|
|
READINGS IN THE HISTORY OF EDUCATION
MEDIAEVAL UNIVERSITIES
BY ARTHUR O. NORTON
_Assistant Professor of the History and Art of Teaching in Harvard
University_
CAMBRIDGE
PUBLISHED BY HARVARD UNIVERSITY
1909
PREFACE
These readings in the history of mediaeval universities are the first
installment of a series, which I have planned with the view of
illustrating, mainly from the sources, the history of modern education
in Europe and America. They are intended for use after the manner of the
source books or collections of documents which have so vastly improved
the teaching of general history in recent years. No argument is needed
as to the importance of such a collection for effective teaching of the
history of education; but I would urge that the subject requires in a
peculiar degree rich and full illustration from the sources. The life of
school, college, or university is varied, vivid, even dramatic, while we
live it; but, once it has passed, it becomes thinner and more spectral
than almost any other historical fact. Its original records are, in all
conscience, thin enough; the situation is still worse when they are
worked over at third or fourth hand, flattened out; smoothed down, and
desiccated in the pages of a modern history of education. Such histories
are of course necessary to effective teaching of the subject; but the
records alone can clothe the dry bones of fact with flesh and blood.
Only by turning back to them do we gain a sense of personal intimacy
with the past; only thus can we realize that schools and universities of
other days were not less real than those of to-day, teachers and
students of other generations not less vividly alive than we, academic
questions not less unsettled or less eagerly debated. To gain this sense
of concrete, living reality in the history of education is one of the
most important steps toward understanding the subject.
In selecting and arranging the records here presented I have had in mind
chiefly the needs of students who are taking the usual introductory
courses in the subject. Students of general history--a subject in which
more and more account is taken of culture in the broad sense of the
term--may also find them useful.
Within the necessarily limited space I have chosen to illustrate in some
detail a few aspects of the history of mediaeval universities rather
than to deal briefly with a large number of topics. Many important
matters, not here touched upon, are reserved for future treatment. Some
documents pertinent to the topics here discussed are not reproduced
because they are easily accessible elsewhere; these are mentioned in the
bibliographical note at the close of the volume.
In writing the descriptive and explanatory text I have attempted only to
indicate the general significance of the translations, and to supply
information not easily obtained, or not clearly given in the references
or text-books which, it is assumed, the student will read in connection
with this work. It would be possible to write a commentary of genuinely
mediaeval proportions on the selections here given; doubtless many of
the details would be clearer for such a commentary. Some of these are
explained by cross-references in the body of the text; in the main,
however, I have preferred to let the documents stand for their face
value to the average reader.
I have given especial attention to university studies (pp. 37-80) and
university exercises (pp. 107-134) because these important subjects are
unusually difficult for most students, and because surprisingly few
illustrations of them from the sources have been heretofore easily
accessible in English. In particular, there has not been, I believe, a
previous translation of any considerable passage from the much discussed
and much criticised mediaeval commentaries on university text-books. The
selection here given (pp. 59-75) is not intended for continuous reading;
but it will fully repay close and repeated examination. Not infrequently
single sentences of this commentary are the outcroppings of whole
volumes of mediaeval thought and controversy; indeed anyone who follows
to the end each of the lines of study suggested will have at command a
very respectable bit of knowledge concerning the intellectual life of
the middle ages. The passage requires more explanation by the teacher,
or more preliminary knowledge on the part of the student, than any other
selection in the book.
The sources from which the selections have been made are indicated in
the footnotes to the text My great indebtedness to Mr. Hastings
Rashdall's "Universities of Europe in the Middle Ages" is also there
indicated. Messrs. G.P. Putnam's Sons and Mr. Joseph McCabe generously
gave me permission to quote more extensive passages from the latter's
brilliant biography of Abelard than I finally found it possible to use.
Mr. Charles S. Moore has been my chief assistant in the preparation of
the manuscript; most of the translations not otherwise credited are due
to his careful work, but I am responsible for the version finally
adopted in numerous passages in which the interpretation depends on a
knowledge of detailed historical facts. In conclusion, I have to thank
Professor Charles H. Haskins and Professor Leo Wiener for information
which has spared me many days of research on obscure details, and
Professor Paul H. Hanus for suggestions which have contributed to the
clearness of the text.
A.O.N.
CONTENTS
PAGE
I. INTRODUCTION 1
II. THE RENAISSANCE OF THE TWELFTH CENTURY 4
III. THE RISE OF UNIVERSITIES 13
1. Teachers and Students of the Twelfth Century
(a) Abelard 13
(b) John of Salisbury 25
2. The New Method 35
3. The New Studies 37
(a) The Works of Aristotle 40
(b) Roman Law 49
(c) Canon Law 55
(d) Theology 76
(e) Medicine 78
(f) Other University Text-books 78
4. University Privileges 80
(a) Special Protection by the Sovereign 81
(b) The Right of Trial in Special Courts 86
(c) Exemption from Taxation 88
(d) The Privilege of Suspending Lectures (Cessatio) 92
(e) The Right of Teaching Everywhere
(Jus ubique docendi) 96
(f) Privileges Granted by a Municipality 98
(g) The Influence of Mediaeval Privileges
on Modern Universities 101
5. Universities Founded by the Initiative of Civil
or Ecclesiastical Powers 102
IV. UNIVERSITY EXERCISES 107
(a) The Lecture 107
(b) The Disputation 115
(c) The Examination 124
(d) A Day's Work in 1476 132
(e) Time-table of Lectures at Leipzig, 1519 132
V. REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREES IN ARTS 135
1. Paris, 1254 136
2. Paris, 1366 138
3. Oxford, 1267 and (?) 1408 138
4. Leipzig, A.B., 1410 139
5. Leipzig, A.M., 1410 139
6. Leipzig, A.B. and A.M., 1519 134
VI. ACADEMIC LETTERS 141
1. Letters Relating to Paris 141
2. Two Oxford Letters of the Fifteenth Century 149
READINGS IN THE HISTORY OF EDUCATION
I
INTRODUCTION
The history of education, like all other branches of history, is based
upon documents. Historical documents are, in general, "the traces which
have been left by the thoughts and actions of men of former times"; the
term commonly refers to the original records or _sources_ from which our
knowledge of historical facts is derived. The documents most generally
used by historians are written or printed. In the history of education
alone these are of the greatest variety; as is shown in the following
pages, among them are university charters, proceedings, regulations,
lectures, text-books, the statutes of student organizations, personal
letters, autobiographies, contemporary accounts of university life, and
laws made by civil or ecclesiastical authorities to regulate university
affairs. Similar varieties of records exist for other educational
institutions and activities. The immense masses of such written or
printed materials produced to-day, even to the copy-book of the primary
school and the student's note-book of college lectures, will, if they
survive, become documents for the future historian of education.
The known sources for the history of education in western Europe since
the twelfth century--to go no further afield--are exceedingly numerous,
and widely spread among various public and private collections; the
labor of a lifetime would hardly suffice to examine them all critically.
Nevertheless many printed and written documents have been collected,
edited, and published in their original languages; and in some instances
the collections are fairly complete, or at least fairly representative
of the documents in existence. Assuming that they are accurate copies of
the original records, many are now easily accessible to students of the
subject, since these reproductions may be owned by all large libraries.
These records, rightly apprehended, have far more than a mere
antiquarian interest. The history of mediaeval universities is
profoundly important, not only for students, but also for
administrators, of modern higher education. For to a surprising degree
the daily and hourly conduct of university affairs of the twentieth
century is influenced by what universities did six centuries ago. On
this point the words of Mr. Hastings Rashdall, a leading authority on
mediaeval universities, are instructive: "... If we would completely
understand the meaning of offices, titles, ceremonies, organizations
preserved in the most modern, most practical, most unpicturesque of the
institutions which now bear the name of 'University,' we must go back to
the earliest days of the earliest Universities that ever existed, and
trace the history of their chief successors through the seven centuries
that intervene between the rise of Bologna or Paris, and the foundation
of the new University of Strassburg in Germany, or of the Victoria
University in England."
Knowledge of the subject should, however, yield much more than
understanding: it should also influence the practical attitudes of those
who are concerned with university affairs. Here I take issue with those
historians who hold that history supplies no "information of practical
utility in the conduct of life"; no "lessons directly profitable to
individuals and peoples." The evidence cannot be exhibited here, but
such information notoriously has been of the utmost practical value in
education, both in shaping influential theories and in determining even
minute details of educational practice. There is no reason to suppose
that it may not continue to be thus serviceable. Other utilities of
university history are less direct, but not less important. The study of
individual institutions and their varying circumstances and problems
"prepares us to understand and tolerate a variety of usages"; the study
of their growth not only "cures us of a morbid dread of change," but
also leads us to view their progressive adaptation to new conditions as
necessary and desirable. If such study teaches only these two lessons to
those who may hereafter shape the course of educational affairs it more
than justifies itself. For to eradicate that intolerance of variety in
educational practice so characteristic of the academic man of the past,
and to diminish in future generations his equally characteristic
opposition to changes involving adaptation to new conditions, is to
render one of the greatest possible services to educational progress.
II
THE RENAISSANCE OF THE TWELFTH CENTURY
During the twelfth century a great educational revival manifested itself
in western Europe, following upon several centuries of intellectual
decline or relative inactivity. Though its beginnings may be traced into
the eleventh century, and though its culmination belongs to a much later
period, the movement is often called the Renaissance of the Twelfth
Century. In that century it first appears as a widely diffused and
rapidly growing movement, and it then takes on distinctly the
characteristics which mark its later development. The revival appears
first in Italy and France; from these regions it spreads during the next
three centuries into England, Spain, Germany, Denmark, Sweden, and
Scotland.
