The University of Cambridge ...

D.Jerent character of Dr Still, his successor

Baker's criticism on two of their main features

Bl brought into Parliament to prevent the buying and selling

of fellowships and scholarships

Etabeth refuses her assent to the measure

Lepresentations on the subject made by Whitgift to Burghley

Art in relation to these practices passed in 1589

Tra.ty College and Westminster School

Petition of Trinity College to Cecil, June, 1569

The grievance partially redressed but only for a few years

Whitzt elected to the see of Worcester.

Ile recommends Howland as his successor at Trinity

PACK

ib.

8: las appointed at Trinity and Howland at St John's

letter to Burghley on the occasion.

taft's influence in attracting the sons of noble families to

lie encourages beneficed fellows to reside at the college rather
than at their cures

Harale at Trinity favorable to the maintenance of order

I's entception of his duty as defined by himself

Figs with which his departure was regarded by many at

Cambridge.

mstances of his departure from the university

ters might have been better spared.

t in the university after his departure

tament of Gabriel Harvey

ib.

The site of affairs at Cambridge far more favorable than that

at Oxford.

ib.

This corroborated by Whitgift and by Giordano Bruno

STATE OF THE CONTINENTAL UNIVERSITIES

Strassburg, Heidelberg, Leyden, and Paris

Evidence of a growing spirit of independence at Cambridge

Impatience manifested in the university at royal nominations

Case of Henry Copinger at Magdalene College

Character of his successor, Degory Nichols

Case of Booth, a nominee of Burghley at Corpus Christi

Dr Norgate's letters to Burghley

Booth declines the ordeal of an examination

Remonstrance addressed to Burghley by the university on

the evils resulting from the practico.

Dr Perne refuses to admit a royal nominee at Peterhouse

The same society refuses to elect John Tenison

Renewed activity of the Puritan party

Proposal to print Cartwright's translation of Travers' Disciplina

in England

RE-ESTABLISHMENT OF THE UNIVERSITY PRESS

Hostility of the Stationers' Company

Thomas Thomas appointed university printer

Interference of the Stationers' Company

Remonstrances of the university

ib.

ib.

Their letter to Burghley

John Aylmer, bishop of London

Burghley's cautious rejoinder

Attitude of the university

His conduct in relation to the Puritan press

He concurs with the Stationers' Company in urging Burghley

to suppress the Cambridge press

Burghley finally sanctions the establishment of the university

press

Reviving spirit of the Puritan party at Cambridge

Increasing importance of the questions raised by the party

Influence still exercised by them in the university

Motives whereby many of their opponents were at this time

actuated

Richard Greenham

His pupil, ROBErt Browne

Browne's career at Cambridge

lle retires to Norwich

300

ib.

PAGE

the post

Together with Robert Harrison of Corpus, he leaves England

Dissensiors among his followers at Amsterdam

The tendencies of Separatism afford a seeming justification of

the policy of Whitgift.

.

A new translation of the Disciplina printed at the university
press

Travers a favorite of Lord Burghley

His general reputation

His relation to Whitgift

His sympathies with the Genevan reformers

Significance of the appearance of this new version of the Dis-

ciplina at Cambridge.

Whitgift's letter to Burghley on the appearance of the volume

The Mastership of the Temple.

Richard Alvey.

Whitgift dissuades Burghley from appointing Travers to

App intment of Richard Hooker

Efforts of both universities to obtain representatives in Parlia-

ib.

Petition to Parliament to allow fellowships at colleges to be held

for the purpose of more protracted study

The proposal implied the endowment of research

Its scope according to the views of the bishops

Tear couster opinion.

Thear unqualified condemnation of the proposal, chiefly on the

ground that it would be prejudicial to the study of

divinity.

Conclusion to which their objections would seem to point .

Permanent consequences of the rejection of the proposal

FOUNDATION OF EMMANUEL COLLEGE, Jan. 1584

SIR WALTER MILDMAY

His attachment to the college and to the university

lle is accused by Elizabeth of designing to found a Puritan

College.

Ciret mstances that might tend to justify the suspicion

The original statutes of the society

Preference given to natives of Essex and Northampton

General design of the college

Its l'uritan character.

Eminent Puritans educated at the college

fabitual disregard shown by the society for the disciplino

of the Established Church

Lengthened exclusion of the collego from the academic

'cycle'.

High reputation of society during the Commonwealth

Sir Walter concurs with the bishops in wishing to dis-

courago long residence at college on the part of the

fellows.

Subsequent history of the statute

Conditions eventually attached to the tenure of college

ib.

Sermon by John Smith of Christ's against the performance of

plays on Sunday evenings

The universities combine to protect their presses against the

piracy of the London Stationers

THOMAS THOMAS .

His Latin Dictionary

He publishes the Harmonia Confessionum

The last election of one who was not a Head to the vice-chan-

He tries to expel Everard Digby from his fellowship at St

John's

Meetings of Puritan leaders at St John's in order to revise

The predominant theology at Cambridge in the latter part of
the sixteenth century eminently Calvinistic

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors]

Barret is cited before the vice-chancellor and Heads

ib.

PAGE

He is induced to make a public recantation

His enemies are dissatisfied with his recantation and he is

again cited. .

He appeals to Whitgift

He complains of the injustice of his persecution.

He had been accused of attributing blasphemy to Beza

Puritan

His writings against the Puritans

Both Bancroft and Whitgift assume a less deferential attitude

towards Beza

Barret avails himself of this change in Whitgift's views and is

to some extent defended by him.

The vice-chancellor and Heads vindicate their proceedings to

ib.

They allege that their efforts towards the repression of heterodoxy

had been attended with success in the university.

Whitgift's reply; he accuses the university of ingratitude.

Ile asserts his right of interference as granted by the Crown,

but denies that the leads have power to decide in

questions of doctrine.

Ile exculpates himself with regard to Barret

He betrays his consciousness that Barret's doctrine could not be

reconciled with that then professed by the English Church

Conduct of Robert Some

335

ib.

Earret is summoned by Whitgift to London and consents to

Bradshaw's account of the library at this period

Ea of John Overall to the Regius professorship

wn of Richard Clayton to the mastership of St John's

Books