_Education and Art in the Seventeenth Century._
AS we have seen in the second volume, after the Reformation many
efforts were made to extend the elements of Education to the people.
Though the nation was disturbed touching forms of Church polity, and
often torn by civil war and persecution, yet the parish and elementary
schools increased in number during the century, while the number of
adventure-schools which appeared throughout the kingdom humbly praying
for liberty to teach, indicates a growing and pretty general desire
among the people to partake of the benefits of education. Thus there
were signs that the mass of ignorance was slowly but surely yielding
to the influences of civilisation. Still, the vagrant habits of
many persons, the severe oppression of a portion of the people, and
many other obstacles, required a long time to elapse ere they could
be thoroughly overcome or a complete system of national education
established.
The legislature, the church, and the local authorities, all endeavoured
to promote the education of the people. In 1616 the Privy Council
enacted that there should be a school established in every parish
of the kingdom, and the Act was to be carried into effect with the
concurrence of the burghs. But this Act was not fully carried out,
and so ten years later the Government ordered a report to be drawn
up on the state of the parishes throughout the kingdom, from which it
appeared that the majority of the parishes were then without regular
schools. Parliament in 1633 ratified the Act of Council, and further
enacted that the bishops, with the consent of the majority of the
parishioners, might impose a rate upon the possessors of land for
establishing and supporting the parish schools. In 1641 the subject
came again before Parliament in the form of an overture, which, among
other points concerning schools and education, stated that “every
parish should have a reader and a school wherein children are to be
taught in reading and writing, and the grounds of religion, according
to the laudable acts both of church and parliament before enacted.”
One of the articles in the overture on the schools was to this effect:
“The Assembly would supplicate the parliament that for youths of the
finest and best spirits of the Highlands and Borders, maintenance may
be allowed as to bursars, to be trained in the Universities.” Again,
in 1645, Parliament ordered “that there be a school founded, and a
schoolmaster appointed in every parish not already provided.” For this
purpose the proprietors in every congregation were enjoined to meet
and to provide a suitable building for a school, and modify a salary to
the schoolmaster, which should not be under one hundred merks or above
two hundred annually. A rate was to be imposed by the proprietors to
maintain the schools and pay the schoolmasters; but if they could not
agree among themselves to settle the matter, then in that case, the
presbytery were to nominate twelve honest men within its bounds, who
should be empowered to execute the work of establishing a school, which
should be as valid as if the proprietors had done it themselves.¹ But
troubles came fast and thick upon the party then at the head of affairs,
and this Act was not put into operation.
¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume V., pages 21,
367; Volume VI., page 216.
In 1696 Parliament anew enacted that a school and schoolmaster should
be established in every parish not already provided “by advice of the
proprietors and the minister of the parish.” As in the Act of 1645,
they were enjoined to provide a suitable building for a school, and
settle a salary to a schoolmaster, which should not be under one
hundred merks (five pounds and eleven shillings) sterling, or above
two hundred merks (eleven pounds, two shillings, and twopence.) The
proprietors were to pay a share of the rate according to their valued
rent within the parish, “allowing each of them relief from his tenants
of the half of his proportion for settling and maintaining of a school
and payment of the schoolmaster’s salary.... If the proprietors, or
a majority of them, shall not meet, or being met and shall not agree
among themselves, then in that case, the Presbytery shall apply to the
commissioners of supply of the shire, who, or any five of them, shall
have power to establish a school, and settle and modify a salary for
the schoolmaster, and to rate and lay on the same upon the proprietors
according to their valued rent, which shall be as valid and effectual
as if it had been done by the proprietors themselves. And because the
proportion imposed upon each proprietor will be but small, therefore
for the better and more ready payment thereof, it is ordained that if
two terms’ proportions run in and the third unpaid, then those that
so fail in payment shall be liable in double of their proportions then
resting, and in the double of every term’s proportion that shall be
resting thereafter, until the schoolmaster be completely paid, and
that without any defalcation.”¹ From this date the parish system of
primary schools became established and continued without interruption,
excepting in some parts of the Highlands, where parishes were so
large as to render the act inoperative; but ultimately other means of
providing elementary education in those remote quarters of the kingdom
were adopted.
¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume X., page 63.
Throughout this period there were elementary schools in many of
the towns distinct from the grammar or burgh schools. But it must
be observed that the grammar schools from an early period enjoyed a
monopoly of teaching certain branches, as they were protected more or
less strictly until recent times. Education like trade and everything
else was subject to the spirit and the influences of the age, and a few
examples of the modes of protection in this field may be interesting to
many. In 1668, the town council of Edinburgh stated that it was illegal
for any person to teach Latin or grammar within the city, except the
masters of the high school, and that none residing in the town might
send their children to be taught without the gates; nevertheless,
several persons were teaching within the city, “to its public loss,
and to the overthrow of the high school.” And therefore the council
“ordained that no person upon any pretence whatever teach grammar
within the city except at the schools of Leith, Canongate, and the
readers’ school of West Port; and that no inhabitant send their
children to any other place within the liberties of the city; and
anyone teaching in contempt of this act shall be imprisoned, and
parents sending their children elsewhere shall pay quarterly to the
master of the high school as much as his other scholars.”¹ Yet “the
adventure schools seemed to have gained ground on the high school in
the course of 1684, when the doctors appeal for augmentation, because
of the number of private schools which, if suppressed, will become
their mortal enemies, slandering them to all concerned.”²
¹ _Burgh Records of Edinburgh._
² Grant’s _History of the Burgh Schools of Scotland_, page 136.