Certain facts concerning this educational Renaissance should be clearly
understood in connection with the following selections:
1. To men of the times it first showed itself as a renewal of activity
in existing schools. Here and there appeared eminent teachers; to them
resorted increasing numbers of students from greater and greater
distances. In a few years some of these institutions became schools of
international fame. The newly roused enthusiasm for study in France at
the opening of the twelfth century is thus described by a modern writer:
The scholastic fever, which was soon to inflame the youth of the
whole of Europe, had already set in. You could not travel far
over the rough roads of France without meeting some footsore
scholar, making for the nearest large monastery or cathedral
town. Before many years, it is true, there arose an elaborate
system of conveyance from town to town, an organization of
messengers to run between the chateau and the school; but in the
earlier days, and, to some extent, even later, the scholar
wandered afoot through the long provinces of France. Robbers,
frequently in the service of the lord of the land, infested every
province. It was safest to don the coarse frieze tunic of the
pilgrim, without pockets, sling your little wax tablets and
stylus at your girdle, strap a wallet of bread and herbs and salt
on your back, and laugh at the nervous folk who peeped out from
their coaches over a hedge of pikes and daggers. Few monasteries
refused a meal or a rough bed to the wandering scholar. Rarely
was any fee exacted for the lesson given. For the rest, none were
too proud to earn a few sous by sweeping, or drawing water, or
amusing with a tune on the reed-flute; or to wear the cast-off
tunics of their masters.[1]
This account refers to the study of logic and theology, which soon
became dominant in Paris and in various cathedral schools in other parts
of France. With slight modifications it would describe also the revival
of interest in Roman law in Italy, especially at Bologna.
2. The revival was concerned mainly with professional, or--as later
appeared--university, education. The prevailing interest was in Law,
Medicine, Theology, and the philosophy of Aristotle. Schools of lower
grade were much influenced by the intellectual activity of the times,
but the characteristic product of this movement was the university. The
universities, organized as corporations, with their teachers divided
into faculties, their definite courses of study, their examinations,
their degrees, their privileges, and their cosmopolitan communities of
students, were not only the result of the revival, but they were
institutions essentially new in the history of education, and the models
for all universities which have since been established.
3. Between the latter part of the twelfth century and 1500 A.D. at least
seventy-nine universities were established in western Europe. There may
have been others of which no trace remains. Several of them were
short-lived, some lasting but a few years; ten disappeared before 1500.
Since that date twenty others have become extinct. The forty-nine
European universities of to-day which were founded before 1500 have all
passed through many changes in character and various periods of
prosperity and decline, but we still recognize in them the
characteristic features mentioned above, and the same features reappear
in the "most modern, most practical, most unpicturesque of the
institutions which now bear the name of 'University.'" This is one
illustration of the statement on page 2 that the daily and hourly
conduct of university affairs in the twentieth century is to a
surprising degree influenced by what universities did seven centuries
ago.
4. The term "University" has always been difficult to define. In the
Middle Ages its meaning varied in different places, and changed somewhat
in the centuries between 1200 and 1500 A.D. In these pages it signifies
in general an institution for higher education; and "institution" means,
not a group of buildings, but a society of teachers or students
organized, and ultimately incorporated, for mutual aid and protection,
and for the purpose of imparting or securing higher education.
Originally, universities were merely guilds of Masters or Scholars; as
such they were imitations of the numerous guilds of artisans and
tradesmen already in existence. Out of the simple organization and
customs of these guilds grew the elaborate organization and ceremonials
of later universities.
There were two main types of university organization,--the University of
Masters, and the University of Students. In the former,--which is the
type of all modern universities,--the government and instruction of
students were regulated by the Masters or Doctors. In the latter, these
matters were controlled by the students, who also prescribed rules for
the conduct of the Masters. Paris and Bologna were, respectively, the
original representatives of these types. Paris was the original
University of Masters; its pattern was copied, with some modifications,
by the universities of England, Germany, Denmark, Sweden, and Scotland.
Bologna was the archetypal University of Students; its organization was
imitated, also with variations, by the universities Italy, France
(except Paris), Spain, and Portugal.
In and after the thirteenth century, the place or school in which a
university existed was almost always called a _Studium Generale_, i.e. a
place to which students resorted, or were invited, from all countries.
This term was used in contrast to _Studium Particulare_, i.e. any school
in which a Master in a town taught a few scholars. In the _Studium
Generale_ instruction was given by several Masters, in one or more of
the Faculties of Arts, Law, Medicine, and Theology. In time the term
came to be synonymous with "University"; it is so used in this book.
5. The theoretically complete mediaeval university contained the four
faculties of Arts, Theology, Law, and Medicine. These we find reproduced
in some modern universities. Then, as now, however, it was not common to
find them all equally well developed in any single institution; many
possessed only two or three faculties, and some had but one. There are
rare instances of five faculties, owing to the subdivision of Law. At
Paris, the strongest faculties were those of Arts and Theology; Law and
Medicine were in comparison but feebly represented. At Bologna, on the
other hand, the study of Law was predominant, although the Arts,
Medicine, and Theology were also taught there.
6. The studies pursued in the various faculties in and after the
thirteenth century were in general as follows:
In the Faculty of Arts:
1. The "three philosophies"--Natural, Moral, and Rational--of Aristotle,
together with his Logic, Rhetoric, and Politics. Of these, Logic and
Rhetoric are included below.
2. The Seven Liberal Arts, comprising
{Grammar.
(_a_) {Rhetoric.
{Logic.
{Arithmetic.
(_b_) {Geometry.
{Music.
{Astronomy.
In the Faculty of Law:
1. The _Corpus Juris Civilis_, or body of Roman Civil Law, compiled at
Constantinople 529-533 A.D., under direction of the Roman Emperor
Justinian.
2. The Canon Law, or law governing the Church, of which the first part
was compiled by the monk Gratian about the year 1142. His compilation of
the Canon Law is usually referred to as the _Decretum Gratiani_.
In the Faculty of Theology:
1. The "Sentences" of Peter Lombard.
2. The Bible.
In the Faculty of Medicine:
1. The works of Hippocrates.
2. The works of Galen.
3. Medical treatises of various Arabic and Jewish writers of the
seventh century A.D. and later.
These studies will be described more fully in connection with the
selections on pages 37-83.
Not all of the works mentioned under these divisions were included in
the regular programme of any university; the actual studies required for
the various degrees consisted rather in selections from these works. The
selections chosen varied somewhat in different universities; moreover,
the course in any given university changed from time to time.
Consequently the degrees of A.B. and A.M., as well as degrees in Law,
Medicine, and Theology, probably never represented exactly the same set
of studies in any considerable number of universities, nor did they even
represent exactly the same work for many years in any single university.
This corresponds exactly with the situation in modern universities,
although at present the variations in studies for the same degree are
greater and the changes in any given university are usually more rapid
than they were in the universities of the Middle Ages.
It is necessary to remember that all the text-books were in Latin. Those
written originally in other tongues were translated into Latin. All
university exercises were conducted in that language, and frequently the
regulations required students to use Latin in conversation outside the
lecture halls. Latin was, in short, the universal academic tongue.
Obviously, the use of the same language everywhere facilitated the
migration of students and teachers from one university to another.
7. Although the first universities were not established as organized
institutions until the latter part of the twelfth century, the
intellectual movement which gave rise to them was well under way a
century earlier. It showed itself first in the rise of great teachers,
some of whom were also notable scholars. There has never been a clearer
demonstration of the central importance in education of the
distinguished teacher:
At the beginning of the twelfth century three schools are
distinguished in the contemporary literature above the multitude
which had sprung into new life in France and were connected with
so many of her cathedrals and religious houses. These three were
at Laon, Paris, and Chartres. It would be more accurate to say,
they were the schools of Anselm and Ralph, of William of
Champeaux, and of Bernard Sylvester. For in those days the school
followed the teacher, not the teacher the school. Wherever a
master lived, there he taught; and thither, in proportion to his
renown, students assembled from whatever quarter.... The tie was
a personal one, and was generally severed by the master's death.
A succession of great teachers in one place was a rare exception;
nor is such an exception afforded by the history of any of the
three schools to which we have referred.[2]
In these days, when education requires a more and more elaborate
equipment of buildings, libraries, laboratories, and museums, it is no
longer possible for teachers, however distinguished, to attract throngs
of students to places absolutely unprovided with the resources for
teaching, or to provide these resources anywhere on the spur of the
moment In the twelfth century, on the contrary, the only necessary
equipment consisted in the master, his small library which could be
carried by one man; wax tablets, or pens, ink, and vellum or parchment
for the students; and any kind of a shelter which would serve as a
protection from the weather. Not even benches or chairs were necessary,
for students commonly sat upon the straw-strewn floors of the lecture
rooms. Thus the school might easily follow the teacher in his
migrations, and easily sink into obscurity or disappear upon his death
or cessation from teaching. The autobiography of Abelard (see page 14),
recounts an experience unusual in itself, but perfectly illustrative of
the point. After relating various misfortunes and persecutions he
continues:
So I betook myself to a certain wilderness previously known to
me, and there on land given to me by certain ones, with the
consent of the Bishop of the region, I constructed out of reeds
and straw a sort of oratory in the name of the Holy Trinity
where, in company with one of our clergy, I might truly chant to
the Lord: "Lo I have wandered far off, and have remained in the
wilderness."
As soon as Scholars learned this they began to gather from every
side, leaving cities and castles to dwell in the wilderness, and
in place of their spacious homes to build small tabernacles for
themselves, and in place of delicate food to live on herbs of the
fields and coarse bread, and in place of soft couches to make up
[beds of] straw and grass, and in place of tables to pile up
sods.[3]
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 1: Adapted from Joseph McCabe, _Abelard_, pp. 7, 8.]
[Footnote 2: R.L. Poole, _Illustrations from the History of Medieval
Thought_, p. 109.]
[Footnote 3: _Petri Abaelardi Opera_, edd. Cousin et Jourdain, I, p.
25.]
III
THE RISE OF MEDIAEVAL UNIVERSITIES
The influences contributing to the rise of universities were numerous,
and in many cases obscure. The most important were: 1. Inspiring and
original teachers, who gathered about them great numbers of students. 2.
A new method of teaching. 3. A new group of studies. 4. Privileges
granted to scholars and masters by civil and ecclesiastical authorities.
5. The direct initiative of those authorities in establishing
universities by decree. The readings which follow are chosen to
illustrate these influences.
