celebrity were every day rearing hosts of pupils, and hundreds of these came boldly forward to claim the post of teachers themselves, the Chancellor needed new help. His personal right to examine the candidate was acknowledged and exercised even long after the middle of the thirteenth century; but even at the end of the twelfth the custom had grown up for the teachers themselves to examine the scholars and recommend to the Chancellor for his licence those whom they deemed competent. The natural progress of events would of itself recommend this to every unprejudiced mind as the solution needed. Let us suppose a Chancellor superannuated, or overprest with business, or too indolent to keep up with the new movement. How could he maintain his dignity in conducting a sham examination of acute young men, fired with enthusiasm at their supposed progress in science, if he were unable to cope with them on their own ground? Things did not go on then, any more than now, according to the letter of ordinances it would have been wonderful had the Chancellor not desired to modify his right, without renouncing it. Thus reserving to himself the exercise of it in extraordinary cases, he ordinarily trusted to the testimony of the teachers. That this natural middle course was taken, is proved by original documents of the first half of the thirteenth century. Yet it cannot have been then less than a century old; for the Papal Bulls on this subject

do not imply that there has been recent innovation, and breathe, throughout, a conservative spirit. But (as we might expect) by the end of the thirteenth century the Chancellor's right to examine dies a natural death; and thenceforth he does not grant the licence to those whom the Teachers recommend. It is not important, nor possible, to settle exactly when the examination fell, finally and exclusively, into the hands of the Universities and their "Faculties," but it was in the course of the thirteenth century. It must have been equally desired by Teachers and Scholars. The Chancellor, an Episcopal Officer, had long stood without their circle, and must have been regarded by them as an incompetent judge.

10. Similar developement in the Abbey of
St. Geneviève.

In the Abbey of Saint Geneviève, a like change in the Chancellor's position took place, about the same time. Circumstances may have led one teacher or other to desire to fix his School-not between the two bridges on the Island of Nôtre Dame where was the principal seat of the Studium Generale, but on the left bank of the Seine, upon the domain of the Abbey and liable only to its prohibition. (For they thus evaded all conflict with the Bishop and his Chancellor, who had no

jurisdiction there.) It would also be to the interest* of the Abbey to encourage such a Colony. The competition, then, of the two Chancellors would promote the independence of the University, while every indulgence granted by one was quoted as precedent to the other.

§ 11. The Scientific and National States.

We must then abandon the idea, that the Universities arose from the spontaneous action of men, who stept beyond and set at nought the ecclesiastical organization. Their independence was not originally contemplated; but it was in great measure achieved by the energies of the men, by whom they were raised into so flourishing a state. Led by a free and inward call, these master-spirits of the age won their emancipation from the restrictions which had now become empty forms; and herein they were not only tolerated, but welcomed with honor.

The state of things which we have described is characterized by the general rule, (allowance being made for exceptions) that the licence to teach was granted by the Chancellor, upon the recommendation of the Teachers. This may be called the

* Fees, though forbidden, were taken, and many indirect advantages accrued both to the Abbey authorities, and to the whole quarter of the town.

scientific in distinction to the national state.* Under the former, an aristocracy of the teachers unfolded itself; of the latter, the pupils appear as the natural supporters. Moreover, while the scientific developement advanced, the Faculties simultaneously received a fuller organization.

When thousands of students of different nations flocked to Paris, methodic arrangement was needed for preventing riot and confusion. That the Chancellor or any Secular authority organized a complete body of Statutes for this purpose, no one will imagine, unless he is ignorant of the spirit and manners of those times and prepossessed with notions of modern police. Matters went on as they best might, till something insufferable occurred; and then, regulations arose for the exigency. The rules to be observed during the time of Lectures, settled themselves by tradition and precedent. Outside the Lecture Room, the academicians fell into clans, based upon community of language and manners, and technically called nations;† which assumed spontaneously an independent organization.

None from without desired to interfere with them, so long as they adhered to decorum: but as the clans had a community of interest, against the townsmen as well as against the teachers, they naturally united into a greater whole, with a more comprehensive inward constitution. Primitively republican as it was, there was yet in it an

* [This word is presently explained.] See Bulæus, i. 250.

aristocratic tendency among its elder and more experienced men. The four nations in Paris are known to have elected superintendents called Proctors, who, with a Rector* as their head (also chosen by all the nations) presided over the Corpus Scholarium. None who understand those times, would think of seeking documentary accounts of the origin of such arrangements. In the beginning of the thirteenth century they appear as the natural order; named indeed only in contrast to the scientific constitution, which then assumed the preponderance, though its commencement was much earlier. Wherever, as in the Italian system, the teachers were primitively independent of the Church; they became proportionably dependent on their pupils, and the national organization prevailed. Where (as in Bologna) no licence to teach was needed at all, there the recommendation of the teachers was equally needless: and, as it rested with the scholars to decide to whom they would listen, it soon fell to them to decide who ought to teach.

*The Rector was afterwards a common head to the nations and to the Teacher-Aristocracy. I confess I am not certain that he was ever head of the nations only.