In 1686, the town of Wigton ordered that no other school but the burgh
one should be permitted there, except for girls to learn sewing, under
a fine on the teachers of ten pounds quarterly, and five groats on
parents for each child. The town council of Banff, in 1688, prohibited
private schools within the burgh under the penalty of banishment. In
1693, the council of Edinburgh ordered the doors of private schools
to be closed; while, in 1698, the council of Stirling ordained that no
child above six years of age should be taught in any school but the
grammar school, no private school was to be permitted. The town council
of Selkirk, in 1721, having appointed an English master, prohibited all
other persons from teaching English to boys within the burgh.¹
¹ Grant’s _History of the Burgh Schools of Scotland_, pages
138‒140; _Burgh Records of Banff_; _Burgh Records of
Stirling_.
The English or primary schools in the burghs were partly under the
control of the magistrates, and their sanction had to be obtained
before a teacher could open a school. In March, 1636, the town council
of Aberdeen discovered that three women had opened a school without
asking or receiving a license from the council, and that they were
teaching their scholars to read, and thus injuring the masters of the
English schools, who had been authorised and admitted by the council;
therefore, the council prohibited these women from keeping a school for
teaching the children, excepting only schools for “learning the bairns”
to sew and weave, and no further; “and that with the licence of the
council, sought and obtained, and in no other way.”¹ In 1658, William
Findlay applied to the council for liberty to teach an English school,
stating that he had been a teacher in John Brown’s school, that he
thought himself capable of conducting an English and writing school,
and that he was very anxious to do it, if their honours should see
fit to authorise him. The council, having considered his application,
granted him a licence to open a school in the Green or Shoregate, “for
teaching the young ones and children of the inhabitants of this burgh,
during the council’s pleasure, and his good service in that charge.”²
¹ _Burgh Records of Aberdeen_, Volume III., page 98.
² _Ibid._, Volume IV., page 176.
The council of Glasgow, in 1639, enacted that there should be four
English schools in the city, with a writing school, “and the masters
of these schools to be admitted by the council, and to receive
instructions from them touching the school hours and other matters,
and this act to be proclaimed by sound of drum.” But in 1654, eight
teachers had taken up Scots schools without authority in the city, and
they then humbly supplicated the magistrates to be allowed to continue
them, while two others prayed that they might be permitted to open new
Scots schools. After consideration, the magistrates authorised them, on
condition that they conducted themselves religiously, praying morning
and evening in the schools, exacting only certain fees, and instructing
all poor children without fees, whose parents or friends required
them to do this; while it was declared that the opening of ♦schools
without the authority of the magistrates “was against all reason, and
contrary to precedent, and to what had been heretofore observed.” In
1663, fourteen persons, male and female, were authorised to keep Scots
schools in Glasgow.¹
♦ “scheols” replaced with “schools”
¹ _Burgh Records of Glasgow_, page 397; Grant’s _History of the
Burgh Schools of Scotland_, page 385.
In 1662, the town council of ♦Aberdeen concluded that the English and
reading schools of the burgh had been for several years much neglected
and abused, owing to there being too many licenced to teach, who were
incapable of teaching. But the council, having now brought John Gormak
from Edinburgh, a highly qualified teacher of reading and writing, to
assume the duties of teaching in the city, and that the schools may be
better regulated and the youth better instructed in future, “resolved
to have a school for teaching the young ones in reading and in writing;
and that Robert Webster, who also has the liberty of the school,
continue it for teaching and instructing the children in reading
and arithmetic; and John Moubray to have the liberty of a school for
teaching the children of Footdee and the Castlegate; prohibiting all
other persons from keeping any English schools for reading, writing, or
arithmetic, within this burgh, except such women as the council shall
permit, for instructing children in the grounds of reading.” The same
year, the council admitted Barbara Mollison as teacher of the school
founded by the Lady of Rothiemay, “in this burgh, for teaching the
young ones in reading, writing, and sewing.”¹
♦ “Aberbeen” replaced with “Aberdeen”
¹ _Burgh Records of Aberdeen_, Volume IV., page 201.
From an early period, French was very generally taught in Scotland,
but no other modern language was introduced into the schools until
very recent times. In 1635, the town council of Aberdeen authorised
Alexander Rolland to open a French school in the city, “for teaching
the youth, and such as shall please to come to him, and for that end
to put up a sign before his school door, to give notice of his licence,
to all who are anxious to learn the French tongue.”¹
¹ _Burgh Records of Aberdeen_, Volume III., page 80.
The Church was invested with the power of visiting and examining all
the parish schools of the kingdom, and she manifested a deep interest
in their welfare. But the Church also claimed, and generally exercised
the right of visiting and examining all the schools in the realm,
though, in the case of the burgh or grammar schools, she usually
acted in conjunction with the town councils or the magistrates. These
visitations of the schools were made at stated times, and helped to
sustain their spirit and efficiency.
Thus in 1629, the town council of Aberdeen appointed four men to
assist Dr. Forbes, Dr. Dun, Dr. Johnston, and Mr. Robert Barron, in
the visitation of the Grammar, English, and Music schools of the city,
enjoining them to take notice of the form of doctrine and discipline
in all of them, and how the masters and the scholars observed the rules
and the instructions set down for their guidance. “And wherein they
find any of the masters deficient, either in doctrine or discipline,
to report this to the council, with their proposals as to how all
such defects should be remedied, to the end that the magistrates
may order reformation, according to an act formerly drawn up. It was
also commanded that the laws of all the schools should be printed and
affixed in every school, that neither master nor scholar may pretend
ignorance.”¹ In 1652, the council of Peebles ordered the school to
be visited, and the minister to be informed thereof. The town council
of Jedburgh, in 1656, ordered visitations of the school to be made
twice a year, in May and November, “in order that the master and
assistant shall be tried, concerning the soundness of their judgment
in matters of religion, their ability as teachers, the honesty of their
conversation, and the fidelity with which they discharge their duties,
so that the proficiency of the scholars may be known.”²
¹ _Ibid._, Volume III., pages 14, 26, _et seq._
² _Burgh Records of Peebles_; _Burgh Records of Jedburgh_;
Grant’s _History of the Burgh Schools of Scotland_, page 148.