1. TEACHERS AND STUDENTS OF THE TWELFTH CENTURY
(a) _A Pre-University Teacher: Abelard_
Among the teachers of the early part of the twelfth century, two were of
especial significance in the later intellectual development of the
period,--Irnerius (_ca._ 1070-1130) at Bologna, and Abelard (1079-1142)
at Paris. They were the forerunners of the universities which began to
take form at the end of the twelfth century in those cities. Irnerius
marks a new epoch in the study of the body of Roman Law; following the
traditions of teaching which he established, the University of Bologna
became the most prominent school of law in Europe. In a similar way
Abelard marks at Paris the introduction of a new method of teaching and
investigation, an attitude of intellectual independence on theological
questions, and a permanently influential position in scholastic
philosophy; following his initiative the University of Paris became the
leading school of Philosophy and Theology. These two
institutions,--Bologna and Paris,--were in turn the models for all other
mediaeval universities, not only in organization, but also so far as the
study of Law, Theology, and Philosophy was concerned. Hence, indirectly,
the influence of Abelard and Irnerius was widely diffused and long
continued.
The documents relating to Irnerius are scanty. For a discussion of his
influence on the teaching of Roman Law, see Rashdall, I, ch. iv, and
especially pages 121-127. Concerning Abelard the records are abundant.
Abelard, the eldest son of a noble family of Pallet (Palais), Brittany,
was in his day the most renowned teacher in France. Instead of becoming
the head of his family and adopting the career of a soldier, he
abandoned his birthright and the profession of arms for the life of the
scholar and the battlefields of debate. His early life as a student
wandering from school to school is thus described by himself:
The more fully and easily I advanced in the study of letters the
more ardently I clung to them, and I became so enamored of them
that, abandoning to my brothers the pomp of glory, together with
my inheritance and the rights of the eldest son, I resigned from
the Councils of War that I might be educated in the camp of
Minerva. And since among all the weapons of philosophy I
preferred the arms of logic, I exchanged accoutrements and
preferred the conflicts of debate to the trophies of war.
Thenceforward I walked through the various provinces engaging in
debates wherever I had heard that the study of this art [logic]
flourished, and thus became a rival of the Peripatetics.
At length [about 1100 A.D.] I reached Paris, where for some time
this art had been prospering, and went to William of Champeaux,
my instructor, distinguished at the time in this particular by
his work and reputation as a teacher. Staying with him for a
while, I was at first acceptable, but shortly after was very
annoying to him, namely, when I tried to refute some of his
opinions, and often ventured to argue against him and, not
seldom, seemed to surpass him in debate.[4]
_In scholis militare_--to wage war in the schools--was the phrase aptly
used to describe this mode of debate. William of Champeaux was then the
head of the cathedral school of Notre Dame and the leading teacher of
logic in France. "Within a few months Abelard made his authority totter,
and set his reputation on the wane. In six or seven years he drove him
in shame and humiliation from his chair, after a contest which filled
Christendom with its echoes." By overcoming William in debate he
established his own reputation as a teacher. At various times between
1108 and 1139 he taught in Paris, whither crowds of students came to
hear him. His fame was at its height about 1117, shortly after his
appointment to the chair which William himself had held. Few teachers
have ever attracted a following so large and so devoted. His remarkable
success in drawing to Paris students from all quarters is vividly
described by a modern writer:
The pupil who had left Paris when both William and Abelard
disappeared in 1113 would find a marvellous change on returning
to it about 1116 or 1117. He would find the lecture hall and the
cloister and the quadrangle, under the shadow of the great
cathedral, filled with as motley a crowd of youths and men as any
scene in France could show. Little groups of French and Norman
and Breton nobles chattered together in their bright silks and
fur-tipped mantles, with slender swords dangling from embroidered
belts, vying with each other in the length and crookedness of
their turned-up shoes. Anglo-Saxons looked on, in long fur-lined
cloaks, tight breeches, and leathern hose swathed with bands of
many colored cloth. Stern-faced northerners, Poles and Germans,
in fur caps and with colored girdles and clumsy shoes, or with
feet roughly tied up in the bark of trees, waited impatiently for
the announcement of _Li Mestre_. Pale-faced southerners had
braved the Alps and the Pyrenees under the fascination of "the
wizard." Shaven and sandalled monks, black-habited clerics, black
canons, secular and regular, black in face too, some of them,
heresy hunters from the neighboring abbey of St. Victor, mingled
with the crowd of young and old, grave and gay, beggars and
nobles, sleek citizens and bronzed peasants....
Over mountains and over seas the mingled reputation of the city
and the school were carried, and a remarkable stream set in from
Germany, Switzerland, Italy (even from proud Rome), Spain, and
England; even "distant Brittany sent you its animals to be
instructed," wrote Prior Fulques to Abelard (a Breton) a year or
two afterwards.[5]
What was there in the teaching of Abelard which brought together this
extraordinary gathering? One may admit the presence of unanalysable
genius in this master, and still find certain qualities indispensable to
the efficient teacher of to-day,--a winning personality, fulness of
knowledge, and technical skill as a teacher. These are admirably set
forth in the following description:
It is not difficult to understand the charm of Abelard's
teaching. Three qualities are assigned to it by the writers of
the period, some of whom studied at his feet; clearness, richness
in imagery, and lightness of touch are said to have been the
chief characteristics of his teaching. Clearness is, indeed, a
quality of his written works, though they do not naturally convey
an impression of his oral power. His splendid gifts and
versatility, supported by a rich voice, a charming personality, a
ready and sympathetic use of human literature, and a freedom from
excessive piety, gave him an immeasurable advantage over all the
teachers of the day. Beside most of them, he was as a butterfly
to an elephant. A most industrious study of the few works of
Aristotle and of the Roman classics that were available, a
retentive memory, an ease in manipulating his knowledge, a clear,
penetrating mind, with a corresponding clearness of expression, a
ready and productive fancy, a great knowledge of men, a warmer
interest in things human than in things divine, a laughing
contempt for authority, a handsome presence, and a musical
delivery--these were his gifts.[6]
He takes his place in history, apart from the ever-interesting
drama and the deep pathos of his life, in virtue of two
distinctions. They are, firstly, an extraordinary ability in
imparting such knowledge as the poverty of the age afforded--the
facts of his career reveal it; and, secondly, a mind of such
marvellous penetration that it conceived great truths which it
has taken humanity seven or eight centuries to see--this will
appear as we proceed. It was the former of these gifts that made
him, in literal truth, the centre of learned and learning
Christendom, the idol of several thousand eager scholars. Nor,
finally, were these thousands the "horde of barbarians" that
jealous Master Roscelin called them. It has been estimated that a
pope, nineteen cardinals, and more than fifty bishops and
archbishops were at one time among his pupils.[7]
Abelard's fame as a teacher, with the consequent increase of masters and
students at Paris, undoubtedly paved the way for the formation of the
University later in the century. This is not however his greatest
distinction in the history of education. His most enduring influences
came from (1) his independence in thinking, (2) his novel method of
dealing with debatable questions, and (3) his contributions to
scholastic philosophy and theology. The first two of these are
considered below; the last belongs more properly to the history of
philosophy.
(1) Nothing singles Abelard out more clearly among the teachers of his
time than his intellectual independence. Most of his contemporaries
accepted unquestioningly the view that in religious matters faith
precedes reason. One might seek to justify one's faith by reason, but
preliminary doubt as to what should be the specific articles of one's
faith was inadmissible. As they supposed, these articles had been
determined by the church fathers--Augustine, Jerome, and others--and by
the Bible. Their view had been formulated by Anselm of Canterbury in the
preceding century:
"I do not seek to know in order that I may believe, but I believe
in order that I may know." "The Christian ought to advance to
knowledge through faith, not come to faith through knowledge."
"The proper order demands that we believe the deep things of
Christian faith before we presume to reason about them."
With his keenly critical, questioning mind Abelard found a flaw in this
position: on many questions of faith the authorities themselves
disagreed. "In such cases,"--he said in effect,--"how shall I come to
any definite belief unless I first reason it out?" "By doubting we are
led to inquiry, and by inquiry we attain the truth." His attitude--as
contrasted with that of Anselm, given above--is set forth in the
prologue to his _Sic et Non_ (Yes and No):
In truth, constant or frequent questioning is the first key to
wisdom; and it is, indeed, to the acquiring of this [habit of]
questioning with absorbing eagerness that the famous philosopher,
Aristotle, the most clear sighted of all, urges the studious when
he says: "It is perhaps difficult to speak confidently in matters
of this sort unless they have often been investigated. Indeed, to
doubt in special cases will not be without advantage." For
through doubting we come to inquiry and through inquiry we
perceive the truth. As the Truth Himself says: "Seek and ye shall
find, knock and it shall be opened unto you." And He also,
instructing us by His own example, about the twelfth year of His
life wished to be found sitting in the midst of the doctors,
asking them questions, exhibiting to us by His asking of
questions the appearance of a pupil, rather than, by preaching,
that of a teacher, although there is in Him, nevertheless, the
full and perfect wisdom of God.
Now when a number of quotations from [various] writings are
introduced they spur on the reader and allure him into seeking
the truth in proportion as the authority of the writing itself is
commended ...
In accordance, then, with these forecasts it is our pleasure to
collect different sayings of the holy Fathers as we planned, just
as they have come to mind, suggesting (as they do) some
questioning from their apparent disagreement, in order that they
may stimulate tender readers to the utmost effort in seeking the
truth and may make them keener as the result of their seeking.[8]
(2) The new method which Abelard formed for discovering the truth is
presented in the "Yes and No." He first stated in the form of a thesis
for debate the question on which doubt existed. The book contains one
hundred and fifty-eight such questions. He then brought together under
each question the conflicting opinions of various authorities, and,
without stating his own view, left the student to reason for himself in
the matter. There is no doubt that this method served his purpose to
"stimulate tender readers to the utmost effort in seeking the truth."
His boldness in considering some of these questions debatable at all,
the novelty of the doubt which they imply, and their incisive challenge
to keen thinking are evident from the following list:
1. That faith is based upon reason, _et contra_.
5. That God is not single, _et contra_.
6. That God is tripartite, _et contra_.
8. That in the Trinity it is not to be stated that there is more than
one Eternal being, _et contra_.
