educational reformers
after Knox Andrew Melville is the most prominent. Returning from his studies
in Paris in full sympathy with the opinions of Ramus who taught that
Aristotle was not infallible, he was appointed in 1574. Principal of Glasgow
University, which he found in a state of utter confusion and poorly equipped
with teachers. With characteristic energy he drew up a scheme in which Greek
was introduced, and wider study of the Latin classics and Mathematics formed
a part. The result was so entirely satisfactory as to warrant the opinion in
his nephew's Diary that " Scotland receavit never a greater benefit at the
hands of God nor this man." In the following year we learn from the same
Diary [Melville's Diary, p. 53, ed. 1842.] that his uncle and Arbuthnot had
a conference about the studies and management of Glasgow and Aberdeen. From
this conference was produced the Erectio Regia for Glasgow (p. 120), and
from a Commission appointed in 1579 a new scheme for St Andrews (p. 110).
The question of a Nova
Fundatio for Aberdeen is one of great complexity and conflicting testimony.
For its full discussion, which quite exceeds our limits, reference must be
made to Mr P. J. Anderson's Officers and Graduates of King's College. [New
Spalding Club, p. 324] Mr Anderson says "it is not now possible to give a
complete account of the origin of the Foundation, or to reconcile the
contradictory statements made as to the extent to which its provisions were
enforced." It may be safely assumed that his attempt at reconciliation is
the best possible. Mr Rait also admits that it is almost hopeless to attempt
a satisfactory explanation. [Rait's Universities of Aberdeen, pp. 108-117.]
A very incomplete summary of
what was done in connection with it may not be out of place.
Parliament passed an act in
1578 "anent the visitation of the Universities and Colleges." Commissioners
were sent to the three universities with full powers (p. 110). In the
following year the St Andrews Commissioners sent in their proposals. There
is no record that the Aberdeen Commissioners did so. In the parliament of
1581 mention is made of the " Reformation of the College of Aberdeen " as
being ready for confirmation. Nothing more is known of the document thus
designated. During the next three years, the attempts made to have the Nova
Fundatio formally established were either opposed or evaded, and for another
thirteen years nothing further was done. In 1593 Earl Marischal, despairing
of seeing it introduced into King's College, founded the University which
bears his name. In 1597 the Nova Fundatio was sanctioned subject to revision
by certain Commissioners. What and whether any emendations were made during
revision is not known. The original document is lost, but some copies of it
are still in existence. Let us suppose that we have a copy of a duly
ratified original document. It bears that the King is anxious to give to
Aberdeen a constitution like that of St Andrews and Glasgow. It confirms
previous grants and specifies new endowments. The number of members of the
college, the mode of election, the duties and salary of the Principal are
all detailed. The most important changes are that each Regent is to have
only one department instead of conducting one class through the whole
curriculum, and that the offices of Canonist, Civilist, and Mediciner are to
be abolished. It contains a list of the Arts subjects, and specifies their
distribution among the teaching staff. Aristotle is not excluded, but it is
only a selection of his Organon, Ethics, and Politics that is included in
the list.
There are other details but
these may suffice.
In the relegation of
Aristotle to a subordinate position, and the assignation of professorial
duties to the Regents we see the hand of Melville. In the abolition of Law
and Medicine we see, as events proved, a source of dissension and a line of
cleavage of university authorities into two factors-on one side the
supporters, on the other the opponents of the new foundation. Nor is this to
be wondered at. It seems unaccountable that for over twenty years neither
medicine nor civil law was taught in the university. It is beyond doubt that
here, as in St Andrews, the Nova Foundation was to some extent observed.
While there is conflicting evidence about the extent to which the
regulations on `regenting' were carried out, it is tolerably clear that on
the whole the authorities did not take kindly to them. They were alternately
adopted and abandoned at comparatively short intervals on personal,
political, or ecclesiastical grounds, according as one party or another had
greater influence on the vacillating moods of the reigning monarchs. Bishop
Patrick Forbes in 1619 restored the old foundation. Nine years afterwards a
professoriate was established, and in thirteen years a return was made to
the old foundation. "If," says Rait, "the reason for instituting a
professoriate in 1628 is doubtful, the cause of its abandonment in 1641 is a
complete mystery."