The General Assembly of 1642 appointed a committee to consider the
time and manner of visiting schools, and the best and most orderly
course for teaching grammar. And in 1645, the Assembly, with the aim
of advancing learning and good order in grammar schools, enacted that
every grammar school should be visited twice in the year by visitors
appointed by the presbytery and kirk-session in landward parishes,
by the town council and ministers in burghs, and by the universities
where there are any, always with the consent of the patrons of the
school, in order that the diligence of masters, and the proficiency of
scholars may be ascertained, and deficiency censured.¹ The Presbyteries,
generally, were painstaking and careful in assisting to conduct these
examinations.
¹ _Acts of the General Assembly._
In 1659, the town council of Aberdeen, considering that the quarterly
visitation of the grammar and music schools of the city, appointed
by the former acts, if rightly conducted, would tend to promote the
learning of the youth, approved the following regulations, together
with the laws of the school adopted in 1636: 1. That there should be
four solemn visitations of the grammar school every year, one at the
beginning of every quarter, at which the scholars should be tried in
making themes, interpreting and analysing authors, and making verses,
which will take up one day, if rightly done. 2. That the master of
the grammar school should keep a register of visitations, in which
should be entered “the laws of the school,” printed about the year
1636, and also the act of council approving these regulations; and the
scholar who at the quarterly visitation gains the prize, should with
his own hand insert his name in the register, mentioning whether he
gained it by making a theme or a verse, or analysing authors, and also
recording the date of the visitation, which must be done by _nonas
idus calendus_, the master helping those of the lower classes to enter
it correctly, and the prizeman’s name to be affixed above his class
till the next visitation. 3. That each scholar in the school should
have an antagonist, who as near as possible should be his equal, for
stirring up emulation, and neither to receive help in his trials at
the visitation. 4. The masters should keep the themes of the present
visitation until the next quarterly visitation, that their proficiency
may be observed. 5. Those who make the best verse and the best theme
should each have a prize, after it appears by examination to be their
own composition. 6. At every quarterly visitation there should be
public acting, short recitations and declamations before the visitors,
that the scholars may learn boldness and vivacity in public speaking.
7. When two or more are equal in making a theme or in any other point
of trial, they may be put to an extempore trial for ascertaining the
order of merit; but the visitors must be careful not to discourage
the unsuccessful competitor, who should also receive a word of public
commendation when the prize is given to the victor. 8. That the
visitors should test the scholars on the grounds of religion by asking
some questions of the Shorter Catechism, and to ascertain if they
understood them.¹
¹ _Burgh Records of Aberdeen_, Volume IV., pages 180‒182.
The Town Council of Aberdeen passed an act for redressing abuses which
had arisen in the Grammar School in 1671. The scholars were interrupted
in their learning by being changed from one teacher to another too
often, as the assistant teachers were changed from one class to another
every quarter, therefore it was settled that all the assistant teachers
should begin with the scholars they received at each of the four
quarters of the year, and carry them on continuously till they were fit
for entering the master’s class. “Seeing that in the three years’ time,
the scholars coming in May and in August cannot be so far advanced
as those who came in autumn and at Candlemas, their teacher having
delivered up the autumn scholars to the master’s class, he may begin
to receive the new class in the elementary branch at the same time,
and also perfect the rest of his former classes, and always as he
receives a new class every quarter so he may give off the class of his
former course every quarter to the master’s class, and so every third
year each teacher of the school is to receive the scholars of a whole
year, and at the four general quarters go up with his own scholars
to the master’s class. And if any boy through neglect or dullness of
understanding fall short of his fellows, by the advice of the visitors
or with consent of his parents, he ought to descend under the master
that teaches next to that class.” The mode of exercising discipline
being defective, it was enjoined that the head master and the assistant
teachers should exercise discipline every twenty-four hours upon the
scholars under their respective charges. The master and teachers had
been in the habit of not attending to their duty till eight in the
morning, therefore it was enacted that one of the teachers should be
in the school every day at six in the morning, and the head master and
the rest of the teachers should be in the school every day before seven,
that the scholars might not be idle when they came. It was ordered that
one at least of the teachers should attend the scholars when they were
at their play, to keep them in the usual playgrounds, and see that they
did not hurt each other.¹
¹ _Ibid._, pages 270‒272.
In 1700 the council of Aberdeen, the principal and regents of Marischal
College, and the ministers of the city, framed a set of rules for
the government of the Grammar School. It was resolved that a solemn
visitation of the school should be held annually in the beginning of
October, at which the scholars were to be examined, and prizes awarded
to the most deserving. Besides this, there should be three other
visitations at intervals of three months conducted by members of the
council, the ministers of the burgh, and one or two of the regents of
the College. Further, two or more of the magistrates should visit the
school on the first Tuesday of every month and inquire how the rules
and the discipline of the school were observed. At the same time they
appointed the method of teaching grammar and the classical authors, and
enjoined that they should be diligently pursued.¹
¹ _Burgh Records of Aberdeen_, Volume IV., page 327.