11. That the Divine Persons mutually differ, _et contra_.
12. That in the Trinity each is one with the other, _et contra_.
13. That God the Father is the cause of the son, _et contra_.
14. That the Son is without beginning, _et contra_.
27. That God judges with foreknowledge, _et non_.
28. That the providence of God is the cause of things happening, _et
non_.
32. That to God all things are possible, _et non_.
36. That God does whatever he wishes, _et non_.
37. That nothing happens contrary to the will of God, _et contra._
38. That God knows all things, _et non_.
53. That Adam's sin was great, _et non_.
84. That man's first sin did not begin through the persuasion of the
devil, _et contra_.
55. That Eve only, not Adam, was beguiled, _et contra_.
56. That by sinning man lost free will, _et non_.
69. That the Son of God was predestinated, _et contra_.
79. That Christ was a deceiver, _et non_.
85. That the hour of the Lord's resurrection is uncertain, _et contra_.
116. That the sins of the fathers are visited upon the children, _et
contra_.
122. That everybody should be allowed to marry, _et contra_.
141. That works of sanctity do not justify a man, _et contra_.
144. That at times we all sin against our will, _et contra_.
150. That sins are not remitted without confession, _et contra_.
153. That a lie is never permissible, _et contra_.
154. That a man may destroy himself for some reasons, _et contra._
155. That Christians may not for any reason kill a man, _et contra_.
156. That it is lawful to kill a man, _et non_.
How he brought out the conflict of opinions is shown by the following
example:
THAT IT IS LAWFUL TO KILL A MAN, AND THE OPPOSITE THESIS.
_Jerome on Isaiah, Bk. V._ He who cuts the throat of a man of
blood, is not a man of blood.
_Idem, On the Epistle to the Galatians:_ He who smites the
wicked because they are wicked and whose reason for the murder is
that he may slay the base, is a servant of the Lord.
_Idem, on Jeremiah:_ For the punishment of homicides, impious
persons and poisoners is not bloodshed, but serving the law.
_Cyprian, in the Ninth Kind of Abuse:_ The King ought to restrain
theft, punish deeds of adultery, cause the wicked to perish from
off the face of the earth, refuse to allow parricides and
perjurers to live.
_Augustine:_ Although it is manslaughter to slaughter a man, a
person may sometimes be slain without sin. For both a soldier in
the case of an enemy and a judge or his official in the case of a
criminal, and the man from whose hand, perhaps without his will
or knowledge, a weapon has flown, do not seem to me to sin, but
merely to kill a man.
_Likewise:_ The soldier is ordered by law to kill the enemy, and
if he shall prove to have refrained from such slaughter, he pays
the penalty at the hands of his commander. Shall we not go so far
as to call these laws unjust or rather no laws at all? For that
which was not just does not seem to me to be a law.
_Idem, on Exodus ch. xxvii:_ The Israelites committed no theft in
spoiling the Egyptians, but rendered a service to God at his
bidding, just as when the servant of a judge kills a man whom the
law hath ordered to be killed; certainly if he does it of his own
volition he is a homicide, even though he knows that the man whom
he executes ought to be executed by the judge.
_Idem, on Leviticus ch. lxxv:_ When a man is justly put to death,
the law puts him to death, not thou.
_Idem, Bk. I of the "City of God":_ Thou shall not kill, except
in the case of those whose death God orders, or else when a law
hath been passed to suit the needs of the time and express
command hath been laid upon a person. But he does not kill who
owes service to the person who gives him his orders, for he is
as it were a mere sword for the person who employs his
assistance.
_Likewise:_ When a soldier, in obedience to the power under which
he is legitimately placed, kills a man, by no law of the state is
he accused of murder; nay if he has not done it, he is accused of
desertion and insubordination. But if he had acted under his own
initiative and of his own will, he would have incurred the charge
of shedding human blood. And so he is punished if he does not do
when ordered that for which he would receive punishment if he did
it without orders.
_Idem, to Publicola:_ Counsel concerning the slaying of men
pleaseth me not, that none may be slain by them, unless perhaps a
man is a soldier or in a public office, so that he does the deed
not in his own behalf, but for others and for the state,
accepting power legitimately conferred, if it is consonant with
the task imposed on him.
_Likewise:_ It has been said: let us not resist the evil man, let
not the vengeance delight us which feeds the mind on others' ill,
let us not neglect the reproofs of men.
_Idem, to Marcella:_ If that earthly commonwealth of thine keep
to the teachings of Christ, even wars will not be waged without
goodwill, for with pitying heart even wars if possible will be
waged by the good, so that the lusts of desire may be subdued and
those faults destroyed which ought under just rule to be either
rooted out or chastised. For if Christian training condemned all
wars, this should rather be the advice given in the gospel for
their safety to the soldiers who ask for it, namely to throw
aside their arms and retire altogether from the field. But this
is the word spoken to them: Do violence to no man, neither accuse
any falsely; and be content with your wages.
He warns them that the wages that belong to them should satisfy
them, but he by no means forbids them to take the field.
_Idem, to his comrade Boniface:_ "I will give thee and thine a
useful counsel: Take arms in thy hands; let prayer strike the
ears of the creator; because in battle the heavens are opened,
God looks forth and awards the victory to the side he sees to be
the righteous one."
_Idem:_ The wars to be waged we undertake either at the command
of God or under some lawful rule. Else John when the soldiers to
be baptized came to him saying, "And what shall we do?" would
make answer to them: "Cast aside your arms, leave the service;
smite no man; ruin no man."
But because he knew that they did these things because they were
in the service, that they were not slayers of men, but servants
of the law; and not avengers of their own injuries, but guardians
of the public safety, his answer to them was: "Do violence to no
man," etc.
_Isidore, Etymologiae, Bk. XVIII, ch. iii:_ A righteous war is
one waged according to orders, to recover property or drive back
the enemy.
_Pope Nicholas to the questions of the Bulgarians:_ If there is
no urgent need, not only in Lent but at all times, men should
abstain from battles. If however there is an unavoidable and
urgent occasion, and it is not Lent, beyond all doubt
preparations for wars should be sparingly made in one's own
defence or in that of one's country or the laws of one's fathers;
lest forsooth this word be said: A man if he has an attack to
make, does not carefully take counsel beforehand for his own
safety and that of others, nor does he guard against injury to
holy religion.[9]
This example shows the scholastic method in its earliest form,--the
statement of the thesis, followed by the simple citation of authorities,
_pro_ and _con_. Later writers added the conclusion which they wished to
support, or at least indicated it in the statement of the thesis. This,
of course, robbed the method of much of its stimulus to independent
thinking. Other modifications also appeared. See the examples on pages
58 ff., 121 ff. The point to be noted here is that in the "Yes and No"
Abelard struck out definitely the method which was followed for
centuries in a large part of university instruction. How great a part it
played can be understood only by an extended study of university
history. A brief discussion of the subject is given on pages 35-37. The
stimulating way in which Abelard used it was potent in drawing students
to Paris. Among those who came to hear him was John of Salisbury.
(b) _A Pre-University Scholar: John of Salisbury_
John of Salisbury (c. 1120-1180), "for thirty years the central figure
of English learning," "beyond dispute the best-read man of his time," is
a good example of the more serious students among those who travelled
abroad for study in the early days of the revival described above. He
spent twelve years (1136-1148) at Paris and at Chartres. His
"Metalogicus" (completed about 1159) is perhaps the best contemporary
account of educational affairs in France in the twelfth century.
The book is interesting now mainly for its account of the writer's
training, for its advocacy of liberal studies as a preparation for
logic, and for its vigorous argument in favor of using all of the works
of Aristotle then known, several of which had only recently become
accessible. It was written originally, however, to discredit the
educational practices of a certain person--designated by the pseudonym
"Cornificius "--who was offering a short and showy education, and
spreading it abroad through his disciples. The description of
"Cornificius" and his school is not necessarily true, but some passages
are quoted from it to illustrate a mode of educational argument
thoroughly characteristic of the Middle Ages,--and not unknown to-day.
They also give point, by contrast, to the education and views of John
Salisbury himself. John begins by personal abuse of "Cornificius":
The shamelessness of his looks, the rapacity of his hands, the
frivolousness of his bearing, the foulness of his manners (which
the whole neighborhood spews out), the obscenity of his lust, the
ugliness of his body, the baseness of his life, his spotted
reputation, I would lay bare and thrust into the face of the
public, did not my respect for his Christian name restrain me.
For being mindful of my profession, and of the fraternal
communion which we have in the Lord, I have believed that
indulgence should be given to his person while, nevertheless,
indulgence is not given to his sin.
Having fairly joined battle by several pages of vituperation, John
proceeds to describe his opponent's manner of teaching:
But I object vigorously to his views, which have destroyed many,
because he has a crowd that believes in him, and although the new
Cornificius is more senseless than the old, yet a mob of foolish
ones agrees with him. And there are in particular some of these
who, although inert and slothful, are eager to seem rather than
to be wise.
* * * * *
For my part I am not at all surprised if after being employed at
a large fee, and beating his drum a long time, he taught his
credulous hearer to know nothing. For he, too, was equally
untaught by teachers, since, without eloquence, and yet verbose,
and lacking the fruit of ideas, he continuously throws to the
wind the foliage of words ... He feeds his hearers on fables and
trifles, and if what he promises is true, he will make them
eloquent without the need of skill, and philosophers by a short
cut and without effort.... In that school of philosophizers at
that time the question whether the pig which is being led to
market is held by the man or by the string, was considered
insoluble. Also, whether he who bought the whole cloak bought the
cowl. Decidedly incongruous was the speech in which these words,
"congruous" and "incongruous argument" and "reason" did not make
a great noise, with multifold negative particles and transitions
through "esse" and "non-esse." ... A wordy clamor was enough to
secure the victory, and he who introduced anything from any
source reached the goal of his proposition.... Therefore they
suddenly became expert philosophers, for he who had come there
illiterate delayed in the schools scarcely longer than the time
within which young birds get their feathers. So the fresh
teachers from the schools and the young birds from the nests flew
off together, having lingered an equal length of time.... They
talked only of congruity or reason, and argument resounded from
the lips of all, and to give its common name to an ass, or a man,
or any of nature's works, was like a crime, or was much too
inelegant or crude, and abhorrent to a philosopher.... Hence this
seething pot of speech in which the stupid old man exults,
insulting those who revere the originators of the Arts because
when he pretends to devote his energies to them he finds nothing
useful in them.[10]
John's own training was in marked contrast to all this. Instead of
remaining in the schools "scarcely longer than the time within which
young birds get their feathers," he spent, as above noted, twelve years
in study. Instead of devoting himself to logic and disputation alone, he
received an extensive training in the classics and in theology. His
first teacher at Paris was Abelard.