It seems impossible to state
with precision when and for how long the Nova Fundatio was fully or even
nominally in force. Between I592 and 1638 several Acts of Parliament were
passed confirming the old foundation. In 1638, the Presbyterians being in
power, an attempt was made to restore the new foundation. A commission was
appointed with the Marquis of Huntly as president. The majority of the
college officials including the Rector and Principal were in favour of the
proposal; the Professors of Law and Medicine, whose occupations were in
danger of being extinguished, were opposed to it. The commissioners had been
ordered by Charles to confirm the old foundation and they did so. [Rait's
Universities of Aberdeen, P. 137.]
Gordon in his Scots affairs
says that the Nova Fundatio was in 1592 prepared by Principal Rait and
presented to James VI, "and it went near to be ratified by Parliament, had
it not been opposed by Secretary Elphinstone," and that the document fell
into the hands of Bishop Patrick Forbes, who instead of setting it on foot
as requested threw it into the fire. This may or may not be true. There is
certainly no clear proof that the Nova Fundatio was ever sanctioned by Act
of Parliament. It is true that the party, who were anxious that it should be
held as ratified, offered to produce witnesses who had seen and read the
document. It does not appear that witnesses were produced. There is no
evidence that it was really placed in the statute book. That it expressed
the wishes of the Protestant Reformers is beyond question. It had received
the approval of the General Assembly in 1583 and thence acquired such
authority as caused it to be intermittently acted upon for nearly a hundred
years.
In the early years of the
17th century there were few entrants, the number ranging from twelve to
thirty-eight. Few of the officials were men of special note, - but in 1618
we find the name of one who was not only a great benefactor of the
university, but universally beloved and revered alike by allies and
opponents, Bishop Patrick Forbes. Melville in his diary speaks of him as the
"guid, godly, and kind Patrick Forbes." He was asked in 1619 by King James
to examine into the condition of King's and Marischal Colleges. At Marischal
College the gates were shut against him and the porter speaking from a
window said that he was locked in and the Rector had taken away the key. The
Rector was arrested, but he declined to "deluyer ony keyis or open ony
yettis." A few days after application was made to Earl Marischal, but the
refusal was repeated. [Bulloch's History of Aberdeen University, p. 100.]
David Rait was then Principal of King's College. Its condition was far from
satisfactory in respect of both teaching and finance. Rait had taught
practically nothing, and had so mismanaged the revenues that there was a
deficiency of three thousand pounds. Graduation fees had been "invertit to
privat use," buildings were dilapidated and had become ruinous, the churches
which were connected with the university had no ministers, and there was
"lamentable hethenisme and sic lowsnes as is horrible to record." Instead of
proceeding to a sentence against him the Commissioners gave him four years
to repair the dilapidations and clear off the debt. Whether he kept his
promise is not recorded, but it is probable that he to some extent satisfied
the Commissioners, as he retained the Principalship till his death. The
Commissioners restored the old foundation, and elected a canonist, a
civilist, a mediciner, and a grammarian.
During thirty years of
Episcopalian ascendancy at the beginning of the 17th century the university
has, in respect of classical scholarship and general culture, a, very good
record, and can point to some
famous names--the brothers Johnstons, Wedderburns, Leeches and Reids. " This
was," says Bulloch, "indeed the Augustan Age of the University, and if there
was a dash of pedantry about it, that, as Cosmo Innes has remarked, was the
misfortune of the age, rather than the fault of Aberdeen [Bulloch's
History of Aberdeen University, p. 115.]."
It was to Bishop Forbes that the
university owed the establishment in 1620 of a theological chair to which
his son John was appointed. The money (10,000 marks) which he collected for
this purpose was invested in lands in the parish of Kinnellar, which at the
present day bring to the college £400 a year. After his death in 1635
election to the chair-now called a chair of Systematic Theology-was settled
by competition. This mode of appointment, which is still adhered to, is
(outside China) perhaps unique. The composition of the examining body, and
the subjects of examination, Latin, Greek, Hebrew, History, Philosophy and
religious controversies, are practically the same as in 1642.
In 1628 the Bishop, as Chancellor,
made another visitation of the college, which seems to have been followed by
only one recorded enactment. It was found necessary to impose a check on the
hospitable intentions of students towards their professors at graduation
seasons, because parents complained of the expense of banquets which had
become customary. It was accordingly enacted that they must cease, "except
it sall please the saidis studentis so to be graduat [at] the tyme of their
examination to bestow upoun the saidis maisteris and examinatouris ane
drinke upoun fute for recreation allanerlie, without anie forder addition."