As to the subjects taught in the grammar schools and the method of
teaching, there seems to have been a gradual improvement. In the higher
class of schools the course extended to five years. At the High School
of Edinburgh in 1640 the order of teaching was as follows:――For the
first half of the first year the scholars were taught the principles
of grammar “in vernaculo sermone,” at the same time learning the
Latin names of everything on earth and in heaven; and during the
second half they had daily to repeat a certain portion of grammar,
and learn particular sentences relating to life and manners. The first
half of the second year they daily repeated certain parts of grammar,
especially as laid down by Despauter,¹ translating it into English,
and at the same time reading Cordery’s Colloquies; while, during the
second half, they were taught daily the Syntax of Erasmus, the masters
teaching and the scholars learning in the Latin language. Throughout
the third year they repeated daily a portion of etymology and syntax,
being exercised in reading Cicero’s De Senectute and De Amicitia,
Terence’s Comedies and Elegies, Ovid’s Tristia, Buchanan’s Psalms,
and Cicero’s Epistles, reading the same _clara voce_. The fourth
year, for the first month they repeated daily what they had already
learned, being taught Buchanan’s Prosody, Despauter’s Select Rules,
and Buchanan’s Epigrams and Poetry. During the rest of the year they
were exercised in poetry and in the practice of the rules of grammar,
reading Virgil, Ovid’s Metamorphoses, Horace, Buchanan’s Psalms,
translating Cicero, Cæsar, and Terence, and the beauties of these
authors were explained to them. The fifth year they studied the
rhetoric of Tully, and the compendious rhetoric of Cassander, read
Cicero’s Orations, the short speeches in Sallust, Virgil, and Lucan,
and were at all times enjoined to read audibly and distinctly, and
declaim.²
¹ A notable Flemish grammarian, who flourished from 1460 to
1520, and whose grammar long continued to be used in our
schools.
² Chalmers’ _Life of Ruddiman_, pages 88‒90; Grant’s _History
of the Burgh Schools of Scotland_, page 339. For comparison
of the above course of instruction in this school with the
earlier one adopted in 1598, see the second volume of this
history, pages 404‒5.
The course of the Grammar School of Glasgow and that of Aberdeen also
extended to five years, and the class of subjects and the instruction
imparted being very similar in these schools, though there were some
variations which may be a little further illustrated. In 1685, at the
request of the Town Council of Glasgow, the regents of the College and
the ministers of the city framed a scheme of teaching for the Grammar
School. According to it, the first year the scholars were to be taught
the common rudiments of Latin, including the Vocables; the second year
the larger half of the first part of grammar, with Cordery’s Colloquies,
Erasmus’s Minor Colloquies, and some select epistles of Cicero and
Cato. The third year they were to be taught the other half of the first
part of grammar, and a short piece of the second, as far as Regimen
Genitivi; and for authors they were to have Ovid’s Epistles, Buchanan’s
Psalms, especially such of them as are written in elegiac verse, with
themes and versions from the best authors. The fourth year they were
to learn the rest of Syntax from Regimen Genitivi, repeating the former
parts, and reading Cæsar’s Commentaries, Justin’s History, Ovid’s
Metamorphoses, and Virgil. The fifth year they were to be perfected
in the third and fourth parts of the Latin grammar, and to learn
Buchanan’s Epigrams, Jephtes, and Baptistes, and also select parts of
Horace and Juvenal, with exercises in poetry, in themes and versions.¹
¹ Grant’s _History of the Burgh Schools of Scotland_, page 338.
The course of instruction in the grammar school of Aberdeen, in 1700,
was ordered as follows: “The entrants should read Latin during the
first quarter, or longer if the masters thought fit. After this, they
should learn the declensions, comparisons, pronouns, conjugations, and
the rest of the rudiments, to the constructions, and they should also
learn by heart the first four sections of Webberburn’s Vocables, and
decline and conjugate them; with the constructions they should have
the two last sections of Vocables. With the first part of the grammar
they should have Tully, Sulpicius, Distich of Cato, Ovid’s Epistles,
Virgil’s Epigrams, and Terentii Andria; and for prose authors, Cordery,
Erasmus’s Minor Colloquies, and Cicero’s Minor Epistles; and for sacred
prose, Ursin’s Catechism, Dialogi Sacra Sebastiani. With the second
part of the grammar, Virgil’s Eclogues and the fourth book of his
Georgics, and Ovid’s Metamorphoses, should be used; for prose authors,
Curtius, Sallust, and Cæsar’s Commentaries; and for sacred lessons,
Buchanan’s Paraphrase of the Psalms. With the third part of the grammar,
Virgil’s second and sixth Æneids, and Horace’s Odes; and for prose
authors, Cicero’s Offices, and Erasmus’s Minor Colloquies; and for
sacred lessons, Buchanan’s ♦Paraphrase continued. With the fourth
part of the grammar, some of the select Satires of Horace, the tenth
and thirteenth Satires of Juvenal, and some of the Satires of Persius;
and for prose authors, Livy’s First Decade, and Buchanan’s History,
together with the turning and making of verse, dictates of rhetoric
and rules of elegance, to which should be added some practice in
composing and resolving orations according to the rules of rhetoric.
After Despauter’s Grammar, Kirkwood’s Orthography and Syntax should be
learned, with his tract, De Variis Carminum Generibus. Throughout the
prose authors, the choicest sentences of each day’s lesson should be
dictated in Latin and in English, together with the versions of each
day’s lesson, and for each lesson throughout the several factions, a
daily conference should be appointed. As to composition, the public
arguments should be dictated thrice a week, and besides these the high
class should have five arguments more. On Saturday afternoon there
should be disputes, repeating of rules and authors publicly by the
several classes in turn; and all the rules and questions of the Shorter
Catechism should be repeated once a week publicly. In the winter
quarter each scholar of the higher class should repeat a fable of Æsop
from the public desk before the whole class.” Rules were also adopted
for regulating the discipline of the school, the play-days, and the
tasks for Sunday.¹
♦ “Paraphase” replaced with “Paraphrase”
¹ _Burgh Records of Aberdeen_, Volume IV., 327‒332.