When I was a very young man, I went to study in France, the year
after the death of that lion in the cause of justice, Henry [the
First], king of England. There I sought out that famous teacher
and Peripatetic philosopher of Pallet [Abelard], who at that time
presided at Mont St. Genevieve, and was the subject of admiration
to all men. At his feet I received the first rudiments of the
dialectic art [logic], and shewed the utmost avidity to pick up
and store away in my mind all that fell from his lips. When,
however, much to my regret, Abelard left us, I attended Master
Alberic, a most obstinate Dialectician, and unflinching assailant
of the Nominal Sect. Two years I stayed at Mont St. Genevieve,
under the tuition of Alberic and Master Robert de Melun.
Then follows a characterization of these teachers. The statement that
one of them went to Bologna for the further study of logic indicates
that that place was eminent for its teaching of dialectics as well as
for the study of law.
One of these teachers was scrupulous even to minutiae, and
everywhere found some subject to raise a question; for the
smoothest surface presented inequalities to him, and there was no
rod so smooth that he could not find a knot in it, and shew how
it might be got rid of. The other of the two was prompt in reply,
and never for the sake of subterfuge avoided a question that was
proposed; but he would choose the contradictory side, or by
multiplicity of words would show that a simple answer could not
be given. In all questions, therefore, he was subtle and profuse,
whilst the other in his answer was perspicuous, brief, and to the
point If two such characters could ever have been united in the
same person, he would be the best hand at disputation that our
times have produced. Both of them possessed acute wit, and an
indomitable perseverance, and I believe they would have turned
out great and distinguished men in Physical Studies, if they had
supported themselves on the great base of Literature, and more
closely followed the tracks of the ancients, instead of taking
such pride in their own discoveries.
All this is said with reference to the time during which I
attended on them. For one of them afterwards went to Bologna, and
there unlearnt what he had taught: on his return also, he
untaught it: whether the change was for the better or the worse,
I leave to the judgment of those who heard him before and after.
The other of the two was also a proficient in the more exalted
Philosophy of Divinity, wherein he obtained a distinguished name.
With these teachers I remained two years, and got so versed in
commonplaces, rules, and elements in general, which boys study,
and in which my teachers were most weighty, that I seemed to
myself to know them as well as I knew my own nails and fingers.
There was one thing which I had certainly attained to, namely, to
estimate my own knowledge much higher than it deserved. I thought
myself a young scholar, because I was ready in what I had been
taught.
Evidence external to this narrative shows that he now went to the school
at Chartres,--some sixty miles southwest of Paris,--which was one of
three great French schools of the period (see p. 10). During the first
half of the twelfth century it became famous under the teaching of the
brothers Theodoric and Bernard Sylvester, who are both mentioned in the
following passages. The school was distinguished in particular for its
devotion to Grammar, Rhetoric, and classical Latin literature; in this
respect it was in marked contrast to Paris, where Logic and Theology
were the prevailing studies.
I then, beginning to reflect and to measure my strength, attended
on the Grammarian William de Conches during the space of three
years; and read much at intervals: nor shall I ever regret the
way in which my time was then spent. After this I became a
follower of Richard l'Eveque, a man who was master of every kind
of learning, and whose breast contained much more than his tongue
dared give utterance to; for he had learning rather than
eloquence, truthfulness rather than vanity, virtue rather than
ostentation. With him I reviewed all that I had learned from the
others, besides certain things, which I now learnt for the first
time, relating to the Quadrivium, in which I had already acquired
some information from the German Hardewin. I also again studied
Rhetoric, which I had before learnt very superficially with some
other studies from Master Theodoric, but without understanding
what I read. Afterwards I learnt it more fully from Peter
Hely.[11]
In another chapter, which is here inserted in the narrative, John
describes in detail the teaching at Chartres. This is one of the most
complete accounts which we have of the manner and the matter of the
teaching in a twelfth-century school. He begins by a general discussion
of the importance of Grammar, which is the "foundation and root" of
reading, teaching, and reflection. Throughout this discussion he refers
constantly to Quintilian's "Institutes of Oratory." The study of
Rhetoric and of other Arts prepares one for the proper understanding of
Literature: "The greater the number of Arts with which one is imbued,
and the more fully he is imbued with them, so much the more completely
will he appreciate the elegance of the authors, and the more clearly
will he teach them."
As to the study of Literature, care should be used in selecting the best
authors. Bernard, he reports, "always said that unnecessary reading
should be avoided, and that the writings of illustrious authors were
sufficient; since to study whatever all that the most contemptible men
have ever said results in too great torture or in idle boasting, and
hinders and even overwhelms the intelligence, which is better left empty
for other writings." The reading chosen was classical Latin literature;
"in this reverent dependence upon the ancients, lies the main
peculiarity of the school of Chartres," which under Bernard and his
brother "enjoyed a peculiar distinction, continually growing until it
became almost an unapproached pre-eminence among the schools of
Gaul."[12]
This reading is in turn a preparation for Philosophy. "He who aspires to
Philosophy should understand reading, teaching and reflection, together
with practice in good works." "Search Virgil and Lucan, and there, no
matter of what philosophy you are professor, you will find it in the
making." All this is in marked contrast to the method of "Cornificius,"
who proposed to train philosophers "suddenly." John continues:
Bernard of Chartres, the most copious source of letters in Gaul
in modern times, followed this method, and in the reading of
authors showed what was simple, and fell under the ordinary
rules; the figures of grammar, the adornments of rhetoric, the
quibbles of sophistries; and where the subject of his own lesson
suggested reading related to other arts, these matters he brought
into full view, yet in such wise that he did not teach everything
about each topic but, in proportion to the capacity of his
audience, dispensed to them in due time the full scope of the
subject. And because the brilliancy of any speech depends either
on _Propriety_ (that is, the correct agreement of adjective or
verb with the substantive) or on _Metathesis_ (that is, the
transfer of the meaning of an expression for a worthy reason to
another signification), these were the things which he took every
opportunity to inculcate in the minds of his hearers.
And since the memory is strengthened by exercise and the wits are
sharpened by imitating what is heard, he urged some by warnings,
and some by floggings and punishments [to the constant practice
of memorizing and imitation]. They were individually required on
the following day to reproduce some part of what they had heard
the day before, some more, some less, for with them the following
day was the pupil of the day preceding.
Evening drill, which was called _declension_, was packed with so
much grammar that if one gave a whole year to it he would have at
his command, if he were not unusually dull, a method of speaking
and writing, and he could not be ignorant of expressions which
are in common use.... For those of the boys for whom preliminary
exercises in imitating prose or poetry were prescribed, he
announced the poets or orators and bade them imitate their
example, pointing out the way they joined their words and the
elegance of their perorations.
But if any one to make his own work brilliant had borrowed the
cloak of another he detected the theft and convicted him, though
he did not very often inflict a punishment; but he directed the
culprit thus convicted, if the poorness of his work had so
merited, to condescend with modest favor to express the exact
meaning of the author; and he made the one who imitated his
predecessors worthy of imitation by his successors.
The following matters, too, he taught among the first rudiments
and fixed them in their minds:--the value of order; what is
praiseworthy in embellishment and in [choice of] words; where
there is tenuity and, as it were, emaciation of speech; where, a
pleasing abundance; where, excess; and where, a due limit in all
things....
And since in the entire preliminary training of those who are to
be taught there is nothing more useful than to grow accustomed
to that which must needs be done with skill, they repeatedly
wrote prose and poetry every day, and trained themselves by
mutual comparisons,--a training than which nothing is more
effective for eloquence, nothing more expeditious for learning;
and it confers the greatest benefit upon life, at least, if
affection [rather than envy] rules these comparisons, if humility
is not lost in literary proficiency.[13]
John's stay at Chartres (1138-1141) made him a permanent advocate of
liberal education; but to no avail; the influence of Paris and the
rising tide of Aristotelianism gained the day. As a champion of the
newly-recovered works of Aristotle (see p. 42) he was more in accord
with the tendencies of his time.
The concluding section of the account narrates John's return to Paris,
his further studies there (1141-1148), and his visit to his old school
on the "Mount":
From hence I was withdrawn by the poverty of my condition, the
request of my companions, and the advice of my friends, that I
should undertake the office of a tutor. I obeyed their wishes;
and on my return [to Paris] after three years, finding Master
Gilbert [de la Porrée] I studied Logic and Divinity with him: but
he was very speedly removed from us, and in his place we had
Robert de Poule, a man amiable alike for his rectitude and his
attainments. Then came Simon de Poissy, who was a faithful
reader, but an obtuse disputator. These two were my teachers in
Theology only.
Twelve years having passed away, whilst I was engaged in these
various occupations, I determined to revisit my old companions,
whom I found still engaged with Logic at Mont St. Genevieve, and
to confer with them touching old matters of debate; that we might
by mutual comparison measure together our several progress. I
found them as before, and where they were before; nor did they
appear to have reached the goal in unravelling the old questions,
nor had they added one jot of a proposition. The aims that once
inspired them, inspired them still: they had progressed in one
point only: they had unlearned moderation, they knew not modesty;
in such wise that one might despair of their recovery. And thus
experience taught me a manifest conclusion, that, whereas
dialectic furthers other studies, so if it remain by itself it
lies bloodless and barren, nor does it quicken the soul to yield
fruit of philosophy, except the same conceive from elsewhere.[14]
This was doubtless one of the experiences which led John to vigorous
argument on the futility of devotion to Logic alone, and on the
importance of a liberal education:
That eloquence is of no effect without wisdom is a saying that is
frequent and true. Whence it is evident that to be of effect it
operates within the limits of wisdom. Therefore eloquence is
effective in proportion to the measure of wisdom which each one
has acquired; for the former does harm if it is dissociated from
the latter.
