The visitation of 1588 revealed the limited impact of educational reform at St Andrews, but following this there was a marked rise in Melville’s fortunes, both at court and in St Andrews. This included his assumption in 1590 of the role of rector of the university. However, the second half of the 1590s saw Melville fall from grace as rapidly as he had ascended. The royal commission that visited the university in the summer of 1597 not only deprived Melville of the rectorate, but also severely curtailed his freedom of movement and involvement in ecclesiastical politics, and attempted to bring the administration of the university entirely under royal control. Their actions were part of a wider attempt by the royal government to arrest the momentum of the Presbyterian party in Kirk affairs, which James VI believed had sponsored a riot in Edinburgh against him on 17 December 1596. The lead commissioner and chancellor of the university, John Lindsay of Menmuir, also had a personal grudge against the St Andrews Presbytery for his humiliation in the pulpit by one of their ministers late in the preceding year. However, the proceedings of the royal commission were not entirely arbitrary or politically motivated. On the contrary, unpublished draft proposals for the overhaul of the university’s administration show that it clearly aimed to make St Andrews a public institution, free from the ancient privileges awarded to it by the Catholic church and answerable to government for its conduct. Moreover, accusations denouncing Melville’s performance as rector, though perhaps influenced by political factors, appear to have had some real foundation if the gaps in university record-keeping and administration during his tenure are anything to go by.
Politics and teaching at St Andrews, 1588-1596
In the aftermath of the events off the English coast in the summer of 1588, and amidst a growing fear of encroaching Catholic and Jesuit influence in Scottish affairs, the king and Kirk enjoyed a period of uneasy co-operation. James VI accepted a growing level of support and advice from the Kirk in state matters, and also showed some willingness to deal with the recusant Earls Huntly, Erroll and Angus, who were seen as the most pressing Catholic threat to the country. When Huntly was found to be
carrying out secret negotiations with King Philip of Spain in 1589 he was warded in Edinburgh castle and, following a rumour on his release that he and the Earl of Errol were planning to take an army into southern Scotland, he surrendered without a fight to a military force led by James VI at the Brig of Dee. In the following year when James sailed to Denmark to meet his bride Princess Anne, he left the country in the hands of a coalition of ministers and Privy Council members, with a prominent position in government given to the Presbyterian minister Robert Bruce. On his return he ratified a range of anti-Catholic legislation and supportive measures for the Kirk that gained him a standing ovation at the General Assembly in August 1591, and in 1592 passed the ‘Golden Act’ that legally recognised the Presbyterian system of church government.
A further conspiracy led by the Catholic earls, known as the ‘Affair of the Spanish Blanks’, came to light early in 1593. Despite some reluctance to persecute the earls, James bowed to pressure from both Parliament and Kirk and took a military force against them to the north-east in autumn 1594.1 It is a telling indicator of how close the Presbyterian party and the king had become that Melville and a number of other ministers accompanied him, and it was due to Melville’s rather merciless stance against the earls in council meetings that the king slighted Huntly and Errol’s castles at Strathbogie and Slains.2 By the beginning of the following year the earls had left the country, along with the king’s chief political rival Francis Stewart fifth Earl of Bothwell. Relations between the government and the Kirk grew to such an extent that the presbyteries worked with local government to organise local militias who were to assemble in the event of a Catholic invasion. By the beginning of 1596 there was even discussion of a new system of ecclesiastical funding that would give the Kirk political representation. The ‘constant platt’, devised by the king’s secretary John Lindsay of Menmuir, advocated the creation of 51 parliamentary representatives drawn from the presbyteries. These representatives would replace the surviving bishops, abbots and other ecclesiastical commendators as they died out, and would result in far tighter control by the Kirk over existing church lands.3
1
MacDonald, Jacobean Kirk, 39-59; Donaldson, James V-James VII, 186-196; R. Grant, ‘The Brig o’ Dee affair, the sixth Earl of Huntly and the politics of the Counter-Reformation’, in The Reign of James VI, 93-109.
