Education in England in the Middle Ages Part 20

The doctrines a.s.sociated with Wycliffe seem to have made great progress among the teachers of the time. This is not a matter for surprise.

Facilities for education were abundant and education was free. Either by means of begging, or by exhibitions, or through social interest, a student might be maintained without expense to himself until his course was completed. What happened then? Owing to the system of patronage prevailing in the Church, the clerk found that all the lucrative positions were usually given to men who on account of their social connections could command influence, regardless of their merits or demerits. This is brought out clearly when we consider the presentees to benefices by patrons whom Bishop Grosseteste refused to inst.i.tute. One presentee was refused by the bishop because he was a "boy still in Ovid";[749] another on the ground that the young man was practically illiterate;[750] in answer to a request of the papal legate, to inst.i.tute a son of Earl Ferrers to a living, the bishop asks to be excused; when pressed, he suggests that the son of Earl Ferrers should simply draw the revenues of the living and appoint a vicar to discharge the spiritual duties.[751]

It is not a matter of wonder that the views of Wycliffe found ready supporters among those of the clergy who were of a low social origin. They considered themselves qualified for ecclesiastical positions which they had little hope of ever filling; hence they drifted to the teaching profession, and in their bitterness of feeling would use the opportunity they possessed to propagate among their scholars the new ideas they had acquired.

It is on an hypothesis of the kind which we have outlined that it is possible to interpret the legislation against Lollard teachers which was enacted in the fifteenth century. In 1400, an Act was pa.s.sed which provided that:--

"None of such sect and wicked doctrines and opinions shall make any conventicles, or in any wise hold or exercise schools."[752]

Any offender against this Act or anyone who in any way a.s.sisted or supported an offender, "shall before the people in an high place be burnt."

In 1406 a pet.i.tion was presented to the king by the Prince of Wales which drew attention to the propagation of teaching against the temporal possessions of the clergy by certain teachers in "lieux secretes appellez escoles,"[753] and prayed that no man or woman of any sect or doctrine which was contrary to the catholic faith should hold school. The rigour with which this commission was enforced is ill.u.s.trated by the commission which was issued to the prior of St. Mary's, Coventry, and to the mayor and bailiffs of that city ordering them to arrest and imprison all offenders found there.

The spread of Lollardism among teachers is further ill.u.s.trated by the "Const.i.tutions" of Archbishop Arundel issued in 1408. He forbade "masters and all who teach boys or others the arts of grammar and that instruct men in the first sciences" to teach theology except in accordance with the customary teaching of the Church, and also prohibited them from allowing their scholars to select as subjects for disputations any topics relating to the catholic faith or the sacraments of the Church.[754]

As the existing legislation was apparently not sufficient to effect the desired purpose, another Act was pa.s.sed in 1414. By this Act "all of them which hold any errors or heresies as Lollards" and who sustained it in "sermons, schools, conventicles, congregations, and confederacies" were to be arrested.[755]

We have not found it possible to trace the effects of this legislation.

(3) We pa.s.s next to consider the Educational Legislation during the later Middle Ages. In our summary of the economic condition of this country at the opening of this period we referred to the scarcity of labour consequent upon the Black Death.[756] As a result an Act was pa.s.sed in 1388, which provided that "he or she which used to labour at the Plough and Cart till they be of the age of twelve years, from henceforth they shall abide at the same labour without being put to any Mystery or Handicraft; and if any Covenant or Bond of Apprentice be from henceforth made to the contrary, the same shall be taken for void."[757] The reason for this Act is embodied in the statute itself: "there is so great scarcity of Labourers and other Servants of Husbandry that the Gentlemen and other People of the realm be greatly impoverished for the cause thereof."

Either on account of the prosperity of the labouring cla.s.ses due to the increase of wages resulting from the demand for labour in the later fourteenth century, or to avoid the provisions of the Act we have just described, or for the purpose of making progress in social status, the custom of sending children to schools seems to have developed. As a result, the Commons of England pet.i.tioned the king in 1391 "de ordeiner et comander, que null neif ou Vileyn mette ses Enfantz de cy en avant a Escoles pur eux avancer par Clergie et ce en maintenance et salvation de l'honour de toutz Frankes du Roialme."[758]

Mr. de Montmorency suggests four reasons for this action on the part of the Commons.

(1) The Commons "were anxious to check the further increase in the number of unbeneficed clergy and of those whom the bishops could claim as subject to ecclesiastical law."

(2) Lollardism would be very attractive to the newly educated and "the Legislature must have realised the revolutionary possibility of the first and n.o.bler Reformation."

(3) "The jurisdiction of Rome increased with the increase of popular education," consequently, this "was a serious consideration for the patriotic baronage of England."

(4) If a man became ordained, his services would be lost to the manor.[759]

These reasons do not appear to be very conclusive. The first implies an opposition between the clergy and laity which was non-existent; the second and the third are contradictory. If the development of education fostered Lollardism (which is probable, though it has not yet been demonstrated) it could scarcely be regarded as equally favourable to Rome.

Further, the desire of limiting the jurisdiction of the Church could have been gratified more simply by the abolition of the "privilege of clergy."