From this it follows that dialectic, which is the quickest and
most prompt among the hand-maids of eloquence, is of use to each
one in proportion to the measure of his knowledge. For it is of
most use to him who knows the most and of least use to him who
knows little. For as the sword of Hercules in the hand of a pygmy
or dwarf is ineffective, while the same sword in the hand of
Achilles or Hector strikes down everything like a thunderbolt, so
dialectic, if it is deprived of the vigor of the other
disciplines is to a certain degree crippled and almost useless.
If it is vigorous through the might of the others, it is powerful
in destroying all falsehood and, to ascribe the minimum to it,
it is adequate for the proper discussion of all things ...
Now it is very easy for each workman to talk about his own art;
but to do skilfully what the art requires, is most difficult. For
what physician is there who does not talk often and much about
elements, and humors, and complexions, and diseases, and the rest
that pertain to physic? But he who gets well on such talk could
well have afforded to be even sicker. What ethical teacher has
not an abundance of rules for good living so long as they exist
only on his lips? But it is clearly a much harder task to express
them in actual life. Mechanics, individually, talk glibly about
their own arts, but not one of them so lightly vies (in practice)
with the architect or the boxer. It is the same in every other
line. So it is very easy to talk about definition, arguments, or
genus and the like, but to devise these same things within the
limits of a single art for the purpose of performing fully the
functions of the art, is far more difficult [i.e. to discuss
logic in the abstract is easy, but to reason logically in any
specific field of knowledge is difficult]. Therefore he who is
hampered by a dearth of the disciplines will not have the power
which Dialectic promises and affords.[15]
The views of John of Salisbury concerning the study of Aristotle are
indicated on pages 42-44.
2. THE NEW METHOD
The new method of study and investigation, developed by Abelard, was a
second influence of importance in the growth of universities. The method
itself--later known as the scholastic method--is illustrated on pages
20, 58, 121 ff. The present section therefore merely indicates the ways
in which it influenced the course of higher education.
(_a_) The new method was one cause of the awakened interest in study
and investigation. Its effect is thus described by the most learned
historian of mediaeval universities:
Paris and Bologna experienced before all other schools, and
nearly simultaneously, at the beginning of the twelfth century,
an unexpected, almost sudden development. For in these schools
alone a definite branch of learning was treated ... by a new
method, adapted to contemporary needs, but hitherto unknown, or
insufficiently known, to other teachers of the period; and
thereby a new era of scientific investigation was inaugurated.
This new method had an attractive power for teachers and scholars
of various countries ... In this way the cornerstones of
permanent abodes of learning were laid. The continually growing
number of scholars brought with it the increase of teachers; the
desire of both classes for learning was awakened; and this
desire, and the combative exchange of ideas in the
disputations,--which now first became really established in the
schools as a result of the new method,--were effective forces to
keep investigation active, and the schools themselves from
decline.
In Paris, it was the cultivation of Logic, but chiefly the new
method in Theology, ... developed in various ways especially by
Abelard and other teachers, and extended by his contemporaries
and their disciples ... which caused the revolution in the
schools of that city.[16]
(_b_) The new method of Abelard established a new form of exposition,
and consequently a new mode of teaching, in Canon Law and in Theology.
The earliest university text-book in Canon Law--the "Decretum" of
Gratian--adopted this method, with some modifications. It was followed
in portions of the chief text-book in Theology,--the "Sentences" of
Peter Lombard. Variously modified, it became the method used in all
subsequent scholastic philosophy and theology. It was widely used in
connection with other university studies. In general, it was to
mediaeval education what the method of experiment is to the study and
teaching of modern natural science. A good illustration of its recent
use is Thomas Harper's "Metaphysic of the School."
(_c_) The scholastic method became the basis of one of the most
important university exercises,--the disputation or debate, which was
employed in every field of study.[17]
3. THE NEW STUDIES
During the twelfth and thirteenth centuries the intellectual life of
western Europe was enriched by the addition of a group of books, old and
new, which were destined to influence profoundly the growth of the
universities, as well as the whole course of mediaeval life and thought.
Without some such addition to the stock of learning higher education
could hardly have developed at all, for the materials available for it
previous to the twelfth century were decidedly scanty. The books
presently to be described furnished a body of advanced and solid
instruction, suited to the needs of the times. They formed one of the
permanent influences which both developed and maintained centers of
higher education, for the new learning was not less potent in
attracting students than the fame of individual teachers or the new
method of study.
The greater number of the books which formed the body of university
instruction were recoveries from the mass of ancient and long-disused
Greek and Roman learning, together with a few works of Arabic and Jewish
origin. To this group belong the works of Aristotle, the body of Roman
Law, and the medical works of Galen, Hippocrates, and various Arabic and
Jewish physicians. In the main, these had been hitherto unknown in
western Europe, or at least practically for-gotten since the days of the
Roman Empire. In the twelfth and thirteenth centuries they were
collected and made generally accessible to students. Those not
originally written in Latin were now translated into Latin; manuscript
copies were multiplied and widely diffused.
But the intellectual activity of the times accomplished much more than
the recovery of some fragments of ancient learning; it also created two
new fields of study,--Scholastic Philosophy and Theology, and Canon
Law,--and produced the text-books which marked them off as distinct and
professional studies. The book which established the _method_ of these
studies was Abelard's "Yes and No" (see p. 20); but the works which
furnished the substance of university instruction were, in Theology, the
"Sentences" (Sententiae) of Peter Lombard, and in Canon Law, the
"Decree" (Decretum) of Gratian, which was also known as the "Harmony of
Contradictory Canons" (Concordia Discordantium Canonum), and additions
thereto, indicated on page 56.
Thus, during the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, the growth of
universities was stimulated by the development of a great body of
learning hitherto inaccessible or unknown. The striking nature of this
development will be clearer if we recall that no addition to the
learning of western Europe in the least degree comparable to this had
been made during the entire seven centuries preceding.
The books above mentioned did not constitute the sole resources for
higher education. Besides the already long-used text-books on the Seven
Liberal Arts there were mathematical and philosophical works of Arabic
origin, and as the revival progressed many new books were written on the
old subjects. But the books already named were fundamentally important
as furnishing not only the early intellectual impulse to the growth of
universities, but also the main body of studies in the Faculties of
Arts, Theology, Law, and Medicine down to the year 1500. Many of them
were in use at a much later date, and some--with many revisions--are
still standard text-books. No one can understand the intellectual life
of the universities who does not have some acquaintance with the titles
and contents of these works. It may be added that acquaintance with them
is essential also to the understanding of European history and
literature. This section is therefore devoted to certain details
concerning the early history of university studies.
(a) _The Works of Aristotle_
The works of Aristotle were composed in Athens, 335-322 B.C. Their
history, from the time of Aristotle's death to their appearance in Latin
translations in western Europe, fifteen hundred years later, cannot be
here detailed. The translations commonly used in the universities were
nearly all made during the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. The earlier
ones were made in Spain, from Arabic versions of the original Greek; the
later, directly from Greek copies found in Constantinople, and elsewhere
in the East. The Arabic-Latin translations were very poor, owing to the
two removes from the original Greek and the incapacity of the
translators. Those directly from the Greek were somewhat better, yet far
from satisfactory; and new versions were repeatedly made down to the end
of the fifteenth century. University reforms sometimes included the
adoption of these better translations (see p. 48).
The works known by the year 1300 may be classified in four groups:
{1. Categories = {Predicamenta.
I. Logical { {Categoriae.
treatises {2. On interpretation = {De Interpretatione.
commonly { {Peri Hermeneias.
referred to {3. Prior Analytics = Analytica Priora.
as the Organon {4. Posterior Analytics = Analytica Posteriora.
or {5. Topics = Topica.
Methodology {6. Sophistical} = Sophisticae Elenchi.
{ Refutations}
II. Moral {7. Politics.
and Practical {8. Ethics.
Philosophy {9. Rhetoric.
{10. Poetics.
{11. A Physical Discourse (Physics).
{12. On the Heavens.
{13. On Generation and Destruction.
{14. Meteorologies.
{15. Researches about Animals.
{16. On Parts of Animals.
{17. On Locomotion of Animals.
{18. On Generation of Animals.
III. Natural {19. On the Soul.
Philosophy. {20. Appendices to the work "On the Soul."
{ (_a_) On Sense and Sensible Things.
{ (_b_) On Memory and Recollection.
{ (_c_) On Sleep and Waking.
{ (_d_) On Dreams and Prophesying in Sleep.
{ (_e_) On Longevity and Shortlivedness.
{ (_f_) On Youth and Old Age.
{ (_g_) On Life and Death.
{ (_g_) On Respiration.
IV. Rational {21. Metaphysics.
Philosophy. {
This encyclopedic collection became accessible in Latin translations
only by slow degrees. Abelard knew only the first two (possibly also the
third and fourth) works of the Organon. John of Salisbury, in the next
generation, was familiar with the six treatises of the Organon, but
apparently not with the others. Little seems to have been added to these
until the beginning of the thirteenth century, when the Ethics, the
Physics, and the Metaphysics were mentioned at Paris,--the last two as
forbidden works. The great era of translation seems to have been between
1200 and 1270, when both Arabic-Latin and Greek-Latin versions were made
of most of the remaining treatises. The recovery of Aristotle thus
occupied more than a century and a half. During that period the
intellectual life of western Europe was stimulated by the influx of
hitherto unknown works of that philosopher, and weighty additions were
made to the list of available studies.
As usual, the world of scholars and the universities were slow to
recognize the worth of the new studies. This was due partly to the
natural conservatism of teachers, and partly to the fear of
ecclesiastical authorities that the study of Aristotle would give rise
to heresies. Thus in the documents of the time we meet, on the one hand,
vigorous arguments by progressive scholars in favor of Aristotle, and on
the other, university regulations prescribing what books shall or shall
not be studied.
The attitude of Abelard toward Aristotle has already been cited (see p.
19).
His pupil, John of Salisbury, devotes a considerable portion of the
_Metalogicus_ to a discussion of the utility of the various portions of
the Organon and to the defense of Aristotle, as is shown by the titles
of various chapters of that work. It is important to remember that he is
advocating the study of the _newly_ translated books, as well as those
already known:
That Logic, because it seeks the truth, takes the lead in all
Philosophy.