The expense thus saved was appropriated by the college, every graduand being
held bound to pay four pounds Scots for books to the library. There was
probably behind this some general university practice. A graduate of Upsala
at the present day incurs in this way considerable expense.
At this time the antagonism between
Episcopacy and Covenanting Presbytery was more pronounced than at any former
period. Bishop Forbes took the side of the anti-Presbyterian party. His
strong personality had gathered around him, among others, the brilliant
coterie of scholars and theologians known as the six Aberdeen Doctors, four
of whom belonged to King's College, viz. Principal Leslie, John Forbes the
Bishop's son, Alexander Scroggie, and Alexander Ross, both subsequently
Rectors of King's College. The two belonging to Marischal College were
Barron, Professor of Divinity, and Sibbald `ane eloquent and painefull
preacher' and Professor of Natural Philosophy.
Bishop Forbes and Principal Rait were
succeeded by Bishop Bellenden and William Leslie as Chancellor and Principal
respectively. Both were deposed in I639 on their refusal to sign the
Covenant.
Between the visitations in 1628 and
1638 the life of the College seems to have been uneventful and at any rate
not progressive. A few unimportant changes were made, but even these were
carried out with difficulty, owing to the political turmoil of the time.
When the Presbyterian party came into power in 1638, the Chancellor and
Principal were, as already mentioned, deposed and with them a regent "who
was fled of set purpose" from the meeting, but the other officials
subscribed the Covenant. Teaching was discontinued for a short time as the
students had fled at the approach of Montrose with his army. Dr John Forbes,
Professor of Theology, was deposed in 1641. He had appeared before the
Assembly which met in Greyfriars Church, Aberdeen, in 1640, and pleased them
so well by his 'ingenuitie' that, rather than depose him at once, they had
"given him yet tyme for advysement." Still refusing to sign the Covenant he
was deposed, "to the gryte greif of the youth and young students of
theologie."
About this time Aberdeen suffered
severely from the constant raids of Montrose and the Covenanters, and at
last in 1640 the magistrates signed the Covenant, and the town was held by a
covenanting regiment for nearly two years.
In 1641 parliament passed an act for
the union of King's and Marischal Colleges in a joint university to be
called in all time coming King Charles' University. For twenty years the
union was merely nominal. The presence of the Principals of both Colleges at
meetings in 1650 is evidence of intercourse of
some kind, but it does not appear that the
administration of the two institutions was in any way affected by this
statutory but nominal union. Mutual jealousy prevented the union from being
hearty. By this act it was proposed that the revenues of the see of Aberdeen
should be divided between the colleges in the proportion of two to King's
and one to Marischal College. The Episcopal residence was given to the
Principal of King's to be used as a manse.
A meeting was held in
Edinburgh in 1647 to which each university sent a representative to arrange
for uniformity of doctrine and government in all the Universities. A summary
of the leading features of the courses in King's College must suffice.
To the first class Greek,
covering among other books orations of Isocrates and Demosthenes and a book
of Homer.
To the second, the dialectics
of Ramus, the rhetoric of Vossius, Aristotle's categories and analytics, and
some arithmetic.
To the third, logic, ethics,
physics and geometry.
To the fourth, mainly
astronomical subjects, and geography.
The courses of the other
universities were similar, with slight differences, such as Hebrew to the
first class in St Andrews - in Edinburgh and St Andrews Anatomy was taught.
The session was to last from October to July.
In 1651 Cromwell paid a visit
to King's College, and dismissed Guild and Middleton, Principal and
Vice-Principal, and put in their places Row and Rule. Row was a man of much
the same masterful type as Cromwell, and such a man was required. Since the
execution of Huntly in 1649 the chancellorship had remained vacant. The
college had not been visited by order of parliament, Church, or Rector. Row
had all power and he made a full use of it. Though a strict disciplinarian
he recognised the necessity of recreative games. Bowls, golf, football, and
archery were practised, and he even fitted up a billiard room in Cromwell's
Tower, but all under due supervision as to time and place.
This tower is a square
building erected in 1658 in the North-East corner of the quadrangle at Row's
suggestion, and largely by funds provided by Cromwell's officers, General
Monk himself being a liberal contributor. It is probable that this extension
of the fabric in King's College set an example which was followed by the
authorities of Marischal College, who in the course of the next year erected
a new school, to which Oxford and Cambridge, and the Episcopalian clergy
furnished handsome contributions.