His fourth reason is a more plausible one but it must be noted that the consent of the lord of the manor was required before children could be sent to schools and before ordination.[760] For this reason, legislation would scarcely be necessary to effect this purpose.

The more probable reason for this pet.i.tion of the commons is that the diminution of the supply of labour had caused employers to become fearful of future possibilities, and that they were afraid that the result of sending children to school would be that the number of those who would be prepared to act as "hewers of wood and drawers of water" would be seriously diminished.

We have just referred to the custom that villeins were not allowed to send their children to school without the consent of their lords. This custom was abolished by a statute of 1406 which provided that "chascun homme ou femme de quele estate ou condicion qil soit, soit fraunc de mettre son fitz ou file dapprendre lettereure a quelconque escole que leur plest deinz le Roialme."[761] The same statute provided that labourers could not apprentice their children to trades and manufactures in the towns unless they owned land worth 1 a year, probably about 40 a year now.

It is difficult to understand the reasons for this legislation. The Feudal System was already crumbling and its complete collapse was not far off. It cannot therefore be a.s.sumed that the Act was pa.s.sed merely to remove a grievance, because the grievance itself was probably lightly felt. It is just possible that the Act might have been intended to facilitate the process by which it was sought to make good the deficiency of priests occasioned by the Black Death. The reference to "daughters," however, makes this suggestion improbable. There is also the possibility that the phrase "dapprendre lettereure" meant an education which would provide for "G.o.dly and virtuous living," which, as we have shown in the preceding chapter, was becoming recognised as a part of the educational ideal.

The years 1446-7 are important in the history of education in England. In 1446 the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of London pet.i.tioned the king for permission to erect two new grammar schools in London; the permission was granted and the Letters Patent duly issued.[762] In 1447, a pet.i.tion was similarly sent to the Commons by four London Rectors for permission to set up four new grammar schools.[763] As we have already considered these pet.i.tions in the chapter dealing with the question of the monopoly of school keeping,[764] it will not be necessary for us to deal further with the topic here.

We have now brought to a close our exposition of the educational administration in England in the Middle Ages. Until comparatively recently it was generally believed that the educational provision available in this country could not be traced back further than to the efforts of the Reformers of the Church in the sixteenth century, and to the influence of the Renaissance. We are now able to realise that the two centuries preceding the Reformation, at least, were a period in which facilities for education in England were widespread and practically open freely to all.

The educational effect of the Reformation--even though undesigned--was to remove from the great ma.s.s of the people the opportunities for attending school which had previously been available for them. It is also extremely probable that the significance of the Renaissance upon the educational development of this country has been considerably exaggerated; this, however, is a question which still awaits investigation.

APPENDIX.

WORKS CONSULTED.

A.--SOURCES.

Aelfric: _Homilies_ (with translation by B. Thorpe), 2 vols., Lond., 1844-6.

Alcuin: _Opera Omnia Patrologiae Cursus Complexus_, ed. Migne, vols. C., CI., 1851.

Aldhelm: _Opera_, ed. J. A. Giles, Oxon., 1844.

Alfred the Great: _Preface to Gregory's Pastoral Care_, ed. H. Sweet (Early English Text Society), 50.

_Ancient Laws and Inst.i.tutes of England_, ed. B. Thorpe, (Rec. Com.) Lond., 1840.

_Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, The_, ed. B. Thorpe, 2 vols. (R. S.), Lond., 1861.

_Annales Monastici_, ed. H. R. Luard, 5 vols. (R. S.), Lond., 1864-6-9.

_a.s.serius de Rebus Gestis Alfredi_, ed. W. H. Stevenson, Lond., 1904.

Bacon, Roger: _Opera Inedita_, ed. J. S. Brewer (R. S.), Lond., 1859.

Basil, St.: _Opera_, 3 vols., Paris, 1839.

_Becket, Thomas a, Materials for a History of_, ed. J. C. Robertson, J. B.

Sheppard (R. S.), 7 vols., Lond., 1885.

Bede: _Opera Historica_, ed. C. Plummer, 2 vols., Oxon., 1876.

_Beverley Minster, Memorials of_, ed. A. F. Leach (Surtees Society), Durham, 1898.

Cardwell, E.: _Synodalia_, 2 vols., Oxon., 1842.

Cardwell, E.: _Doc.u.mentary Annals of the Church of England_, 2 vols., Oxon., 1844.

_Charters and Doc.u.ments ill.u.s.trating the History of the Cathedral City of Sarum_, 1100-1300, ed. W. D. Macray (R. S.), 1891.

Chaucer, Geoffrey: _Complete Works_, ed. W. W. Skeat, Oxon., 1894-7.

_Chronica Jocelini de Brakelonda_, ed. J. G. Rakewood (Camden Society Publications, XIII.).

_Chronica Monasterii St. Albani, Johannis de Trokelowe, Chronica et Annales_, ed. H. T. Riley, 2 vols. (R. S.), Lond., 1866.

_Chronica Monasterii Gesta Abbatum Monasterii Sancti Albani_, ed. H. T.