2
JMAD, 318-319; Calderwood, V, 357. 3
The growing relationship between king and Kirk in the early 1590s mirrors in many ways the complex one between the king and Melville. It appears that following the heated events of the preceding decade a measure of rapprochement grew between the two men. Anecdotal evidence of their meetings, captured by James Melville and David Calderwood, shows that Melville enjoyed a great deal of liberty with James VI, taking an active role in several council meetings and exhorting him to deal with the threat posed by Catholic recusancy.4 Melville’s growing friendship with the king is reflected by the fact that he wrote two lengthy poems for court events in this period. The ‘Small Garland’ (Stephaniskion) was recited before Queen Anne at her coronation in May 1590, and the ‘Birth of the Scoto-Brittanic Prince’ (Principis Scoti- Britannorum Natalia) was written to celebrate the birth of Prince Henry in 1594. Both poems were full of praise for the Stewart line and extolled the importance of a king to a well-ordered society, and were so well liked by James VI that he ordered their immediate publication.5
As Melville grew in favour at court, he consolidated his place in St Andrews, particularly in St Mary’s. Melville was appointed rector of the university in March 1590 following the death of Robert Wilkie, and he would hold this post unchallenged for seven years.6 Melville also continued to hold his post as principal of St Mary’s. The combined authority of both roles gave him a free hand in dictating policy and staffing at the college, which he used to secure the appointment of John Johnston in 1593.7 Johnston was initially opposed as second master by John Caldcleuch,8 who continued to be difficult and argumentative towards Melville. Caldcleuch was incensed at the intrusion of Johnston, and one of the few papers surviving for St Mary’s in this period records his list of grievances at this given in before the Privy Council. However, Caldcleuch was not only unsuccessful in his petition, but was removed from his post for disrupting the college and attempting to appeal unlawfully to the civil government above the decision of Melville and his assessors.9
It is easy to see why Melville would be keen to employ Johnston, as they shared much in common. Johnston was originally educated at King’s College, 4 Calderwood, V, 288-289, 330-331; JMAD, 313, 318-320. 5 Williamson/McGinnis, 31-32, 276-287. 6
Acta Rectorum, 109; M’Crie, 153-154. 7
Johnston first appears on the presbytery on 19 April 1593. StAPR, 125. 8
Caldcleuch was still a member of the college staff as late as 19 October 1592, as he was still part of the presbytery in his capacity as a master of St Mary’s. StAPR, 110.
9JMAD
Aberdeen, and like Melville had studied in several institutions on the Continent. Unlike Melville, his studies led him not to France but to reformed centres in Switzerland and the Palatinate including Rostock, Helmstedt, and Heidelberg. Johnston and his fellow Aberdeen alumnus, Robert Howie, also shared Melville’s distinction of being the first to print a work by George Buchanan. Melville had shepherded Buchanan’s History through the press in the early 1580s, while Johnston and Howie prepared the first two editions of his De Sphaera in 1586 and 1587 at Herborn from manuscripts in their possession.10
Johnston also shared Melville’s interest in Ramism, if his early published works are any indicator. While Johnston published a very traditional set of theses physiologicae on Aristotle’s Physics during his regency at Heidelberg in the later 1580s, he also wrote a pamphlet in response to criticisms of Ramus by his former colleague at Helmstedt, Owen Günther. In 1589, in consultation with Johannes Piscator, he also produced an introductory manual for the study of theology. This manual apparently used the Ramist ‘method’ in its organisation and featured various ‘tabulae’ that logically expounded the main heads of doctrine.11 Unfortunately, neither of these latter two works has survived and their contents are only known from scattered references in Johnston’s correspondence. However, they do suggest that Johnston, like his elder colleague Melville, engaged with the works of Ramus during his Continental education.