Though provision was made for teaching Greek in some of the grammar
schools, it was not generally taught in these schools during the
seventeenth century. There are some notices of the teaching of Greek
in the schools; thus in the high school of Edinburgh, a class was
established for teaching the rudiments of Greek, in 1614. In 1625, 1642,
1656, the masters of the grammar school of Stirling promised to teach
all the scholars both Latin and Greek grammar. The town council of
Aberdeen, in 1661, authorised Mr. William Aidy to teach scholars in the
Greek tongue at such hours as should not interfere with the teaching
of the grammar school. In 1663, Latin and Greek were taught in the
school of Dumfries. As indicated before, Latin, and its classic writers,
formed the chief subject-matter in the higher grammar schools. But
in most of the smaller grammar or burgh schools, English was taught,
including even reading, spelling, and writing. Throughout this period,
however, there is little mention of the teaching of arithmetic, or
any branch of mathematics, geography, or drawing; and, indeed, in
these and other cognate branches of knowledge the nation as yet was
not far advanced.¹ From about the end of the seventeenth century onward
the subject of navigation was assiduously taught in the schools of
the chief seaport towns of Scotland. In 1673, the master of the Scots
school at Ayr was enjoined to teach the children to paint, but there
was little teaching of drawing anywhere.
¹ _Burgh Records of Aberdeen_, Volume IV.; _Burgh Records
of Stirling_; Grant’s _History of the Burgh Schools of
Scotland_, page 332.
The town councils throughout the kingdom frequently encouraged and
rewarded their school teachers. In 1620, the master of the grammar
school of Paisley was made a burgess and freeman of the burgh, and in
1632, the assistant teacher, for his encouragement, was made a burgess
without paying any composition; and again, in 1685, the master of
the grammar school was admitted a burgess gratis, on account of his
service to the town, and for his encouragement. In 1677, the master
of the grammar school of Ayr was made a burgess and guild brother
“for the good service which he had done in attending on the scholars
in the school.” The town council of Aberdeen, in 1632, granted to
David Wedderburn, master of the grammar school, the sum of two hundred
merks Scots, for printing his grammar, lately published, which he had
dedicated to the council.
During the century some interest was manifested in the teaching of
music. In a considerable number of the schools music was taught as
a subordinate branch of education, and there were also, in different
places, separate schools for teaching the vocal and instrumental forms.
In 1624, the town council of Glasgow arranged with James Sanders to
teach all the children of the burgh who should be sent to his music
school, allowing him ten shillings each quarter, and three shillings
and fourpence for his assistant. Then the provost and magistrates
prohibited all other schools from teaching music in the city, unless
they were licensed by the council. But in 1638, their music school had
decayed, “to the disgrace of the city, and the regret of all honest
citizens;” the council, therefore, with the consent of James Sanders,
appointed Duncan Burnett to teach the music school. In 1669, the
council agreed to give the teacher of music three hundred and fifty
merks annually, and the bishop of Glasgow also was to give one hundred
pounds Scots. In 1691, the music master was to receive fourteen
shillings monthly for teaching one hour daily, and for writing the
thirteen common tunes and some psalms, fourteen shillings; and further,
the magistrates allowed him one hundred pounds Scots yearly.¹ The
town council of Stirling, in 1620, granted to the teacher of music
an annual salary of twenty pounds, with six shillings and eightpence
quarterly, for every scholar of the town learning music; and in 1694,
the precentor of the burgh was appointed to keep a public school for
teaching singing and playing. Frequently the master of the song school
was also English or rather Scots master, and taught the children
reading and spelling, and sometimes writing and grammar. In 1621, the
master of the music school of Dunbar was also the English master of
the town school. Shortly before the Restoration, the music school of
Elgin was converted into an English school, music, however, being still
taught.²
¹ _Burgh Records of Aberdeen_, Volume III., page 50; _Burgh
Records of Paisley_; _Burgh Records of Ayr_; _Burgh Records
of Glasgow_, pages 354, 388, _et seq._
² Grant’s _History of the Burgh Schools of Scotland_, pages
381‒382.
In 1636, the town council of Aberdeen admitted Andrew Melville to be
master of the music school. He had already been a teacher of music
for eighteen years, and the council thought he had produced sufficient
evidence of his qualifications in the art. They, therefore, appointed
him master of the music school, to teach the art of singing and playing,
stipulated that he should find a properly qualified assistant, to
instruct and attend to scholars, and also to take up the psalms in
both the churches of the city, at preaching and at prayers, evening
and morning, on week-days and Sunday. In 1666, the council agreed
to give Thomas Davidson, the master of the music school, a salary of
two hundred and fifty merks annually, with school fees. The council,
in 1675, issued a notice inviting persons expert in the science of
music to compete for the office of master of the song school; and this
brought an application from a Frenchman, who had been teaching music
in Edinburgh with much success. The council engaged him for one year,
or longer if they thought fit, at an annual salary of two hundred
pounds, and thirty shillings quarterly from each scholar. His hours
for teaching were fixed from seven to nine, and ten to eleven, in the
forenoon, and from two to three in the afternoon.¹
¹ _Burgh Records of Aberdeen_, Volume IV., pages 212, 226,
292‒293. In 1682, the town council of Aberdeen granted John
Forbes, printer, one hundred pounds Scots, as a gratuity,
in recognition of his merit in publishing a book for the
instruction of the young, which he dedicated to the provost
and council. _Ibid._, page 302. The council, in 1643, granted
John Row four hundred merks Scots, in consideration of his
having taught the Hebrew tongue, and published a Hebrew
Dictionary, which he dedicated to the council. _Ibid._,
Volume III., pages 165, 248.
Passing to the Universities of Scotland, we cannot record that they
exhibited any marked advance in the seventeenth century. There was
scarcely any improvement or change in the regular methods of imparting
knowledge, but some additional subjects were introduced. Amidst the
ecclesiastical and political wars under which the nation groaned,
letters, science, philosophy, and art, could not be expected to bloom
and ripen. Nevertheless, it is encouraging to find that in spite of
adverse circumstances, much violence, suffering, and poverty, many of
the people continued to take a lively interest in the diffusion of the
higher education.