When brother teachers from
Marischal College paid a visit to King's they were supplied with "wyne,
tobacco, and pyps." As Row kept elaborate accounts of expenditure, it is
probable that indulgence in these luxuries was kept within reasonable
bounds. Notwithstanding the vigour and care which characterised his
administration he did not satisfy the Reformers. Cromwell's policy was set
aside at the Restoration. The union of the colleges was rescinded, and Row
was dismissed from the principalship in 1661.
Living in college was not
popular with the students, but those who lived outside were subject to the
same discipline as the others, and returned to supper and studied till ten.
They had to attend religious services and declare themselves Protestants. A
hurried summary of the way in which the day was spent is all for which space
can be found. From six o'clock in summer or half-past six in winter till ten
at night the student was under constant surveillance, except for a short
recreative interval three times a week. After breakfast morning prayers at
six, classes till ten, roll call and Scripture reading till eleven, revision
and repetition of lessons till twelve, dinner [Their manners at dinner were
not above suspicion. They are warned not to throw bones at each other, but
to place them on their plates or on the floor. Rait, p. 161.], secular and
Scripture reading till two, lectures on theological subjects till five,
classes from five till six, evening prayers and Scripture reading till
supper at eight, after supper singing psalms till nine, study till ten,
filled up the day.
During the twelve years of
his principalship Row adhered to the system of' regenting.' By this time,
Episcopacy being again in the ascendant, there were depositions and fresh
appointments. Though parliament had a large share in guiding academic
affairs, these constantly recurring ecclesiastical changes were not
favourable to steady progress or strict discipline. By an edict of the Privy
Council the two Colleges were visited in 1669, when it was found that there
was great laxity in respect of graduation. Degrees were being conferred
privately by Regents, and without the responsibility of the Chancellor. The
commission forbade degrees to be conferred except with the consent of the
leading authorities in each College. They also forbade the admission of
students for graduation passing from one college to another without
sufficient testimonials from the college whence they came. About the same
time the Privy Council thought it necessary, in the interest of the
university, to forbid private tutors to lecture on university subjects. This
prohibition was addressed to all the five Universities.
As already mentioned there
was no love lost between the two colleges, but at this time the rivalry
became accentuated. Recourse was had to undignified touting for students by
the Regents of both institutions "intyseing the scholleres of the one
College to the other." Commission after commission was appointed to keep the
jealousy within bounds. It became at last necessary to ordain that should
Professor A of one college admit to his class a student from Professor B of
the other college, Professor A was bound to hand over to Professor B the
student's fees.
This petty rivalry however
was not an unmixed evil. Each College was put upon its mettle, Marischal
College with the ardour of youth leading the way by the establishment of
fresh chairs in Mathematics, Divinity, and Hebrew, King's College following
suit somewhat tardily. The former had its professor of Hebrew in 1642, the
latter its chair of Oriental languages in 1673. This was an event of great
importance. Though Hebrew had been taught in all the universities since the
Reformation, it had always in Aberdeen been conjoined with some other
subject, and the instruction was wanting in thoroughness.
When Presbytery was
re-established in 1690 a Parliamentary Commission visited the universities.
It was ordained that all Regents except "Principals, Professors of Divinity
and other Professors" should be appointed by examination. [It may be
inferred from this that in some of the universities `regenting' in the old
sense had been given up, and that Regents were on a lower level than
Professors.] The examination seems to have been conducted in much the same
way as the final graduation disputation. Reforms of greater or less
importance were 'made in all the universities, but security for the loyalty
of the candidates and their subscription to the Confession of Faith were the
main objects of the Commissioners. Among other reforms they shortened the
session to eight months, and ordained that students should wear red gowns.
This latter ordinance was obeyed everywhere but in Edinburgh.
Before their labours were
ended the Commissioners revived the consideration of a scheme which had been
proposed in 1647. The proposal was to divide the philosophical subjects
among the four universities-Metaphysics to St Andrews, Logic to Glasgow,
Ethics and Mathematics to Aberdeen, and Physics to Edinburgh. This 'cursus
philosophicus' met with little favour and dropped out of sight. Nevertheless
there was much sense in the scheme. The Scottish Universities cannot afford
such a staff as to make them copies of Oxford and Cambridge in spite of all
the efforts of the last twenty years. But in the seventeenth century the
difficulties of travelling made the scheme impracticable. The vexed question
of the Nova Fundatio was again in evidence before a Commission in Aberdeen
in 1696 but no satisfactory conclusion was reached. |