In early 1592 the Zurich linguist and scholar Casper Waser visited St Andrews, which caused a considerable stir among both the town and gown community. Born in 1565, Waser had matriculated at Heidelberg on 1 May 1585 and at Basel in November 1586, and it was at the former that he likely made the acquaintance of Johnston. The pair met again in London between December 1591 and March 1592, where Johnston had been forced to stop on his journey home due to serious illness. Waser was visiting Britain as tutor to the young German noble J. P. Hainzel von Degerstein, and in the first half of 1592 the two travelled to Scotland, eventually getting as far north as Aberdeen. Waser and his young charge paid a visit to St Andrews between 12 and 17 May, and made the acquaintance of Melville and the ministers and councilmen of the city, who continued to correspond with Waser
10
Cameron, Letters, pp. xvii, xx, xxv-xxvi. 11
after his return home.12 A batch of letters sent to him in February 1594 give a number of insights into academic life at St Andrews, particularly at St Mary’s, and the list of correspondents is itself revealing.13 A letter to Waser from David Monypenny, the dean of arts and second master of St Salvator’s, shows he was spending considerable time with his colleagues at St Mary’s. He had clearly become a good friend to Melville, whom he describes as his magnificus rector.14 The alliance of Monypenny with the ‘Melvillian’ faction in the university suggests that either he supported Presbyterianism, or that the underlying tensions between him and James Martine were still unresolved and Monypenny saw this alliance as another opportunity to undermine him. Another of the correspondents was John Kennedy, the young fifth Earl of Cassilis. Cassilis, who was born in 1574/5,15 had succeeded to the title at an early age and was served heir to his father in 1588. He matriculated in St Salvator’s at some point in the late 1580s, and was enrolled as a divinity student by the time of Waser’s visit in early 1592, for he is described in another letter to Waser as having lived in St Mary’s for ‘another year’ (apud nos in Collegio Theologico alterum annum vivit). Cassilis, as hereditary presenter to many of the bursaries and prebendaries of St Salvator’s, would have been another valuable ally for Melville. His letter to Waser shows a young man who was extremely devout and deeply interested in theology.
One of the only fragments alluding to the actual content of teaching in this period is found in a letter by Johnston to Waser, though it may be a throwaway comment. There is nothing concrete to show that Hebrew, Chaldaic and Syriac were being taught to the students in the early 1590s, but Johnston notes in a terse comment that Waser’s Institutio Linguae Syrae ex Optimis Scriptionibus, published at Leyden in 1594, had been ‘seen and tried out’ at the college (Grammatica tua Syra nobis visa est et probata).16 Whether this means it was actually being used as part of a teaching programme in near Eastern languages at the college, or was merely browsed through by staff, is unknown. However, it is worth noting that advanced biblical languages
12
Cameron, Letters, pp. xxxv, lvii, lxviii, 92, 304-305. 13
Cameron, Letters, 90-93 (Johnston to Waser, 19 February 1594), 360 (Cassilis to Waser, 12 February), 361-362 (Monypenny to Waser, 13 February).
14
However, this was also a standard title used in many German academies and universities. I am grateful to Professor Howard Hotson for this observation.
15
A. R. MacDonald, ‘Kennedy, John, fifth Earl of Cassillis (1574/5–1615)’ ODNB
[http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/15377, accessed 14 March 2008]. Cameron cites Cassilis as being born in 1567: Letters, 93.
16
were clearly under discussion at St Mary’s, even if there is no way to prove they were fully taught.
Perhaps heeding the warnings of the visitation commission to maintain better records, divinity students began to be formally recorded after 1588 in a register separate from the matriculation roll found in the Acta Rectorum.17 Although those recorded do not represent the entire divinity student body,18 it is clear that new entrants to the college between 1588 and 159619 must have been few in number, fluctuating between a low of three entrants per year (in 1594) and a high of 13 (in 1593). A tentative analysis based on recurring names in the register suggests that while approximately 40 percent of this group (29 students) stayed for just one year, around 50 percent stayed for two, three or four years (16, 9 and 13 students respectively), with just under ten percent staying on for five or six years (four and three students). While this suggests that many students were merely gaining some practical theological ‘polish’ following their MAs, a significant percentage were staying on for the equivalent of an extended period of theological study.
The undergraduate origins of these students, where known, also reveal some interesting trends. Out of 74 known entrants to St Mary’s in the same period, just over 50 percent (38 students)20 came from outside St Andrews or cannot be traced elsewhere in the university records. 31 percent (23 entrants) came from St Leonard’s, while just under 18 percent (13 entrants) came from St Salvator’s. The far lower entrant rate from St Salvator’s again suggests an underlying hostility towards St Mary’s, and to Melville, from Martine and the other conservative masters at the college.