About the beginning of the century, the magistrates and council of
Glasgow manifested a keen interest in the preservation of the rights
of their University. And in 1630, the town council, upon a petition
from the principal and the regents of the University for assistance to
erect a new building, agreed to contribute a sum of one thousand merks
when the building was commenced, and another thousand merks to purchase
books for increasing the number of volumes in the library. Later in
the century, we find the council still taking a warm interest in the
College.¹ The town council of Aberdeen, in 1634, granted four hundred
merks to the masters and regents of King’s College, to help to repair
the crown of the College, which had lately been broken down by a
tempest. In 1642, the council granted four hundred merks to aid in
repairing the College of the burgh. The same year the council commanded
that all the bursars admitted into the College of the burgh should
diligently attend all the public lectures and lessons of the several
professors, during the time that they received the benefit of their
bursaries. The town council also appointed Mr. John Row to teach Hebrew
in the College of the burgh. Dr. Robert Dun bequeathed his books to
the College, and the town council was careful to see them placed in
the library, and entered in a catalogue. In 1694, the council gave a
contribution of five hundred merks for the observatory of Marischal
College.²
¹ _Burgh Records of Glasgow_, pages 217‒223, 245, 275, 336,
340, 345, 351, 352.
² _Burgh Records of Aberdeen_, Volume III., pages 26, 59, 67;
Volume IV., pages 169, 199, 232, 315.
As observed in the last volume, each dominant party in the government
eagerly sought to impose their views upon the universities. When the
Covenanting party gained the ascendancy, it was resolved, in 1639, that
all masters and teachers of universities, colleges, and schools, and
all scholars at the passing of their examination for degrees, should
subscribe the Covenant, and this resolution was carried out by a
commission of visitation between 1639 and 1642.¹ One of the proposals
touching the universities which the General Assembly presented to
Parliament in 1641, was to the following effect:――That in order to
remove and to prevent abuses in the universities, to promote piety and
learning, it was very requisite and highly expedient that a constant
intercourse and correspondence should be kept up between all the
universities and colleges of the kingdom. And, therefore, it should
be ordained that a meeting of commissioners from all the universities
and colleges should be held once every year, at such time and place as
should be agreed upon, who should consult and determine upon their
common affairs, and the best means of advancing the end above specified;
and who also, or some of their number, should represent to parliament,
and to the General Assembly, what should be necessary and best for the
universities. Another item was, that special care should be taken that
all the chairs in the universities, and more especially the chairs of
divinity, should be filled with the ablest men, and the best affected
to the Reformation and the order of the Church.²
¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume V., pages
291‒293.
² _Ibid._, Volume V., page 367.
It was not merely the doctrines and political opinions taught in the
universities that were affected by the changes and the revolutions in
the government, but even the funds of these institutions were greatly
affected, being often diminished and sometimes a little increased.
The general seizure of Church property and funds at the Reformation
has been already explained. The portion that belonged to the
universities was, like the rest, generally diverted from its purpose,
notwithstanding the efforts made to recover it; but without enlarging
on this, it may be well to state a few facts. In 1641, parliament
passed an act, granting the revenues of the bishopric and the priory
of St. Andrews to the University of St. Andrews; that is, the income
of the dismissed primate of Scotland was now to be transferred to
the principal, the regents, and the professors of the University of
St. Andrews. Accordingly, the Estates appointed a commission for the
visitation of the Colleges of St. Andrews, to distribute the above fund
among the principals, professors, and other members of the University,
assigning due proportions to each of the three Colleges. The commission
was also empowered to order the course of studies, to rectify what was
wrong, to recommend what was best for training the students in religion
and in learning, and to report their proceedings to the Estates.¹
¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, pages 382, 448‒450,
483, 498‒499.
In 1641, the King and parliament granted to the University of Glasgow
the temporality of the bishopric of Galloway, and ordered that the name
and the memory of this bishopric should be suppressed and extinguished.
The same year the Estates passed an act assigning the revenues of
the bishopric of Aberdeen to the Colleges of Old and New Aberdeen.
Cromwell, as we have seen, had to listen to some scathing preaching
against himself in Glasgow; and though the majority of the professors
and masters of the University submitted, with much reluctance to his
government, still, Oliver and his council renewed all its immunities
and privileges, adding that of printing bibles and all kinds of books
relating to the liberal sciences or licensed by the University. The
Protector further confirmed all former foundations, mortifications,
and donations made in favour of the University, and particularly those
of the bishopric of Galloway, adding thereto, for seven years to come,
the vacant stipends of the parishes which had been in the patronage of
the bishop of Galloway, also in perpetuity, the revenues of the deanery
and sub-deanery of Glasgow. This last gift, however, was under several
restrictions, by which the University could not obtain possession
of the subjects during Cromwell’s rule; however, as his acts were
rescinded at the Restoration, it fell to the ground.¹
¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume V., page 566;
Dr. Reid’s _Account of the University of Glasgow_.
At the Restoration, the universities were as far as possible made
subservient to the government and its principles. When Episcopacy
was re-established, the funds which the universities were receiving
from the revenues of the bishoprics, as above indicated, were at once
withdrawn. This crippled them for some time. At this time there were
eight chairs in the University of Glasgow, but three of them had to be
given up, and the five which remained were reduced to very low salaries,
while the College buildings remained in an unfinished condition.
According to the report of a visitation appointed by parliament in 1644,
an annual sum of three thousand nine hundred and forty-one pounds Scots
should speedily be provided for the University, otherwise it would
quickly decay and go to ruin; for it had a great load of debt, and many
chairs wanting which it should have, but cannot for want of revenue. In
this state, however, it continued till after the Revolution. In 1693,
however, each of the Scotch universities received a grant of three
hundred pounds annually out of the bishops’ rents in Scotland. They
continued to struggle on, but none of them have yet become very rich
institutions.¹
¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume VII., page 498.
