the use of terms and classifications. When now he could define and determine and could demonstrate this to the satisfaction of masters other than his own, he was accepted, as it were, as a journeyman workman; he continued his studies under some master, no longer being rigidly held to the one as hitherto, and at the same time gave instruction to the younger boys under the direction of a master. After a further period of study, varying with time and place, in which he demonstrated his ability to carry on a logical disputation, and familiarized himself with the required texts, or the course of study, he was permitted to demonstrate this ability, as a journeyman workman does by making a "masterpiece," by defending in public a thesis against the masters of the art, that is, the members of the faculty or those who already possessed the degree. This having been done successfully, he was given the degree, the licentiate, the mastership, the doctorate whatever it might be called. Master, doctor, professor, were synonymous terms in the early university period. These degrees were all one and the same; they signified that he was able to dispute as well as to define and determine, and authorized him to teach publicly, that is, to determine and dispute; thus he was admitted into the guild of masters or teachers, in other words, into the faculty. He was now on a parity with other members of the faculty, and could teach in the free competition into which they all entered, providing he could obtain students. The preliminary degree, the baccalaureate, — a term which signified a beginner, an inferior, an apprentice in any field, and was used in the Church, in chivalry, in the guilds, and in the country feudal organization, as well as in the university, - was simply formal admission into candidacy for the license and was not originally a degree in itself. During the fifteenth century it became a distinct stage in the educational process and hence quite well defined as a minor degree. The mastership and doctorate, so far as there was any distinction between them, also indicated merely two aspects of the final confer ment of the privilege, — one was the more private profes sional test, the other the public ceremonial. The one term came to be preferred in England, the other on the Continent. That there should be three successive degrees, as in an American institution, is an anomaly or at least a result of slow historical growth, not to be found in the mediæval institution. THE METHODS AND CONTENT OF UNIVERSITY STUDIES have been previously discussed under scholasticism. After the opening of the thirteenth century the course of study was determined by papal bull or university statute and was far more restricted than was the intellectual activity of the twelfth century. While it is true that the thirteenth century possessed far more of Aristotle than did the twelfth, this but resulted in making the work more formal and restricted. Peter the Lombard was a pupil of Abelard and held much the same theological views; but the spirit of Abelard was that of free inquiry, of investigation, of rationalism, while that of Peter was one of rigid scholastic orthodoxy. Abelard was condemned as a heretic; Peter became the master authority of the university for two centuries. The influence of the one was dangerous to the supremacy of nonrational ecclesiasticism; the influence of the other rendered it triumphant. A brief statement of definite details will make more vivid our conception of the work of the early universities. In the school of arts were used the grammatical works of Priscian, a work on grammatical figures by Donatus, the logical works of Aristotle given through Boethius and Porphyry; the Categories and the de Interpretatione of Aristotle, and the Isagoge of Porphyry, from which originated the realistic-nominalistic controversy, were known in the translations of Boethius; the remainder of the Organon was known only through sum maries or other writings of Boethius. To these latter the greatest amount of time was given, and even much of the time aside from the long hours in the lecture room was spent in participating in or listening to the endless disputations. At Paris the statutes of 1215 introduced the Ethics of Aristotle, and in 1255 his Physics, Metaphysics, and his treatise On the Soul. These works of Aristotle, previously interdicted at Paris, had been introduced somewhat earlier in other universities. Elsewhere some other introductory works on logic might be read, but everywhere the study of logic consumed the greater part of the time. Up to the middle of the fifteenth century, Aristotle controlled the work of the universities. The study of logic replaced all others, and rhetoric was given no attention whatever. The study of geometry and astronomy had made some progress, especially in the Italian universities and in the University of Vienna. The work of the professional faculties consisted, likewise, in the study of a few fundamental texts together with their innumerable commentaries. The education of the early universities was wholly one of books, of a very limited selection of books in each particular field, but of books that were looked upon as furnishing in the written word absolute and ultimate authority. It was directed much more to the mastery of form and the development of power of formal speech, especially argumentation, than to the acquisition of knowledge, the pursuit of truth in the widest sense, or even to familiarizing the student with those literary sources of knowledge which, though lying within his grasp, were outside the pale of orthodox ecclesiastical approval. - THE INFLUENCE OF EARLY UNIVERSITIES. The results of scholasticism may be taken as the results of the universities, as was true with content and method of work. There are other influences, however, to be noted. The politi |