On the usefulness of the Categories and their appliances.
What Conception is, and the usefulness of the Periermeniae or
more correctly Periermenia. [Peri Hermeneias. On Interpretation.]
Of what the Body of Art consists; and on the usefulness of the
Topics.
Why Aristotle deserved more than others the name of philosopher.
That Aristotle erred in many ways; that he is eminent in Logic.
John of Salisbury clearly recognized the supremacy of Aristotle among
logicians. After naming Apuleius, Cicero, Porphyry, Boethius, Augustine,
and others, he adds:
But while individually they shine forth because of their own
merits, they all boast that they worship the very footsteps of
Aristotle; to such a degree, indeed, that by a sure pre-eminence
he has made peculiarly his own the common name of all
philosophers. For by Antonomy [a figure of speech] he is called
The Philosopher _par excellence_.
It is clear, however, that Aristotle had by no means attained, at the
middle of the twelfth century, the authoritative position which he held
a hundred years later. This appears in the chapter "On those who Carp at
the Works of Aristotle":
I cannot sufficiently wonder what sort of a mind they have (if,
that is, they have any) who carp at the works of Aristotle,
which, in any case, I proposed not to expound but to praise.
Master Theodoric, as I recall, ridiculed the Topics,--not of
Aristotle, but of Drogo. Yet he once taught those very Topics.
Certain auditors of Master Robert of Melun calumniated this work
as practically useless. All decried the Categories. Wherefore I
hesitated some time about commending them; but [there was no
question as to] the rest of his works, since they were commended
by the judgment of all; but I did not think that they should be
praised grudgingly. Yet opposition is made to the Elenchi
[Sophistical Refutations], though stupidly, because it contains
poetry; but clearly the idiom of [the Greek] language does not
lend itself readily to translation. In this respect the Analytics
seem to me preferable, because they are no less efficient for
actual use, and because by their easier comprehension they
stimulate eloquence.[18]
The slowness with which these works made their way is described by Roger
Bacon at the end of the thirteenth century.
But a part of the philosophy of Aristotle has come slowly into
the use of the Latins. For his Natural Philosophy and
Metaphysics, and the Commentaries of Averrhoes and of others,
were translated in our times, and were excommunicated at Paris
before the year of our Lord 1237 on account of [their heretical
views on] the eternity of matter and of time, and on account of
the [heresies contained in the] book on Interpretation of Dreams
(which is the third book on Sleep and Wakefulness), and on
account of the many errors in the translation. The Logicalia were
also slowly received and read, for the blessed Edmund, Archbishop
of Canterbury, was the first at Oxford, in my time, to lecture on
the book of Elenchi [Sophistical Refutations] and I saw Master
Hugo who at first read the book of Posterior Analytics, and I saw
his opinion. So there were few [books] which were considered
worth [reading] in the aforesaid philosophy of Aristotle,
considering the multitudes of Latins; nay, exceedingly few and
almost none, up to this year of our Lord 1292. So, too, the
Ethics of Aristotle has been tardily tried and has lately been
read by Masters, though only here and there. And the entire
remaining philosophy of Aristotle in a thousand volumes, in which
he treated all the knowledges, has never yet been translated and
made known to the Latins.[19]
The last sentence of the account displays an ignorance of the number of
Aristotle's extant writings which was doubtless shared by all of Bacon's
contemporaries. Earlier writers, beginning with Andronicus of Rhodes
(first century B.C.), had also placed the number at one thousand; Bacon
probably copied the statement from one of these.
The attitude of ecclesiastical authorities toward the study of Aristotle
at Paris is expressed in a series of regulations extending over nearly
half a century (1210-1254). They indicate at first a fear of certain of
the newly translated books on account of their heretical views, as is
stated by Roger Bacon (p. 44). This suspicion gradually disappears; and
by 1254 all the more important works of Aristotle are not only approved,
but prescribed for study.
In 1210 a church council held at Paris sentenced certain heretics to be
burned, condemned various theological writings, and added:
Nor shall the books of Aristotle on Natural Philosophy, and the
Commentaries [of Averrhoes on Aristotle] be read in Paris in
public or in secret; and this we enjoin under pain of
excommunication.[20]
In 1215 the statutes of the Papal Legate, Robert de Courçon, for the
University, prescribe in detail what shall, and what shall not, be
studied:
The treatises of Aristotle on Logic, both the Old and the New,
are to be read in the schools in the regular and not in the
extraordinary courses. On feast-days [holidays] nothing is to be
read except ... the Ethics, if one so chooses, and the fourth
book of the Topics. The books of Aristotle on Metaphysics or
Natural Philosophy, or the abridgments of these works, are not to
be read.[21]
In other words, the Old and New Logic are prescribed studies; the
Ethics, and Topics, Bk. IV, are optional; the Metaphysics and the
Natural Philosophy are forbidden.
Sixteen years later (1231) the Statutes of Pope Gregory IX for the
University prohibit only the Natural Philosophy, and even these works
only until they are "purged from error":
Furthermore, we command that the Masters of Arts ... shall not
use in Paris those books on Natural Philosophy which for a
definite reason were prohibited in the provincial council [of
1210], until they have been examined and purged from every
suspicion of error.[22]
The final triumph of Aristotle in the University is indicated by the
statute of the Masters of Arts in 1254.[23] It must have had at least
the tacit approval of the pope or his delegate. The statute is too long
to quote effectively to the point. None of the works are forbidden, and
a large number are prescribed. The list of works mentioned includes--
(1) The six logical treatises of the Organon; (2) Ethics, Bks. I-IV; (3)
Physics, On the Heavens and the Earth, Meteorologics, On Generation, On
Animals, On the Soul, On Sense and Sensible Things, On Sleep and Waking,
On Memory and Recollection, On Life and Death; (4) Metaphysics. To these
are added two other works then believed to be Aristotle's,--On Plants,
and On Causes,--and numerous books by other authors (named on p. 137)
which do not concern the present discussion. A comparison of the list
above with the list on page 40 will show that nearly the whole range of
Aristotle's works is prescribed. Comparison with the statute of 1215
will show not only a change of view regarding the works then forbidden,
but also an immense broadening of the studies of the Faculty of Arts in
the course of forty years.
The foregoing details are cited to give an idea of the first stage of
the question of Aristotle in the universities. The statute of 1254 may
be taken as closing the long struggle for the recognition of his works.
The broad principle of their general acceptance had been established;
thenceforward for nearly three centuries they remained the dominant
studies of the Faculties of Arts everywhere.
These centuries include the second period of their academic history.
Their authority is now hardly questioned; and woe to the questioner!
They furnish the basis for the great structure of scholastic philosophy;
they are reconciled with Christian doctrine. Aristotle is thenceforward
"The Philosopher"--he is so styled even in modern scholastic philosophy;
he is "the forerunner of Christ in things natural," "the master of those
who know." In this period, then, academic debate concerned itself with
matters of detail. What portions of his works should be studied for the
various degrees in Arts? In what order should they be studied? What
comments should be read? What translations should be used? So late as
1519 these are the chief questions considered in the reformed plan of
studies in Arts at Leipzig. The reader will note the stress laid upon
the study of the text itself; the exclusion of frivolous comments, and
the use of the latest translations by Greek scholars.
Inasmuch as no good thing is more desirable than philosophy, as
Cicero says, and none more advantageous has been given to the
race of mortals, or granted by heaven, or will ever be given as a
gift; in order that we may possess this too, we choose as our
guide Aristotle, whom we cause to be commended for his knowledge
of facts, the number of his works, his ability in speaking, and
the acumen of his intellectual powers. Nor will we interpret the
visions and involved questions of his interpreters, since it is
characteristic of a very poor intellect to grow wise from
commentaries only, in which, neglecting Aristotle's meaning, the
Sophists dispute about empty trifles. But his works, translated
in part by Archeropylus [Argyropulos], in part by Augustus Nipho
and Hermolaus Barbarus and Theodoras Gaza, will be made clear in
the order outlined below:[24] [Then follows the list of books,
for which see p. 134].
The third stage of the debate concerning Aristotle began shortly after
1500. His works were less exclusively the subject of study: they were
being displaced by the Latin and Greek classics. They were, moreover,
the object of repeated attack. In 1536, in the University of Paris,
which had so long maintained their study, Pierre Ramus successfully
defended the startling thesis, "Everything that Aristotle taught is
false." This was only one sign of their loss of prestige. New and
improved text-books in Logic absorbed the useful portions of the
Organon; the authority of the Natural Philosophy waned with the rise of
experimental science; that of the Metaphysics yielded to the new
philosophy of Descartes. By the end of the seventeenth century they
ceased to be a potent factor in university studies.
(b) _The Roman Law_
The great compilation of the Roman Law known as the _Corpus Juris
Civilis_ (Body of Civil Law) constitutes a second important addition of
the twelfth century to the field of university studies. It was probably
more important as an influence upon the growth of universities than the
works of Aristotle.
The greater part of the Corpus Juris was compiled at Constantinople,
529-533 A.D., by certain eminent jurists under the Roman Emperor,
Justinian. The purpose of the work was to reduce to order and harmony
the mass of confused and contradictory statutes and legal opinions, and
to furnish a standard body of laws of manageable size in place of the
unwieldly mass of incorrect texts commonly in use, so that "the entire
ancient law, in a state of confusion for some fourteen hundred years and
now by us made clear, may be, so to speak, enclosed within a wall and
have nothing left outside it." The jurists entrusted with this work were
also required to prepare an introductory book for students, as described
below. After the completion of the whole work Justinian issued (533-565)
many new statutes (Novellae) which were never officially collected, but
which came to be considered a part of the Corpus Juris. The main
divisions of the Body of Civil Law are--
(1) The Code, in twelve books, which contains statutes of the Emperors
from the third century A.D.
Since [says Justinian] we find the whole course of our statutes
... to be in a state of such confusion that they reach to an
infinite length and surpass the bounds of all human capacity, it
was therefore our first desire to make a beginning with the most
sacred Emperors of old times, to amend their statutes, and to put
them in a clear order, so that they might be collected together
in one book, and, being divested of all superfluous repetition
and most inequitable disagreement, might afford to all mankind
the ready resource of their unalloyed character.[25]
(2) The Digest, or Pandects, in fifty books, containing extracts from
the opinions of Roman lawyers on a great variety of legal questions.