Dr. Reid’s _Account of the University of Glasgow_.
After the Revolution, of course, the universities had to be purged, and
in 1690, parliament passed an act authorising the visitation of all the
educational establishments of the kingdom. A long list of commissioners
were named in the act, and empowered to proceed, and to see that no
person disaffected to the government, or otherwise disqualified, should
be permitted to remain in any of the universities or schools, upon
the ground of its being necessary “for the advancement of religion and
learning, the good of the Church, and the peace of the kingdom, that
the universities, colleges, and schools be provided and served with
pious, able, and qualified principals, professors, regents, masters,
and others bearing office therein, well affected to their Majesties,
and the established government of Church and State.” Therefore it was
enacted that henceforward “no professors, principals, regents, masters,
or others bearing office in any university, college, or school, in this
kingdom, be permitted to continue in the exercise of their functions,
but such as shall acknowledge and profess, and subscribe, the
Confession of Faith, ratified by this parliament; and also swear and
subscribe the oath of allegiance to their Majesties: and withal shall
be found of a pious, loyal, and peaceable conversation, and of good and
sufficient literature and abilities for their respective employments;
and submitting to the government of the Church now settled by law.”¹
¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume IX., pages
163‒164.
In 1695, the commissioners of the universities had arrived at the
conclusion that none of the text-books should be of foreign origin.
“They tell the commissioners of parliament that it is altogether
dishonourable to the universities, and the famed learning of the nation,
that a course of philosophy should be made the standard of authority,
which none belonging to the universities have composed. They criticise
the existing books and systems of logic and philosophy. The existing
courses of philosophy are either not intended and suited for students,
or they are in themselves objectionable. The course that runs the
fairest is, ‘Philosophia Vetus et Nova,’ which is done by a popish
author, and bears marks of that religion; but therein the logics are
barren, the ethics erroneous, and the physics too prolix. Henry Moir’s
ethics cannot be admitted; they are grossly Arminian, particularly in
his opinion ‘de libero arbitrio.’ The determinations and pneumatology
of De Vries are too short. Le Clerc is merely sceptical and Socinian.
For Cartesius, Rohault, and others of his gang, besides what may be
said against their doctrine, they all labour under this inconvenience
――that they give not any sufficient account of the other hypotheses,
and the old philosophy, which must not be ejected.”¹
¹ _Printed Muniments of the University of Glasgow_, Volume II.,
page 531.
In accordance with this conclusion, the University of St. Andrews
was ordered to draw up the logics and general metaphysics; to that
of Edinburgh was given the pneumatology; to Glasgow, the general and
special ethics; and to the two Colleges of Aberdeen the general and
special physics. The treatises were written and placed before the
commissioners of parliament in 1697, who were empowered to revise
them. Two of these productions were printed in London in 1701. The one
produced in Edinburgh is entitled “An Introduction to Metaphysics,” and
contains fifty-six pages; the other from St. Andrews, “An Introduction
to Logic,” of the same size. But no more was heard of the project, and
it produced no practical effect on the course of university education.
In short, these compends, and the views which they expressed, may
be regarded as the closing words of the regenting system, and of the
older method of philosophical teaching in the Scotch universities. The
leading peculiarity of this method has been pointed out in the previous
volume.¹ The professorial system was finally instituted in Glasgow in
1727: it was introduced there by Melville in 1577, but regenting was
resumed in 1642; in Edinburgh in 1708; in St. Andrews, 1747; but in
Aberdeen the regenting continued till 1754.
¹ Mackintosh’s _History of Civilisation in Scotland_, Volume
II., page 407, 416.
The chief point of difference between this system and that of the
regents is the limiting of the teaching of the professor to a special
subject, out of the many subjects which the regent had to teach. Then
in the newer system, the professor is not usually restricted to the
teaching of specific books, but may arrange and develop his subject
as he thinks fit, and in his lectures contribute what he can to
its progress. Thus the professorial system allows the instructor
full freedom to exert his powers in presenting the various points
and relations of his subject, as well as its special exposition and
practical applications. But the mode of instruction in the universities
will be fully explained in the next volume, in connection with the
history of Scottish philosophy.
In what is usually termed the fine arts, Scotland long remained
behind other modern nations. Indeed the circumstances of the nation
were exceptionally unfavourable to the growth of art. There was too
much internal strife, too few of the elements of wealth, too little
culture or love of refinement, or elevated ideal feeling, among the
Scotch aristocracy, to prompt and encourage art; even though the
Scots naturally possessed aptitude for art, the conditions for its
encouragement and realisation did not exist. Hence the seventeenth
century produced only one eminent Scottish artist, George Jamesone.
George Jamesone, a son of Andrew Jamesone, master mason, was born in
Aberdeen about the year 1588, and was the first Scottish painter who
attained to historic character. He received his early education at the
Grammar School of Aberdeen. On leaving the school in 1601, it seems
probable that he studied for some time at Marischal College. At the age
of eighteen years he probably had fixed on his calling, and commenced
to try his hand and eye in drawing and painting. Strictly speaking,
he could have had no teacher, and only a few primitive examples to
stimulate him. Little is known of Jamesone’s early career as an artist.
“Who first encouraged the young artist with the responsibility of
perpetuating their features on canvas or panel we do not know, but a
test of his quality as a faithful painter would quickly justify their
trust in him, and induce that current of popularity which never forsook
him, but went on ever broadening till his death.... Jamesone’s merit
in a great measure, consists in this, that without examples worthy of
mention, without a master of any kind, and, probably, with very poor
materials――with nothing, in short, but his own sense of the beautiful,
and a strong determination to arrest it by his brush――he reached such
a degree of excellence.... Ten years, then, of assiduous work brought
their legitimate rewards of improvement and appreciation.... Something
like a fatality seems to exist in obliterating almost every historical
proof of Jamesone’s early career and movements. It follows us when we
seek to verify the tradition that he went to Antwerp and entered the
study of the famous Rubens, where he met, among others, the brilliant
Vandyck, the prince of portrait painters. But whilst there is no
positive evidence, there is at the same time no moral doubt. The only
doubt on the subject of his having studied abroad is as to the date.”