Melville and the other masters of theology were also heavily involved in the St Andrews Presbytery, the ‘appellate court’ and jurisdictional superior to the local kirk session.21 The presbytery was a particular concern of St Mary’s and the local ministers, as statutes in 1586 and 1590 confirmed that regents in philosophy could not sit on it, but only those holding the ecclesiastical offices of ‘pastor’ or ‘doctor’.22
17
UYUY152/2. Although known as ‘Howie’s Book’ because it features many entries by Howie from his period as principal, the title is misleading, as the register was started long before his arrival at the university.
18
See comments on the student register in the 1597 visitation, discussed below. 19
See appendix. 20
30 are unknown; eight are recorded as matriculating into the University from St Mary’s. Smart,
Register. 21
StAPR, pp. iv-vi. 22StAPR
Melville was moderator of the presbytery between October 1593 and April 1594 and on at least one other occasion, and there are numerous references to his acting as a commissioner and visitor for presbytery business.23 By far the most important function of the presbytery in relation to the university was in trying the doctrine and preaching of divinity students and ministers in the weekly ‘exercise.’ This could take the form of either a public disputation or lecture before the town congregation or an assembly of students, or a private session before the presbytery where a text would be subjected to systematic exposition and discussion. In the case of the latter one minister or student was proposed as ‘maker’ or chief speaker on the text, while a second would ‘add’ further points on its broader themes without the detailed exegesis. The person chosen to ‘add’ became the ‘maker’ in the following week.24 This programme can be seen in action in the example of the divinity student Nathaniel Harlaw. On 15 April 1590, Harlaw was given eight days to prepare a sermon on John 3 which he would give at 2PM ‘in the New Colledge scholis.’ Two weeks later he was given the same length of time to prepare for a further public trial of ‘the heads of catechisme’. Having passed this, Harlaw was then ordered on 21 May ‘to studie to Calvinis cathechisme and to give ane compt of the questionis and answeris thairof being, and for him places of scripture and ressonis to conferm the said answeris’, to be tried on 1 August. Harlaw was clearly successful, for he was appointed to the ministry at Ormiston in the following year. Similarly, Robert Yule was recommended to the parishioners at Largo after being found to be ‘indewit with guid qualeteis’ in February 1592, and the presbytery minutes record a number of other students who underwent the same process.25 Divinity students who were sufficiently skilled were also occasionally allowed to participate in the practical work of the church. On 7 March 1594 licence was given to any of the theology students who had been on the ‘exercise’ to help Andrew Moncrieff dispense the sacrament to his parish at communion.26
23StAPR
, pp. xxiv-xxv, 41 (26 March 1590, visitation to Abdie to examine Nans Murit for witchcraft), 47 (30 April, visitation to Auchtermoonzie), 52 (18 June, trial of religious faith of Master of Angus), 57 (3 September, mediation of feud between Laird of Craighall and the ‘guidman of Callinch’), 68 (15 October, visit to Laird of Forret).
24StAPR
, pp. xii-xiv; Kirk, ‘“Melvillian” movement’, 374-378. 25StAPR
, 43, 47, 48, 50 (John Wemyss and Nathaniel Harlaw), 56 (trial and censure of ministers), 68- 69 (Robert Buchanan), 93, 95, 98 (Robert Yule), 113-114, 118 (John Dykes, Gilbert Ramsay), 131-132 (Alexander Forsyth), 133 (John Kinnear).
26StAPR , 156.
Outwith St Mary’s, Melville’s influence in church and town affairs also grew considerably. By 1591 his erstwhile enemy Patrick Adamson had fallen completely from royal favour, owing to the massive debts he had incurred in England, and his continued changeability towards church politics.27 Disgraced and penniless, Adamson turned to Melville, and despite the great chasm that had developed between them, Melville offered him financial aid. This support did not come without cost, however, for Adamson was forced to recant his support for Episcopacy in a written ‘Refutation’ (Palinodia), which was circulated widely in both Scots and Latin to other Presbyterian communities across Europe. Adamson died on 10 February 1592, and by then Melville had taken considerable steps to ensure that a large body of Presbyterian supporters were in place in the local church. It was through his ‘cairfull procurement’