The contrast between the cathedral school of Chartres and the University
of Paris illustrates the change from the twelfth to the thirteenth
century. The former has been spoken of in a previous chapter, where its
story was brought down to the times of its great teachers, Bernard and
Thierry, of whom we shall have to speak in connection with the teaching of
grammar and the reading of classical authors. The school flourished
exceedingly until the middle of the twelfth century.[174] By that time the
schools of Paris had received an enormous impetus from the popularity of
Abaelard, and scholars had begun to push thither from all quarters. But it
was not till the latter part of the century that the University, with its
organization of Masters and Faculties, began visibly to emerge out of the
antecedent cathedral school.[175] Chartres was a home of letters; and
there Latin literature was read enthusiastically. But in Paris Abaelard
was pre-eminently a dialectician; and after he died, through those decades
when the University was coming into existence, the tide of study set
irresistibly toward theology and metaphysics. Students and masters of the
Faculty of Arts outnumbered all the other Faculties; nevertheless,
counting not by tumultuous numbers, but by intellectual strength, the
great matter was Theology, and the majority of the Masters in the Arts
were students in the divine science. The Arts were regarded as a
preparatory discipline. So through its great period, which roughly
coincides with the thirteenth century, the University of Paris was for all
Europe the supreme seat of Dialectic, Metaphysics, and Theology, and yet
no kindly nurse of _belles lettres_.
The tendencies of Oxford were not quite the same as those of Paris, yet
Latin literature as such does not seem to have been cultivated there for
its own fair sake. This apparently was unaffected by the fact that a
movement for “close” or exact scholarship existed at the English
university. Grosseteste, its first great chancellor, teacher and inspirer,
unquestionably introduced, or encouraged, the study of Greek; and his
famous pupil, Roger Bacon, was a serious Greek scholar, and wrote a
grammar of that tongue. But neither Grosseteste nor Bacon appears to have
been moved by any literary interest in Greek literature; both one and the
other urged the importance of Greek, and of Hebrew too and Arabic, in
order to reach a surer knowledge of Scripture and Aristotle. They sought
to open the veritable founts of theology and natural knowledge, an
intelligent aim indeed, but quite unliterary. In spirit both these men
belong to the thirteenth century, not to the twelfth.[176]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account