It seems probable that Jamesone went abroad in 1618, and returned home
about the year 1620.¹
¹ Bullock’s _Life of Jamesone_, pages 36‒45. 1885.
Jamesone established himself as a portrait-painter in his native city
in 1620, and several references to him occur in the Burgh Records. In
1621 he produced a portrait of John Stewart, Earl of Traquair; it is a
bust portrait representing the Earl as a man past middle age. From this
time onward Jamesone was busily engaged. His early patrons were chiefly
local and north country people; and subsequently some of the southern
nobles and gentry patronised him. On the occasion of the coronation
of Charles I. at Edinburgh in the summer of 1633, Jamesone visited the
capital, and was introduced at Court. Charles sat to Jamesone for his
portrait, and the King was highly pleased with it. It was said that he
presented to the artist a diamond ring from his own hand as a special
mark of his approval. The picture of the King was a full length figure,
but it is lost. Amongst many other persons of rank whom Jamesone met
during his visit to Edinburgh, Sir Colin Campbell of Glenorchy, the
chief of the house of Breadalbane, was the most important. Campbell
became an appreciative patron and a warm friend of the artist. Sir
Colin was a man of culture and an admirer of art. Jamesone painted
many portraits for him; and nineteen specimens of the artist’s work
are still in Taymouth Castle.
In May, 1635, Jamesone acquired from the town council of Aberdeen a
lease of a piece of ground lying along the banks of the Denburn valley,
which he laid out as a garden, and erected a summer house in the middle
of it.
Jamesone’s usual scale of prices was, for a half length portrait,
twenty merks, if he provided a gold-gilded frame the price was twenty
pounds. In making arrangements for a list of sixteen portraits for Sir
Colin Campbell, Jamesone said in the postscript to his letter:――“If
I begin the pictures in July, I will have the sixteen ready about the
last of September.” Sixteen portraits in three months was pretty rapid
work. It has ♦been calculated that “In full employment, and at his own
prices, Jamesone was making a very good annual income of not less than
£1000 or £1500 a year.”¹ Considering the position of the nation this
was a handsome sum.
♦ “beeu” replaced with “been”
¹ Bullock’s _Life of Jamesone_, pages 91‒93.
In Mr. Bullock’s interesting and valuable work a very careful
catalogue of Jamesone’s works is presented, accompanied with much
interesting information. The list includes one hundred and eighty-six
well authenticated works of Jamesone, and indicates where they were
preserved in 1885. Amongst these may be mentioned, a half-length
portrait of the Marquis of Montrose, dated 1640; a half-length portrait
of General Alexander Leslie, the commander-in-chief of the Covenanters;
George, first Marquis of Huntly; George, second Marquis of Huntly; Lord
Loudon; Sir Archibald Johnston of Warriston; and a fine portrait of
William, sixth Earl Marischal. Jamesone was working for the Haddington
family in 1644. In the autumn of that year he died at Edinburgh, and
was interred in the Churchyard of Greyfriars.
Jamesone’s style was comparatively simple and uniform. The greater
part of his portraits are half-lengths. “The face is a three-quarter,
looking to the sitter’s left.” The head is usually somewhat smaller
than life-size, which slightly detracts from the dignity of the
portraits. The drawing of the face is mannered, though presenting a
naturalness of expression; the eyes are well formed and restful; the
nose long; and the corners of the mouth slightly turned up. Hands are
seldom introduced.¹
¹ Bullock’s _Jamesone_, page 115.
His chief merit lay in portraying the human countenance, and in making
it appear as if animated by a soul within; he concentrated his power
on the face and the head: he rarely introduced accessories to arrest
attention.
It was reported that Michael Wright had been a pupil of Jamesone’s,
but there is no evidence of this; and it seems unlikely that he really
trained any one to his art. Wright was an artist of some note, and
went to London when a youth, and it does not appear that he returned to
Scotland. Thomas Murray was born about the year 1666. He studied under
John Riley, painter to King William. Murray was an eminent painter
of portraits, and was very successful in his profession. He died in
1724. John Scougal had an extensive practice as a portrait painter
in Edinburgh in the latter part of the seventeenth century. Three
full-length portraits by him, representing William III., Queen Mary,
and Queen Anne, are in the Glasgow Collection. He died at Prestonpans
in 1730.
The art of architecture showed some progress in the seventeenth century,
despite the unfavourable conditions of society. But there is little
information as to the names of architects in any branch of the art
before the eighteenth century; although the names of certain persons,
called masters of works, occasionally occurs in the national and
local records. Sir William Bruce was the son of Robert, third baron of
Blairhall. He was trained abroad; and appears as architect to Charles
II. in 1671. He prepared designs for rebuilding a part and restoring
the palace of Holyrood. He had intended the interior of the quadrangle
to be finely decorated, but this was not carried out, because “his
Majesty thinks the way proposed for the inner court would be very noble,
but he will not go to that charge; and therefore his pleasure is that
it be plain ashlar, as the front is, with table divisions for storeys;
and if that be deemed too great an expense, his Majesty will rest
satisfied if it be good handsome rough work, with handsome mouldings
for the windows and table divisions for the storeys.” This work was
completed in 1679 at a cost of £127,000 Scots. Sir William planned
Hopetoun House, Linlithgowshire, which was commenced in 1698, but not
completed for several years. He also designed several other mansions
and buildings, and died in 1710.¹
¹ _Notes on Early Scottish Architects, in Transactions of the
Architectural Institute of Scotland_, Volume I., pages 64‒67.