This work was also undertaken to bring order and harmony out of the
prevailing confusion:
We have entrusted the entire task to Tribonianus, a most
distinguished man, Master of the Offices, ex-quaestor of our
sacred palace, and ex-consul, and we have laid on him the whole
service of the enterprise described, so that with other
illustrious and learned colleagues he might fulfil our desire.
[He is] to collect together and to submit to certain
modifications the very most important works of old times,
thoroughly intermixed and broken up as they may almost be called.
But in the midst of our careful researches, it was intimated to
us by the said exalted person that there were nearly two thousand
books written by the old lawyers, and more than three million
lines were left us by them, all of which it was requisite to read
and carefully consider and out of them to select whatever might
be best. [This was accomplished] so that everything of great
importance was collected into fifty books, and all ambiguities
were settled, without any refractory passage being left.[26]
In mediaeval university documents the Digest is frequently mentioned in
three divisions, which probably indicate three separate instalments in
which the MS. of the work was brought to Bologna in the eleventh and
twelfth centuries: the Old Digest (Digestum Vetus) Bks. I-XXIV, title
ii, Infortiatum Bks. XXIV, title iii-XXXVIII, title iii, and New Digest
(Digestum Novum) Bks. XXXVIII, title iv-L. The meaning of the term
Infortiatum is uncertain.
This distinction between the various parts of the Digest is
purely arbitrary.... The division must have originated in an
accidental separation of some archetypal MS.[27]
(3) The Institutes, in four books, an elementary text-book for students.
The purpose of the book was to afford a simple, clear, and trustworthy
introduction to the study of law, and to economize the student's time:
When we had arranged and brought into perfect harmony the
hitherto confused mass of imperial constitutions (i.e. the Code),
we then extended our care to the vast volumes of ancient law;
and, sailing as it were across the mid ocean, have now completed,
through the favour of heaven, a work that once seemed beyond hope
(i.e. the Digest).
When by the blessing of God this task was accomplished, we
summoned the most eminent Tribonian, master and ex-quaestor of
our palace, together with the illustrious Theophilus and
Dorotheus, professors of law, all of whom have on many occasions
proved to us their ability, legal knowledge, and obedience to our
orders; and we have specially charged them to compose, under our
authority and advice, Institutes, so that you may no more learn
the first elements of law from old and erroneous sources, but
apprehend them by the clear light of imperial wisdom; and that
your minds and ears may receive nothing that is useless or
misplaced, but only what obtains in actual practice. So that,
whereas, formerly, the junior students could scarcely, after
three years' study, read the imperial constitutions, you may now
commence your studies by reading them, you who have been thought
worthy of an honour and a happiness so great that the first and
last lessons in the knowledge of the law should issue for you
from the mouth of the emperor.
When, therefore, by the assistance of the same eminent person
Tribonian and that of other illustrious and learned men, we had
compiled the fifty books, called Digests or Pandects, in which is
collected the whole ancient law, we directed that these
Institutes should be divided into four books, which might serve
as the first elements of the whole science of law.
In these books a brief exposition is given of the ancient laws,
and of those also, which, overshadowed by disuse, have been again
brought to light by our imperial authority.
These four books of Institutes thus compiled, from all the
Institutes left us by the ancients, and chiefly from the
commentaries of our Gaius, both in his Institutes and in his work
on daily affairs, and also from many other commentaries, were
presented to us by the three learned men we have above named. We
have read and examined them and have accorded to them all the
force of our constitutions.
Receive, therefore, with eagerness, and study with cheerful
diligence, these our laws, and show yourselves persons of such
learning that you may conceive the flattering hope of yourselves
being able, when your course of legal study is completed, to
govern our empire in the different portions that may be entrusted
to your care.
Given at Constantinople on the eleventh day of the calends of
December, in the third consulate of the Emperor Justinian, ever
August (533)[28]
(4) The Novellae (Novels), or new statutes issued by Justinian between
the final edition of the Code and his death (534-565). These are really
a continuation of the Code, but they were never officially collected.
The Code and the Institutes were known and studied in Italy throughout
the Dark Ages, but the Digest, much the largest and most important part
of the Corpus Juris, was almost wholly neglected, if not unknown, until
the time of Irnerius of Bologna (_c._ 1070-1130). He and his co-laborers
collected and arranged the scattered parts of the entire Body of Civil
Law, and in particular introduced the Digest to western Europe. "Without
the Digest the study of Roman Law was in a worse position than the study
of Aristotle when he was known only from the Organon." In a most
important sense, therefore, the recovery of the Corpus Juris was a
contribution of the twelfth century to the group of available higher
studies. Hitherto Law had been taught usually as a mere branch of
Rhetoric, and as a part of a liberal education. The body of material now
made available was sufficient to occupy the student's entire time for
several years. It therefore attained standing as an independent subject,
and as a distinctly professional study.
The effect of this newly recovered body of learning upon the rise of
universities was very much like that of Abelard and his new method.
Students flocked in thousands to study law at Bologna, and toward the
close of the twelfth century the University was organized. Numerous
other universities arose directly from the same impulse, and "Law was
the leading Faculty in by far the greater number of mediaeval
universities" (Rashdall). Except for Canon Law, the Corpus Juris Civilis
remained the chief study of the Faculties of Law for more than five
centuries. Roman Law is still very generally taught in European
universities. Thus the impulse given by Irnerius and his co-laborers is
influential in university affairs of to-day.
The influence of Roman Law upon the social and political history of
Europe is far-reaching. The subject is beyond the limits of the present
work; but it is to be noted that this influence was exerted as a result
of its study in the universities (see Rashdall, Vol. II, Pt. II, pp.
708-709).
Rashdall and Denifle think that the example of Justinian inspired the
first mediaeval grant of special privileges to scholars (see p. 82). If
this is true, the Roman Law had a most important effect upon the history
of universities themselves. Two important mediaeval privileges for
masters and scholars were exemption from taxation and the right of trial
before special courts. Whether or not these were copied from the Roman
Law is a question; but the Code of Justinian, following the statutes of
earlier emperors, explicitly grants both of these privileges to
teachers. These are so often mentioned that it is worth while to present
those bearing on the subject:
THE EMPERORS LEO AND ZENO, AUGUSTI, TO EUSEBIUS, MASTER OF
OFFICES.
By this law we decree that those who serve in the individual
schools, and who, after completing the curricula of their duties,
shall have reached the rank of chiefs and through the adored
purple of our divinity have won the dignity of most illustrious
Counts, shall enjoy both the girdle and all the privileges open
to them, and hereafter to their life's end shall be subject to
the court of Your Highness only, nor shall they be compelled by
the command of any one else whomsoever to undergo civil
litigation.
Yet in criminal suits and in matters connected with public
tribute we wish the appropriate jurisdiction of the rulers of the
provinces to be recognized against even such men, lest, under the
pretext of a granted privilege, either the influence of the
wicked be increased or the public good be diminished.[29]
THE EMPEROR CONSTANTINE, AUGUSTUS, TO THE PEOPLE.
We direct that physicians, and chiefly imperial physicians, and
ex-imperial physicians, grammarians and other professors of
letters, together with their wives and sons, and whatever
property they possess in their own cities, be immune from all
payment of taxes and from all civil or public duties, and that in
the provinces they shall not have strangers quartered on them, or
perform any official duties, or be brought into court, or be
subject to legal process, or suffer injustice; and if any one
harass them he shall be punished at the discretion of the Judge.
We also command that their salaries and fees be paid, so that
they may more readily instruct many in liberal studies and the
above mentioned Arts.
Proclaimed on the fifth day before the Kalends of October (Sept.
27) at Constantinople, in the Consulship of Dalmatius and
Zenophilas.[30]
(c) _Canon Law_
About 1142 (the year of Abelard's death) Gratian, a monk of Bologna,
doubtless influenced by the school of Roman Law in that city, made a
compilation of the Canon Law, which included the canons or rules
governing the Church in its manifold activities,--"its relations with
the secular power, its own internal administration, or the conduct of
its members." Hitherto Canon Law had been regarded as merely a
subdivision of Theology, just as Roman Law had been considered a branch
of Rhetoric. It now became an independent subject,--further addition to
the body of higher studies. As an influence upon the development of
universities it was not less important than the _Corpus Juris Civilis_.
The compilation made by Gratian was added to in later generations, and
the whole body of church law was known in the fifteenth century as the
_Corpus Juris Canonici_ (Body of Canon Law). Its main divisions are:
1. The Decree of Gratian _(Decretum Gratiani)_ in three parts,
published c. 1142. Part I contains one hundred and one
distinctions (_distinctiones_) or divisions, which treat of
matters relating to ecclesiastical persons and offices. Dist.
XXXVII is translated below. Part II contains thirty-six cases
(_causae_) each of which is divided into questions
(_quaestiones_). These questions deal with problems which may
arise in the administration of the canon law. Part III contains
five distinctions which deal with the ritual and the sacraments
of the church. Under each distinction, or question, are arranged
the canons--the views of ecclesiastical authorities--on the
matter under discussion.
2. The Decretals (_Decretales_), in five books, published by Pope
Gregory IX in 1234.
3. The Sixth Book (_Liber Sextus_), a supplement to the Decretals
by Pope Boniface VIII, 1298.
4. The Constitutions of Clementine (_Constitutiones
Clementinae_), 1317.
5. Several collections of papal laws not included in those above,
known by the general title of _Extravagantes_, i.e., laws _extra
vagantes_, or outside of, the four compilations just mentioned.
Among all these the _Decretum_ of Gratian was the great innovation
which first marked out Canon Law as a distinct field of learning,
separate from both Theology and Roman Law. It was written as a
text-book; "it was one of those great text-books which take the world by
storm." It created an entirely new class of students, separate from
those devoted to Arts, Theology, Roman Law, and Medicine,--just as the
development of Engineering and other new professional studies have
created new groups of university students to-day,--and thereby increased
the resort to the universities.
The selection following illustrates numerou |
